forums

Tears Gator Tears

Advertisement
Hold My Beer said:
Wisconsin fans: "We're so glad Mertz transferred. He never was going to be the answer."

UF fans before Thursday: "Once he gets to UF and we surround him with good talent and good offensive coaching, he'll be much improved."

UF fans now: "Be patient. Mertz just needs a little time to get comfortable."

UF fans in a couple weeks: "Billy needs to play the back-up QB. Mertz ain't working out."
Click to expand...
They know the backup situation is worse. Theyā€™re simply hoping to hold on for fear life to Lagway
 
GojiraCane said:
Thatā€™s what I was afraid of. College kids signing away portions NFL earnings for cash now.

huddleup.substack.com

The $400 Million Investment Fund That Gives Athletes Cash In Exchange For Future Earnings

Huddle Up is a 3x weekly newsletter that breaks down the business and money behind sports.
huddleup.substack.com huddleup.substack.com

www.msnbc.com

MS NOW

MS NOW breaking news and the latest news for today. Get daily news from local news reporters and world news updates with live audio & video from our team.
www.msnbc.com www.msnbc.com
Click to expand...
Yeah, there needs to be regulation or something to protect these guys or have a central clearing house which approves amateur athleteā€™s monetary deals because this will be like the local Miami record industry in the 80ā€™s. Unsophisticated, poor people will get pillaged
 
TemplarCane said:
Or maybe the court would say ā€œyour contract, your risk, your lossā€.
Click to expand...
Itā€™s possible. Just because a contract is illegal under NCAA rules doesnā€™t make it invalid or illegal under civil law which isnā€™t subject to the NCAA rules.

The problem I see, looking at it broadly, is not so much the contract but the non-reporting of income.
 
Advertisement
RVACane said:
Itā€™s possible. Just because a contract is illegal under NCAA rules doesnā€™t make it invalid or illegal under civil law which isnā€™t subject to the NCAA rules.

The problem I see, looking at it broadly, is not so much the contract but the non-reporting of income.
Click to expand...
I would be surprised if the $436K wasnā€™t reported. This would have serious ramifications for both sides, and neither would want to go to court. I would assume the court would want to see paperwork for the payments, and might notice no tax withholding or a 1099. I donā€™t know how it would be reported.

If I read the article correctly, the lawsuit is charging the contract invalid because it violates state law.

Dexterā€™s legal challenge alleges that BLA violated Floridaā€™s athlete agent act and NIL law, shedding light on the complexities and potential pitfalls of the evolving NIL landscape.
 
Last edited:
TemplarCane said:
I would be surprised if the $436K wasnā€™t reported. This would have serious ramifications for both sides, and neither would want to go to court. I would assume the court would want to see paperwork for the payments, and might notice no tax withholding or a 1099. I donā€™t know how it would be reported.

If I read the article correctly, the lawsuit is charging the contract invalid because it violates state law regarding athlete registration and representation, or something to that effect. Again, Iā€™m not a lawyer.

Dexterā€™s legal challenge alleges that BLA violated Floridaā€™s athlete agent act and NIL law, shedding light on the complexities and potential pitfalls of the evolving NIL landscape.
Click to expand...
Ok well, this is something though if itā€™s violating a state law as youā€™re pointing out.
 
Advertisement
IMG_0281.png
 
RVACane said:
Itā€™s possible. Just because a contract is illegal under NCAA rules doesnā€™t make it invalid or illegal under civil law which isnā€™t subject to the NCAA rules.

The problem I see, looking at it broadly, is not so much the contract but the non-reporting of income.
Click to expand...


Yes, I agree, two parties can make a contract that says, literally, anything.

What I was pointing out is that the "advance fund" clearly put forth a contract, to an 18 year old, that is in direct violation of brand new NIL rules that had just been put into place. ****, they could have even done one of these contracts 5 years ago, before NIL was even legal, since the "future money" is the NFL salary. I do think that the EXTRA citation of the "agent rules" is to bring in an area of state legality that HAS been in place prior to NIL rules.

I'm just pointing out that the court is highly unlikely to uphold that contract, whether it is for illegality or public policy or any other grounds.

But you are also correct, the non-reporting of income is going to be WAY worse, once the IRS comes sniffing around.

This **** is fascinating. Two years ago, I said that a lot of dirt would eventually come out, and here we are.
 
Back
Top