Started By
Message
re: Jaden Rashada sues Billy Napier, Florida booster over NIL deal
Posted on 5/23/24 at 4:00 pm to jonnyanony
Posted on 5/23/24 at 4:00 pm to jonnyanony
quote:
Again, this is the problem. He has absolutely nothing to show a judge or jury in a civil trial. His team knows this isn't winnable. He wants money to go away.
Next time, get a contract, both parties sign, and it's solid. Life lesson. But I have a feeling this won't be his last fishing expedition. Probably should focus more on football.
What you're talking about is what the lawyers can prove.
What I'm talking about is what any reasonable person thinks looking at the information available, not what the courts will decide.
Any reasonable person believes he was lied to at least by Hathcock and likely by the others mentioned in the suit (Castro-Walker and Napier) in order to get him to switch from Miami and in order to keep him as a commitment until after signing day at UF.
Because of those lies, he lost the potential to earn a lot of money? Can he win in court? Who knows. But based on your phrasing, even you believe that's what happened.
Or do you think he was NOT promised 13.85 million if he decommitted from Miami and went to UF instead? I get you believe UF is fine legally for backing out from the deal, but do you think the promise was made?
And for what reason did he still sign with UF once they cancelled the deal if it was NOT because of lies from someone he felt could be trusted about the money? I'm not asking if he can prove it or not... but do you have an alternative explanation on why he still signed with UF if it wasn't due to promises of payment? A reason that makes sense given he ended up leaving UF after signing day (because he wasn't paid in his explanation of why)?
You're saying nobody connected to UF would be liable. Heck, court cases are funny, you could very well be right.
I'm saying that regardless of what happens, they did lie to the kid to get him away from Miami and to take away his chance to get back into Miami's class once they weren't paying him.
And that's scummy behavior. In my mind, people doing that shite should be forced to pay something for their bad faith actions.
This post was edited on 5/23/24 at 4:01 pm
Posted on 5/23/24 at 4:08 pm to DawginSC
Get some of these UF folks on the stand and under oath. We might learn a lot
Posted on 5/23/24 at 5:05 pm to DawginSC
quote:
What you're talking about is what the lawyers can prove.
The lawyers have no intention of proving anything. This is a nuisance suit, the point is to get 'go away' money. That's all this is.
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/SR_Icon.jpg)