Winds of change with NIL

#51
#51
BigOrangeMojo said:
I agree this is a bad look for UGA. The kid entered into an agreement with the collective in late 2024. The rights and responsibilities of NIL contract were assigned over to UGA in July 2025. (Im sure the NIL contract had an assignment provision)

The issue with the school taking over these deals is it becomes a legal slippery slope. If you choose not to enforce some contracts but not others, it gets slippery quick. Fot example, if you choose to enforce a female athletes contract but not a football players and you potentially run into Title IX issues quickly...
Click to expand...
I've not thought about that. Various discrimination angles including Title IX might come up.

I'm not saying the NIL situation is fine but this legal tactic seems dicy on a couple of fronts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plecoptera
#52
#52
Redheads said:
The thing that is interesting to me is how these contracts work. How does a player choose to opt out of a bowl game or any game (to prevent an injury that might jeopardize
their pro career) if he has a contract to play? Can’t wait to see how the “meaningless“ bowl games play out.
Click to expand...
They don't have a contract to play after the fall semester ends. Bowl games and playoffs are after the semester.
 
#53
#53
EastTNVol6240 said:
Doesn’t look to be a winning case by Ga. But I do like the accountability this could set precedent for going forward.

Not a good look for recruiting going forward for GA. I’m all about it.
Click to expand...

temptn said:
.
The only thing that will change is that lawyers will get even more money.
.
Click to expand...

BigOrangeMojo said:
How is the UGA situation different from the following

Let's say it was a coordinator. He got paid $150K for 1 month of work until he got hired away for a HC position. Let's say his buyout was $2M if he left for another gig.

I dont really see how that is any different..
Click to expand...
Agree...this is a potential first step towards accountability on both sides.

YES...Ol' Billy had it right. Find all the lawyers and kill 'em tonight.

Nailed it...NIL contracts need to be structured the same. You transfer after X amount of time, you owe us Y amount of money. The contract clause UGA had with this guy was more of scare tactic than anything.
 
#54
#54
I wonder if this player will try to turn this clause in the contract around on GA by submitting that "Once I realized what this part of the NIL contract actually meant, I immediately made plans to transfer."
 
#56
#56
MontyPython said:
You make some good points.

The problem with the current landscape, in general, is it's still the wild west. There are few - if any rules - governing the NIL and portal situation. But I'm not sure if the NFL solutions are the best or even legally possible.
Click to expand...
There is an uber important rule governing NIL. The Sherman Antitrust Act.
 
#57
#57
CAVPUT said:
I'm no legal eagle...thank goodness...but this kinda sounds like a buyout. Teams and coaches both have 'em so why not attach something similar to a NIL contract? Honestly, it makes a ton more sense than giving a kid a ton of money up front only to see him walk prematurely. Teams are damaged when kids bail. Why can't they sue for damages? They aren't "kids" anymore. They've got reps/agents and are professional athletes. Hate UGA, but I hope this becomes more of a trend to be honest.
Click to expand...
A school has no legal basis to enforce a buyout for a private NIL deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IndianaVol
#61
#61
S.C. OrangeMan said:
A school has no legal basis to enforce a buyout for a private NIL deal.
Click to expand...
I think that's the point of the lawsuit.
Just not sure UGA is going about it the right way.
But hey, if it starts a precedent or at least gets people thinking along those lines, im all for it
 
#64
#64
TNHopeful505 said:
I mean, the whole system needs accountability. We went from the schools having all of the power and the players not benefitting (outside of scholarship, room and board and everything else) to the other side of the pendulum, where the players benefit and the schools take on all of the liability.

There has to be a balance. Do I think it's fair that a player can get "paid" for his services, both present and future, and then not be held accountable if he doesn't hold up his end of the bargain? No, I don't. If I accept extra benefits from my employer (say, tuition reimbursement to pay for school, or a sign on bonus), then I am required to either finish out the terms of the benefit, or I am required to pay it back.

There has to be some level of accountability. I'm all for Georgia in this one. Players can get paid, but they also have to have the other side of it of responsibility and consequences. Wanna get paid like pros, then act like pros.
Click to expand...
I once worked at a machine shop that paid for me to go to tech school and get my degree in machine tool technology…while attending school I got in good with one of my instructors and he referred me to a different company that offered much more money than what I was currently making. After discussing it with my wife and parents and praying about it I decided to take the new job. That left me on the hook to pay for my schooling that my original company set me up with and was paying for. I had no issues with that and I was happy to pay for my tuition, after all it’s only fair. These are grown men and a deals a deal. If you don’t hold up to your end of the deal then there will be penalties and or cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IndianaVol
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top