re: This is what Florida had set up for Rashada:

quote:

---

Considering it's an inducement to play ball for the school and a collective that has been publicly supported by the school

Yes they do

---

That's conjecture at this point. I think we can assume there was no written inducement to play at Florida in that collective deal, or at the very least there is no way anyone with the University proper would be a party to it. As for the collective being supported by the school, a lot of things are supported by the school such as marketing partners. I am pretty sure it would be an NCAA violation for the school to financially support any collective or individual paying athletes for NIL.

I think it is safe to say neither of us knows enough about this contract to make any factual statement about who is libel for any damages. Obviously if a lawsuit is filed, the courts will decide.

EDIT
And for the record, I agree with you and would be shocked if his attorney did not include the University of Florida in any lawsuit, regardless of the language of the contract.