You people are clueless. This would only apply if the school had already paid out the player the full amount at signing, which would be pretty dumb on the school's part. In the likely scenario that the player received either nothing or only a partial payment at signing, then the theoretical transfer school (LSU?) certainly wouldn't be on the hook for $4 million that hadn't and won't have been paid out by Washington. That doesn't even make sense. LSU? in this instance would perhaps be liable to owe $4 million only if Washington did pay out the full NIL agreement to the player subsequently, which seems highly unlikely if the player was going to transfer to another school. You people need an exercise in commonsense.
Washington QB Demond Williams wants to enter transfer portal after re-signing with the Huskies
- Thread starter Bigred2467
- Start date
Well, one of us is, that is for sure!
I have answered all your questions. You can't do the same. That is okay
Contracts are broken all the ******* time. In business, terms of agreement, etc. In some of those cases, something happens. But in the majority of cases actually, nothing happens. Especially if there is no demonstrated loss. In most cases of a breach, the agreement just ends, the parties don't have an obligation to each other, and they go their separate ways.
Literally all the time.
Clarence Thomas over there seems to think that is not the case.
That kid is a dipshit. Am i a terrible person because i still hope he crashes and burns over this somehow?
Cite me one case of a coach or a player breaching a contract with no consequences. Pro or college, either is fine. Breaking the contract pursuant to the contract's terms is not the same thing. That is by definition following the agreed terms of the contract.
Employment, for example, is a contractual agreement between employer and employee. These relationships form and end for every reason you can possibly imagine. Only in a small minority of cases, where there is a demonstrated grievance with the breaching of some employment law, does civil legal action become relevant.
I worked with two different people that had signed contracts to work and just never showed up. Even though the contract said that they had to come to work.
I worked with teachers that have signed contracts to come back to teach for the next year and then went and found a new teaching job and broke the contract by just not showing up.
I know Sal Goodman won't consider that breaking contracts though.
Ha! They roll their eyes!Do the high school kids get a kick out of your Latin bully example
I learned that one at a stupid anti-bullying education thing I was forced to attend.
If there was no problem with the situation, why did the player decide to go back to Washington and not pursue the transfer? Clearly $6 million is more than $4 million. If Washington hadn't paid out anything and that is the ONLY time this would apply, why not leave and not take $6million?
Talk about clueless, Just admit you are wrong in this situation and move on. Simply put the shovel down
Oh I think there was. Sounds like his family intervened and told him to stay put. I can only imagine what kind of legal expense he would have chalked up.
Here is my guess
1. LSU was not offering "enough"
2. Washington is going to get him even more
3. Washington is the happiest because had they tried to take him to court, it would have ruined them for other players later.
Such a stretch. The new coach, without a portal QB after 4 or 5 QBs in on visits, at a school who puts winning above all other things, and a history of being underhanded didn't offer the deal.
You really don't think there wasn't an offer. You are just digging in your heels. You have already stated your true intentions on this board. No different than Kong, just to create conflict and more conflict.
Last edited:
Why would Washington up their offer? They were in control. They had a contract and they controlled if they put him in the portal or not. He couldn't go anywhere unless they put him in the portal. LSU obviously offered enough or there would be no need to tweet he was entering the portal. He had a $4 million deal.
I agree with #3. I have stated that in this thread. But it would have been just as easy to let him go and not ruined themselves for future players
Why would they up it?
Because you don't want your best player coming back to the team with a bad attitude and hating the situation.
So they are going to give him more...they are the ones that need to "make things right", because either way, him playing well or not playing well, he is getting 4 million.
I don't think the best player is who you need to worry about having a bad attitude and hating the situation. It is the 104 or whatever other players that are going to have the bad attitude and hating the situation and they will hate it more if you reward this dude for wanting to quit on them. I would bet a good number of players don't even want him back. They may not say it out loud, but it will be the elephant in the room.
If that is true and it might be...they made an even bigger mistake bringing him back.
Washington basically did everything wrong...
This is like telling a girl "I can change" to get her to like you...all that is going to happen is you are going to hate the situation you created.
They will hate it, that is different than the legal ramifications of the situations that was the crux of the conversation. Heck look at the situation Rhule and Nebraska created for itself with kissing Raiola's ***. Bending over backward to keep him happy and he leaves anyway. Who won that little battle. Unless he lands at Miami, it would appear both parties lost. Such is life in a world where everyone is looking out only for themselves. Probably a part of the reason Indiana is having such great success. A good number of guys who were lower rated dudes without a bunch of individualism.
