How One Word Might Determine Clemson’s ACC Fate

New information in Clemson’s suit with the ACC revealed a strategy that might help the school win its lawsuit with the conference.

Graham Neff, Clemson University Athletic Director looks toward plaintiffs counsel with Kevin Hall, during a hearing about Clemson and the ACC before Judge Perry H. Gravely, ruling on the university's motion for summary judgement and the conference's motion to dismiss, at the Pickens County Courthouse in Pickens, S.C. Friday, July 12, 2024. / Ken Ruinard / Greenville News / POOL

Clemson and the Atlantic Coast Conference are involved in two different lawsuits right now — one in Pickens County (S.C.) and one in Mecklenburg County (N.C.).

For the past week the two sides have fought over whether their jurisdictions should be where the case is ultimately heard. Clemson is in South Carolina, while the ACC’s home offices are in Charlotte, N.C.

Well, for now, both cases will continue on parallel tracks. But, new documentation emerged that shed some light on how Clemson might strategize its way out of the conference, if that is its ultimate goal.

It might just come down to one word.

The Post and Courier published a story on Sunday that examined additional information from documents that were part of Clemson’s suit against the ACC in South Carolina. These documents, which were part of the filing on April 17, were redacted due to what the ACC considered “trade secrets.”

Well, some of that information is now unredacted, and the Post and Courier reported that it gave further light to a strategy that Clemson might use.

Per the publication, one of Clemson’s argument is that “…ESPN conveyed the broadcast rights to games played by a ‘conference institution.’ That is defined in the ESPN contract as a ‘college, university or other institution that is a member of the ACC.’

That seems like perfectly normal contractual language. But that’s not the whole argument. Clemson is putting an emphasis on the word “is.” Why?

The Post and Courier explained it like this:

If the Tigers left the ACC, they wouldn't be a "conference institution" in the present tense — "is" — as written in the ESPN deal. According to Clemson's lawyers, the ESPN contract doesn't speak to a school that "was" a member.

It’s a minute word choice, but one that it hopes helps their argument. If ESPN’s contract doesn’t specify what happens to a school’s rights if it is no longer a member, it’s possible a judge might see that as running counter to the ACC’s grant of rights, which is theoretically irrevocable and binds the league together through the life of their television deal.

Clemson is making several arguments in its suit. But this is one it might rely upon to get a favorable ruling.

On Friday, Pickens County Judge Perry H. Gravely, allowed Clemson’s suit to continue, but also ruled against Clemson’s sovereign immunity claim, which could have brought an injunction against the ACC’s countersuit in Mecklenburg County. A Mecklenburg County judge ruled on Wednesday that the ACC’s countersuit could also continue.

Clemson originally filed its suit against the ACC on March 19, charging that it was due damages from the conference over alleged false statements over the league’s media rights.

There are five different lawsuits that entangle Clemson, Florida State and the ACC. Along with the Clemson suits in Mecklenburg County and in Pickens County, there are separate suits between FSU and ACC in Leon County (Fla.) and Mecklenburg County. Plus, the Florida attorney general is suing the ACC in Leon County.