Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

[JCPanthers]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Want to hear something that will really make you sick?

I heard that Victor and Johnny were in the Cedar Falls elementary schools promoting drug prevention to the kids during Red Ribbon Week.

[GonzoCat]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Most likely such contracts, in this context, would have to be year-to-year. The player could be required to pay back only the tuition for the current year if permanently dismissed from the team, but not for previous years.

Now you've changed your story and basically agreed with me, but I know you will be able to claim you were right and I was wrong. You've got a gift that way.

[Newsbreaker]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Now you've changed your story and basically agreed with me, but I know you will be able to claim you were right and I was wrong. You've got a gift that way.

I haven't changed my story at all, the scholorship could be enforced in this way. It's likely, like any obligee, the player would get credit for partial performance despite their total and material breach, but that doesn't change the fact that the scholorship as a contract could be enforced against them. You claimed such a provision "could not be enforce in court." That is patently and completely untrue according to standard contract law.

As a personal service contract, the damages can be difficult to quantify. Hence, Reliance damages against the player would be proper, as codified in most states under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts Section 349. In that case, the University could collect what they have paid in tuition, plus what they paid in reliance on the contract (training costs, prepaid expenses for the remainder of this season [most likely the costs prepaid for the rest of the year divided by some quantification of the players worth to the team], plus some quantification of the lost opportunity the breaching player represents minus a quantification of what the player has "paid" to date by the player (minus mitigation, the value of the replacement player).

What would the player end up paying? Not a lot, but it would be enforceable and it would be legal and the player would owe compensation for the prior years.

Such a contract could also be structured as a four-year, unilateral contract under which legal acceptance occurs only by way of full-performance of the 4-year playing by the player, in which case the University would be under no obligation to pay the athlete's tuition until after the full playing contract had been fulfilled. There are two legal problems with that. First, the athlete would get some credit for partial performance. Second, under such a construct a "signed" player would be under no obligation to actually arrive on campus and play, and any player who voluntarily quits and leaves would be on the hook for their costs to-date. Finally, the University would have to use some financial trickery to only pay an athlete's tuition at the end of the four years.

Now, I can fill pages with detailing why this these scholorships could be deemed legal contracts, but that's a waste of both of our time. If you are seriously contending that these hypothetical contracts would be invalid or unenforceable (since you are the one making the claim) I'd love to see you explain why and how.

All of this is premised upon one underlying fact. Courts try to do what is fair to both parties. A player with dozens of other students relying upon them, breaching in an illegal an particularly egregious way may be deemed by a court as someone not owed much in the way of "credit" for past performance. That is well within a court's power.

[dan_beeding]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

All of this is premised upon one underlying fact.

Yeah... That none of this is ever going to happen, and arguing about hypothetical scenarios is a colossal waste of your time.

[Back2BackCats]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

No. It's the fact that they are very public figures in the Cedar Valley. And they think they are above the law. I hope this serves notice to these athletes who think they can do anything because they play for UNI that they are not invincible. I very much doubt it will happen, as the program has been on a downhill slide with regard to values and morales for the past couple of years.

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder.

[Back2BackCats]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

I haven't changed my story at all, the scholorship could be enforced in this way. It's likely, like any obligee, the player would get credit for partial performance despite their total and material breach, but that doesn't change the fact that the scholorship as a contract could be enforced against them. You claimed such a provision "could not be enforce in court." That is patently and completely untrue according to standard contract law.

As a personal service contract, the damages can be difficult to quantify. Hence, Reliance damages against the player would be proper, as codified in most states under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts Section 349. In that case, the University could collect what they have paid in tuition, plus what they paid in reliance on the contract (training costs, prepaid expenses for the remainder of this season [most likely the costs prepaid for the rest of the year divided by some quantification of the players worth to the team], plus some quantification of the lost opportunity the breaching player represents minus a quantification of what the player has "paid" to date by the player (minus mitigation, the value of the replacement player).

What would the player end up paying? Not a lot, but it would be enforceable and it would be legal and the player would owe compensation for the prior years.

Such a contract could also be structured as a four-year, unilateral contract under which legal acceptance occurs only by way of full-performance of the 4-year playing by the player, in which case the University would be under no obligation to pay the athlete's tuition until after the full playing contract had been fulfilled. There are two legal problems with that. First, the athlete would get some credit for partial performance. Second, under such a construct a "signed" player would be under no obligation to actually arrive on campus and play, and any player who voluntarily quits and leaves would be on the hook for their costs to-date. Finally, the University would have to use some financial trickery to only pay an athlete's tuition at the end of the four years.

Now, I can fill pages with detailing why this these scholorships could be deemed legal contracts, but that's a waste of both of our time. If you are seriously contending that these hypothetical contracts would be invalid or unenforceable (since you are the one making the claim) I'd love to see you explain why and how.

All of this is premised upon one underlying fact. Courts try to do what is fair to both parties. A player with dozens of other students relying upon them, breaching in an illegal an particularly egregious way may be deemed by a court as someone not owed much in the way of "credit" for past performance. That is well within a court's power.

Honest question Newsy, what happens when these scholarships are signed by 17 year old kids, doesn't happen often but it does happen. Is that even legally binding?

[dan_beeding]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder.

No. I'm tired of seeing people who are literally given every possible advantage throw it all away, and then people feel bad for them, or feel like it is somehow society's fault. They need to man up and take responsibility for their actions, and the rest of the team needs to realize that this kind of garbage doesn't fly.

[Back2BackCats]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

No. I'm tired of seeing people who are literally given every possible advantage throw it all away, and then people feel bad for them, or feel like it is somehow society's fault. They need to man up and take responsibility for their actions, and the rest of the team needs to realize that this kind of garbage doesn't fly.

I agree with you in that case, but are they any worse than their peers in the general student population. When the athlete is caught they are typically punished by both local law enforcement and the school. Does a student also have to answer to the school. I don't know.

[Newsbreaker]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Yeah... That none of this is ever going to happen, and arguing about hypothetical scenarios is a colossal waste of your time.

Well I disagree with that completely. Most of the great ideas in history started as mere "hypotheticals" that people argued about. I can't imagine living in a world where such discussions were viewed as a "colossal waste of...time."

I thought of one other comment to the "contract" discussion. Courts have a strong tendency to do the will of the parties absent express statutory reasons not to. If the player enters into a contract with an indemnification clause, it would likely be enforced. The player is under no duress, and most scholarship athletes have a number of choices available to them, so it can't be said that the individual didn't enter into the contract with free choice and will. The University, in the contract language, makes clear they are paying for four years of playing, and if that is disrupted by specifically described conditions, the indemnification clause kicks in requiring repayment of all past paid tuition monies. It might not be viewed as fair by the court, but it would likely be enforced.

The problem is that this type of contract, though enforceable, would never be possible because it would place the school at a huge competitive disadvantage. The solution would be NCAA-wide uniformity, in which case it's a contract of adhesion and the above no longer applies.

There some other ways of examining these hypothetical contracts by inserting conditions precedent (or even conditions precedent) but I think we've covered this enough.

I'd still LOVE to hear Gonzo describe why such contracts would certainly be unenforceable, applying the relevant legal principles he believes he has mastered.

Edit to address Back2Back - I believe a minor can sign a binding contract as long as they were able to understand it - hence our strictly contract based National Letter of Intent system. Still, the NLI could be signed by the minor, and the student, having arrived on campus as an 18 year-old, signs the contract being discussed here.

[dan_beeding]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Well I'm sure by debating it here on Panthernation, it's probably going to go in front of an NCAA committee in the very near future.

I don't know to what extent a regular student answers to the school, but they do lose financial aide for the violations for which Johnny is being held.

[dan_beeding]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Well I disagree with that completely.

Let me also be the first to say that I'm completely shocked by this statement

[Newsbreaker]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

You're very angry today, dan.

Every single discussion on a site like this is "pointless" in the way that this one apparently bothers you.

[Back2BackCats]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Well I disagree with that completely. Most of the great ideas in history started as mere "hypotheticals" that people argued about. I can't imagine living in a world where such discussions were viewed as a "colossal waste of...time."

I thought of one other comment to the "contract" discussion. Courts have a strong tendency to do the will of the parties absent express statutory reasons not to. If the player enters into a contract with an indemnification clause, it would likely be enforced. The player is under no duress, and most scholarship athletes have a number of choices available to them, so it can't be said that the individual didn't enter into the contract with free choice and will. The University, in the contract language, makes clear they are paying for four years of playing, and if that is disrupted by specifically described conditions, the indemnification clause kicks in requiring repayment of all past paid tuition monies. It might not be viewed as fair by the court, but it would likely be enforced.

The problem is that this type of contract, though enforceable, would never be possible because it would place the school at a huge competitive disadvantage. The solution would be NCAA-wide uniformity, in which case it's a contract of adhesion and the above no longer applies.

There some other ways of examining these hypothetical contracts by inserting conditions precedent (or even conditions precedent) but I think we've covered this enough.

I'd still LOVE to hear Gonzo describe why such contracts would certainly be unenforceable, applying the relevant legal principles he believes he has mastered.

Edit to address Back2Back - I believe a minor can sign a binding contract as long as they were able to understand it - hence our strictly contract based National Letter of Intent system. Still, the NLI could be signed by the minor, and the student, having arrived on campus as an 18 year-old, signs the contract being discussed here.

Not arguing with you Newsy just bringing possibilities. I do know there are times a school will tell the recruit that the offer is only good until a certain date or that the same scholarship has been offered to several recruits, meaning you need to let us know. Could this not be considered a form of duress?

[Newsbreaker]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

No, that's not duress. I'm just walking out the door, but the most basics of contracts: You must have an offer, legal acceptance, and consideration. Until it is accepted, any offer can be rescinded by the oferee. Hence, anyone offering can place a "deadline" on acceptance at which point the offer no longer exists.

There is more to it, especially in unilateral contracts and option contracts, but generally that covers it.

[dan_beeding]

Re: Johnny Gray, Victor Williams Suspended

Somewhat angry with the situation surrounding the football team, yes. Seeing two recognizable people who had good futures throw it all away for a few extra dollars is pretty disheartening.