Started By
Message
re: The agreement Demond Williams signed with Washington included a provision. Uh oh, LSU.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:27 pm to WildcatMike
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:27 pm to WildcatMike
I think we (SEC Footprint) all learned the hard way you can't force a man to work for you
0
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:27 pm to LSU Patrick
quote:
You are suggesting that UW can somehow prevent a free citizen of the US from playing football at another school, man.
That is already occurring lol
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:30 pm to stitchop
quote:
You don’t understand how courts work.
The court rulings and the settlement are now legal precedent concerning NIL and transfers.
Legal precedent has been changed tens of thousands of times.
“Changing precedent” can mean several different things:
-Explicitly overruling a prior case
-Narrowing or limiting a precedent
-Distinguishing a case so it no longer applies
-Implicitly abandoning a rule without formally overruling it
Since 1789, the U.S. Supreme Court has explicitly overruled its own precedents roughly 230–260 times.
If you include partial overrulings, limitations, and effective reversals, the number rises well above 1,000.
But again, as an attorney, you know or at least SHOULD know that.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:31 pm to stitchop
quote:
It’s already been to court
Did the courts rule for Williams or Washington?
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:33 pm to lsufball19
quote:
so basically your entire argument boils down to you don't care what current Washington state law says
Never stated that. I stated that courts adapt and change precedent all the time. And a lot of times it strikes down fully or partially LAWS.
What you are not grasping is the grow sound of disapproval from universities over the wild west that has become the NCAA and it's going to get reined in sooner or later.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:36 pm to WildcatMike
quote:
WildcatMike
quote:Checks out.
LSU
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:39 pm to LSUminati
quote:If he is unable to abide by the contract because of his occupation then Washington should not be bound by law to hold their end of the deal.
Any contract can be breached, it is a matter of remedies. As he is not an employee, equitable remedies are highly unlikely. So Washington would be entitled to money damages.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:46 pm to jangalang
quote:
If he is unable to abide by the contract because of his occupation then Washington should not be bound by law to hold their end of the deal.
So many people out there don't understand contracts and law. Understandable.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:51 pm to LSUminati
I guess you dont understand lawyers smarter than you threw that provision just for this purpose.
But I understand: Williams is not in the portal thus Lane Kiffin=tampering therefore must blame the NCAA and Washington for this. Dodge! Deny! Deflect!
But I understand: Williams is not in the portal thus Lane Kiffin=tampering therefore must blame the NCAA and Washington for this. Dodge! Deny! Deflect!
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:54 pm to jangalang
It appears all Big Ten Members are prepared to wrestle back control from players frivolously abusing the NIL payday circus.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:54 pm to jangalang
Again, you can have provisions in an agreement that say anything, that doesn't 1. make it enforceable; 2. mean the counterparty cannot breach. The question is what remedy is appropriate and available? Damages is the answer. And I would take my chances with the BIG10 lawyers.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:56 pm to LSUminati
quote:
And I would take my chances with the BIG10 lawyers.
And you would lose your arse
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:56 pm to WildcatMike
UW already has Mizzou QB visiting. Demond will be a Bayou Bengal.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:56 pm to pgaddxn
quote:
Too bad they can’t legally do that. Uhh oh
Did he sign a contract?
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:57 pm to BCreed1
quote:
Did you seriously just compare SLAVERY to a guy making millions in a mutually agreed upon SIGNED CONTRACT?
Realize the 13th Amendment also prohibits involuntary servitude. Accordingly, there is essentially a per se rule against specific enforcement of a personal services contract. You cannot MAKE someone work for you, even if they agreed to do so at one point.
A number of remedies may be available for such breach, but most are monetary.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 3:59 pm to jangalang
quote:
And you would lose your arse
No, I don't think I would. These cute little rev share agreements are a fun little break from what I do. Carry on.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:01 pm to jangalang
quote:
It appears all Big Ten Members are prepared to wrestle back control from players frivolously abusing the NIL payday circus.
Good for them. Demond will still be QB at LSU next season
And why hasnt Sankey done that for us?
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:01 pm to RaginAstros
quote:
RaginAstros
Lulz, you’re the fool that said Leavitt would be a Tiger.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:01 pm to LSUminati
quote:
These cute little rev share agreements are a fun little break from what I do
Nobody cares about your Pokemon games.
A 4 million dollar contract being unenforceable is absurd. Cant wait until you're wrong.
Page 7 of 13
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News