Rashada is suing Napier and a Florida booster.

[TheOriginalCane]

I hate the Gators as much as the next guy, but we should actually be aligned with UF here. Let me explain. This is potentially a bad precedent and might even hurt UM more than other places, considering how ahead of the game we are on NIL (or reliant on it).

Consider this. Let's assume a coach, in selling his school over a rival, tells a recruit, "come here because we have a great NIL package awaiting you, and lots of donors and businessmen that will want you to promote/market their product." The player is a middling player and later sues, claiming that he was misled and no donors or businessmen stepped up and that had he gone elsewhere, he would have done better. Its really dangerous to make selling points (the legal term is puffery) actionable claims that players can bring.

Or, a more concrete example. Which apparently is pretty close to what happened at UF.

Let's assume we're fighting for a recruit with OSU. OSU has offered $500,000. Cristobal receives a commitment from local businessman or UM collectivel it'll up the ante and do $600,000. Cristobal merely conveys that if player commits, player will do $100K better here than elsewhere. No lie is told. But Cristobal isn't offering actual "UMiami" funds, nor has Cristobal verified source of funding and how legitimate it is. Player commits. NIL source bails. Now what? Can player sue MC because MC was told and accurately relayed that UM collective would do $100K better. That's risky.

Kids should not be misled but allowing something like this also opens up a huge can of worms and possibilities for a lot of "he-said-he-said" and varying accounts between player and coach about what was actually said.

Wrong.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Jaden Rashada had a signed and enforceable contract with the Miami Collective. The actions of Slingblade Billy and Angel of Death Hugh Hathnocock constitute tortious interference with a contract.

SEPARATELY, after the Gator Collective and Hathnocock repudiated the FLORIDA NIL contract 25 days after it was signed, they fraudulently led Jaden Rashada to believe that the ONLY reason for the repudiation of the contract was because they needed to change the payor from Velocity Automotive to Hugh Hathnocock personally. These lies convinced Jaden Rashada to eventually sign his LOI, a separate legally-binding contract.

Collectively, these two actions (convincing Jaden Rashada to breach his Miami Collective contract while also breaching the Florida Collective contract 25 days after it was signed for no valid reason under the contract) left Jaden Rashada unable to enroll and/or secure a replacement NIL contract within the desired time frame, and cost him, at a bare minimum, the amount he would have been paid under the Miami Collective contract.

This is NOT about "offers".

This IS about signed contracts. And false PROMISES to pay which cause delay and detrimental reliance.

 

[AlexCane]

Wrong.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Jaden Rashada had a signed and enforceable contract with the Miami Collective. The actions of Slingblade Billy and Angel of Death Hugh Hathnocock constitute tortious interference with a contract.

SEPARATELY, after the Gator Collective and Hathnocock repudiated the FLORIDA NIL contract 25 days after it was signed, they fraudulently led Jaden Rashada to believe that the ONLY reason for the repudiation of the contract was because they needed to change the payor from Velocity Automotive to Hugh Hathnocock personally. These lies convinced Jaden Rashada to eventually sign his LOI, a separate legally-binding contract.

Collectively, these two actions (convincing Jaden Rashada to breach his Miami Collective contract while also breaching the Florida Collective contract 25 days after it was signed for no valid reason under the contract) left Jaden Rashada unable to enroll and/or secure a replacement NIL contract within the desired time frame, and cost him, at a bare minimum, the amount he would have been paid under the Miami Collective contract.

This is NOT about "offers".

This IS about signed contracts. And false PROMISES to pay which cause delay and detrimental reliance.

I don't know, man. It's a slippery slope for future lawsuits. If I'm a collegiate coach right now, I'm being more careful when I discuss financial numbers. That's good in some ways, but bad in that if your selling point is $, your pitch just got limited.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I don't know, man. It's a slippery slope for future lawsuits. If I'm a collegiate coach right now, I'm being more careful when I discuss financial numbers. That's good in some ways, but bad in that if your selling point is $, your pitch just got limited.

I have no problems with coaches discussing numbers.

The law has a problem with coaches (and others) discussing numbers when someone already has a signed and enforceable contract.

Pitch away. But if a kid has already signed a huge NIL deal, proceed with caution.

 

[AlexCane]

I have no problems with coaches discussing numbers.

The law has a problem with coaches (and others) discussing numbers when someone already has a signed and enforceable contract.

Pitch away. But if a kid has already signed a huge NIL deal, proceed with caution.

Why? If Player X signs an NIL contract that gives Player X the discretion to cancel the contract at will, why can't Player X use that contract to negotiate a better NIL deal elsewhere? I know no one like this because "you signed a contract" but lets leave morality at the door when it comes to college athletics because we know kids are already playing schools against each other for leverage.

 

[Cookie917]

Why? If Player X signs an NIL contract that gives Player X the discretion to cancel the contract at will, why can't Player X use that contract to negotiate a better NIL deal elsewhere? I know no one like this because "you signed a contract" but lets leave morality at the door when it comes to college athletics because we know kids are already playing schools against each other for leverage.

I think the why is simple even if a kid can get out at will and cancel at any time without repercussion that is largely irrelevant, if Player A signs an NIL with School A, School B is aware of that and offers more and that entices Player A to cancel with School A then sign with School B and School B does not pony up the bucks then that is where the problem lies. Hence the proceed with caution. If a deal is already in the universe signed sealed and delivered, better make sure your ducks are in a row before that player jumps ship and loses that opportunity.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Why? If Player X signs an NIL contract that gives Player X the discretion to cancel the contract at will, why can't Player X use that contract to negotiate a better NIL deal elsewhere? I know no one like this because "you signed a contract" but lets leave morality at the door when it comes to college athletics because we know kids are already playing schools against each other for leverage.

"Let's leave morality at the door". Sure.

That doesn't work in court.

As in life, a person can breach a contract if he/she wants to do so. That is INDEPENDENT from whether a third party tortiously interferes with that contract.

Again, another thought that goes FAR beyond athletics or "leaving morality at the door": if you want to induce someone to break a contract, don't leave a paper and/or digital trail.

Word to the wise.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I think the why is simple even if a kid can get out at will and cancel at any time without repercussion that is largely irrelevant, if Player A signs an NIL with School A, School B is aware of that and offers more and that entices Player A to cancel with School A then sign with School B and School B does not pony up the bucks then that is where the problem lies. Hence the proceed with caution. If a deal is already in the universe signed sealed and delivered, better make sure your ducks are in a row before that player jumps ship and loses that opportunity.

Calendar dates are important.

 

[JamesQuall]

I don't know, man. It's a slippery slope for future lawsuits. If I'm a collegiate coach right now, I'm being more careful when I discuss financial numbers. That's good in some ways, but bad in that if your selling point is $, your pitch just got limited.

In my opinion, coaches shouldn't be pitching dollar amounts anyway. I thought that was illegal for coaches to do that but maybe things changed.

I'm imagining something along the lines of "We offer some of the best NIL contracts through Canes Connection and other NIL affiliates. You can speak to Mr. Collective Representative who is right here about how much the collective is ready to offer you." Maybe cite public examples, i.e Nigel Packs as an example of what can be offered. But again coaches should not be saying "We're going to offer you X amount of dollars." Because the coaches are not part of and do not represent the collectives.














Disclaimer: who the **** am I and what do I know?

 

[Rellyrell]

Wrong.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Jaden Rashada had a signed and enforceable contract with the Miami Collective. The actions of Slingblade Billy and Angel of Death Hugh Hathnocock constitute tortious interference with a contract.

SEPARATELY, after the Gator Collective and Hathnocock repudiated the FLORIDA NIL contract 25 days after it was signed, they fraudulently led Jaden Rashada to believe that the ONLY reason for the repudiation of the contract was because they needed to change the payor from Velocity Automotive to Hugh Hathnocock personally. These lies convinced Jaden Rashada to eventually sign his LOI, a separate legally-binding contract.

Collectively, these two actions (convincing Jaden Rashada to breach his Miami Collective contract while also breaching the Florida Collective contract 25 days after it was signed for no valid reason under the contract) left Jaden Rashada unable to enroll and/or secure a replacement NIL contract within the desired time frame, and cost him, at a bare minimum, the amount he would have been paid under the Miami Collective contract.

This is NOT about "offers".

This IS about signed contracts. And false PROMISES to pay which cause delay and detrimental reliance.

If he signed an enforceable contract w/ Miami, & to claim that they were the victims of tortious interference of a contract, then it is incumbent upon The Rashadas to provide said NIL stating the parameters, correct?

 

[TheOriginalCane]

If he signed an enforceable contract w/ Miami, & to claim that they were the victims of tortious interference of a contract, then it is incumbent upon The Rashadas to provide said NIL stating the parameters, correct?

Yes.

 

[mirvin88]

In my opinion, coaches shouldn't be pitching dollar amounts anyway. I thought that was illegal for coaches to do that but maybe things changed.

I'm imagining something along the lines of "We offer some of the best NIL contracts through Canes Connection and other NIL affiliates. You can speak to Mr. Collective Representative who is right here about how much the collective is ready to offer you." Maybe cite public examples, i.e Nigel Packs as an example of what can be offered. But again coaches should not be saying "We're going to offer you X amount of dollars." Because the coaches are not part of and do not represent the collectives.














Disclaimer: who the **** am I and what do I know?

Yeah, I thought coaches couldn’t discuss it anyway…..

But wtf do I know

 

[Ispyin]

The more I think about this, this is just a stinker all-around.

The Gators already have a black eye. Regardless of what the truth is, everyone now believes their NIL program is weak and their coach was apparently so desperate, he was pleading with Rashada to commit in exchange for $1 million.

On the other side, Rashada and his team may be looking at long litigation with little upside. I've litigated with and against these fantastically wealthy individuals and they have "f u" money and simply don't care spending millions in legal fees because it appeases their ego to win. No idea who Hathcock is and his attitude, but these multimillionaires generally don't give a __. No one wants to litigate against guys like this. It's a war of attrition.

As an aside, really questionable for Rashada to file in federal court. I guess he didn't want to be hometowned in podunk Gainesville but federal court won't be a friendly venue either.

Honestly the more I think about this, the ******* more hysterical it gets.

**** em both. Pox on both their houses

 

[IbzRlz]

Dude has an ego bigger than the Grand Canyon! Maybe he should have stuck with his commitment to the U...glad he didn't though as he seems like a prima donna who requires extra coddling

 

[JamesQuall]

Honestly the more I think about this, the ******* more hysterical it gets.

**** em both. Pox on both their houses

 

[Hoyacane1620]

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Here is why Michelle is wrong.

She is interpreting the situation as "Jaden Rashada is going to have to prove fraud by showing that Hathnocock and the Collective never intended to pay Rashada any money, and never wanted him to play".

But I believe that Jaden Rashada will be able to prove fraud THIS way: Hathnocock and the Collective never intended to pay the PROMISED amount, and hoped to use the signed LOI as leverage to get Rashada to take a LESSER amount.

AT THE TIME, there were not "unlimited transfers". You got one, and then that was it. So if a kid doesn't want to burn his "one free transfer" a month after enrolling, the school/collective/coach has all the leverage to try to get Rashada to take a LESSER amount. And THAT actually happened.

The Collective and Hathnocock HAD the money. They COULD have paid Rashada. They didn't WANT to pay Rashada. They tried to use the LOI to get Rashada to renegotiate to a lower amount.

 

[pacusmc]

Here is why Michelle is wrong.

She is interpreting the situation as "Jaden Rashada is going to have to prove fraud by showing that Hathnocock and the Collective never intended to pay Rashada any money, and never wanted him to play".

But I believe that Jaden Rashada will be able to prove fraud THIS way: Hathnocock and the Collective never intended to pay the PROMISED amount, and hoped to use the signed LOI as leverage to get Rashada to take a LESSER amount.

AT THE TIME, there were not "unlimited transfers". You got one, and then that was it. So if a kid doesn't want to burn his "one free transfer" a month after enrolling, the school/collective/coach has all the leverage to try to get Rashada to take a LESSER amount. And THAT actually happened.

The Collective and Hathnocock HAD the money. They COULD have paid Rashada. They didn't WANT to pay Rashada. They tried to use the LOI to get Rashada to renegotiate to a lower amount.

How do you not know that you don’t have 13 million dollars to give someone??

Sounds like a Kevin Hart joke

“See the way my checking and my savings are set up the money goes into my ……..”

 

[JG14]

Just stopping in to applaud TOC for using "Hathnocock" every single time

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Just stopping in to applaud TOC for using "Hathnocock" every single time

Appreciated.

I've been typing "F$U" since the Free Shoes scandal...

 

[canesupremacy]

He's kind of got a nice thing going at Ole Miss right now. Got them humming, has NIL support, getting a pretty good salary and the expectations are much lower. He may want the UF job, but if I was in his situation, I'd prefer Ole Miss.

I expect UF to fire him this year and cite cause to not pay him. I don’t think a decent coach will be touching the swamp rats for a while