The FSU/Clemson/Others vs ACC case is merely one

State Attorney General away from becoming the Gordian Knot of cluster-flocks and the current judge knows it. Probably others do as well, but aren't 'vocalizing' it. Still, whenever the word 'taxpayer' is used, that's the hint.

Whether right, wrong, empowered, overstepped their authority...what have you, one state AG can lock this thing down by stating no public university leadership had the right to lock a state institution into agreements such as is being challenged. Where this leaves private schools, I don't know..nor do I care.

Pretty sure other conferences know this, too. As far as kicking conference members to the curb, that's a horse of a different 'silk' (Derby recognition!

)

Unless all parties want this thing dragged out to make the Hundred Years Wars seem like a 'Weekend at Bernies', it's hard not to see reasonable settlement on the horizon...in the interest of everyone.

Re: The FSU/Clemson/Others vs ACC case is merely one

FSU privatized their athletic department in order to shield it from

LakeNormanTiger

Walk-On [135]

TigerPulse: 95%

Posts: 324

Joined: 6/3/00

I disagree.

Apr 23, 2024, 1:00 PM

Not going to argue that it could take some time to litigate, but I do think University Boards/ and Presidents have the authority to enter an institution into multimillion dollar agreements.

One of my favorite classes during my stay at Clemson was Clemson 100 (History of Clemon University). One of the topics that was covered by Dr. Reel was the Universities governance. Per Mr. Clemson's will/ and instructions, Clemson's board of Trustees would be made up of 13 individuals. 7 selected by Mr. Clemson and subsequently the board member would choose their successor when they retired. The remaining 6 trustees were selected by the state. It was set up in "Clemsons favor" to give them a bit of freedom from the state. The State did not like that arrangement. But had to accept that stipulation for the will to be executed and Clemson College to be formed. The state did not want to give up the land donation

Clemson's Board responsibility is to govern the University by establishing policies that ensure academic quality and freedom, protect the University’s financial security, and promote efficient and effective administration through the Board’s selected president and his or her executive officers.

I contend that the effective administration of a University would be the ability to sign contracts. That is why I think Clemson's leadership can sign for Clemson. Their is "state representation" involved with the selection of the University President. I also suspect this governance style/ system is in place at other University's as well, and is not unique to Clemson.

That said, I think there is plenty of issues with the Grant of Rights that can be used to negotiate out of the contract. The exit penalty is one of those. Penalties have to be based on actual damages for them to be valid. Not a selected value. But getting back to the original point, I just dont think the "no person can sign" argument is valid. If that is the case, how far does that go? How would multimillion dollar state construction contracts get approved/ and be trusted. The state legislature cant vote on everything.

Another interesting thought I have had regarding this topic. I am curious which state is going to push forward some type of accounting change first. The amount of money that is being discussed is not small. The "property" that helps generate the funds are "state property" (Colleges and Universities). I am curious to see which state has enough representatives to start inquiring about capturing a piece of that pie/ or at least having power in regards to how it is spent/ allocated. I have to believe that the state is going to want their cut. Maybe the state will be appeased by income taxes collected once the universities are able to deal directly with athletes. All I know is that ticket prices are not coming down.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

The FSU/Clemson/Others vs ACC case is merely one

Re: The FSU/Clemson/Others vs ACC case is merely one

FSU privatized their athletic department in order to shield it from

Re: FSU privatized their athletic department in order to shield it from

I disagree.

Read again...I didn't say they couldn't...

TigerBoard POTD