There are four ways to challenge such a deal. Most of them involve a lot of money and patience.
theathletic.com
"For something to be a contract, it must have three components: an offer, an acceptance and consideration.
"In the grant of rights, the school has given the conference something of value — its media rights. But what has the conference given the school? It’s not the money for those media rights. That comes from one or several networks based on the terms of the conference’s deal with the network(s). The school’s attorneys could argue that an entirely separate contract covers that consideration."
I am sure someone somewhere could argue that the contract should be void because of any number of reasons:
Substantive unconscionability
Unconscionability in contracts can be substantive or procedural. Substantive unconscionability in contracts is when the terms of a contract are harsh,
unfair, excessively oppressive, and
unduly one-sided. Substantive unconscionability will make a contract invalid, and it can be tricky to determine.
Procedural unconscionability
Unlike substantive unconscionability that deals with the terms of the contract, procedural unconscionability focuses on the circumstances in which the contract was made. It can arise when contract negotiation is unfair to a party because of unequal bargaining power, lack of meaningful choice, or a wide knowledge gap on the subject matter.