https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/georgia-qb-jaden-rashada-sues-florida-coach-billy-napier-among-others-over-botched-13-85m-nil-deal/

Georgia quarterback Jaden Rashada has sued Florida coach Billy Napier, top Gators booster Hugh Hathcock and former football staffer Marcus Castro-Walker over a failed name, image and likeness deal that would have paid the quarterback $13.85 million, according to a lawsuit filed in federal court on Tuesday. 

In short Florida Coach and Booster promised a total of $13.85 million to get him to turn down $9.5 million from Miami. The suit claims that the coaches and boosters all misled him with no intention of upholding the deal.

First, this is just the first of these types of suits that will come out.

Second, the money being thrown around is much higher than I expected. 

34 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/georgia-qb-jaden-rashada-sues-florida-coach-billy-napier-among-others-over-botched-13-85m-nil-deal/

Georgia quarterback Jaden Rashada has sued Florida coach Billy Napier, top Gators booster Hugh Hathcock and former football staffer Marcus Castro-Walker over a failed name, image and likeness deal that would have paid the quarterback $13.85 million, according to a lawsuit filed in federal court on Tuesday. 

In short Florida Coach and Booster promised a total of $13.85 million to get him to turn down $9.5 million from Miami. The suit claims that the coaches and boosters all misled him with no intention of upholding the deal.

First, this is just the first of these types of suits that will come out.

Second, the money being thrown around is much higher than I expected. 

It was only a matter of time before this started happening and honestly, I don't blame the player one bit. Schools can't just lie to players and expect no repercussions. 

16 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

It was only a matter of time before this started happening and honestly, I don't blame the player one bit. Schools can't just lie to players and expect no repercussions. 

Exactly!

Seems like the people who might get the richest from NIL are lawyers looking at how many lawsuits are popping up and are also looming with Title IX when it comes to universities directly paying players (since that's on the horizon).

I'm also surprised we haven't heard more stories yet of players having 1099 problems for taxes.  I'm sure that won't be far behind!

The other thing I read which makes this lawsuit weird/sketchy is that there's no contract he's claiming he signed, right?  Just a promise?  That's going to be tough to prove if its just verbal.  But IIRC the NCAA has said that NIL deals can't be a contract, is that right?

Whole thing is a mess!

25 minutes ago, DanvilleFan said:

Seems like the people who might get the richest from NIL are lawyers looking at how many lawsuits are popping up and are also looming with Title IX when it comes to universities directly paying players (since that's on the horizon).

I'm also surprised we haven't heard more stories yet of players having 1099 problems for taxes.  I'm sure that won't be far behind!

The 1099 thing is coming, it's definitely going to bite some kid in the backside.

29 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

The 1099 thing is coming, it's definitely going to bite some kid in the backside.

I've said this for a while. There's zero chance most of these dudes are thinking about taxes with the NIL money and they are going to be in a world of hurt, especially if they don't go pro. 

2 hours ago, DanvilleFan said:

Seems like the people who might get the richest from NIL are lawyers looking at how many lawsuits are popping up and are also looming with Title IX when it comes to universities directly paying players (since that's on the horizon).

Billable hours are undefeated. 

7 hours ago, DanvilleFan said:

The other thing I read which makes this lawsuit weird/sketchy is that there's no contract he's claiming he signed, right?  Just a promise?  That's going to be tough to prove if its just verbal.  But IIRC the NCAA has said that NIL deals can't be a contract, is that right?

Whole thing is a mess!

If NILs can't be a contract, then it's one party's word against the other.  As you stated, hard to prove whether he is in the right or not.

On 5/21/2024 at 3:17 PM, DanvilleFan said:

The other thing I read which makes this lawsuit weird/sketchy is that there's no contract he's claiming he signed, right?  Just a promise?  That's going to be tough to prove if its just verbal.  But IIRC the NCAA has said that NIL deals can't be a contract, is that right?

Whole thing is a mess!

Surely there can be some contract. If I hire Reed Sheppard to be in an advertising campaign for my Ford Dealership, I'm going to sign him to exclusively only endores my Dealership and brand. I'm not paying him $200K to do an Ad Campaign for me and him to also advertise for a competitor at the same time. Only a contract could ensure that doesn't happen. 

When this will get the ugliest is when the Universities start really treating it like the business the players want them too.   Player A signs with school A.  But isn't producing as desired.   So they are fired.    But can't go to schools B through ZZZZZZZZ because of the Non-Compete clause in the deal they signed.  Sorry about your luck, ex-employee.

On 6/10/2024 at 9:39 PM, Tranquility Base said:

When this will get the ugliest is when the Universities start really treating it like the business the players want them too.   Player A signs with school A.  But isn't producing as desired.   So they are fired.    But can't go to schools B through ZZZZZZZZ because of the Non-Compete clause in the deal they signed.  Sorry about your luck, ex-employee.

Non-compete clauses were just ruled illegal by the courts. You could still fire players in the middle of the season though. 

6 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

Non-compete clauses were just ruled illegal by the courts. You could still fire players in the middle of the season though. 

Not to get off on a tangent, but non-competes are stupid to me anyway, and I feel like you could get out of or around one anyway. 

21 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

Not to get off on a tangent, but non-competes are stupid to me anyway, and I feel like you could get out of or around one anyway. 

They have been routinely upheld for decades by the courts as a breech of contract, until they were recently banned.

No need to worry about them any longer. 

4 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

They have been routinely upheld for decades by the courts as a breech of contract, until they were recently banned.

No need to worry about them any longer. 

Thanks! I'll look into that. 

The wife has signed non-competes at work a couple times, and they've made her think she can never leave because of them, in so many words.