The civil suit isn't about recovering money damages from the defendants, and it isn't about the plaintiff's reputation. The outcome of the suit will not in reality affect the public's perception, except perhaps if the plaintiffs lose. Folks will generally continue to believe what they want about RR and whether it has or has not given free stuff to athletes, whatever happens. Whether the athletes involved in this case lied or not will not likely affect what RR's customers or potential customers believe about whether RR has given stuff to other athletes.

You may well be correct that the real issue is about the NCAA potentially forcing Ole Miss to dissassociate the plaintiffs. The civil suit itself can't stop the disassociation. The NCAA and Ole Miss are not defendants in the suit. So my point remains, it isn't about damages from the defendants, as they presently don't have the ability to pay significant damages; the conspiracy theory is fairly weak; and the disparagement suit is not strong (no Mississippi case has ever recognized the claim, and at least one federal court has dismissed a trade libel suit for that reason). So my best guess is the plaintiffs are seeking to indirectly impact the NCAA's actions in dealing with the charges involving plaintiffs which might result in disassociation, and to try to help Ole Miss generally in pressuring the NCAA.

The problem is that even if they win the suit, the NCAA may still force the disassociation, because the suit doesn't have a direct impact on the NCAA. If the NCAA does force the disassociation, then the damage to RR you mention is done. If that leads to law suits against the NCAA and/or even Ole Miss, it will likely be years down the road before there is a resolution that would help RR.