Another question for SportsLaw

SMUguy · Post by **SMUguy** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:32 pm

There's a story on ESPN.com about how USC wide receiver Mike Williams - the guy who wanted to get into the NFL draft with Maurice Clarett - has cut ties with his agent. Do you think this will help his request for reinstatement with the NCAA? Wouldn't he need a lawyer to wade through that process? Seems to me that since the NFL asked if he was coming out, with the assumption that Clarett would be accepted, the league should hold a supplemental draft for Williams.

Silk · Post by **Silk** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 12:28 pm

I bet firing his agent will do nothing to help his case. I doubt there's any way he gets reinstated, whether or not he fires his agent.

And I bet the agent is fired in name only. He'll be back on Williams' payroll the minute he re-enters the draft (even a supplemental draft). If he somehow gets back in to USC, the agent will still be something of a confidant -- just not for money (for now. There will be a handshake agreement for Williams to reimburse him once that first NFL contract is signed.)

StangEsq · Post by **StangEsq** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 12:54 pm

SMUguy wrote:There's a story on ESPN.com about how USC wide receiver Mike Williams - the guy who wanted to get into the NFL draft with Maurice Clarett - has cut ties with his agent. Do you think this will help his request for reinstatement with the NCAA? Wouldn't he need a lawyer to wade through that process? Seems to me that since the NFL asked if he was coming out, with the assumption that Clarett would be accepted, the league should hold a supplemental draft for Williams.

He dissolved his relationship with his agent in an effort to get reinstated by the NCAA. If he is not reinstated (likely that he won't be), look for another lawsuit against the NFL to try to get him into a supplemental draft. His agent was a friend of the family and I'm sure that once he re-applies for the draft the same agent will represent him again.

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 1:27 pm

there is an essential difference in the Mike Williams case-he declared for the NFL draft based on the "law of the land" at the time of his declaration. Remember that a lower federal court had ruled that the NFL could not bar underclassmen from entering the NFL(albeit a slightly different question than whether the NCAA can declare a player loses his amateur status by hiring an agent and declaring for the draft). Only later, did an appeallate Court overturn the lower court. I think this is a situation that calls for a reasonable decision by the NCAA to allow Williams to return to college.

GoRedGoBlue · Post by **GoRedGoBlue** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 1:37 pm

The law of the land was also going to be appealed, to which his attorney was privy to...

The greated question is his academically ineligibility to compete next year.

The NCAA would have to grant him a waiver on that issue as well, since he decided to skip out on classes since the Rose Bowl - that is a MAJOR sticking point.

"Well, he thought he'd get drafted..." So what? He could have taken classes in the interim, just in case.

This also sets a dangerous precedent that you can quit school, declare for the draft, and IF you don't get drafted, apply for re-instatement and apply for an academic waiver. This is essentially what he is doing.

OPINION: Don't let him back it.

StangEsq · Post by **StangEsq** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 1:45 pm

Besides what's already been argued, Williams:
1) has to apply for a waiver of satisfactory academic progress (since he left school last semester) and
2) needs to come up with restitution for the big contracts he accepted from trading card companies and from Nike.
It's not a clear-cut case... will be interesting to see what develops.

93Mustang · Post by **93Mustang** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 3:57 pm

Williams' best argument that goes along with Stallions' "law of land" statement is the fact that many NFL teams contacted him and worked him out after the lower court ruling suggesting to Williams that they were intending for him to be in the draft and that they might draft him. The NFL and teams that "induced" him to enter draft will pay him some cash in a settlement if he's frozen out of the league this season and the NCAA doesn't reinistate him. His case is distinct from Clarett's for these reasons.

GoRedGoBlue · Post by **GoRedGoBlue** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 7:22 pm

Distinct, yes.

But it doesn't overcome the fact that he is not academically eligible to return in the fall.

The Q · Post by **The Q** » Sun Jun 13, 2004 11:14 am

StangEsq wrote:Besides what's already been argued, Williams:
1) has to apply for a waiver of satisfactory academic progress (since he left school last semester) and
2) needs to come up with restitution for the big contracts he accepted from trading card companies and from Nike.
It's not a clear-cut case... will be interesting to see what develops.

Has he accepted cash from the card companies and Nike? Or just reached an agreement? I would think if he hasn't gone out and bought a new house and cars with his new cash, he could sidestep that a little more easily than he could the academic interruption.

Another question for SportsLaw

Another question for SportsLaw

Re: Another question for SportsLaw

Law of the Land

Re: