Two key college football conferences are butting heads. Oh, not in gridiron or the ranking chart, but in court. When a jam-packed season awaits a stupendous ending on January 20th, the ‘not so gullible’ side of the CFP stole the spotlight. The transfer portal and the overindulgence of NIL money have dramatically changed the college football landscape in recent times. From the difficult portal schedule affecting players’ careers (overlapping with the regular season) to the growing trend of manipulating athletics under the radar, the situation calls for action. Well, the recent consequences are present in the form of a legal skirmish between Mountain West and Pac-12.

The battle dates back to September. The Pac-12 started to beam with hope for a role in 2026 after adding four Mountain West programs: Boise State, Colorado State, Fresno State, San Diego State, and Utah State. They were ready to leave the MWC for the Pac-12 owing $17 million each as exit fees, while the Pac-12 would supposed to pay around $43 million for manipulating the no-poaching clause of the two diluted programs ‘ game scheduling agreement. The scheduling agreement demands the conference to pay a $10 million fee if a school were to leave the MWC for the Pac-12, with a $500,000 escalator for additional defectors.

The Pac 12, a few months back, started the legal proceedings and asked the court to declare it invalid and unenforceable. Consequently, The MWC answered with a counter-motion to dismiss the lawsuit in November. On Monday in the Northern District of California, the Pac-12 again declared another bombshell, a response to a response, ideally. According to Bay Area News Group’s Jon Wilner, the $42.7 million conference sticks to their approach to the poaching fees is “unenforceable” and “unreasonable.”

In case you want to know the heat underneath the decision, a part of the official statement argues, ”The poaching penalty was, in fact, entirely unrelated to scheduling football games and designed to limit the Pac-12’s ability to compete with the MWC for years into the future, even after the Scheduling Agreement has expired.”

Coming to the other side, MWC commissioner Gloria Nevarez defended their case, noting, ”The (poaching) provision was put in place to protect the Mountain West Conference from this exact scenario. At no point in the contracting process did the Pac-12 contend that the agreement that it freely entered into violated any laws.” Well, PAC 12 is not seeking any damage. It’s just that they look to use the reduced money to lure other NCAA programs.

We need to wait until March 25 for the hearing, according to a case timeline approved by U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen. But on a backdrop of reality, why did the schools leave in the first place? What is the main spur behind it?

Why did some MWC schools depart from Pac-12?

Boise State, Fresno State, Colorado State, and San Diego State stand for four of the highest money-making schools in the Mountain West. They quite understandably didn’t want to associate with the lower-budget fellow MWC schools like Utah State and Josh State. So, the urge to join a higher revenue conference was real, and the poaching came as an aftereffect.

“Movement creates opportunity. I said it when I got here, ‘It’s always what’s next.’ We are not going to sit back and let things happen. Boise State AD Jeramiah Dickey said during an interview with local TV station KTVB on Thursday. However, the other factor in the MWC’s departure is media rights.

The American Athletic Conference has the most premium media rights deal of any group of Five conferences at around $10 million annually. The hearsay suggested there is a slight possibility that a rebounded Pac-12 with the Mountain West four, Washington State, Oregon State, and whoever else joins the race next might draw better on the open market. So, the silver lining is money and only money.

We will see how the legal battle pans out a month later.