I agree with rpbobcat's impression of Nellis. I hope that we are both wrong. Sometimes first impression are correct and at other times they are not. So far though, his unwillingness to embrace a First Amendment policy similar to that of the University of Chicago's is disheartening. He has been presented with it by a member of the journalism faculty and so far he seems not to have the guts to propose it.
Here for the record is Chicago's policy:
https://tinyurl.com/y98qor45
For those who don't want to look at the link, here's the key part: Fundamentally, however, the University is committed to the principle that it may not restrict debate or deliberation because the ideas put forth are thought to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed. It is for the members of the University community to make those judgments for themselves. As a corollary to this commitment, members of the University community must also act in conformity with this principle. Although faculty, students and staff are free to criticize, contest and condemn the yviews expressed on campus, they may not obstruct, disrupt, or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject or even loathe. For members of the University community, as for the University itself, the proper response to ideas they find offensive, unwarranted and dangerous is not interference, obstruction, or suppression. It is, instead, to engage in robust counter-speech that challenges the merits of those ideas and exposes them for what they are. To this end, the University has a solemn responsibility not only to promote a lively and fearless freedom of debate and deliberation, but also to protect that freedom when others attempt to restrict it.
For the record, this policy at Chicago goes way back to the 1930s, when my father was a student at UC. At that time Robert Hutchins, known by the students as the "boy wonder president" because he was only 30 when appointed to that position, was a fierce defender of free speech rights. His ideas were later more fully developed at UC under the auspices of the Hutchins Commission (aka Commission of Freedom of the Press) during World War II.

The idea advertised here about going with paying the MAC minimum because the dynamics that limit OU's ability to compete I would think would apply more to football where the edge goes to programs in the talent centers like cities in Florida and then you have this G5 thing which sets the MAC at a different level. In MAC basketball Buffalo invested and its paid off for them so I don't see why OU can't especially with a facility like The Convo and proximity to the conference tournament in Cleveland where the fanbase can deliver support. Saul himself came from an outpost D1 in NDSU to be at a place with a better situation.