Started By
Message

re: Ole Miss files lawsuit against two LSU players

Posted on 7/30/26 at 10:38 pm to
Posted by SidewalkTiger
Member since Dec 2019
72852 posts
Posted on 7/30/26 at 10:38 pm to
quote:

but the interesting part is what it means for these contracts going forward. Miami had to pay off duke, the buyout kept demond Williams from going to lsu. How this is handled will have a big impact on college football.

Mensah was an NIL contract, completely different.

But I agree, this is both schools testing the parameters of if a revenue share contract and buyout is actually enforceable or not and will be the precedent by which these cases are judged going forward.

Ultimately, though, I believe there will be too many loopholes and the players will have to be classified as employees.
Posted by dljtigers
Sulphur, LA
Member since Feb 2012
2144 posts
Posted on 7/30/26 at 10:43 pm to
Then you have a crappy memory because most LSU contract experts did not think or say BK's buyout wouldn't be paid, I'm sure most wanted to fire him for cause, but again you are wrong.

You are wrong a lot--at least that's consistent. Your obsession with anything LSU gives us confidence that you must be an idiot or psycho--or both.
Posted by ColoradoElkHerd
USA
Member since May 2014
4944 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 2:26 am to
quote:

LSU never agreed to pay it, so 


Nobody on this board knows that for sure.
Posted by LSUtigerNVegas9
Member since Nov 2025
172 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 3:58 am to
I’m kinda glad this is happening to be honest. It’s starts to set a precedent and starts establishing some sort of rules and boundaries. I think Kiffin knows this. If it does truly start jeopardizing their eligibility, LSU will pony up the money. They won’t let a little north of a mil stop them from having this roster all eligible. It will however start to set guidelines that buyouts must paid and rev share contracts are enforceable. Don’t be surprised if Kiffin is telling these players to let them take whatever means at their disposal. If they get an injunction that makes you ineligible we’ll pay the buyout. Ole Miss is hoping for an injunction to make these players ineligible. Which is kinda a loop hole in the system when you take the timing into consideration. Either way, one of these cases will go to court or they’ll change the language in the rev share contracts to be repaid sooner.


ETA
Some sort of court ruling on this rev share contract will come out within the next season or two.
This post was edited on 7/31/26 at 4:00 am
Posted by BeachsideLBC
Member since Sep 2024
233 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 5:22 am to
Because the players are PROFESSIONALS, with lawyers/agents. They are adults that enter under professional contracts with other adults and/or organizations, with both parties following advice of counsel. The players and their lawyers know the risks, and they benefit from the rewards.

This is a legal matter contemplating breach, which is basically OM saying “though I gave you no money, you broke your promise to me, and it caused me financial damages at some level.” OM has the burden of proving its measurable damages, which will be quite difficult, given the team has not played one down with the two players this season, and comparison to last year’s performance is immaterial given so many factors have changed, players, coaches, etc.

The NCAA will not subject itself to a damages suit from the players or LSU via restricting play.
Posted by BeachsideLBC
Member since Sep 2024
233 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 5:31 am to
LSU is not party to the contract and hasn’t been sued, moron.
Posted by BeachsideLBC
Member since Sep 2024
233 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 5:32 am to
Six months if fairly typical.
Posted by BeachsideLBC
Member since Sep 2024
233 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 5:39 am to
Finally, a lucid position. The only thing I’ll add is that if LSU made a promise to the players which it did not keep, the players could seek legal action to recover any judgments they suffered from LSU. I very much doubt LSU contractually agreed to pay players’ breach responsibilities with third parties.
Posted by AlbinoGator
Member since Oct 2016
2409 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 7:04 am to
Hey if yiu sign contract to get paid then you have to honor it,
These players knew that and whatever lsu promised them should have been taken care off before they signed with lsu,

These players want to get paid firne im ok with that but if they breach a contract then they need to be held responsible like anyone else, this thing needs to happen or nothing will change with the transfer portal and paying players

Because for sure if the scholl supposedly owed a player money like Glorida with Resheda
For sure that player is going to sue, so the schools need to do the same, you are paid to play to find more money and greener pastures fine but you give us the money back we already gave you. These players need to know that side of the business as well teach them a hard lesson I hope they don't play and have to pay the money back in full , that will be a valuable lesson sent to all players
Posted by Diamondawg
Mississippi
Member since Oct 2006
39269 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 8:32 am to
quote:

If you were a business owner, how long would you let a past due debt sit
Some businesses sell the bad debt to a collection agency for pennies on the dollar. However, I think this is more of a precedent case than a money case. In other words, let's set some ground rules for going forward. It needs or has to happen soon.
Posted by CatfishJohn
Member since Jun 2020
21838 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 8:40 am to
quote:

Multiple fans of other schools have chimed in on this thread agreeing with OM AD’s actions. Even some LSU fans agree with it too.



I think schools should all start doing it.

I think Ole Miss doing it first sucks for them and looking at the situation between the schools right now holistically (and the Clemson tampering), should've let this one go and wait for another opportunity. That is what I would want if I'm an Ole Miss fan. I'm not mad they're doing it though



Posted by RebelExpress38
In your base, killin your dudes
Member since Apr 2012
14340 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 8:41 am to
Shows you how little casual LSU fans know about current state of this sport when they regurgitate national writers calling this an NIL dispute when it’s actually Revenue Share. That’s an important distinction if you actually follow the sport and recruiting.

This has been in the news for weeks and we have people who still don’t understand the difference. I recommend reading up on it and then posting.
Posted by LSU Patrick
Member since Jan 2009
78187 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 8:42 am to
I didn't write the article, angry little reb. I simply posted it here to demonstrate how the national media is viewing the situation.
This post was edited on 7/31/26 at 8:45 am
Posted by RebelExpress38
In your base, killin your dudes
Member since Apr 2012
14340 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 8:49 am to
The difference between NIL and Rev Share is a massive part of this case. Yet you post someone who doesn’t know the difference.
Posted by stopitnow1
Florida
Member since Mar 2013
2509 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 8:56 am to
quote:

At the end of the day the $1M isn't really going to matter to ole Miss


It clearly matters to old piss, lol. If it didn't they wouldn't be pursuing money they aren't owed. This is like someone suing Walmart because they were clumsy and slipped. I guess old piss is just that broke.
Posted by LSU Patrick
Member since Jan 2009
78187 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 8:58 am to
And you got so rustled, you had to nitpick the title and try to belittle the poster who linked it.

Apparently, the SEC commissioner doesn't "know the difference" either. From another article about OM tampering.

quote:

“We all live in a glass house,” Sankey told Sports Talk Mississippi. “And I respect that frustrations boil over from time to time, but the environment that we’re in [with player] representatives, NIL representatives, agents making phone calls, we’re in a very different environment, which puts us into the glass houses. So, we all have to be careful about throwing stones – including me.”


Well, there goes your stupid little gotcha attempt.
This post was edited on 7/31/26 at 9:01 am
Posted by RebelExpress38
In your base, killin your dudes
Member since Apr 2012
14340 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 9:07 am to
Sanky was talking generally about tampering. You linked a specific article about a legal case where the difference between NIL and Revenue Share is literally the reason why there is even a case to begin with, yet the writer doesn’t know or care enough to make the distinction.

Just admit you don’t know either or you just liked the bias and posted it to fit your narrative.
Posted by RebelExpress38
In your base, killin your dudes
Member since Apr 2012
14340 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 9:11 am to
Posted by geauxcoco
Greenville, SC
Member since Apr 2007
12940 posts
Posted on 7/31/26 at 9:53 am to
Loved this from the article

quote:

I get it. In this upside-down world of no accountability for players and NIL deals, where a player can transfer from one school, be enrolled in classes at his new school, and accept another offer from another school and transfer again — ahem, Ole Miss? — someone at some point has to take responsibility for his actions.
Jump to page
Page First 14 15 16 17 18
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 16 of 18Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on X and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter