CLEMSON — Clemson athletic director Graham Neff says Clemson checked off the goals it had for suing the Atlantic Coast Conference last year.

According to Neff, the lawsuit achieved what Clemson wanted, especially in terms of gaining “certainty around our future media rights.”

The settlement agreement allows any league member “to pay a flat exit fee and leave with ‘exclusive’ access to their media rights.”

That was a point of emphasis by Clemson in its lawsuit – it wanted the ability to own its media rights if it were to leave the conference.

“The reasons why [the lawsuit] was initially filed… were certainty around our future media rights. While that was uncertain before, now there is certainty on what that looks like for future media rights ownership,” Neff said on Tuesday. “That was the primary [objective], just to have certainty on what that looks like, given our anticipation and our preparedness for the dynamic nature of college athletics in the years to come.”

The settlements are also expected to include increased payouts to Clemson and Florida State, as part of a new brand initiative.

The new deal will give Clemson and other ACC institutions significant flexibility on the league’s Grant of Rights and significant increase of the ACC’s revenue distribution.

Clemson and Florida State are expected to benefit the most from this new revenue distribution model. As reported by ESPN, the settlement will call for 40 percent of the ACC’s revenues to be spilt equally between league members, while the other 60 percent will be divided based on a five-year rolling average of television ratings.

Clemson could see its payout increase by $15 million or more per year, which will put the school financially within striking distance of some of the SEC and Big Ten schools it competes with on a yearly basis.

The ACC has already established a success initiative that allows its members to keep money earned from participating in the College Football Playoff. In other words, Clemson and SMU were allowed to keep all of the $4 million they earned from making the CFP in 2024.

Bettering Clemson’s financial position was another big objective for the lawsuit, as Neff noted.

“In addition, objectively, the financial position changing with ACC success initiatives, new viewership model,” Neff said. “The innovative nature, that Commissioner [Jim] Phillips has led through, is certainly something that we feel like is going to have big upside for Clemson. Not just because we’re Clemson, but we have to go earn it, continue to perform on the field and be a compelling brand and drive viewership, etcetera, consider different scheduling strategies – all these things are interrelated.

“So, very pleased with the outcomes of meeting our objectives of the future certainty around our media rights and current financial position.”

Neff added that “a strong ACC is good for Clemson, and a strong Clemson is good for the ACC,” and says Clemson will “continue to lean in hard to the ACC” while being “nimble” with conference realignment in the ever-changing landscape of college sports.

“The landscape’s going to continue to change,” he said. “Yes, we are positioned to be nimble with that, while also needing to be great members and partners with the schools that we compete against within the conference, let alone our national expectations that we have — certainly in football, let alone across the board.”