NIL players who leave may get sued

[jivecat]

A door has opened that a player who was compensated and left the program could be viewed as detrimental and hurting the program. Since compensation was made, this would allow the NIL donor to sue the player since their actions had an adverse effect on their business or in this case the program. The non-compete clause is still active and is not likely to be overturned anytime soon. Many of these kids will get sued for leaving and have to give back money or sit out.

 

[HopeandChangeforAntoons]

I think it would be similar to suing a former employer. It might work, but if word gets around it may cause others to avoid you in the longer term.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

good luck to these shell companies and booster run companies in getting their "already spent" money back from young college athletes..


you give an 18 year old tens of thousands of dollars because they are tall and can run fast, you deserve what you get..

 

[pittdan77]

The non-compete clause is still active and is not likely to be overturned anytime soon.

It is, but it isn't. Nobody is going to try to add one or enforce it.

 

[PittMan 72]

I think it would be similar to suing a former employer. It might work, but if word gets around it may cause others to avoid you in the longer term.

Yeah. Suing a player for that might be a classic example of penny-wise, pound-foolish.

Unless all college programs would stick together and follow suit. But that’s never going to happen. And there would be “collusion” lawsuits even if it did.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

A door has opened that a player who was compensated and left the program could be viewed as detrimental and hurting the program. Since compensation was made, this would allow the NIL donor to sue the player since their actions had an adverse effect on their business or in this case the program. The non-compete clause is still active and is not likely to be overturned anytime soon. Many of these kids will get sued for leaving and have to give back money or sit out.

No. The contracts only run through the season. Some are month to month contracts.

 

[303vND]

Nothing to see here.

 

[jivecat]

I think it would be similar to suing a former employer. It might work, but if word gets around it may cause others to avoid you in the longer term.

I agree with that but it would also prevent other programs from offering more money and breaking their contract. I think it is is called tortious interference when a third party encourages a person/company to break a current contract. So PITT (or the NIL group) could have sued USC for offering Jordan Addison more money and breaking his agreement with PITT/NIL entity.

 

[wbrpanther]

Yeah. Suing a player for that might be a classic example of penny-wise, pound-foolish.

Unless all college programs would stick together and follow suit. But that’s never going to happen. And there would be “collusion” lawsuits even if it did.

I'll say it for the hundredth time. A player getting huge NIL money needs to sign a contract binding him to the team for the entire season, including any Bowl or playoff game.

 

[PittMan 72]

I'll say it for the hundredth time. A player getting huge NIL money needs to sign a contract binding him to the team for the entire season, including any Bowl or playoff game.

Yep. But they let the genie out of the bottle before any reasonable parameters were established. Harder to clean up a big mess than to take the necessary measures to not create one in the first place.

 

[jivecat]

Yep. But they let the genie out of the bottle before any reasonable parameters were established. Harder to clean up a big mess than to take the necessary measures to not create one in the first place.

Contract law is still in effect.

 

[PittMan 72]

Contract law is still in effect.

Sure. As long as there is a contract with terms and conditions that are mutually agreed to.

 

[PittPharm2002]

good luck to these shell companies and booster run companies in getting their "already spent" money back from young college athletes..


you give an 18 year old tens of thousands of dollars because they are tall and can run fast, you deserve what you get..

Truf
What - they didn’t get the value ?

 

[PittPharm2002]

Contract law is still in effect.

What contact ?
They aren’t employees
You can’t restrict their trade and labor .

 

[PittPharm2002]

Sure. As long as there is a contract with terms and conditions that are mutually agreed to.

Yep- has worked great for the coaches to restrict their movement !

So- quick question , who and what are the harmed parties’ standing ?

 

[PittMan 72]

Yep- has worked great for the coaches to restrict their movement !

So- quick question , who and what are the harmed parties’ standing ?

There are reciprocal contract term remedies to deal with that.

 

[HopeandChangeforAntoons]

I agree with that but it would also prevent other programs from offering more money and breaking their contract. I think it is is called tortious interference when a third party encourages a person/company to break a current contract. So PITT (or the NIL group) could have sued USC for offering Jordan Addison more money and breaking his agreement with PITT/NIL entity.

I have no idea if it was mandated, or if it voided with him leaving Pitt, but my understanding was that Addison returned the NIL money when he decided to leave. So I’m not sure there was any grounds to sue.

That was back when NIL payments were at least nominally for use of their name, image, and likeness, and not pay for play agreements. You’d have to think collectives have adjusted to account for players leaving after they take the money.

 

[jivecat]

What contact ?
They aren’t employees
You can’t restrict their trade and labor .

The NIL contract....They sign a contract to outline the terms of the NIL agreement. Now, those terms probably don't include a non-compete clause but if "they" were smart, They would include a buyout clause...the NIL sponsor would get money if the player left for a better deal.

 

[PittPharm2002]

The NIL contract....They sign a contract to outline the terms of the NIL agreement. Now, those terms probably don't include a non-compete clause but if "they" were smart, They would include a buyout clause...the NIL sponsor would get money if the player left for a better deal.

They are paid up front for their likeness
It’s for the player , not the team
Don’t be silly

 

[jivecat]

They are paid up front for their likeness
It’s for the player , not the team
Don’t be silly

They absolutely sign a contract for the NIL rights.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

They absolutely sign a contract for the NIL rights.

And that contract absolutely does not require them to play in the games. Because that would be against the rules.

 

[jivecat]

And that contract absolutely does not require them to play in the games. Because that would be against the rules.

Yes but there is an "exclusivity" clause against competing entities....which would be another school or athletic program.

 

[cashisking884]

schools can’t be the beneficiary of these contracts. The NCAA does not allow that yet.

The SCOTUS has held you can’t treat these players like employees if you don’t recognize them as employees. Injunctive/non-compete clauses are highly scrutinized in the employee context. In the non-employee context? It would be impossible.

If these collectives made a deal and got screwed out of money under the terms of the deal, then sue the player for monetary damages.

That’s the only remedy. Limiting their movement under the terms of the contract is just not legal, and isn’t going to become legal until they are employees.

 

[pittdan77]

schools can’t be the beneficiary of these contracts. The NCAA does not allow that yet.

The SCOTUS has held you can’t treat these players like employees if you don’t recognize them as employees. Injunctive/non-compete clauses are highly scrutinized in the employee context. In the non-employee context? It would be impossible.

If these collectives made a deal and got screwed out of money under the terms of the deal, then sue the player for monetary damages.

That’s the only remedy. Limiting their movement under the terms of the contract is just not legal, and isn’t going to become legal until they are employees.

How are the schools paying under the lawsuit that said they had to?

 

[cashisking884]

How are the schools paying under the lawsuit that said they had to?

That settlement is not currently in effect.
So schools shouldn’t be doing that as of yet. The hearing doesn’t take place until April.

So as of today, the NCAA regulation making it illegal for schools to be the beneficiary of NIL deals or pay players directly, is still the law of the land.

 

[pittdan77]

That settlement is not currently in effect.
So schools shouldn’t be doing that as of yet. The hearing doesn’t take place until April.

So as of today, the NCAA regulation making it illegal for schools to be the beneficiary of NIL deals or pay players directly, is still the law of the land.

Okay. I'll be honest, I didn't read much about that settlement and I thought it was in affect and that was what we were discussing.

Let's switch it to that. Wouldn't the schools have to give athletes some sort of employment status in order to pay them?

 

[cashisking884]

Okay. I'll be honest, I didn't read much about that settlement and I thought it was in affect and that was what we were discussing.

Let's switch it to that. Wouldn't the schools have to give athletes some sort of employment status in order to pay them?

Not necessarily. It’s not true that just because I pay you, I recognize you as an employee. The WWE/WWF has gone 50 years with not having any of the wrestlers actually be employees, while paying them millions.

I would agree though that, once you pay them, it becomes difficult to justify not recognizing them as employees.

And even if a school refuses to recognize it, that doesn’t mean you aren’t an employee for legal purposes. The players would certainly check a lot of judicial test boxes at that point.

 

[pittdan77]

And even if a school refuses to recognize it, that doesn’t mean you aren’t an employee for legal purposes. The players would certainly check a lot of judicial test boxes at that point.

That last bit is sort of what I was thinking. Difference with WWE, there isn't a "boss" that you necessarily answer to. Just meet your enforceable contract obligations. I think they will end up lining up with how other paid athletes are considered employees.

 

[PittPharm2002]

Yes but there is an "exclusivity" clause against competing entities....which would be another school or athletic program.

If that’s true , why are there so many disputes with players regarding payments they haven’t received ?

 

[jivecat]

If that’s true , why are there so many disputes with players regarding payments they haven’t received ?

Like who?

 

[PittPharm2002]

Like who?

6 FSU basketball ball players

The UNLV starting qb who quit the team because he didn’t receive his promised NIL.

 

[jivecat]

6 FSU basketball ball players

The UNLV starting qb who quit the team because he didn’t receive his promised NIL.

Sounds like they did not have a binding contract and were depending on Bird law to plead their case.

 

[mike412]

My understanding is that two Pittsburgh entities had NIL agreements with Addison to use him in ads and commercials. When USC/Riley approached him with a more lucrative deal, those entities had claims against them for inducing breach of contract and tortious interference with contractual advantage. They also had a claim against Addison for breach. The tortious interference claim has particularly sharp teeth because it can include an award of punitive damages. For whatever reason, they chose not to pursue those claims.

Pitt had no claim but those entities did. A lawsuit wouldn’t have prevented him from leaving Pitt, but it could have had significant financial repercussions for Riley, USC and the entities in California which entered into NIL agreements with Addison. Moreover, because of the punitive danages claim, a court could have required those entities to open up their books. To determine the appropriate amount of punitive damages, a business’ income and net worth both can be relevant.

I can’t help but wonder if that had happened would it have changed the trajectory of NIL.