Share

Tweet

Share

Share

Email

Utah Valley University has filed its own separate lawsuit in Utah’s Fourth District Court accusing the Western Athletic Conference of orchestrating a calculated scheme to strip the university of millions in revenue, bar its athletes from championships, and publicly pressure the institution into a premature exit announcement all while quietly engineering its own escape.

The filing is in direct response to an earlier lawsuit filed by the WAC in Tarrant County, Texas seeking the $1 million exit fees the conference claims UVU owes due to its decision to leave for the Big West Conference effective July 1st, 2026. The verified complaint was filed alongside a motion for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction from a judge in Utah County with UVU requesting an emergency hearing on or before February 23rd, 2026.

At the heart of the lawsuit is what UVU calls an “egregious bait-and-switch” by a conference it says was fighting for survival in 2024 but is now singling out its longest-tenured member for punishment.

According to the complaint, the WAC faced an existential crisis in spring 2024 when four members announced their departures. The instability left the league teetering, with just seven remaining schools and serious questions about its viability.

In response, the WAC proposed a two-year “Commitment Agreement” requiring remaining schools, including UVU, to pledge loyalty through the 2025–26 academic year. In exchange, the conference promised additional financial distributions and the possibility of a “planned orderly exit” with reduced or waived exit fees if meaningful expansion or partnership progress was not achieved.

UVU alleges it had a formal invitation from another conference in hand at the time but declined it in reliance on the WAC’s promises. The university signed the agreement on June 21, 2024.

The lawsuit argues that UVU delivered on its commitment. The WAC, UVU claims, did not.

The complaint describes what UVU characterizes as a deliberate strategy by WAC leadership and its three Texas-based members to protect themselves economically while isolating the Utah schools.

By early 2025, UVU alleges, WAC leadership was deep in discussions with the Atlantic Sun Conference about forming a new alliance. That arrangement would eventually become the “United Athletic Consortium,” rebranding the Texas-based remnants of the WAC alongside the ASUN under the name United Athletic Conference.

Critically, UVU claims the ASUN had already made clear in prior conversations that it had no interest in “being in the state of Utah.” The Utah schools UVU, Utah Tech University, and Southern Utah University were allegedly never part of the merger vision.

Rather than inform UVU transparently, the complaint alleges the WAC voted to rescind the Commitment Agreement in March 2025 without UVU’s approval, excluding its representative from part of the discussion, pressured UVU to publicly announce its departure sooner than required and positioned UVU’s announcement as justification to withhold distributions and demand a $1 million exit fee.

Less than two weeks after UVU formally announced it would join the Big West Conference in 2026, the WAC unveiled its ASUN alliance.

The timing, UVU argues, was no coincidence.

“Less than two weeks later, the Commissioner and the Texas schools announced
their own “strategic alliance” with the ASUN and a “rebranding” of the WAC as the United
Athletic Conference (UAC) as part of the newly created United Athletic Consortium. The
complexity of this Consortium arrangement indicated that this plan had quietly been in the works
for some time and came with a carefully orchestrated media campaign and talking points for what
not to say about the arrangement:”

The UVU complaint further alleges:

“Commissioner Ray and the Texas schools described it this way because even
though they had made their own plan to abandon the three Utah-based WAC schools, they wanted
to keep for themselves all of the economic benefits of the WAC by claiming the WAC still existed
as part of their new Consortium. To achieve this goal, the Commissioner and Texas schools
schemed to first “rescind” the commitment agreement without UVU’s approval. They then
pressured UVU to announce its departure from the WAC so they could point to the league bylaws
as justification to withhold further distributions and claim that UVU was obligated to pay the $1
million exit fee. Finally, because the ASUN had no interest in being in Utah, upon information and
belief, the Commissioner and the Texas schools excluded UTU and SUU from the Consortium
plans and did not attempt to collect an exit fee from UTU or SUU when they announced,
conveniently, that they were joining the Big Sky Conference the day before the Commissioner and
the Texas schools announced their new Consortium. The Commissioner and the Texas schools
also continue to permit UTU and SUU to broadcast their games on WAC-sponsored media and,
upon information and belief, have paid those departing members all of their conference
distributions without interruption.”

One of the most striking allegations in the filing is that UVU is being uniquely targeted.

While the WAC demanded a $1 million exit fee from UVU and immediately cut off distributions including NCAA funds earmarked for student-athlete assistance the complaint states that Utah Tech and Southern Utah were not assessed exit fees and have continued receiving conference distributions.

UVU President Astrid Tuminez was reportedly told that those schools had “pre-negotiated” their exit.

The university alleges the difference in treatment underscores the WAC’s motive: remove the Utah schools from the merger equation while preserving the economic value of the Texas institutions within the new consortium.

In effect, UVU claims, the conference wanted to keep the WAC brand alive long enough to transition into the ASUN partnership but needed UVU to go first so it could invoke bylaws to cut off payments and assert leverage.

The dispute escalated sharply in February 2026.

After UVU refused to pay the exit fee, arguing the Commitment Agreement entitled it to reduced or waived penalties the WAC declared UVU not in good standing while barring its teams from conference championships. Removed all UVU games from WAC-sponsored broadcasts, including ESPN+ and withheld more than $1.3 million in distributions, including student-athlete assistance and academic performance funds.

The lawsuit describes the moves as punitive and irreparably harmful, particularly to athletes who had spent months preparing for conference championships that serve as gateways to NCAA postseason play.

The complaint also highlights the optics of the pressure campaign. On February 5th, the WAC notified UVU it would be pulling broadcasts beginning that night.

UVU frames the case as more than a contract dispute. It calls the WAC’s actions a deliberate attempt to:

1. Secure two years of stability when the conference needed it most.

2. Quietly orchestrate a merger that excluded Utah institutions.

3. Force UVU into a public announcement to trigger punitive bylaws.

4. Preserve financial benefits for favored members while isolating one institution.

“The WAC has engaged in an egregious bait-and-switch,” the complaint states, alleging deliberate and unlawful conduct.

UVU is seeking an injunction to restore its broadcast rights, championship eligibility, and distributions, while also seeking damages for withheld funds. The university has asked the court for an emergency hearing before February 23rd in an attempt to receive injunctive relief to allow the universities indoor track and field team to compete in the WAC Championships that are scheduled for February 27th-28th. The university, however, must submit the athletes to the WAC by the 23rd in order for them to be eligible to compete at the indoor championships.