• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Cincinnati Sues QB Brendan Sorsby to Enforce NIL Agreement

Does anyone know if UM’s NIL contracts have a multi year stipulation with a buyout like this one or are they just year to year deals?
 
Hells bells said:
Honestly:

I wonder how many athletes read their NIL contract?
Click to expand...
I believe it will be the revenue-sharing, that makes players more employees that could affect transferring out (not just me, being discussed on national level). Part of their revenue-sharing will have to be paid to the school they transfer from especially if there is a multi year deal which I did not know existed.
 
Right from the start, I wondered how all this NIL money coming in would "play" with the schools involved. They provide the "platform" that makes the player/entertainer worth all that dough. Reasonably like a theater or outdoor music venue. The entertainers get most of the revenue, but the venue operator also expects to make a good return. The main difference is that the theater-owner isn't paying for coaches and trainers for the player/entertainers. This could/should be the start of addressing that disconnect.
 
tourist said:
No. Just get the money the hell out of college sports.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure when that's ever been the case. If you mean the old system where programs found ways to pay players under the table, I'm not sure that was much better. The schools didn't have much recourse if a player left with the duffel bag full of cash that "didn't exist."

As for the linked story, meh. It almost certainly went down like this: UC made a demand, the player('s reps) said, "Nah, come get it." UC's argument is the basic, "You get x if you do y. If you don't do y, we get z. You didn't do y; we get z." Player's counter is the basic, "the liquidated damages clause here constitutes an unlawful penalty." Both sides absolutely have to make those respective arguments, and it'll settle in a week for somewhere between $1 and $999,999. Same old shit.

The interesting part to me is whether UC filed in federal court despite what I would expect is the existence of a mediation/arbitration clause. At the moment, I can't think of a reason why an NIL deal wouldn't have one.
 
HOW they get the money out of college sports isn't my concern, just get it out. The NCAA actually lowered the boom on SMU long ago:

The NCAA imposed the "death penalty" on Southern Methodist University (SMU) football on February 25, 1987, canceling the 1987 season (and later the 1988 season) due to a massive, ongoing pay-for-play scandal. It remains the only time this punishment has been used, as SMU was a "repeat violator" of NCAA rules.
Facebook +4
Key Details of the SMU Death Penalty:
  • The Cause: SMU boosters and officials continued paying over $61,000 to 13 players even while on probation.
  • The Punishment: The NCAA prohibited all games/scrimmages for 1987.
  • The Aftermath:The program was shut down for two years (1987–1988), with SMU's president adding the second year
    .
    • Impact: The team did not have a winning season until 1997 and struggled for over three decades to recover.
    • Key Figures: Coach Bobby Collins resigned following the scandal, and the athletic director was also implicated.
 
tourist said:
HOW they get the money out of college sports isn't my concern, just get it out. The NCAA actually lowered the boom on SMU long ago:

The NCAA imposed the "death penalty" on Southern Methodist University (SMU) football on February 25, 1987, canceling the 1987 season (and later the 1988 season) due to a massive, ongoing pay-for-play scandal. It remains the only time this punishment has been used, as SMU was a "repeat violator" of NCAA rules.
Facebook +4
Key Details of the SMU Death Penalty:
  • The Cause: SMU boosters and officials continued paying over $61,000 to 13 players even while on probation.
  • The Punishment: The NCAA prohibited all games/scrimmages for 1987.
  • The Aftermath:The program was shut down for two years (1987–1988), with SMU's president adding the second year
    .
    • Impact: The team did not have a winning season until 1997 and struggled for over three decades to recover.
    • Key Figures: Coach Bobby Collins resigned following the scandal, and the athletic director was also implicated.
Click to expand...
And how did this stop all the SEC and ACC schools from paying their athletes all through the 90's until NIL became a thing?
 
tourist said:
HOW they get the money out of college sports isn't my concern, just get it out. The NCAA actually lowered the boom on SMU long ago:

The NCAA imposed the "death penalty" on Southern Methodist University (SMU) football on February 25, 1987, canceling the 1987 season (and later the 1988 season) due to a massive, ongoing pay-for-play scandal. It remains the only time this punishment has been used, as SMU was a "repeat violator" of NCAA rules.
Facebook +4
Key Details of the SMU Death Penalty:
  • The Cause: SMU boosters and officials continued paying over $61,000 to 13 players even while on probation.
  • The Punishment: The NCAA prohibited all games/scrimmages for 1987.
  • The Aftermath:The program was shut down for two years (1987–1988), with SMU's president adding the second year
    .
    • Impact: The team did not have a winning season until 1997 and struggled for over three decades to recover.
    • Key Figures: Coach Bobby Collins resigned following the scandal, and the athletic director was also implicated.
Click to expand...
That just changed the source of the money, my guy. Alabama also ALMOST got the death penalty in 2002 (main event wasn't as egregious as SMU's, but the sum of the Tide's many smaller violations almost did them in). The fact remains that money was always in college sports, and it always will be. I mean, we've all heard the old saying that the only basketball team with a higher payroll than the UCLA Bruins in the early 70s was the LA Lakers. :ROFLMAO:

The only way to get money out of college sports is for people to stop caring at all. Don't go to games, don't watch them on TV, don't buy merchandise, don't support it in any way. If everyone did that, there would be no incentive. It would just be a bunch of rascals rasslin' in a vacant field like Bob Yale and Rusty Princeton intended.
 
Last edited:
CDAGRIZ said:
That just changed the source of the money, my guy. Alabama also ALMOST got the death penalty in 2002 (main event wasn't as egregious as SMU's, but the sum of the Tide's many smaller violations almost did them in). The fact remains that money was always in college sports, and it always will be. I mean, we've all heard the old saying that the only basketball team with a higher payroll than the UCLA Bruins in the early 70s was the LA Lakers. :ROFLMAO:

The only way to get money out of college sports is for people to stop caring at all. Don't go to games, don't watch them on TV, don't buy merchandise, don't support it in any way. If everyone did that, there would be no incentive. It would just be a bunch of rascals rasslin' in a vacant field like Bob Yale and Rusty Princeton intended.
Click to expand...
Ohhh the good ol days.
 
He should get sued. We'll see if the courts say the liquidated damages clause is valid under state law, in this instance. I would structure NIL payments in a different manner. Perhaps a bonus amount paid the first year or even upfront, with the "unearned" part to be paid back if the player departs early; and perhaps with more of the payback allocated to the second year. Then, a separate payment/amount for the actually NIL "work" or whatever that is for, allocated more to the second year. Then, if the player leaves early, the second year NIL "work" part isn't paid and the "unearned" part of the first-year/upfront bonus has to be paid back.

I haven't read this contract, but it sounds like there's just a big liquidated damages amount. The school is trying to argue that more of the NIL payment was for the second year, when the player would be more valuable. If my first sentence is accurate, then that leaves an opening for a defense lawyer to argue that the clause and amount are unfair and unreasonable end not valid under state law.

For decades, Montana law has had a concept in some areas for a particular clause (like arbitration) as not being valid because it's against "public policy". That was an opening that kept getting widened and eventually a truck could get through it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top