forums

Imperative to read the fine print.... NIL/Rev Share contracts

The transfer portal is just a database of convenience, it is no different than on3 or 247 player lists. It is unnecessary to change schools
 
Hoyacane1620 said:
Click to expand...

Excellent thread. Can someone please explain to me what a “settlement related benefits agreement” is specifically??? Why would anyone agree to give up their portal entry rights???

IMG_2299.jpeg
 
RVACane said:
@TheOriginalCane please “mansplain” for us simpletons. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. RVA
🤣
Click to expand...
The school will try to lock you in via the NIL agreement. The player obviously doesn't want to be locked in so another in a list of items for the parties to arm wrestle over. Want to lock me in? Pay me more? Outs if I don't get x plays? Lots of possible outcomes.
 
RVACane said:
Excellent thread. Can someone please explain to me what a “settlement related benefits agreement” is specifically??? Why would anyone agree to give up their portal entry rights???

View attachment 361443
Click to expand...


Well, without some further digging with people who do this regularly, I would say this.

When the Xavier Lucas situation went down, I pointed out that student-athletes had a BASIC right to transfer. They did. And that this right was more fundamental and important than "contract rights".

HOWEVER, I specifically said that there might be a FUTURE scenario where the school and the student-athlete, by virtue of a specific "transfer buyout clause", could agree (FOR CONSIDERATION) to forego his/her right to transfer.

Of course, this never happened. At least then.

But this NEW version of transfer-restrictive clauses, using misleading language (as always) seems to say that when these NIL and/or rev-share deals are ENTERED INTO, at that particular time, both parties (and we would all agree that the power and knowledge factors are equal, amirite?) could "enter into"...wait for it, wait for it...a "valid settlement related benefits agrreement" that...here it comes now..."releases the institution from the obligations of the NOTIFICATION of transfer process".

Wow. That was rough.

And what I think that means is this. IN ADVANCE, before there has ever been a decision to part ways, the parties are PRE-settling...in a way that holds zero benefit for the student-athlete, but paternalistically "releases" the university from the "obligations" of "notification". What in the actual ****? Notification? All the university has to do is press "send" on the transfer portal button. The student-athlete has already filled out the paperwork for submission, and given it to the school as (up until now) a COURTESY.

Let's not forget, the NCAA rules never previously gave the universities ANY grounds by which to "deny" entry into the Portal. Wisconsin just invented that **** on their own. Over a FALSE contractual claim for a document that was signed BEFORE rev-share deals had become legal.

But now they want to call it an "obligation of the notification of transfer process". Which appears to be a fancy way of saying "we won't put you in the Portal because you PRE-settled, saying we would be RELEASED from our OBLIGATION".

And ultimately what this does...from a legal standpoint...is to give relatively moderate judges...who could go either way on the contract claims...the opportunity to say what all of these ******* sportswriters are saying....

That if you want to play college football orr basketball in this country...and you want to be paid JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER PLAYER ON THE TEAM....then your broke-*** moms and dads, particularly the ones in rural towns with names you've never heard before...have to suddenly become these geniuses who know how to locate a specialized attorney who understands byzantine and ever-changing NIL/rev-share contract language...and then PAY such a lawyer to redline one of these oppressive documents...because if you don't do that, if you are a poor high school student from a poor family in a poor town...then you should somehow be blamed for not being able to comprehend such dense and misleading languge, allowing future judges to bind these student-athletes to one-sided contracts "because they didn't hire their own attorneys to review these documents before they signed them."

So, yeah, apparently the universities are, years before a transfer, tricking the athletes into PRE-APPROVING the right of the universities to NOT enter their names into the Portal...without negotiation...without a separate consideration being paid...without any ability to reopen the discussion closer in time to the decision to transfer.

And I think you'll understand my reference here, that student-athletes are being forced to sell their transfer birthrights for a mess of pottage.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Well, without some further digging with people who do this regularly, I would say this.

When the Xavier Lucas situation went down, I pointed out that student-athletes had a BASIC right to transfer. They did. And that this right was more fundamental and important than "contract rights".

HOWEVER, I specifically said that there might be a FUTURE scenario where the school and the student-athlete, by virtue of a specific "transfer buyout clause", could agree (FOR CONSIDERATION) to forego his/her right to transfer.

Of course, this never happened. At least then.

But this NEW version of transfer-restrictive clauses, using misleading language (as always) seems to say that when these NIL and/or rev-share deals are ENTERED INTO, at that particular time, both parties (and we would all agree that the power and knowledge factors are equal, amirite?) could "enter into"...wait for it, wait for it...a "valid settlement related benefits agrreement" that...here it comes now..."releases the institution from the obligations of the NOTIFICATION of transfer process".

Wow. That was rough.

And what I think that means is this. IN ADVANCE, before there has ever been a decision to part ways, the parties are PRE-settling...in a way that holds zero benefit for the student-athlete, but paternalistically "releases" the university from the "obligations" of "notification". What in the actual ****? Notification? All the university has to do is press "send" on the transfer portal button. The student-athlete has already filled out the paperwork for submission, and given it to the school as (up until now) a COURTESY.

Let's not forget, the NCAA rules never previously gave the universities ANY grounds by which to "deny" entry into the Portal. Wisconsin just invented that **** on their own. Over a FALSE contractual claim for a document that was signed BEFORE rev-share deals had become legal.

But now they want to call it an "obligation of the notification of transfer process". Which appears to be a fancy way of saying "we won't put you in the Portal because you PRE-settled, saying we would be RELEASED from our OBLIGATION".

And ultimately what this does...from a legal standpoint...is to give relatively moderate judges...who could go either way on the contract claims...the opportunity to say what all of these ******* sportswriters are saying....

That if you want to play college football orr basketball in this country...and you want to be paid JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER PLAYER ON THE TEAM....then your broke-*** moms and dads, particularly the ones in rural towns with names you've never heard before...have to suddenly become these geniuses who know how to locate a specialized attorney who understands byzantine and ever-changing NIL/rev-share contract language...and then PAY such a lawyer to redline one of these oppressive documents...because if you don't do that, if you are a poor high school student from a poor family in a poor town...then you should somehow be blamed for not being able to comprehend such dense and misleading languge, allowing future judges to bind these student-athletes to one-sided contracts "because they didn't hire their own attorneys to review these documents before they signed them."

So, yeah, apparently the universities are, years before a transfer, tricking the athletes into PRE-APPROVING the right of the universities to NOT enter their names into the Portal...without negotiation...without a separate consideration being paid...without any ability to reopen the discussion closer in time to the decision to transfer.

And I think you'll understand my reference here, that student-athletes are being forced to sell their transfer birthrights for a mess of pottage.
Click to expand...
Yeah, just what I thought. A way to ***** the players, particularly if they don’t have counsel.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Well, without some further digging with people who do this regularly, I would say this.

When the Xavier Lucas situation went down, I pointed out that student-athletes had a BASIC right to transfer. They did. And that this right was more fundamental and important than "contract rights".

HOWEVER, I specifically said that there might be a FUTURE scenario where the school and the student-athlete, by virtue of a specific "transfer buyout clause", could agree (FOR CONSIDERATION) to forego his/her right to transfer.

Of course, this never happened. At least then.

But this NEW version of transfer-restrictive clauses, using misleading language (as always) seems to say that when these NIL and/or rev-share deals are ENTERED INTO, at that particular time, both parties (and we would all agree that the power and knowledge factors are equal, amirite?) could "enter into"...wait for it, wait for it...a "valid settlement related benefits agrreement" that...here it comes now..."releases the institution from the obligations of the NOTIFICATION of transfer process".

Wow. That was rough.

And what I think that means is this. IN ADVANCE, before there has ever been a decision to part ways, the parties are PRE-settling...in a way that holds zero benefit for the student-athlete, but paternalistically "releases" the university from the "obligations" of "notification". What in the actual ****? Notification? All the university has to do is press "send" on the transfer portal button. The student-athlete has already filled out the paperwork for submission, and given it to the school as (up until now) a COURTESY.

Let's not forget, the NCAA rules never previously gave the universities ANY grounds by which to "deny" entry into the Portal. Wisconsin just invented that **** on their own. Over a FALSE contractual claim for a document that was signed BEFORE rev-share deals had become legal.

But now they want to call it an "obligation of the notification of transfer process". Which appears to be a fancy way of saying "we won't put you in the Portal because you PRE-settled, saying we would be RELEASED from our OBLIGATION".

And ultimately what this does...from a legal standpoint...is to give relatively moderate judges...who could go either way on the contract claims...the opportunity to say what all of these ******* sportswriters are saying....

That if you want to play college football orr basketball in this country...and you want to be paid JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER PLAYER ON THE TEAM....then your broke-*** moms and dads, particularly the ones in rural towns with names you've never heard before...have to suddenly become these geniuses who know how to locate a specialized attorney who understands byzantine and ever-changing NIL/rev-share contract language...and then PAY such a lawyer to redline one of these oppressive documents...because if you don't do that, if you are a poor high school student from a poor family in a poor town...then you should somehow be blamed for not being able to comprehend such dense and misleading languge, allowing future judges to bind these student-athletes to one-sided contracts "because they didn't hire their own attorneys to review these documents before they signed them."

So, yeah, apparently the universities are, years before a transfer, tricking the athletes into PRE-APPROVING the right of the universities to NOT enter their names into the Portal...without negotiation...without a separate consideration being paid...without any ability to reopen the discussion closer in time to the decision to transfer.

And I think you'll understand my reference here, that student-athletes are being forced to sell their transfer birthrights for a mess of pottage.
Click to expand...
It's a negotiation. Nobody is making anyone do anything. Well, I guess if you are dumb enough not to have someone competent review the document and negotiate the points. Otherwise, it isn't dissimilar to the rate to be paid itself.
 
NCCanefan said:
It's a negotiation. Nobody is making anyone do anything. Well, I guess if you are dumb enough not to have someone competent review the document and negotiate the points. Otherwise, it isn't dissimilar to the rate to be paid itself.
Click to expand...
my assumption is this will be a non-negotiable condition of accepting rev sharing money.
 
Here we are several years after NIL and Transfer Portal geneses and we have nothing for CBA's, proper conference construction, proper portaling..... Somehow the NCAA and a few conferences tap dance around topics, always looking for one leg up on the players, yet calling it something other than F'ing the players around.
 
NCCanefan said:
It's a negotiation. Nobody is making anyone do anything. Well, I guess if you are dumb enough not to have someone competent review the document and negotiate the points. Otherwise, it isn't dissimilar to the rate to be paid itself.
Click to expand...


My brother, it is NOT a negotiation. Not when entire conferences use the same template.

And this has NOTHING to do with "intelligence" as to whether you "review" the document. Ask yourself a simple question, if you live in, say, NIXA MISSOURI, who in the **** is the best lawyer to "review the document and negotiate the points". This is a BRAND NEW area of the law, since it is not a typical contract and has connectons to NCAA rules and guidelines that very few attorneys have ever studied.

So you are calling people "dumb" for living in a part of the country and/or having limited resources when it comes to consulting with a real expert like Darren Heitner. And that's just wrong and misguided.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
NCCanefan said:
It's a negotiation. Nobody is making anyone do anything. Well, I guess if you are dumb enough not to have someone competent review the document and negotiate the points. Otherwise, it isn't dissimilar to the rate to be paid itself.
Click to expand...


My brother, it is NOT a negotiation. Not when entire conferences use the same template.

And this has NOTHING to do with "intelligence" as to whether you "review" the document. Ask yourself a simple question, if you live in, say, NIXA MISSOURI, who in the **** is the best lawyer to "review the document and negotiate the points". This is a BRAND NEW area of the law, since it is not a typical contract and has connectons to NCAA rules and guidelines that very few attorneys have ever studied.

So you are calling people "dumb" for living in a part of the country and/or having limited resources when it comes to consulting with a real expert like Darren Heitner. And that's just wrong and misguided.
Click to expand...
Wow. It only isn’t a negotiation if you don’t negotiate the points. Don’t make this into some moon shot. The school wants to lock you in and the athlete wants flexibility. Pretty straightforward negotiation.
 
NCCanefan said:
Wow. It only isn’t a negotiation if you don’t negotiate the points. Don’t make this into some moon shot. The school wants to lock you in and the athlete wants flexibility. Pretty straightforward negotiation.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t work like this unfortunately. It really isn’t an arm’s length transaction because the NCAA and the conferences are monopolies and if they band together and come up with a conference template, like the B1G has done, then that may not be as negotiable as it would appear. And as a once practicing lawyer, like TOC who still practices, I absolutely recommend players get qualified counsel. However, a number of players unfortunately will have Uncle Morris, who owns a barbershop, advising them because “he knows business”. That’s on the player and his family but unfortunately people will get taken advantage of or not represented properly.

Whoever is out there in this situation, just google “Darren Heitner attorney” and reach out to him for representation. He knows what he’s doing.
 
basically just means there will be a buyout "settlement" similar to mensah at duke

would be my guess

they cant force you to play, and ultimately if the player wants out they just need to be compensated for that
 
He who represents himself has a fool for a client.

Also, if you're not a lawyer, don't practice law the same as if you're not a doctor, don't practice medicine.

Lastly, don't argue with a lawyer. Or my Mrs. BigDik. She will slap a bltc.h.
 
Back
Top