forums

2026 Portal QBs

I’d love to know how this is being handled inside the building as they prepare for Monday. I hope coaches and players are focused on Monday and “roster people” are working this. Mario of course doing both
 
Advertisement
prayer GIF
 
PSU Cane said:
This is what i expected once revenue sharing became a thing. NIL is not linked to the school or supposed to be school specific, so no legal grounds to block kids (like Wisconsin) or lead to penalties. But revenue sharing is a much different contract with the school directly.....so i expect that language to be more binding and/or have more teeth.
Click to expand...
Nobody wants to mess with NIL because it’s pay for play with manipulative wording to say different . Rev share can be a tad more tricky.
 
Da Jumbo Mutombo said:
I mean whats Dukes best argument?

Specific performance will never be enforced. So Mensah will leave.

Duke will say, well we will keep your rev share rights then. OK? Pay me my rev share Duke. They wont do that. Alternative two, we will keep your rev share rights, not let you get reb share from anywhere else, but not pay you. Yea, good luck with that one in court!

The only option here for duke is to terminate the rev share agreement. Everything else is just scare tactics. Im sure their are termination damages, fine...pay it. But they cant hold him hostage.
Click to expand...
The key question is whether this is actually enforceable.

As Moss mentioned earlier, this feels like a backdoor non‑compete, and if I’m understanding correctly, that would be invalid since Mensah isn’t technically an employee.

That said, this language is creative and may still be just strong enough, or uncertain enough legally, to scare a player into backing off. We’ll see.
 
Advertisement
Josh said:
This is my understanding also. They'll try to make it difficult but ultimately they cant do too much. Their best hope is to make it a spectacle
Click to expand...
Yup. Look ultimately, until there is a CBA or employment contracts, all these rules are BS and prolly not enforceable.

Basic contract principles rule. Specific performance is almost never enforced (forcing a player to play somewhere). So monetary damages is the most likely remedy. Fine....pay them their money and tell them to enjoy watching us play in the natty on the way out.
 
Canesrule230 said:
I f*cking love this team and this message board. If we pull this off we’re going to have the rest of cfb talking sh*t about player stealing.

And I f*cking love it! Go Canes! Let’s get this done and win a natty Monday night!
Click to expand...
Good. We are the villain in everyone's mind already. Why not play the part.

 
Advertisement
Da Jumbo Mutombo said:
Yup. Look ultimately, until there is a CBA or employment contracts, all these rules are BS and prolly not enforceable.

Basic contract principles rule. Specific performance is almost never enforced (forcing a player to play somewhere). So monetary damages is the most likely remedy. Fine....pay them their money and tell them to enjoy watching us play in the natty on the way out.
Click to expand...
In this case though, they wouldn't be gunning for specific performance. Duke would instead try to enforce the provision that prevents others from paying Mensah. They wouldn't argue that Mensah can't play at all. It's different, and I have no idea whether this variant is potentially enforceable.
 
Back
Top