Wisconsin officially sues Miami over Xavier Lucas

[Calinative]

No freaking way. You had to have put in the prompt...read this and give an orange and green shades response.

Not that I don't agree with everything this bot said. It's as eloquent as it is accurate!

My prompt was to to write a defense for Miami from a lawyer that showed high confidence in their defense, and was as professionally insulting as possible.

 

[caneingville]

At first, I thought that this was just an attempt to smear Miami’s name. It’s a win-win situation. Even if they lose they get to allegedly expose all the things we did to try to allure other players to come to Miami in the transfer portal or recruiting.
However, I really don’t see that being the end goal with the amount of money they would have to spend to fight this. Especially when you consider that the U getting mentioned in any negativity is like a cfb Pavlovian response.

From the beginning I suspected that they didn’t release him into the transfer portal because they knew that the flood gates would open with other players that signed that stupid contract.

The entire conference had most of their teams hand out this contract to other players. They were probably hoping for the smoke to clear to see where other players thoughts and actions would be at.
Suing Miami is probably gonna stop some players from entering the transfer portal because they would be afraid that if Wisconsin wins, then they would have to pay that money back.

This has the big 10’s fingerprints all over it and trying to stop a bunch of those contracts being automatically voided.

If they don’t sue, a bunch of players are gonna leave as soon as the next window opens. If they lose the same thing happens. But at least a lawsuit puts things in limbo indefinitely.

The season is about to start and they are probably players that have been wanting to transfer but are scared to because of what they signed.
But if an entire season passes, and Lucas doesn’t pay any money back, gets some all American honors or mentions, and gets a lot of NFL buzz; that contract is getting more and more worthless by the minute.
As soon as that portal window opens, they’re gonna jump in it. But if there’s pending litigation, they might not want to do it. So in essence, by suing Miami that contract holds some weight.

Also, if a bunch of people donated money to that collective and they can’t hold on to any of their players; they risk any future financial funding.

Agreed. The only thing is that I don’t think they really gave him much money. The way it reads is that they gave him some on the day he signed, and then would get more after the House settlement went through. So I suspect the first payment was nominal, and meant simply as consideration for one or possibly both of the agreements. (Consideration is a requirement of a valid contract for those who aren’t aware.)

I absolutely agree that we are just collateral damage. This is an attempt to get the courts to enforce their NIL agreement-that’s it. Note that we all keep harping on the damages element. One of the things they asked for is a declaratory judgment, which everyone may recall from the FSU / ACC suit. They don’t care about money as much as they just want the court to lay out their rights in the agreements.

 

[AtlAtty]

Agreed. The only thing is that I don’t think they really gave him much money. The way it reads is that they gave him some on the day he signed, and then would get more after the House settlement went through. So I suspect the first payment was nominal, and meant simply as consideration for one or possibly both of the agreements. (Consideration is a requirement of a valid contract for those who aren’t aware.)

I absolutely agree that we are just collateral damage. This is an attempt to get the courts to enforce their NIL agreement-that’s it. Note that we all keep harping on the damages element. One of the things they asked for is a declaratory judgment, which everyone may recall from the FSU / ACC suit. They don’t care about money as much as they just want the court to lay out their rights in the agreements.

Your last point is why we see the lawsuit as pointless, but to UW and the Big Ten it has some meaning. This is likely the conference even more so than the school wanting a court to find that they have an enforceable NIL contract, especially if the Big Ten is encouraging all their member schools to use a similar NIL contract.

But you and I know that courts do not care to be used this way and find such lawsuits to be an absolute waste of time and resources. This will likely take 3+ years to be decided if the parties choose to take discovery, and UM may just as a way of saying F You to UW. And by that time the entire point of the lawsuit may be moot considering the evolution of college sports and player payment.

In the end it all seems like a colossal waste of time.

 

[caneingville]

Your last point is why we see the lawsuit as pointless, but to UW and the Big Ten it has some meaning. This is likely the conference even more so than the school wanting a court to find that they have an enforceable NIL contract, especially if the Big Ten is encouraging all their member schools to use a similar NIL contract.

But you and I know that courts do not care to be used this way and find such lawsuits to be an absolute waste of time and resources. This will likely take 3+ years to be decided if the parties choose to take discovery, and UM may just as a way of saying F You to UW. And by that time the entire point of the lawsuit may be moot considering the evolution of college sports and player payment.

In the end it all seems like a colossal waste of time.

And for those who are worried that this prevents us from ever getting into the Big10, I don’t believe that is true. UM tends to handle these things professionally and I don’t see why that wouldn’t continue.

Sometimes lawsuits are just a means to an end. It doesn’t mean the Big10 hates us.

 

[scrantoncane]

And for those who are worried that this prevents us from ever getting into the Big10, I don’t believe that is true. UM tends to handle these things professionally and I don’t see why that wouldn’t continue.

Sometimes lawsuits are just a means to an end. It doesn’t mean the Big10 hates us.

Whether UM gets an invite to the B1G will come down to dollars and cents, like it always does. It is business, just like this lawsuit is.

And that Barry Alvarez/shalala connection doesn’t hurt.

 

[CanefaninBuckeyeland]

It'll be interesting to see where the NCAA falls on all of this. I think we can all agree that the B10 is the one really pulling the strings here, but what they are essentially saying is that their template supersedes and/or invalidates NCAA mandates. Perhaps the NCAA has already ceded any semblance of authority or control to the member institutions/conferences, but the fact that their argument says that they did not input Lucas' name into the portal due to to a "contractual" agreement (no matter how it was presented) is a big F U to the NCAA.

Also, for the attorneys out there, though it is awfully shady (and you can argue unethical) for any entity to present a contract to an individual with no legal representation and who is obviously not equipped to decipher all of the legal mumbo jumbo, Lucas is legally an adult of sound body and mind. How is that handled?

 

[PalyCane]

Great relies/insight from the attys.

How likely do you guys think it ends up in Fed court, where I could see these arguments playing well vs remaining in Wisconsin state court where home team factors are likely more in play?

 

[PalyCane]

This discussion from Jan would seem prescient given current events lol

 

[TruCane81]

This is the point that everyone seems to be missing and is the bigger concern rather than the lawsuit itself.

Well if they don’t **** with us at least it’s out in the open and we ain’t got to guess and pray

 

[JG14]

Fickell is a ****. End thread

 

[TheOriginalCane]

They will probably sue us for giving them TVD

They might actually win that lawsuit…

 

[Fart Keyhole]

Fickell is a ****. End thread

Looking for revenge against Miami for the beating he got at the hands of Al Golden's first team.

 

[caneingville]

Also, for the attorneys out there, though it is awfully shady (and you can argue unethical) for any entity to present a contract to an individual with no legal representation and who is obviously not equipped to decipher all of the legal mumbo jumbo, Lucas is legally an adult of sound body and mind. How is that handled?

Court isn’t going to like the power imbalance, even if the kid is 18 and of sound body and mind. If they indeed coerced him to sign on the spot without allowing him to have representation review the documents, especially with those restrictions imposed? There are legal defenses to this for a reason. Courts have also been known to toss non-competes out, and this is what they will compare it to, as it is meant to restrict Lucas’s freedom.

Great relies/insight from the attys.

How likely do you guys think it ends up in Fed court, where I could see these arguments playing well vs remaining in Wisconsin state court where home team factors are likely more in play?

It will get removed to federal court.

 

[Clipse]

The case UW is making is so laughable, Miami could easily win it by putting interns on the case and using the heavy hitters to counter-sue.

 

[DangerMouse949]

I am not sure if this was brought up, but this whole tampering thing and contract deal sounds like a "Non-Compete" clause I was made to signed when working for big companies.

Most of those were never enforced because the cost of lawyers wasn't worth it.

 

[Virginia_Cane]

Looking for revenge against Miami for the beating he got at the hands of Al Golden's first team.

Probably more driven by the boosters and collective vs Fickell

 

[Fart Keyhole]

Probably more driven by the boosters and collective vs Fickell

True.

I really think this has very little to to with Wisconsin and almost everything to do with the B1G (what a stupid name).

The B1G is trying to get a court to sanctify their anti-competition agreements. Miami is simply easy prey, and the filing is only coming now after the House settlement was finalized. DMoney and others are correct on this issue.

It's a frivolous case and I hope it gets tossed. Discovery will probably be worse for Miami than Wisconsin. Not because the facts are against us, but because of the asymmetric hatred. Nobody gives two ***** about the desolate backwater that is Wisconsin unless it's an election year, whereas a great many American has nasty thoughts about the great metropolitan area of Miami.

 

[PalyCane]

Court isn’t going to like the power imbalance, even if the kid is 18 and of sound body and mind. If they indeed coerced him to sign on the spot without allowing him to have representation review the documents, especially with those restrictions imposed? There are legal defenses to this for a reason. Courts have also been known to toss non-competes out, and this is what they will compare it to, as it is meant to restrict Lucas’s freedom.

Contract of Adhesion argument possible? (Though UM isn't party to the "contracts")

 

[caneingville]

Contract of Adhesion argument possible? (Though UM isn't party to the "contracts")

Definitely one of the arguments, although not the primary. Hard to say for sure without having seen the contracts, but it is an obvious argument for why the agreements aren’t enforceable. Their own complaint reads of them bullying a naive kid into complying with the agreements, while they disregard NCAA bylaws. The thing with this legal argument is that you can also argue that the whole circumstances around the contract signing, and not just the contract itself, are “unconscionable.” It’s all about the power imbalance. So the contract wording itself could be drafted perfectly fine, but the court could throw it out because they think the whole thing isn’t fair to the signing party.

Remember that, also, regardless of whether or not UM was a party to the agreements, UW and the collective have to prove the agreements were valid and enforceable and that Lucas breached the agreements. They also have to prove UM both knew about the agreements AND did some nefarious, unjustifiable act to induce Lucas to breach those valid and enforceable agreements. If UM acted lawfully at all times - and I mean United States lawfully, not NCAA lawfully - that is one element they cannot prove and they can’t win the case.

 

[Gennaker Cane]

No.

You were wrong in your belief about the 11th Amendment.

And you were also wrong in thinking you understood what I was saying.

Me being right and you being doubly-wrong is not much of a debate, friend-o.

Go **** off. You don't know **** about my "diversity argument".

Again, I have known for MONTHS that there were two "contracts". I've posted about that on other threads. So to sit here and yap about "Eleventh Amendment" stuff when you were absolutely wrong is comical.

And I have no idea whether you ever attended law school. But as any DECENT law student would tell you, 12(b)(6) becomes a running joke among law students. It is shorthand for dismissing something without being bogged down by the details. It was not, as you misperceived, a literal claim that the case absolutely would go to federal court. It's a joke which flew way over your head.

Having said that, I absolutely believe this case can and should be removed to federal court, even if based solely upon the Collective being one of the Plaintiffs. This is a contractual scheme involving TWO contracts, and only one of them could even be argued to be operative, valid, and/or enforceable in December 2024. It was literally impossible to enforce the rev-share agreement with UW in December 2024. ****, the University of Wisconsin should be DISMISSED from the lawsuit as a plaintiff, having no valid contract as of December 2024.

Just acknowledge your ****-up without being worried about anyone else. I know what I'm talking about, I've done way more examination of this issue, since December 2024, than you have, what with your "I'm pretty sure the 11th Amendment applies" nonsense.

Now that we have both seen the actual complaint, it looks like their path to avoid federal court is even easier due to the LLC being the other plaintiff. BOP is on the moving party and the other side has had five months to prepare for this.

Now, all of this has been interesting and fun, but ultimately UM doesn't need to go to federal court to win this one as, like everyone here has already said, there just are too many flaws in their theories for both liability and damages. The complaint is amusing at times though-arguing that UM "continued to recruit" an athlete who had made a "written commitment" to another school likely means a recruit tweeted his commitment and UM, like every other school, didn't stop trying to recruit him. The tortious interference with prospective contracts because of an "expectation" took some courage to write as well.

I acknolwedged I was wrong on the 11th Am issue long ago, amigo. I have no issue acknowledging errors, and this was one of them. I can definitely appreciate a joke too, and if that is what you want to call the discussion about a 12(b)(6) , good on you, you fooled me. Lastly, I'm done with the personal back and forth on this.