No worries...I'm not blaming the messenger. I still think that this issue will never see the inside of a courtroom., however.
The longer Rashada remains unsigned and not a starter performing at a high level, the stronger the evidence is that he was never worth the money he was supposedly offered.
Agree it's crappy reporting. Not surprised given the source is a college football recruiting website. As for the reason many Americans don't trust reporters, it has little to do with the quality of reporting and much more to do with the people they listen to at the top of their political tribe. The reporters I know toil for mediocre pay because they believe in what they're doing and they're good at it. I find that the majority of Americans that don't like reporters aren't people that are sticklers for accuracy, but rather they're people that don't like what they're hearing. This is a football forum and I'd prefer not getting into too hot territory but if we're going to go there let's go there.
Putting opinions of the journalist trade aside, the primary reason the article was clickbait was because the way the headline was written to make it appear that UF was also on the hook in this suit. It was done purposely to generate clicks. Casual readers and those that don't follow this situation closely that didn't bother to view the whole article may now believe that UF is part of this lawsuit.
I don’t know the facts in the case, but if he argues verbally he was offered x amount, his career so far would make that offer not plausible. Now, if some idiot put it on paper, I would hope they are no longer anywhere near our nil group or program in any capacity. I’m sure Napier saw or heard the amount, and was like hell no.
The copy of the contract has been published. It wasn't signed, so there is no way to tell if the $13M that was widely reported as fact is or is not factual.
The collective was disbanded and I don’t think either attorney is directly involved in FV, but pretty sure one of them still involved with some of the athletes we’ve pursued. Hathcock was heavily involved and he’s definitely not someone you’d say you don’t want around our NIL deals unless you’re willing to turn your nose up at a not-insignificant amount of money. Most of these deals are idiotic, imo, but you can’t run off the guys funding it unless you don’t want your team to get any players.
One part of this I struggle with is that at the time it seemed that we had little NIL money available because NIL was new and to my recollection multi million dollar deals were not common. It just doesn't seem plausible we offered that player millions. But then, the entity was disbanded, so was it because they had made a number of senseless, unaffordable offers? I guess we will know eventually.
I don't recall seeing it posted. Were there any solid numbers included? Would be comical if nothing concrete and damning surfaces and the NIL entities final argument focuses on his record of non performance, even "your honor, here's his film, do you really think an entity would offer such money, for that?"
We had a direct conversation about it in the thread posted below. You’ve had numerous other opportunities to review it as it’s come up and been posted a number of other times too. Surprise! Sacovie White arrested for reason (and the Rashadas file a lawsuit) Here is the alleged contract: https://on3static.com/uploads/dev/assets/cms/2024/05/21111050/Rashada-Contract-2022.pdf
Anywhere? No idea. None that I’m aware of though. It is the only NIL contract I’ve personally seen for any athlete, executed or not. It is worded about how I expected, but we have no way of knowing what the numbers mean. Was this the offer from GC? I usually sign my offers and if the other party accepts, they sign and we have an executed contract. Was this a counter from Rashada camp? Was it edited by one of the upstanding members of our sports media? No idea.
Are you the discussion police now? I hope you'll accept that this is the first time I've seen a link posted to a real(presumed) legitimate contract. But more importantly, remember, I do not answer to you. If you cannot live with that, I have a solution.
It appears a real offer with contract was made. But if the party responsible for payment did not sign, is it or anyone else liable? I do find it hard to believe those numbers were offered. Incredible really.
