It may be neutral given that schools will likely be impacted differently regardless of what decision a conference (or school) makes going forward. Some ACC schools may be in a position where they can easily afford to treat all their athletes as employees. While other ACC schools may say that path is "too rich for my blood" and opt for a different path. Instead of viewing the decision at the conference level, it may be more accurate to say the decision will be made at the school level and those decisions will eventually roll up to the conference level. Now that isn't to say that the conference won't make a decision too because it will have to at some point. The decision is the only way a conference can clearly and publicly articulate to schools, who may be interested in joining a conference at a future date, what the requirements will be in order to secure a membership in said conference. Regardless if it is the public sector or the private sector, we can all think of examples where the "solution" to a problem is to continue kicking the can down the road until that option is no longer possible. I don't think the schools avoiding the issue as being any different. Particularly since the schools are able to continue to have their cake and eat it too. Now the schools may have to eventually share the money they are pocketing today. They are willing to wait for that "some day" to come when they are forced to cross that bridge instead of being proactive about it because they can justify the decision by saying the money does more good in their pockets instead of someone else's pocket. Hence why Big12 guy said in another post that real change will only come about when some external entity makes the change for them. If you are a fox and in charge of guarding the hen house, then why would you willing give it up?