UGA Suing Former Player For Clawback of Pay-For-Pay

[4Q Basket Case]

Kind of recruiting, kind of football in general: A player played two years at UGA. Then he transferred to Mizzou. UGA is suing to claw back what they paid him, asking for $390K.

According to the ESPN article below, the method of calculation is “interesting.” I’m not at all sure they’ll get everything they’re asking for.

Still, this is the first time I’ve seen a school sue a player who transferred out.

Could get interesting, not just for this case, but for the precedent it sets for college football as a whole.

Georgia seeks $390K from DE Wilson over transfer

Georgia's athletic department is headed to court to try to obtain $390,000 in damages from a former standout defensive end who transferred from the school after his sophomore season in a potentially precedent-setting case.

www.espn.com

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

Kind of recruiting, kind of football in general: A player played two years at UGA. Then he transferred to Mizzou. UGA is suing to claw back what they paid him, asking for $390K.

According to the ESPN article below, the method of calculation is “interesting.” I’m not at all sure they’ll get everything they’re asking for.

Still, this is the first time I’ve seen a school sue a player who transferred out.

Could get interesting, not just for this case, but for the precedent it sets for college football as a whole.

Georgia seeks $390K from DE Wilson over transfer

Georgia's athletic department is headed to court to try to obtain $390,000 in damages from a former standout defensive end who transferred from the school after his sophomore season in a potentially precedent-setting case.

www.espn.com

Hmmm.

I thought that at that particular time, the schools couldn't be directly involved in any "play for pay".

Something really stinks here.

Why is the school even involved if it is a dispute between the "collective" and a player?

 

[rolltide_21]

Contacts are needed much like you have in professional sports.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

Contacts are needed much like you have in professional sports.

At least according to ESPN, there is a contract, and UGA is suing to enforce it.

When it was signed or last modified, the article doesn’t say. It does say there was a signed term sheet (as distinct from a contract) when he transferred to Mizzou.

To the player I’d say: If you want to get paid like the big boys, you’ll be treated with all the rights and obligations that entails.

 

[BamaNation]

I am all for seeing more of this. Kudos to the Bulldawgs for having the willpower to do it.

In this case, the player took $30K two weeks before he transferred. He almost had to know at that point that he was going to transfer. Seems like there should also be some sizeable claim against Mizzou for signing him while he was under contract with UGA.

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

But if the contract was with the collective, shouldn't it be the collective that sues...?

 

[TheRealPokeChop]

Win you get less tha. Half a million back but look bad to recruits, lose you look bad and rish a counter suit....slim chance maybe it sends a message.

Just dont see the point

 

[4Q Basket Case]

But if the contract was with the collective, shouldn't it be the collective that sues...?

Legitimate point. Since schools can pay players directly, it could be a tri-party agreement. Or maybe the contract is between UGA and the player, by-passing the collective altogether. I don't know.

Regardless, standing to sue is a pretty basic legal concept. Given the publicity they had to know this suit would attract, I'd be shocked if UGA didn't have that base covered before they filed.

I think the real point is that there are endless "what about...." factors that you'd have to see the contract to evaluate. Which neither ESPN nor is readers have done. If the suit makes it into court, the contract could become a public document, which could get most interesting.

Win you get less tha. Half a million back but look bad to recruits, lose you look bad and rish a counter suit....slim chance maybe it sends a message.

Just dont see the point

If the issue began and ended with one player, I might agree. But it doesn't. It sets a precedent for every player who is, or ever will be, on the team and getting pay-for-play. And possibly sets a precedent for other schools.

IOW, if you effectively announce to the world that that you're not going to enforce contractual rights, why have a contract at all?