Fraudulent inducement lawsuit (Weber, etc.)
The Roquan Smith and Mike Weber recruitment stories cry out for someone to take on the NCAA and a school like UCLA or OSU and sue to rescind a NLI for fraudulent inducement. These kids are being misled into thinking guys who have jobs elsewhere are going to be coaching them, and they get trapped in the NCAA regulations and have to miss a year if they are PO'd that the coach left. Weber has perfect facts for a lawsuit: he was conflicted at the last minute, his "position coach" at OSU was recruiting him hard, the guy obviously had the Bears job in his pocket and was waiting until after signing day to announce. Weber can easily allege he would not have chosen OSU had he known the true facts. Discovery into the text messages, emails and phone records among Urbs, his RB coach, the Bears etc. would be fascinating. I'd wager there is testimony to be had (probably from the Bears) that "we need to keep this quiet until after signing day." Fraudulent inducement allows you to rescind the NLI, meaning it never existed. NCAA regulations can't trump the law of the land. I would love to see one of these kids get PO'd enough to bring this abusive system down.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
*internet high five*
February 6th, 2015 at 1:10 PM ^
A 150-comment thread here suggests it's still of interest.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:04 AM ^
February 6th, 2015 at 11:05 AM ^
a very difficult time showing injury in this case. He still gets a full ride to OSU. The fact that his position coach isn't there doesn't really matter. Definitely a broader argument that this type of thing shouldn't be tolerated by the NCAA. All three instances have been covered on this board and all are equally unacceptable, but Weber's probably the worst because the announce was after signing day where UCLA and UF were on signing day.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:06 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 6th, 2015 at 11:08 AM ^
I agree there needs to be more transparency. It is just very hard when coaches are constantly leaving for other jobs. Drayton will not be the last of college assistants bolting for the NFL after signing day this year. Several NFL staffs are still being put together and they are going to be hiring some top college assistants. This fraudulent inducement lawsuit would set a very dangerous precedent. Every year there could be dozens of these type of lawsuits. But the truth is that the agreement is between the recruit and the school. The school agrees to provide 4 years of tuition/boarding if the recruit agrees to participate in the football program. Every year recuirts are promised early playing time, no position change, and all sorts of things. Many of these things never come to fruition. Should a college WR that was told he could play QB as a recruit file a lawsuit when the staff tells him he won't be behind center? These are difficult questions to consider. The Weber situation is just a microcosm of the problem that is college football recruiting. It is a dirty practice and we haven't even starting talking about all the sexual assault transfers that Auburn recruits every year.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:19 AM ^
Injury - any harm done to a person by the acts or omissions of another. injury may include physical hurt as well as damage to reputation or dignity, loss of a legal right, or breach of contract.
The policy is to prohibit one who purposely uses false information to induce another into a transaction from profiting from such wrongdoing.
Don't confuse injury with damages.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:35 AM ^
I've seen you post the same thing a few times now -- but you're missing the point. Did damage occur here? Sure. For the sake of argument, I'll concede absolutely yes.
Now go prove the *damage* in a court of law!!!
That's the rub.
And a butt hurt kid and his dad about a coach leaving doesn't count. There's no hard cost here. There's no case here.
February 6th, 2015 at 12:17 PM ^
What has to be proved is injury, not damage. After you prove your prima facie case, the burden shifts to OSU for a valid defense and if there are no valid defenses then the relief sought comes into play. Damages is one type of relief sought. But in this case voiding of the contract would be the relief sought. Understand now?
February 6th, 2015 at 11:09 AM ^
Why not add a 10-day period after signing the LOI in which kids can "opt-out" of the contract if one of a list of specific events occur (coach leaving, etc)? This would put more pressure on coaches and teams to keep their promises and give kids an out if they don't. Maybe similar to the NBA's early entry policy? In this case, Weber sees the real situation and has an opportunity to "right the wrong". It'd be nice if coaches would just be honest with 17/18 year old kids and their families (Urbz), but that seems to be a relic at this point.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:34 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 6th, 2015 at 2:07 PM ^
Especially what with NSD coming this close to the end of the NFL season. There's an inevitable flurry of shuffling of coaches and coordinators. Kids' expecations shouldn't get screwed up with that.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
Yet another reason why picking your university should be as much about "playing school" as "playing football." With coaching turnover so high, why base a decision on that? Now, if you wanted to be an engineer and your committed university dropped the department, well...
February 6th, 2015 at 11:20 AM ^
I wouldn't say this is fraud but just an example of how seedy recruiting can be:
Coaches lie
Players (and helicopter parents) manipulate
Both sides are guilty.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:19 AM ^
Choose Michigan, if you are dumb enough to believe Urban Meyer then you should pay the price.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:20 AM ^
Well, I agree it sucks for Weber. And for the kids who sent LIA's to UCLA to find out the DC bolted. Now, let me put my attorney hat on.
it's my understanding the LIA is a written agreement between school and player, and that said agreement establishes a scholarship from the University to attend said school and play football.
I have yet to see or hear of LIA which is dependent upon a specific position coach, recruiter, head coach, or AD maintaining a position at the school. This is a mutual agreement, and if the school changed coaches, recruiters, AD's, nor can it cancel the agreement for a scholarship.
Does it suck? Yes. Was it unfair? Probably, I don't know what was promised. Does it change the contract? Clearly not. Were I Mr. Weber, I would ask OSU to release me from my LIA. Beyond that, I don't see anything. On the other hand, under the circumstances, it would be an interesting exercise to see a publicized request for a release denied by OSU under these circumstances, and one which likely would have further ramificaitons on how that staff is viewed.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:23 AM ^
I believe the Higdon excuse was just an excuse. But if I'm wrong and the Higdon commit was indeed a real concern for Weber, what happened with Drayton is like Higdon x 1000. How humiliating to have that happen in public. This situation is terrible for Weber because of the circumstances of his recruitment, the back and forth between us and them, he was obviously torn, and then it turns out the one he picked was worse than the one he didn't. Had he been committed to Ohio State from the beginning, this would be a non-issue, or at least a much smaller one.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:35 AM ^
I think the bigger issue here is that, to my mind, you have large, well-funded institutions taking advantage of 17-year-old kids. There is no equal bargaining here. As an example, the universities have marketing departments, coaches, directors and lawyers up the wazoo. A kid has himself, his parents and perhaps some friends with little to (most likely) no experience dealing with these types of issues. Weber had NFL players showing up at his door the night before NSD. Imagine the pressure brought to bare on a high schooler. If he tries to level the playing field by, for example, hiring an agent, he's screwed for life.
If this were, for example, TJ Wheatley complaining, I'd feel less concern, as he obviously has a parent who understands the process and is supporting him. For someone who doesn't have that, it's an unfair negotiation. If the NCAA and its institutions are going to have NFL-level income from football, then the kids signing with them need NFLPA-level support.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:48 AM ^
I think the Higdon excuse was just an excuse, but I think it was planted by Stan and Urbz shortly after Higdon committed. Something like "Hey Mike, didn't that rat Harbaugh tell you you were the man? You can trust us here, you're the man here, we'd never mislead you like that". Exit Stan, Weber is ANGAR.
February 6th, 2015 at 1:35 PM ^
I think you're right - it's completely plausible that it happened that way. It's too bad Weber chose to believe the wrong guys.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:27 AM ^
February 6th, 2015 at 11:32 AM ^
Would be justice, if you ask me. He's 17. I don't wish him bad. He should transfer (or never enroll) from Ohio.
If Iowa works for him, I'm sure he would be welcome by Ferentz. He could spend his penalty year on the practice squad while acclimating to college life. Then start for two years and join the NFL if all goes according to his dream.
Michigan's ship has most certainly sailed after his signing day comments. Ferentz wins. Urban LOSES!!! And Weber plays football in the Big Ten for a program with perceived integrity. Worst case secenio is he stays until he graduates from a respectable Big 10 University.
It works out for everyone but Urban.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:33 AM ^
The points made are interesting and highlight the concerns:
1. There are legitimate worries about kids jumping around from school to school - this happened when college football first became a "big thing" in the 1910-1920's era (Red Grange era) - and that was BEFORE television, the internet and the whole 24/7 sports media AND before there was the humongous money in the game. That was just driven by small money and fame.
2. There are (let's be honest) a core group of kids who do make their decisions on where to go based on their hopes that this place/coaching team will develop them into professional prospects. This is the group that really would want the greatest latitude and freedom of action. And why not? Consider, if you were a top notch math or physics prospects (not just good but basically doing 1st and second year college work while still in high school) and you find out that professor X whom you wanted to work with has taken a new position at another institution, you'd have every right to withdraw and re-enroll at that place. Why shouldn't these kids be given the same chance? This is especially true when the kid is legally an adult. These NCAA restrictions would seem to be conflict and if one argues that it is a contract then these agreements should be written as such with the various "out" clauses.
3. Most kids however are not in that group and so picking the school and what it could potentially do for the kids long term should be more important. Sports are important to them but not the only thing.
4. The NCAA can bury its head in the sand and pretend it is still 1930 or 1960 but they've long lost the moral high ground that they are "protecting" the welfare of these kids.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:33 AM ^
Nothing will happen. At best the NCAA will maybe add in an opt-out clause. Relax people. Weber ain't going anywhere. Get over it.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:39 AM ^
but a lawsuit would be too lengthy and expensive for Weber or any typical recruit to benefit from.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
Weber will play at OSU.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
February 6th, 2015 at 2:04 PM ^
But the question to me is whether Drayton (acting as part of and representing the institution) staying at OSU was part of the inducement of Weber to OSU. Seems to me you could at least make that case based A) on what Weber says (namely that it was) and B) the fact that Drayton left the day after NSD having known that he was going to be leaving and only revealing it after he got Weber's LOI.
I think if he wants out, he gets out. Whether he'd win a lawsuit, I'm not sure. I expect that the NCAA rules provide for all sorts of administrative remedies that Weber'd have to exhaust before you he'd think about seeing a courtroom.
February 6th, 2015 at 11:53 AM ^
the available information. He wants the most direct route to the NFL. He believed that OSU is the place that will give him the best chance of getting there. After decommitting from Hoke/UM, he committed to OSU, but he turned his head when Harbaugh came. After debating the programs, he chose the one he feels will support his goal of playing in the NFL. I heard Weber say that Urban remarked about how he imagined Weber splitting carries with Ezekiel in a championship game. He is a great salesman, and it worked with Weber, as did the simple mention of his record and title. We wanted Weber to love UM more than OSU; he doesn't; he is simply searching for the most direct path to his goal. Whether or not he succeeds is beside the point. Furthermore, I believe he used the Higdon example as an excuse; he certainly has plenty of competition at OSU, in fact probably more, at the position. I don't wish Weber ill will, but I couldn't care less about his issues at this point as they relate to him being a former UM recruit. Nonetheless, the idea of NCAA reform is always interesting. Go Blue
February 6th, 2015 at 5:19 PM ^
i agree with what you said 100%. i have different feelings.does jim now want him. i say no.
if he wants to go to the nfl he should keep his mouth close. got to bit the bullet some time. i think now we got a good back he chose osu now like with it. michigan does not do second fiddle.
February 6th, 2015 at 12:04 PM ^
I am in total agreement with you. Somebody used the TJ wheatley quote of him being savvy enough to say that he commits to the school and not the coach. As you said, that is good for him, and smart of him. Why is it smart though? Because he had an experienced parent/mentor who had gone through it.
Every kid has a different story, some may have had siblings who have gone through the process, but for a lot of kids, this is their first time doing it. It is an uneven playing field without at least an experienced advisor helping a kid through the process. Even in my baseball days coaches were promising things and leaving, I was lucky enough to dodge the main bullet, but learned a valuable lesson for the kids that I now mentor. The goal here, from the recruits perspective(who has zero legal, business, higher education experience) , is that this is a once in a lifetime decision. Its a sad process and the playing fields needs to be somewhat leveled.
Seriously, think of how mad or at least frustrated all of US get when we have a daily, for the most part arbitrary event go wrong..i.e. ordering something from a restaurant that is supposed to have steak on it and it comes out with chicken.. It sucks... Do you send it back and have to wait for the correct meal and be 15 minutes behind everyone at the table, or do you just suck it up and eat it.. and that is just daily life... I know it is a reach of an analogy, but my point is that it is frustrating, and that is something everyone has experience with.. This is a once-in-a-lifetime decision that a 17-year old may be completely naive to.. Just a bummer, regardless of where he ends up.
February 6th, 2015 at 12:12 PM ^
February 6th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
it would hinge on whether Weber was promised the position coaches wouldn't change. I doubt anyone made that promise on paper or in a text. Also what damages or harm was there as a result of this change in coaches? He has a scholarship. Would be interesting discovery for sure but it ain't happenin.
February 6th, 2015 at 1:48 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 6th, 2015 at 2:47 PM ^
where does public perception enter into a breach of contract? The elements are what I stated. First they have to prove that a particular coach being part of the team was promised then secondly they have to show that this breach caused harm to the player/student. Not saying that a suit couldn't be filed I will concede that but it's unlikely anyone would waste their time. Now you can argue all day that it's deceptive and unethical etc.
February 6th, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^
Pure and simple. OSU or the NCAA does not want the scrutiny of their coaches or personnel being subject to discovery or deposition. It would open a can of worms on recruiting practices. IMHO
February 6th, 2015 at 12:39 PM ^
because there is no case here.
Weber signed to play at OSU, not for a specific coach. Moreover, coaches leave all the time. How many DC's have we had since Lloyd retired? It's not as if there is even a scheme change.
Bottom line: is Weber is good enough to play he will, if not, he won't. He learned an important lesson here (and we got Higdon!).
February 6th, 2015 at 12:51 PM ^
Move along everyone, the judge has ruled. The sentence is death, no appeal.
February 6th, 2015 at 1:06 PM ^
February 7th, 2015 at 8:38 AM ^
February 6th, 2015 at 12:57 PM ^
All's fair in love and recruiting until the kid signs the LOI.
Okay not really, but a lawsuit? Over one lost recruit? That would be quite a waste of time and resources, and would probably be massively counterproductive..
February 6th, 2015 at 1:13 PM ^
February 6th, 2015 at 1:42 PM ^
No strings attached. This is getting way to hot (Urban taking questions from boosters on it) and lawyers are starting to offer pro bono services to help him get out of it. In less than a week.
February 6th, 2015 at 3:14 PM ^
First Weber has to ask to be let out. That said, I understand that he still has to sit so it's not like it's without cost. The discovery would be important. Did Drayton indicate he planned on sticking around? The defense would be that coaches come and go all the time, some times of their own accord and sometimes not. I don't think Cole or Malzone could sue U of M (or Hoke) for Hoke being fired since that's well-known possibility for any coach.
February 6th, 2015 at 4:34 PM ^
The issue for Weber (or any other individual who wanted to challenge this sort of situation) is there's going to be an enormous personal cost for the first guy to do it. Not only would he burn his bridges with Ohio State, he's probably be seen as a trouble maker and find it difficult to transfer elsewhere.
February 7th, 2015 at 8:39 AM ^
February 6th, 2015 at 4:44 PM ^
You said it .. This is a problem the NCAA needs to deal with so the schools can't screw these kids. Man, college football is becoming one slimy scandal after another...
February 6th, 2015 at 10:44 PM ^
wasn't illegal to provide an athlete. I'm guessing reforms bigger than that may be a while in the making.
February 6th, 2015 at 5:14 PM ^
i wish some one would test the school and ask to be released. would be interesting