Zion in Litigation over Marketing Contract

[MCFinARL]

Apparently Zion signed a contract with Prime Sports on April 20, long before the CAA Contract and long before anyone knew he had signed any contract. He is now suing to get out of it because the company (which threatened to sue him for over $100,000,000 if he did not honor the contract) is not certified by the NBAPA nor a registered athlete agent in either NC or Florida, where the company is located--thus the contract is allegedly in violation of NC law.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26966863/zion-sues-end-agreement-marketing-firm
(https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26966863/zion-sues-end-agreement-marketing-firm)
What the heck? What were they thinking?

[hallcity]

Here’s the complaint.
https://www.espn.com/pdf/2019/0613/zw_v_psm_lawsuit.pdf

Don’t know what Zion was thinking signing with them
He couldn’t have asked K about this before doing it

[bundabergdevil]

Apparently Zion signed a contract with Prime Sports on April 20, long before the CAA Contract and long before anyone knew he had signed any contract. He is now suing to get out of it because the company (which threatened to sue him for over $100,000,000 if he did not honor the contract) is not certified by the NBAPA nor a registered athlete agent in either NC or Florida, where the company is located--thus the contract is allegedly in violation of NC law.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26966863/zion-sues-end-agreement-marketing-firm
(https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26966863/zion-sues-end-agreement-marketing-firm)
What the heck? What were they thinking?

Yeah, this is pretty strange. The company in question offers custom sports experiences for consumers as best I can tell. They have an online ordering system for pete's sake. What would Zion (and his people) be thinking they could possibly do for him?! Very odd.

[MCFinARL]

Yeah, this is pretty strange. The company in question offers custom sports experiences for consumers as best I can tell. They have an online ordering system for pete's sake. What would Zion (and his people) be thinking they could possibly do for him?! Very odd.

I saw a blurb for Gina Ford describing herself as Usain Bolt's international marketing and branding agent. I think Prime Sports Marketing is different from PrimeSport, which is the experiential company.

[bundabergdevil]

I saw a blurb for Gina Ford describing herself as Usain Bolt's international marketing and branding agent. I think Prime Sports Marketing is different from PrimeSport, which is the experiential company.

Yep, you're right. My fault for googling too fast when I saw someone going after Zion. Because how freaking dare they?!?!

[johnb]

Here’s the complaint.
https://www.espn.com/pdf/2019/0613/zw_v_psm_lawsuit.pdf

Don’t know what Zion was thinking signing with them


Zion is awesome, charismatic, and sharp, etc.

Why? I’m thinking July 6, 2000.

Making impulse decisions is what 18 year olds do.

[JetpackJesus]

Here’s the complaint.
https://www.espn.com/pdf/2019/0613/zw_v_psm_lawsuit.pdf

Don’t know what Zion was thinking signing with them
He couldn’t have asked K about this before doing it

This isn't my practice area or jurisdiction, but based on the statute, it looks like Zion will easily win if they weren't registered agents per the NC statute. The contract is automatically void in that situation. Even if they were registered, the signature page definitely lacks the disclaimer language required by the statute, so Zion has the right to void the contract, which he has exercised. The only wrinkle, I suppose, would be a choice of law provision that says the laws of another jurisdiction govern the contract, but I'm not sure that would be legal in this type of contract.

If anyone is curious, here are the relevant bits of the two statutory provisions that Zion relies on in the complaint:

§ 78C-88. Athlete agents; registration required; exceptions; void contracts

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, an individual may not act as an athlete agent in this State without holding a certificate of registration under G.S. 78C-90 or G.S. 78C-92.
(b) Before being issued a certificate of registration, an individual may act as an athlete agent in this State for all purposes except signing an agency contract if: (i) a student-athlete or another person acting on behalf of the student-athlete initiates communication with the individual; and (ii) within seven days after an initial act as an athlete agent, the individual submits an application for registration as an athlete agent in this State.
(c) A North Carolina licensed and resident attorney may act as an athlete agent in this State for all purposes without registering pursuant to this section if the attorney neither advertises directly for, nor solicits, any student-athlete by representing to any person that the attorney has special experience or qualifications with regard to representing student-athletes and represents no more than two student-athletes.
(d) An agency contract resulting from conduct in violation of this section is void, and the athlete agent shall return any consideration received under the contract.

§ 78C-94. Required form of contract

* * *
(c) An agency contract must contain, in close proximity to the signature of the student-athlete, a conspicuous notice in boldface type in capital letters stating:


WARNING TO STUDENT-ATHLETE
IF YOU SIGN THIS CONTRACT:
(1) YOU SHALL LOSE YOUR ELIGIBILITY TO COMPETE AS A STUDENT-ATHLETE IN YOUR SPORT;
(2) IF YOU HAVE AN ATHLETIC DIRECTOR, WITHIN 72 HOURS AFTER ENTERING INTO THIS CONTRACT, BOTH YOU AND YOUR ATHLETE AGENT MUST NOTIFY YOUR ATHLETIC DIRECTOR;
(3) YOU WAIVE YOUR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE WITH RESPECT TO THIS CONTRACT AND CERTAIN INFORMATION RELATED TO IT; AND
(4) YOU MAY CANCEL THIS CONTRACT WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER SIGNING IT. CANCELLATION OF THIS CONTRACT SHALL NOT REINSTATE YOUR ELIGIBILITY.

(d) An agency contract that does not conform to this section is voidable by the student-athlete. If a student-athlete voids an agency contract, the student-athlete is not required to pay any consideration under the contract or to return any consideration received from the athlete agent to induce the student-athlete to enter into the contract.

[sagegrouse]

This isn't my practice area or jurisdiction, but based on the statute, it looks like Zion will easily win if they weren't registered agents per the NC statute. The contract is automatically void in that situation. Even if they were registered, the signature page definitely lacks the disclaimer language required by the statute, so Zion has the right to void the contract, which he has exercised. The only wrinkle, I suppose, would be a choice of law provision that says the laws of another jurisdiction govern the contract, but I'm not sure that would be legal in this type of contract.

If anyone is curious, here are the relevant bits of the two statutory provisions that Zion relies on in the complaint:

Well, why does NC law apply? Is there an argument that Zion is a South Carolinian? Or the company is a Florida (or Delaware) entity?

[JetpackJesus]

Well, why does NC law apply? Is there an argument that Zion is a South Carolinian? Or the company is a Florida (or Delaware) entity?

Well, the complaint alleges that the agents came to NC and initiated contact with Zion there. He also signed the contract in NC. And Zion sued in federal court in NC to enforce the NC statute.

Also, the statute seems to apply to anyone signing an NCAA athlete enrolled at an NC institution. If you do that and are not a registered agent, the contract is void as a matter of law, so you'd never reach a choice of law provioson in the contract since its unenforceable in its entirety.

Basically, I can't (generally) go to North Carolina and enter into a contract with someone in the state that NC law says is illegal and then try to enforce it by saying another jurisdiction's law governs.

FWIW, the statute also imposes civil and criminal penalties for violations, though I didn't really look into those.

Edit: There is a choice of law provioson in the contract that says Florida law governs. But if the contract is void as a matter of law as Zion alleges, they can't enforce that provision.

[JetpackJesus]

Too late to edit my last post.

Florida also has adopted the Uniform Athlete Agent Act, so the eligibility warning is also required by Florida law to be included in the contract (it's not in Zion's), otherwise the athlete can void it.

Also, see subpart (a) of the first statute I cited in my first post: "an individual may not act as an athlete agent in this State without holding a certificate of registration under G.S. 78C-90 or G.S. 78C-92."

By coming to NC and signing Zion in NC, they acted as an athlete agent in NC, so I would argue the NC law applies.

[gep]

So... my question. If these provisions that make the contract void/invalid in NC, who was advising Zion to sign the contract.:confused: I can't imagine that Zion signed it without consulting with anyone else, including his parents, at least. Seems like a slam-dunk "don't sign" if a lawyer was consulted.

Or is this something that wasn't noticed until CAA reviewed it. Unfortunate....

[JetpackJesus]

So... my question. If these provisions that make the contract void/invalid in NC, who was advising Zion to sign the contract.:confused: I can't imagine that Zion signed it without consulting with anyone else, including his parents, at least. Seems like a slam-dunk "don't sign" if a lawyer was consulted.

Or is this something that wasn't noticed until CAA reviewed it. Unfortunate...
Good questions. I assume the UAAA has been adopted in most states specifically to protect against this happening--"agents" tricking athletes and their families into entering bad, now-illegal, contracts because they aren't well-versed in the law or NCAA's ridiculous rules.

It's unfortunate Zion has to deal with this, but maybe a silver lining is that his high profile will cause a light to be shined on a problem a lot of student athletes may not realize exists.

[budwom]

I would have thought that Zion would have been carefully instructed to avoid this kind of crap during his brief stay in Durham, but I would be wrong...

[SavDukeGrad]

I would have thought that Zion would have been carefully instructed to avoid this kind of crap during his brief stay in Durham, but I would be wrong...

SI has an excellent article up with more details about Zion's relationship with Prime Sports and how the relationship evolved. It was interesting to me that Gina Ford made 4 trips to Durham in 2019 to aggressively pursue a relationship with Zion and his family. I wonder if the Duke staff was even aware of this.

https://www.si.com/nba/2019/06/13/zion-williamson-lawsuit-prime-sports-marketing-gina-ford

It has occurred to me over the last several years that there has been a shift in the way our star freshmen manage their off the court activities. There have been many families that have moved to Durham in recent years with the player for their freshman year - think Bagley, Carter, Williamson, and Barrett to name a few; I'm sure there are many others. In these instances, I would think Duke would have had a decreasing influence on the player's off the court activities, while the family's role has become much larger and more influential. I'm just not sure we can expect Duke to prevent this sort of thing these days, if the staff is not even aware of it.

[MCFinARL]

This isn't my practice area or jurisdiction, but based on the statute, it looks like Zion will easily win if they weren't registered agents per the NC statute. The contract is automatically void in that situation. Even if they were registered, the signature page definitely lacks the disclaimer language required by the statute, so Zion has the right to void the contract, which he has exercised. The only wrinkle, I suppose, would be a choice of law provision that says the laws of another jurisdiction govern the contract, but I'm not sure that would be legal in this type of contract.

If anyone is curious, here are the relevant bits of the two statutory provisions that Zion relies on in the complaint:

The one issue that may arise here, which the SI article linked by SavDukeGrad notes, has to do with what counts as as "athlete agent" under the statute. The contract with Prime Sports apparently covers marketing and branding opportunities, but not player contract representation and negotiations. While I'm pretty sure that would constitute "agency" under old fashioned black-letter law, I guess an argument could be made that it isn't the kind of agency the UAAA intended to cover if it doesn't include player contract representation. I don't know enough about the history of the law to know how sound an argument that is, but if there is any doubt, that could be enough to get both sides into settlement negotiations.

[JetpackJesus]

The one issue that may arise here, which the SI article linked by SavDukeGrad notes, has to do with what counts as as "athlete agent" under the statute. The contract with Prime Sports apparently covers marketing and branding opportunities, but not player contract representation and negotiations. While I'm pretty sure that would constitute "agency" under old fashioned black-letter law, I guess an argument could be made that it isn't the kind of agency the UAAA intended to cover if it doesn't include player contract representation. I don't know enough about the history of the law to know how sound an argument that is, but if there is any doubt, that could be enough to get both sides into settlement negotiations.

That SI article is very insightful. Based on the definitions in the NC statute, it seems like Ford's argument necessarily turns on the issue of whether Zion was a "Student Athlete" after he declared for the draft, which would determine the applicability of the UAAA to the contract.

The NC statute defines "Student Athlete" as "An individual who engages in, is eligible to engage in, or may be eligible in the future to engage in any intercollegiate sport. If an individual is permanently ineligible to participate in a particular intercollegiate sport, the individual is not a student-athlete for purposes of that sport." Since Zion retained his eligibility until May 29, regardless of his intention to return to Duke, I would think that he was still a "Student Athlete" when he signed the contract. As far as we know, the only thing that could have made Zion permanently ineligible is the signing of this contract, but that means he was eligible at the time he signed it, so the statute should still apply.

The NC statute defines an "Agency Contract" as "An agreement in which a student-athlete authorizes a person to negotiate or solicit on behalf of the student-athlete a professional-sports-services contract or an endorsement contract." According to SI, Zion's contract with Prime allowed them to, among other things, "Introduce Williamson to endorsement opportunities; Exclusively oversee all marketing opportunities brought before Williamson; and Negotiate on Williamson’s behalf with any company for purposes of an endorsement deal." If SI's summary bullet points are accurate, then it seems this contract is an "Agency Contract" under the statute.

The statute defines an "Athlete Agent" as "An individual who enters into an agency contract with a student-athlete or, directly or indirectly, recruits or solicits a student-athlete to enter into an agency contract. The term includes an individual who represents to the public that the individual is an athlete agent. The term does not include a spouse, parent, sibling, or guardian of the student-athlete or an individual acting solely on behalf of a professional sports team or professional sports organization." If the Prime Sports contract is deemed to be an "Agency Contract" then Ford acted as an "Athlete Agent" under the statute--she apparently did everything in the first sentence of the definition.

Definitions can be found at N.C.G.S.A. § 78C-86.

[yancem]

The one issue that may arise here, which the SI article linked by SavDukeGrad notes, has to do with what counts as as "athlete agent" under the statute. The contract with Prime Sports apparently covers marketing and branding opportunities, but not player contract representation and negotiations. While I'm pretty sure that would constitute "agency" under old fashioned black-letter law, I guess an argument could be made that it isn't the kind of agency the UAAA intended to cover if it doesn't include player contract representation. I don't know enough about the history of the law to know how sound an argument that is, but if there is any doubt, that could be enough to get both sides into settlement negotiations.

Yeah but wouldn't marketing and branding require contracts with whoever is marketing/branding the player. I mean if Sports Illustrated or espn wanted to do some article or promotion involving a player and/or their likeness, there would have to interaction between them and the players people and some form of contract or agreement would be necessary. Whenever/whereever money is changing hand doesn't there have to be a contract? If not, what services are being provided.

On a separate note, how ridiculous is the $100m figure thrown out by Prime Sports. I know that Zion is going to make insane amounts of money but even at 20% commission he isn't going to even approach $500m in 5 years. And if they are just doing marketing/promotions that can't take into consideration his actual nba contracts.

I would be very curious to hear what exactly they said they could/would do for Zion. I'm a little shocked that he is finding himself in this position unless there was some seriously shady things (down right lies) coming from Prime Sports.

[Acymetric]

That SI article is very insightful. Based on the definitions in the NC statute, it seems like Ford's argument necessarily turns on the issue of whether Zion was a "Student Athlete" after he declared for the draft, which would determine the applicability of the UAAA to the contract.

The NC statute defines "Student Athlete" as "An individual who engages in, is eligible to engage in, or may be eligible in the future to engage in any intercollegiate sport. If an individual is permanently ineligible to participate in a particular intercollegiate sport, the individual is not a student-athlete for purposes of that sport." Since Zion retained his eligibility until May 29, regardless of his intention to return to Duke, I would think that he was still a "Student Athlete" when he signed the contract. As far as we know, the only thing that could have made Zion permanently ineligible is the signing of this contract, but that means he was eligible at the time he signed it, so the statute should still apply.

The NC statute defines an "Agency Contract" as "An agreement in which a student-athlete authorizes a person to negotiate or solicit on behalf of the student-athlete a professional-sports-services contract or an endorsement contract." According to SI, Zion's contract with Prime allowed them to, among other things, "Introduce Williamson to endorsement opportunities; Exclusively oversee all marketing opportunities brought before Williamson; and Negotiate on Williamson’s behalf with any company for purposes of an endorsement deal." If SI's summary bullet points are accurate, then it seems this contract is an "Agency Contract" under the statute.

The statute defines an "Athlete Agent" as "An individual who enters into an agency contract with a student-athlete or, directly or indirectly, recruits or solicits a student-athlete to enter into an agency contract. The term includes an individual who represents to the public that the individual is an athlete agent. The term does not include a spouse, parent, sibling, or guardian of the student-athlete or an individual acting solely on behalf of a professional sports team or professional sports organization." If the Prime Sports contract is deemed to be an "Agency Contract" then Ford acted as an "Athlete Agent" under the statute--she apparently did everything in the first sentence of the definition.

Definitions can be found at N.C.G.S.A. § 78C-86.

"Or an endorsement contract" pretty much seals this. This is the exact scenario the NC law was written to avoid.

I've been re-watching The Practice on Amazon Prime, so I feel uniquely qualified to discuss this.

[JetpackJesus]

Yeah but wouldn't marketing and branding require contracts with whoever is marketing/branding the player. I mean if Sports Illustrated or espn wanted to do some article or promotion involving a player and/or their likeness, there would have to interaction between them and the players people and some form of contract or agreement would be necessary. Whenever/whereever money is changing hand doesn't there have to be a contract? If not, what services are being provided.

On a separate note, how ridiculous is the $100m figure thrown out by Prime Sports. I know that Zion is going to make insane amounts of money but even at 20% commission he isn't going to even approach $500m in 5 years. And if they are just doing marketing/promotions that can't take into consideration his actual nba contracts.

I would be very curious to hear what exactly they said they could/would do for Zion. I'm a little shocked that he is finding himself in this position unless there was some seriously shady things (down right lies) coming from Prime Sports.

The $100M is silly. Like the SI article says, "Even if Williamson signs a sneaker deal worth $200 million, the 15% commission would be $30 million." I actually wonder how hard Ford will want to fight this because it's a Class I Felony for an athlete agent to do any of the following:


§ 78C-98. Prohibited conduct
(a) An athlete agent, with the intent to induce a student-athlete to enter into an agency contract, shall not:

(1) Give any materially false or misleading information or make a materially false promise or representation.
(2) Furnish anything of value to a student-athlete before the student-athlete enters into the agency contract.
(3) Furnish anything of value to any individual other than the student-athlete or another registered athlete agent.
If Prime lied to Zion as you suggest (it does seem likely), they violated 78C-98(a)(1). Zion isn't asking for money in his suit. If I'm Ford, I would seriously consider just letting him out of the contract and walking away because I would not want to risk having sworn testimony in a civil matter that could later be used as evidence against me in a criminal prosecution. Also, there's the whole paying attorneys' fees vs. paying $0 to consider.

[JetpackJesus]

"Or an endorsement contract" pretty much seals this. This is the exact scenario the NC law was written to avoid.

I've been re-watching The Practice on Amazon Prime, so I feel uniquely qualified to discuss this.

If only you were rewatching The Practice while staying in a Holiday Inn Express.

Also, your post reminded me, since I did not include it in the earlier post: An "Endorsement Contract" is defined as "An agreement under which a student-athlete is employed or receives consideration to use on behalf of the other party any value that the student-athlete may have because of publicity, reputation, following, or fame obtained because of athletic ability or performance."

Anyway, I should probably go do actual work now ...

[yancem]

If Prime lied to Zion as you suggest (it does seem likely), they violated 78C-98(a)(1). Zion isn't asking for money in his suit. If I'm Ford, I would seriously consider just letting him out of the contract and walking away because I would not want to risk having sworn testimony in a civil matter that could later be used as evidence against me in a criminal prosecution. Also, there's the whole paying attorneys' fees vs. paying $0 to consider.

Not to mention making this into a big deal and losing (or maybe even winning) isn't going to look good for her or Prime Sports when trying to sign other players. From a PR stand point it might be best to let this go and revisit your business practices to make sure you don't end up in this situation again. You're going to be hard pressed to get a court to get a court (judge or jury) to award a large settlement for breach of a less than week old contract on which no services were rendered. I get that Zion signed the contract but to me it is kind of like a coach letting a recruit out of his LOI when he wants to go somewhere else. Sure, technically he signed a contract with your school but are you really going to come out ahead by forcing him to play for you or making him sit out a year? Sometimes retreat is the better part of valor.

[sagegrouse]

Not to mention making this into a big deal and losing (or maybe even winning) isn't going to look good for her or Prime Sports when trying to sign other players. From a PR stand point it might be best to let this go and revisit your business practices to make sure you don't end up in this situation again. You're going to be hard pressed to get a court to get a court (judge or jury) to award a large settlement for breach of a less than week old contract on which no services were rendered. I get that Zion signed the contract but to me it is kind of like a coach letting a recruit out of his LOI when he wants to go somewhere else. Sure, technically he signed a contract with your school but are you really going to come out ahead by forcing him to play for you or making him sit out a year? Sometimes retreat is the better part of valor.

Lessee... We have CAA, the world's largest entertainment and sports agency (https://www.caa.com/about-us), going up against a "boutique firm." I expect that all the talk now is posturing for the settlement that Julio forecast on the Front Page of DBR. (A) It could be cash up front. (B) It could be a slice of the Zion business (a "carve-out," as it were). (C) It could be a slice of future cash flow. Or, (D), CAA could just acquire Prime Sports.

I would be truly surprised if this goes to trial.

[Acymetric]

Lessee... We have CAA, the world's largest entertainment and sports agency (https://www.caa.com/about-us), going up against a "boutique firm." I expect that all the talk now is posturing for the settlement that Julio forecast on the Front Page of DBR. (A) It could be cash up front. (B) It could be a slice of the Zion business (a "carve-out," as it were). (C) It could be a slice of future cash flow. Or, (D), CAA could just acquire Prime Sports.

I would be truly surprised if this goes to trial.

Really? It seems to me that Zion/CAA stands a pretty strong chance at trial...no way they give them an ongoing percentage. Maybe they settle, but only if they can settle for a reasonable cash amount. (D) seems least likely, as it would be more expensive than (A) with no apparent benefit.

[JetpackJesus]

Lessee... We have CAA, the world's largest entertainment and sports agency (https://www.caa.com/about-us), going up against a "boutique firm." I expect that all the talk now is posturing for the settlement that Julio forecast on the Front Page of DBR. (A) It could be cash up front. (B) It could be a slice of the Zion business (a "carve-out," as it were). (C) It could be a slice of future cash flow. Or, (D), CAA could just acquire Prime Sports.

I would be truly surprised if this goes to trial.

Setting aside settlement, which is almost always the most likely outcome in civil litigation, I would be shocked if this went to trial simply because I don't see how Prime/Ford would survive summary judgment. They might not even survive a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

[BD80]

Setting aside settlement, which is almost always the most likely outcome in civil litigation, I would be shocked if this went to trial simply because I don't see how Prime/Ford would survive summary judgment. They might not even survive a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

Will they survive the first legal bill?

Of course, the $100 mil demand smacks of contingent fee, which lowers this case down a level in Dante's inferno. CAA could surely cry "Havoc" and let slip the dogs of war. How many contracts has Prime presented for signature without the required prominent disclaimer? How many North Carolina athletes have they approached - hmm, a discovery request should handled that nicely: expense reports, business credit card statements, phone records. The first settlement conference should be a LOT of fun for CAA.

[bundabergdevil]

Minor update (https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27434982/zion-filing-vs-ex-agent-alleges-early-recruitment)with Zion's team filing amendments to the original suit to now include early recruitment violations.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Minor update (https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27434982/zion-filing-vs-ex-agent-alleges-early-recruitment)with Zion's team filing amendments to the original suit to now include early recruitment violations.

Doesn’t seem so minor to me.

[AZLA]

Doesn’t seem so minor to me.

Removing my Duke tinted glasses and looking at all the angles objectively. I wondered if prior to this, that this issue could peel back and reveal some sketchy circumstances. And I’m not talking about Ford. CAA should have vetted and known about this prior to their announced signing. It’s clear they didn’t. Otherwise, they would have dealt with this behind the scenes prior. On the flip side, it’s clear Ford waited until after the announcement — had probably been brushed off by the family — and upped the PR opportunity by putting a lawsuit in motion soon after the CAA signing. This idea about predatory behavior and being told not to contact the player during the season is bunk (a smokescreen). Players have access to university legal consultation and also have protocols in place so that if there is an agent soliciting; they can be protected along with the university. What should be concerning to everyone is that now the legal team is trying to get out of a signed contract by invoking a technicality only applicable in certain state under the classification that when signed the athlete was under amateur status, aka NCAA athlete. Even more bizarre — is the judgment that the athlete signed such a contract with an unknown firm and not announcing it like they did once signed with CAA. This wasn’t Cush’s dad signing with Bob Sugar behind Jerry’s back. Though I’d like to believe and truly hope this gets resolved by clearing up a misunderstanding. Let’s get real here. He was a known #1 recruit with the biggest implied marketing value of any athlete since LeBron, even bigger in the modern social media age. And the player/family happens to just, oh by the way, sign with an unknown representative, not announce it, then sign with the biggest agency (and agents) in the world... that is a major red flag. Now hundreds of millions are at stake and the lawyers are sharpening their knives and it’s going to get very messy. I read where people think this will be a quick settlement and the other party should just cut their losses and walk away to save their reputation. I hope so but this could easily go the other way, and more sketchy things are revealed. Ultimately CAA and Nike will be protected, the other firm will be protected, and the player will be protected. My question is, will the program be protected?

[Jeffrey]

IMO, signing a contract and then trying to get out of your commitment, is not a good look. Hopefully, the residents of Zionville will learn from their mistake(s) and not do this repeatedly.

[flyingdutchdevil]

IMO, signing a contract and then trying to get out of your commitment, is not a good look. Hopefully, the residents of Zionville will learn from their mistake(s) and not do this repeatedly.

Zion = extraordinary athlete, phenomenal personality, potential generational talent.

Zion = horrible business man, atrocious legal decision maker.

His business acumen is akin to Kyrie's leadership.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Zion = extraordinary athlete, phenomenal personality, potential generational talent.

Zion = horrible business man, atrocious legal decision maker.

His business acumen is akin to Kyrie's leadership.
This seems harsh at best. He just turned 19... and was 18 when this all went down. With people coming at him from every angle. What kind of business person is anyone at 18? He made a gnarly error trusting someone who it seems was looking to score big rather than worry about the life/career of a young man. I suspect it will get worked out. Let’s not pile on the kid. That’s not fair. His parents? That might be a different conversation.

[duke79]

Zion = extraordinary athlete, phenomenal personality, potential generational talent.

Zion = horrible business man, atrocious legal decision maker.

His business acumen is akin to Kyrie's leadership.

I think the point here is that, at the age of 18, he should NOT be making ANY business or legal decisions. The first thing his "team" (i.e,, his parents, Duke, hanger-ons, etc) should have done is find the smartest, most experienced and most ethical lawyer, accountant, agent, investment advisor, et al to represent him before he even considers signing any document, entering into any contracts, endorsing any products or even earns one penny as a basketball player.

[sagegrouse]

I think the point here is that, at the age of 18, he should NOT be making ANY business or legal decisions. The first thing his "team" (i.e,, his parents, Duke, hanger-ons, etc) should have done is find the smartest, most experienced and most ethical lawyer, accountant, agent, investment advisor, et al to represent him before he even considers signing any document, entering into any contracts, endorsing any products or even earns one penny as a basketball player.

Well, wasn't the initial plan for his step-dad and a family friend to form a sports agency for the purpose of promoting Zion. This fell apart when the family friend failed the sports agent test. Hmmm.... I think this was an idiotic idea, but you can understand there may have been some family dynamics at play beyond Zion's ability to understand and control..

Then, it seems like they panicked and signed with the Florida agent.

Somewhere along the line, cooler heads prevailed and Zion signed with CAA, but the damage was done. Now it's being undone.

[bundabergdevil]

Well, wasn't the initial plan for his step-dad and a family friend to form a sports agency for the purpose of promoting Zion. This fell apart when the family friend failed the sports agent test. Hmmm... I think this was an idiotic idea, but you can understand there may have been some family dynamics at play beyond Zion's ability to understand and control..

Then, it seems like they panicked and signed with the Florida agent.

Somewhere along the line, cooler heads prevailed and Zion signed with CAA, but the damage was done. Now it's being undone.

Didn't help that family friend happened to be little Tommy Callahan...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1EyN9xTK94

[JetpackJesus]

IMO, signing a contract and then trying to get out of your commitment, is not a good look. Hopefully, the residents of Zionville will learn from their mistake(s) and not do this repeatedly.

Tricking teenagers (and their families) into signing illegal, unenforceable contracts is a much worse look, IMO. Being a superior athlete doesn't mean you or your family are good at business or understanding contracts or the law. The Uniform Athlete Agents Act exists in most states, including NC and FL, for a reason. That said, I share your hope that future athletes learn from his mistakes.

Zion's latest allegations are significant because the UAAA only applies to "Student Athletes" who are engaged in, eligible to engage in, or may be eligible in the future to engage in intercollegiate sports. Zion maintained college eligibility until May 29, even after he declared for the draft. He signed with Prime before that date, so he was still a "Student Athlete." Ford is trying to argue that Zion was no longer eligible when she recruited him, so the law doesn't apply. If she approached while he was still playing for Duke, as Zion's latest allegations say, then the UAAA unequivocally applies.

At the risk of rehashing all my earlier posts on this subject, the contract is void and/or voidable under both the NC and FL UAAA statutes because: (1) Ford apparently was not registered in NC (and possibly FL) as an agent and initiated the contact with Zion (in NC, importantly), making it void and unenforceable as a matter of law and (2) the contract, which is attached to Zion's complaint, does not contain the eligibility disclosure near the signature line that is required by both the NC and FL statutes; therefore, Zion has the option under both statutes to void the contract, which he has done. Most news stories on this subject focus on the first issue as being the crux of Zion's case for some reason, but I think that's wrong because#2 means you don't even need to address #1.

Ford's only hope is to establish that she engaged Zion after he no longer had any college eligibility, which would mean the UAAA doesn't apply. If he was still eligible when she began recruiting him, then the UAAA applies, and the contract is void/voidable and unenforceable.

[bundabergdevil]

An update on this situation from SI (https://www.si.com/nba/2019/12/20/zion-williamson-legal-dispute-former-representative-endorsements-florida). Some of the lawyers on our board are probably better equipped to provide a summary and perspective. The new developments begin about a third of the way in with the following paragraph:

"The Williamson-Ford litigation appears nowhere near resolution. This hazy state of affairs was reaffirmed in a recent ruling by Florida Circuit Court Judge David Miller. On Dec. 16, Judge Miller presided over a hearing held at Miami-Dade County Courthouse. It involved attorneys for both sides and centered on Williamson’s motion to dismiss Ford’s lawsuit.'

[sagegrouse]

An update on this situation from SI (https://www.si.com/nba/2019/12/20/zion-williamson-legal-dispute-former-representative-endorsements-florida). Some of the lawyers on our board are probably better equipped to provide a summary and perspective. The new developments begin about a third of the way in with the following paragraph:

"The Williamson-Ford litigation appears nowhere near resolution. This hazy state of affairs was reaffirmed in a recent ruling by Florida Circuit Court Judge David Miller. On Dec. 16, Judge Miller presided over a hearing held at Miami-Dade County Courthouse. It involved attorneys for both sides and centered on Williamson’s motion to dismiss Ford’s lawsuit.'

I am not a lawyer, although I am reviewing scripts for legal roles in the stream-o-verse. Nothing has happened in the Zion case -- this is just a motion to dismiss in Florida, where the original agent, Gina Ford of Prime Sports Marketing, is based, and the judge is still considering.

By the way Wendell's Mom, Kylia Carter, gets savaged by some on these boards for her use of the term "slavery" in connection with NCAA hoops, but Zion's step-dad and mom have likely done serious damage to his finances. I mean, basketball is the number two world-wide sport. Zion is among the most famous hoops players on the planet, and he is only 19 years old. This stumbling set of missteps could cost him tens of millions of dollars in damages plus loss of revenue as endorsement deals get hung up.

[JayZee]

What sort of role can/should Duke have played in this? Can the basketball staff provide advice, especially around agents and such after these kids declare or use up their eligibility? I can see the potential pitfalls, but having some more sophisticated people in the room could surely help these kids and their families from making bad decisions like this.

[bundabergdevil]

What sort of role can/should Duke have played in this? Can the basketball staff provide advice, especially around agents and such after these kids declare or use up their eligibility? I can see the potential pitfalls, but having some more sophisticated people in the room could surely help these kids and their families from making bad decisions like this.

I don't know about the staff but you'd think the "Brotherhood" network has enough guys that have navigated similar circumstances that Zion and family could have had good advice if they wanted it (and they very well may have, I obviously have no idea).

[cspan37421]

By the way Wendell's Mom, Kylia Carter, gets savaged by some on these boards for her use of the term "slavery" in connection with NCAA hoops, but Zion's step-dad and mom have likely done serious damage to his finances. I mean, basketball is the number two world-wide sport. Zion is among the most famous hoops players on the planet, and he is only 19 years old. This stumbling set of missteps could cost him tens of millions of dollars in damages plus loss of revenue as endorsement deals get hung up.

Slavery is in no way akin to bad business decisions or voluntary, rules-based associations.

[Pghdukie]

During the time Zion was enrolled at Duke, I tend to think K and staff were not permitted to speak with agents, etc. After Zion left, he was fair game to consult with whomever. Bad advice and bad decisions are why Bilas has a daytime job !

[sagegrouse]

During the time Zion was enrolled at Duke, I tend to think K and staff were not permitted to speak with agents, etc. After Zion left, he was fair game to consult with whomever. Bad advice and bad decisions are why Bilas has a daytime job !

True, that. Here is the June article (https://www.si.com/nba/2019/06/20/zion-williamson-caa-lawsuit-prime-sports-marketing-gina-ford-duke-nba-draft), laid out in great detail by the Sports Illustrated legal analyst Michael McCann. Zion was 18 YP and legally an adult, and he signed a bunch of stuff. Now Gina Ford and CAA are "duking" it out in courts, with Ms. Ford trying to get the case tried in her home state of FL.

[AZLA]

True, that. Here is the June article (https://www.si.com/nba/2019/06/20/zion-williamson-caa-lawsuit-prime-sports-marketing-gina-ford-duke-nba-draft), laid out in great detail by the Sports Illustrated legal analyst Michael McCann. Zion was 18 YP and legally an adult, and he signed a bunch of stuff. Now Gina Ford and CAA are "duking" it out in courts, with Ms. Ford trying to get the case tried in her home state of FL.

They (CAA, Zion and family) need to figure out how to quietly settle and move on. They’re hoping to get out of it on a technicality that won’t happen. I don’t feel sorry for CAA but they got screwed too. I guarantee they weren’t disclosed the information Zion signed previously. I’m concerned that they will keep trying to suggest / prove Zion was an underaged amateur and to try and get more leverage under the SC state law. Which to convince any legal authority as such, they would have to document funds received, or have signed documentation of such prior to declaring and more than likely before his 18th birthday or during the Duke basketball season. More than likely the family had been talking with Ford for a while. I’m guessing one parent was pushing for it but not in agreement with the other; or all agreed but when CAA came along with a better package they signed thinking some state law loophole would nullify Fords agreement. It would be interesting to see what the out clause was. But pleading the ‘i didn’t know or I was taken advantage’ approach isn’t going to work. The way this all went down is and should be absolutely shocking considering he was the presumed and proven to be #1 draft pick. Ford has all the leverage. After taxes, management fees to Ford, CAA representation fees, lawyer fees, There might be 40% to 30% leftover for income. Sheesh.

[sagegrouse]

They (CAA, Zion and family) need to figure out how to quietly settle and move on. They’re hoping to get out of it on a technicality that won’t happen. I don’t feel sorry for CAA but they got screwed too. I guarantee they weren’t disclosed the information Zion signed previously. I’m concerned that they will keep trying to suggest / prove Zion was an underaged amateur and to try and get more leverage under the SC state law. Which to convince any legal authority as such, they would have to document funds received, or have signed documentation of such prior to declaring and more than likely before his 18th birthday or during the Duke basketball season. More than likely the family had been talking with Ford for a while. I’m guessing one parent was pushing for it but not in agreement with the other; or all agreed but when CAA came along with a better package they signed thinking some state law loophole would nullify Fords agreement. It would be interesting to see what the out clause was. But pleading the ‘i didn’t know or I was taken advantage’ approach isn’t going to work. The way this all went down is and should be absolutely shocking considering he was the presumed and proven to be #1 draft pick. Ford has all the leverage. After taxes, management fees to Ford, CAA representation fees, lawyer fees, There might be 40% to 30% leftover for income. Sheesh.

I believe NC law may apply because of where the signing took place.

[BD80]

They (CAA, Zion and family) need to figure out how to quietly settle and move on. They’re hoping to get out of it on a technicality that won’t happen. I don’t feel sorry for CAA but they got screwed too. I guarantee they weren’t disclosed the information Zion signed previously. I’m concerned that they will keep trying to suggest / prove Zion was an underaged amateur and to try and get more leverage under the SC state law. Which to convince any legal authority as such, they would have to document funds received, or have signed documentation of such prior to declaring and more than likely before his 18th birthday or during the Duke basketball season. More than likely the family had been talking with Ford for a while. I’m guessing one parent was pushing for it but not in agreement with the other; or all agreed but when CAA came along with a better package they signed thinking some state law loophole would nullify Fords agreement. It would be interesting to see what the out clause was. But pleading the ‘i didn’t know or I was taken advantage’ approach isn’t going to work. The way this all went down is and should be absolutely shocking considering he was the presumed and proven to be #1 draft pick. Ford has all the leverage. After taxes, management fees to Ford, CAA representation fees, lawyer fees, There might be 40% to 30% leftover for income. Sheesh.


I believe NC law may apply because of where the signing took place.

And Ford wasn't licensed in NC. Bye bye leverage. That is why the motion to dismiss is important and viable.

[uh_no]

During the time Zion was enrolled at Duke, I tend to think K and staff were not permitted to speak with agents, etc. After Zion left, he was fair game to consult with whomever. Bad advice and bad decisions are why Bilas has a daytime job !

i can't imagine he's practicing, is he?

[sagegrouse]

i can't imagine he's practicing, is he?

Here is Wikipedia article selection:


Legal career

Bilas received his J.D. degree from Duke University School of Law in 1992. He is currently Of Counsel to the Charlotte office of Moore & Van Allen, where he maintains a litigation practice.

Bilas most notably worked on the case Lyons Partnership v. Morris Costumes, Inc., where he successfully defended the costume business against trademark and copyright claims brought by owners of the popular children's television character Barney the Dinosaur.
Still listed on firm web site as "Of Counsel" at Moore & Van Allen in Charlotte.

[AZLA]

And Ford wasn't licensed in NC. Bye bye leverage. That is why the motion to dismiss is important and viable.

I really hope that’s the case, but don’t forget that Zion and Ford did not enter into a licensed-agent-NCAA or NBA agreement, so she doesn’t need to meet that standard in reference to state law on repping amateur athletes. Her business model and contract isn’t player-agent representation. The contract is for marketing and producing sponsorship projects. So while CAA serves as his legally licensed agency — that doesn’t preclude or absolve him from entering into other contracts to set up deals outside of licensed agency representation, such as public relations, or business management, etc. Happens all the time in Hollywood. The state regulations really only apply to amateur and/or professional sports representation much like your insurance agent must be licensed in your state to provide you insurance. In this case, it’s a contract for marketing services — and unless there can be proven fraud or malfeasance — his out clause in the contract, whatever that may be, will be what most likely dictates how this knot gets untied. Also, Zion could have signed that contract in NC, but so what? He never was a ‘legal’ resident of NC — he only lived there for probably 10 months. You have to have a minimum of a driver’s license and registration, an established address (typically rented or owned with proof of utilities), plus proving to a state school official you’re not supported by parents or other means and that you’ve paid some form of state taxes (typically holding some form of job) — usually for a year or longer. Plus I thought those regs were for minors, which of course, he was a grown adult albeit only 18. If Zion’s people cannot prove Ford operated in bad faith, look out. Based on her previous clientele I’m sure she has a sound and proven contract in place. Otherwise, this would have been thrown out by now. Odds are there will be a settlement before a dismissal.

[BD80]

I really hope that’s the case, but don’t forget that Zion and Ford did not enter into a licensed-agent-NCAA or NBA agreement, so she doesn’t need to meet that standard in reference to state law on repping amateur athletes. Her business model and contract isn’t player-agent representation. The contract is for marketing and producing sponsorship projects. So while CAA serves as his legally licensed agency — that doesn’t preclude or absolve him from entering into other contracts to set up deals outside of licensed agency representation, such as public relations, or business management, etc. Happens all the time in Hollywood. The state regulations really only apply to amateur and/or professional sports representation much like your insurance agent must be licensed in your state to provide you insurance. In this case, it’s a contract for marketing services — and unless there can be proven fraud or malfeasance — his out clause in the contract, whatever that may be, will be what most likely dictates how this knot gets untied. Also, Zion could have signed that contract in NC, but so what? He never was a ‘legal’ resident of NC — he only lived there for probably 10 months. You have to have a minimum of a driver’s license and registration, an established address (typically rented or owned with proof of utilities), plus proving to a state school official you’re not supported by parents or other means and that you’ve paid some form of state taxes (typically holding some form of job) — usually for a year or longer. Plus I thought those regs were for minors, which of course, he was a grown adult albeit only 18. If Zion’s people cannot prove Ford operated in bad faith, look out. Based on her previous clientele I’m sure she has a sound and proven contract in place. Otherwise, this would have been thrown out by now. Odds are there will be a settlement before a dismissal.

Thank you for a more detailed analysis. I obviously haven't read enough of the background to reach informed opinions.

I gather the choice of forum in the contract specifies Florida? As you note, place of signing won't be so strong with such tenuous contacts to NC.

Was the contract signed while he was a student? Is it "legal" per NCAA rules for a scholarship athlete to sign such a contract, or would it affect his eligibility? What consideration was given?

This could get juicy!

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I believe NC law may apply because of where the signing took place.

Unless the contract specified Florida law, which is certainly might have.

[AZLA]

Thank you for a more detailed analysis. I obviously haven't read enough of the background to reach informed opinions.

I gather the choice of forum in the contract specifies Florida? As you note, place of signing won't be so strong with such tenuous contacts to NC.

Was the contract signed while he was a student? Is it "legal" per NCAA rules for a scholarship athlete to sign such a contract, or would it affect his eligibility? What consideration was given?

This could get juicy!

You make salient points — but there’s the rub — what IF Zion signed while still a student athlete — then that would have put his amateur status in jeopardy and Duke in jeopardy too for that season, especially if he or family took some form of compensation. Good news is that this weird contract was entered into agreement after the season was over but before the draft and actually, I think before he actually officially declared (I could be wrong). Point is that this contract with Ford wasn’t made public until after he signed with CAA, and then lawsuits ensued. What’s concerning is how quickly after the season the contract with Ford was supposedly signed. And I seriously doubt the family had just met her. Most likely she had been courting them for a enough time prior to gain their trust. Hopefully nothing was exchanged. This situation is just so incredibly odd for such a high profile person / #1 pick. When there is that much $ involved — people get shifty — accusations fly — etc. Anyhow, hopefully it’s much ado about a nothing...

[JetpackJesus]

Setting aside settlement, which is almost always the most likely outcome in civil litigation, I would be shocked if this went to trial simply because I don't see how Prime/Ford would survive summary judgment. They might not even survive a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
*Narrator Voice* They didn't.

Per ESPN (https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story?id=30749453&_slug_=judge-ruling-favors-zion-williamson-voids-new-orleans-pelicans-star-marketing-agreement-gina-ford), the NC judge ruled that the marketing contract is void:


In Wednesday's ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Loretta C. Biggs voided Williamson's marketing agreement with Gina Ford and Prime Sports Marketing because it didn't meet the requirements of North Carolina's Uniform Athlete Agents Act.

Specifically, Biggs ruled that Williamson was a student-athlete at Duke at the time he signed the marketing agreement with Ford's company; he had not been declared permanently ineligible by the NCAA; Ford was not a certified agent in North Carolina; the agreement did not include the required warnings under the law; and Williamson and his family communicated to Ford that they were terminating and voiding the contract.

[AZLA]

It's over. Done. I had concerns, but again, much ado. Lessons learned. More importantly, Zion controls his destiny which is ultimately how it should be. Now we get to watch him soar even more. Congratulations!

[chrishoke]

New article by Steve Wisemen and the News and Observer about continuing court allegations that Zion's family took money to come to Duke. I didn't know where to put this - it is different litigation.

https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251167494.html

[DukieInKansas]

New article by Steve Wisemen and the News and Observer about continuing court allegations that Zion's family took money to come to Duke. I didn't know where to put this - it is different litigation.

https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251167494.html

Interesting that the claims are that Adidas paid the family. Not sure why they would pay him to come to Duke, a Nike school.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

New article by Steve Wisemen and the News and Observer about continuing court allegations that Zion's family took money to come to Duke. I didn't know where to put this - it is different litigation.

https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251167494.html
Seems like a whole lot of nothing new in there.

[dukelifer]

Seems like a whole lot of nothing new in there.

Seems to be independent of Duke. Given that high school superstars have a high probability of being very good NBA players- the idea that players families can't start the process of exploring endorsement options for their kids- when anything could happen- seems ridiculous to me. It is also highly unlikely that a $5000 transfer of money for who knows what purpose- had any influence on Zion's decisions to do anything.

[tommy]

Maybe Wiseman didn't get it all. The Athletic's story has it this way:

A filing last week in a South Carolina federal court raises an intriguing question for the new world of college sports that most likely will begin on July 1. How will schools and the NCAA handle athletes who can command endorsement deals while still in high school?
In a case pitting former elite recruit Brian Bowen (https://theathletic.com/player/nba/pacers/brian-bowen/) — who was waived by the Pacers last month — against Adidas, an attorney for Adidas filed a response to a set of questions that included this admission: “Rivers may have transferred $3,000 per month to the Williamson family for an unspecified period of time.”
“Rivers” is Chris Rivers, the former head of the Adidas grassroots basketball program. “The Williamson family” is the family of New Orleans Pelicans star Zion Williamson. (https://theathletic.com/player/nba/pelicans/zion-williamson/)



$3000 per month for an unspecified time is a lot more than it seems like Wiseman was talking about. And this isn't an allegation. Forget about the "may have" language. This is an admission by Adidas that their guy was paying the Williamsons that kind of money. I don't know why they would admit that if they didn't have to -- i.e. that it's true, and the other side can prove it's true. I don't think the NCAA is going to go back and open this up again and penalize Duke, but I also don't think we should pretend this is nothing.

And whether it's "independent of Duke" or not, if this is true, Zion was ineligible.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

New article by Steve Wisemen and the News and Observer about continuing court allegations that Zion's family took money to come to Duke. I didn't know where to put this - it is different litigation.

https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251167494.html

A major part of this "story" is that Zion's step-dad coached his AAU team, which was sponsored by Adidas. Wiseman is usually a good reporter but for context it would be helpful to know how much other AAU coaches get paid by their shoe sponsors to know whether this is out of line. Obviously you end up in a huge gray area when the coach of an AAU is the parent of a star recruit. But it doesn't sound like a lot of money for a premiere AAU team.

This article was written and presented (such as through the sub-headings) in a very sensationalistic way. I know that anything about Zion draws clicks and that is the name of the game these days, but it seems like the N&O devoted a lot of time and space to a big nothing.

[dukelifer]

Maybe Wiseman didn't get it all. The Athletic's story has it this way:

A filing last week in a South Carolina federal court raises an intriguing question for the new world of college sports that most likely will begin on July 1. How will schools and the NCAA handle athletes who can command endorsement deals while still in high school?
In a case pitting former elite recruit Brian Bowen (https://theathletic.com/player/nba/pacers/brian-bowen/) — who was waived by the Pacers last month — against Adidas, an attorney for Adidas filed a response to a set of questions that included this admission: “Rivers may have transferred $3,000 per month to the Williamson family for an unspecified period of time.”
“Rivers” is Chris Rivers, the former head of the Adidas grassroots basketball program. “The Williamson family” is the family of New Orleans Pelicans star Zion Williamson. (https://theathletic.com/player/nba/pelicans/zion-williamson/)



$3000 per month for an unspecified time is a lot more than it seems like Wiseman was talking about. And this isn't an allegation. Forget about the "may have" language. This is an admission by Adidas that their guy was paying the Williamsons that kind of money. I don't know why they would admit that if they didn't have to -- i.e. that it's true, and the other side can prove it's true. I don't think the NCAA is going to go back and open this up again and penalize Duke, but I also don't think we should pretend this is nothing.

And whether it's "independent of Duke" or not, if this is true, Zion was ineligible.



Well I am sure it will all be revealed. How this impacts his eligibility, I do not know. It all seems a bit silly unless Duke was somehow involved with the payoff. If the Williamson family was able to benefit from their son's ability in the short term- a career that could be hampered or ended by an ACL tear (see Harry Giles)- I am not sure why this is ethically wrong.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Seems to be independent of Duke. Given that high school superstars have a high probability of being very good NBA players- the idea that players families can't start the process of exploring endorsement options for their kids- when anything could happen- seems ridiculous to me. It is also highly unlikely that a $5000 transfer of money for who knows what purpose- had any influence on Zion's decisions to do anything.

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if Williamson was paid; I'd be very surprised if Duke paid Williamson.

adidas + no track record of Duke paying players + Duke already had RJ and Cam on board = I don't buy it

[JTH]

Maybe Wiseman didn't get it all. The Athletic's story has it this way:

A filing last week in a South Carolina federal court raises an intriguing question for the new world of college sports that most likely will begin on July 1. How will schools and the NCAA handle athletes who can command endorsement deals while still in high school?
In a case pitting former elite recruit Brian Bowen (https://theathletic.com/player/nba/pacers/brian-bowen/) — who was waived by the Pacers last month — against Adidas, an attorney for Adidas filed a response to a set of questions that included this admission: “Rivers may have transferred $3,000 per month to the Williamson family for an unspecified period of time.”
“Rivers” is Chris Rivers, the former head of the Adidas grassroots basketball program. “The Williamson family” is the family of New Orleans Pelicans star Zion Williamson. (https://theathletic.com/player/nba/pelicans/zion-williamson/)



$3000 per month for an unspecified time is a lot more than it seems like Wiseman was talking about. And this isn't an allegation. Forget about the "may have" language. This is an admission by Adidas that their guy was paying the Williamsons that kind of money. I don't know why they would admit that if they didn't have to -- i.e. that it's true, and the other side can prove it's true. I don't think the NCAA is going to go back and open this up again and penalize Duke, but I also don't think we should pretend this is nothing.

And whether it's "independent of Duke" or not, if this is true, Zion was ineligible.


I will wait a while before concluding that Adida's statement is proof that the Williams family received payments from the former Adida's agent. Adida's may not actually know what Rivers did with the money. This would not be the first time that an agent kept money or directed it for purposes other than originally intended. The statement may actually be as accurate as Adida's can make. They may know that money was available for that purpose, but not know for certain how it was used. Only how it "could" have been used.

I would not be surprised one way or the other. I'm just saying that until we get more information, I am not going to read more into their statement than is there.

[uh_no]

Well I am sure it will all be revealed. How this impacts his eligibility, I do not know. It all seems a bit silly unless Duke was somehow involved with the payoff. If the Williamson family was able to benefit from their son's ability in the short term- a career that could be hampered or ended by an ACL tear (see Harry Giles)- I am not sure why this is ethically wrong.

Because they attested to not doing that exact thing?

[Billy Dat]

This Steve Wiseman N&O article describes more Duke players being named in the Daniel Cutler testimony
https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251198629.html

The most damning new stuff is related to Frank Jackson who looks like he had Cutler buying plane tickets for he and his girlfriend. Looks like Duke may be safe, in part, because we are 4 years past the alleged transgression.

This is how this stuff works. The sneaker companies funnel money and product through runners and other layers to give everyone involved plausible deniability. In this case, even with Duke being a Nike school, Adidas is still working the player hard in the hopes that he'll rep Adidas down the road.

Looks like Frank was most recently wearing some Nikes
https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/the-sneakers-worn-by-frank-jackson-of-the-detroit-pistons-news-photo/1232548571

[chrishoke]

I will wait a while before concluding that Adida's statement is proof that the Williams family received payments from the former Adida's agent. Adida's may not actually know what Rivers did with the money. This would not be the first time that an agent kept money or directed it for purposes other than originally intended. The statement may actually be as accurate as Adida's can make. They may know that money was available for that purpose, but not know for certain how it was used. Only how it "could" have been used.

I would not be surprised one way or the other. I'm just saying that until we get more information, I am not going to read more into their statement than is there.


See this new article from Steve Wiseman. Not good. "Bank records show payments from ex-Adidas exec to Zion Williamson’s mom and stepfather" https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251473183.html

[budwom]

See this new article from Steve Wiseman. Not good. "Bank records show payments from ex-Adidas exec to Zion Williamson’s mom and stepfather" https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251473183.html

I suppose the silver lining is that the money didn't come from Nike.

[LasVegas]

See this new article from Steve Wiseman. Not good. "Bank records show payments from ex-Adidas exec to Zion Williamson’s mom and stepfather" https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251473183.html

Why don’t these people use cash? Do they not care or are they just stupid?

[duke79]

See this new article from Steve Wiseman. Not good. "Bank records show payments from ex-Adidas exec to Zion Williamson’s mom and stepfather" https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251473183.html

Obviously, I have no clue IF this is actually true, but if it is, the "Adidas person" either didn't believe that what they were doing was against the NCAA rules OR they were incredibly stupid in using wire transfers that could easily be traced to make these payments. Not that I advocate this, but shouldn't you be making the payments in "cash" to avoid a direct link?

Also, it is somewhat concerning about the allegations involving Frank Jackson.

[proelitedota]

I suppose the silver lining is that the money didn't come from Nike.

The other silver lining is that we don't have a ff / title banner at risk of being taken down.

As for Frank Jackson, it is pretty evident that some of these guys don't care about the consequences of their actions and how it reflects on the institution.

[chrishoke]

The other silver lining is that we don't have a ff / title banner at risk of being taken down.

As for Frank Jackson, it is pretty evident that some of these guys don't care about the consequences of their actions and how it reflects on the institution.

That team won the ACC Championship.

[jacone21]

Is it bad that I just can't really care about this stuff? There was a time when these kinds of things would bother me terribly because of how they might reflect on Duke. Those days are gone. With transfers in and transfers out, and one and dones, and roster turnover and rebuilding, and NIL money, and TV money, and shoe money, and beer money, and promos playing instead of the band, because money... well you get the picture. Does it even matter anymore?

[MarkD83]

Is it bad that I just can't really care about this stuff? There was a time when these kinds of things would bother me terribly because of how they might reflect on Duke. Those days are gone. With transfers in and transfers out, and one and dones, and roster turnover and rebuilding, and NIL money, and TV money, and shoe money, and beer money, and promos playing instead of the band, because money... well you get the picture. Does it even matter anymore?

I was about to say the same thing. What would bother me is if there was a direct "bribe" from a member of the Duke staff to a player, such as the case at Arizona (if I have my facts straight).
I am almost ready to applaud that a 3rd party gave money to a player's family as a way to stick it to the NCAA.

[chrishoke]

Is it bad that I just can't really care about this stuff? There was a time when these kinds of things would bother me terribly because of how they might reflect on Duke. Those days are gone. With transfers in and transfers out, and one and dones, and roster turnover and rebuilding, and NIL money, and TV money, and shoe money, and beer money, and promos playing instead of the band, because money... well you get the picture. Does it even matter anymore?

I bet you we paid to say that. :p

[Nugget]

Wiseman's N&O story linked above is behind a paywall, but I'm guessing this publicly-available version from an Oregon newspaper is the same:

https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2021/05/bank-records-show-payments-from-ex-adidas-exec-to-zion-williamsons-mom-and-stepfather.html

"Bank records filed in federal court show Adidas executive Chris Rivers made payments from his Oregon-based company to former Duke star Zion Williamson’s family between 2016 and 2019, including payments to Williamson’s stepfather’s furniture store account. ... The News & Observer reported last week the detailed testimony in depositions and documents about payments to Williamson’s family as well as a different Adidas rep buying plane tickets for former Duke player Frank Jackson while he was playing for the Blue Devils in 2016.

The documents obtained Monday included copies of bank records uncovered via a subpoena filed by Bowen’s attorneys. They show wire transfers from Rivers’ company, In Your Eye Sports, to a joint bank account in the name of Williamson’s mother, Sharonda Anderson, and her husband, Lee Anderson (Williamson’s stepfather) in 2016 and 2017. The payments listed in the bank documents were for $1,000 on Dec. 21, 2016, $500 on Jan. 30, 2017, $2,500 on Feb. 24, 2017, and $1,000 on March 22, 2017. Anderson ran the Adidas-sponsored S.C. Supreme summer-league team in 2017 and payments from Adidas to him for team expenses are permitted under NCAA rules. But the payments from Rivers’ company to Williamson’s family appear to violate those rules, which would have made Williamson ineligible during his one season playing for Duke …

PAYMENTS TO ZION’S STEPFATHER’S FURNITURE ACCOUNT

Colin Ram, Bowen’s attorney also alleges, and bank account records show, Rivers made payments to the Ashley Furniture Homestores account that Williamson’s stepfather opened on Sept. 5, 2016. … According to the motion filed by Bowen’s attorney: “In a letter to (Bowen’s) counsel from Synchrony Bank, the consumer financing company confirmed that at least two of the payments made to Zion’s stepfather’s Ashley Furniture account came from the Bank of the West account ending in –835 controlled by In Your Eye Sports, Inc.” While the payment amounts are not shown, the documents from Synchrony Bank, which operates Ashley Furniture’s customer accounts, show payments were made in 2017 from a Bank of the West account, which is tied to Rivers, on Aug. 10 and Sept. 12. A third payment to the account was made on Jan. 3, 2019. But the name of the bank where the money came from was redacted.

OTHER ALLEGED PAYMENTS TO ZION’S FAMILY
Earlier this year, Bowen’s attorneys filed a series of questions with the court for Adidas to answer. Known as interrogatories, these questions sought details of payments by Adidas to a host of recruits, including [Dennis Smith, Williamson, Billy Preston and Silvio De Sousa]. Kansas, which is an Adidas-sponsored school, also recruited Williamson. William Taft, an Adidas lawyer, in a letter to one of Bowen’s attorneys filed with the court last month, said the shoe company “is aware of the following documents suggesting that certain fund transfers to Mr. Williamson or his family may have occurred.”
Taft in the letter went on to detail nine payments that totaled $5,474, starting with a $404 payment on Nov. 14, 2016, and ending with an $800 payment on Sept. 12, 2017. The largest payment was $1,107 on Feb. 14, 2017. Taft also wrote, “Rivers may have transferred $3,000 per month to the Williamson family for an unspecified period of time” and “Rivers may have transferred $1,000 to the Williamson family.” “Adidas does not know the specific purpose of these transfers,” Taft wrote. Starting with a $404 payment on Nov. 14, 2016, a list of nine payments are detailed with the last being an $800 payment on Sept. 12, 2017, according to the letter. The largest payment was $1,107 on Feb. 14, 2017, the letter states.

FORMER MARKETING AGENT FILES ANOTHER MOTION
Evidence of these payments filed as part of the Bowen case are also now part of the case file in a dispute between Williamson and his former marketing agent, Gina Ford. Ford signed Williamson in April 2019 with Florida-based Prime Sports Marketing, but Williamson broke the contract the following month to sign with his current agent, CAA. Ford claimed Williamson owes her $100 million for breaking the contract. A federal judge in a Greensboro court ruled earlier this year that the contract between Ford and Williamson is void because Ford violated North Carolina’s Uniform Athlete-Agent Act due to her, among other things, not being registered with the state. Ford’s attorneys argued that Williamson shouldn’t have been protected by that state law because he had already accepted payments that should have ruled him ineligible under NCAA rules. In a motion filed last week in Greensboro, Ford’s attorneys asked federal judge Loretta C. Biggs to revisit her decision, citing the evidence of payments to Williamson’s family presented in the Bowen case.

As these allegations have been presented about Williamson’s family receiving payments over the last two years, Duke has always pointed to the NCAA Clearinghouse declaring Williamson eligible in 2018. Duke athletic director Kevin White, in statements released by the school, said Duke and the NCAA conducted enhanced background checks into the family’s finances to ensure no violations of NCAA amateurism rules had occurred.

Should the NCAA open an infractions case and rule that Williamson did indeed violate rules before and during his Duke career, it could rule the school has to vacate wins and serve other penalties for using an ineligible player even if the school had no knowledge of the violations."

Some observations:

1. I think none of this is likely to change the North Carolina federal judge's ruling in Gina Ford's lawsuit -- even if Zion "should have been" ruled ineligible, he wasn't. So, he was in any event a "student-athlete" as defined by the UAA. I doubt this has any impact on the resolution of the Florida lawsuit Ford brought against Zion (which should remain disposed of in deference to the first-filed North Carolina case and also there is still the issue -- not addressed by the Florida appellate court -- whether Zion was subject to personal jurisdiction in Florida). I suppose Ford's lawyers will try to use this in her suit against CAA, but the same rationale for the North Carolina decision should apply to that claim also.

2. The newly-disclosed payments of $5,000 from the account associated with the Adidas rep to Zion's parents appears to be in addition to the previously disclosed payments of $5,474 in odd amounts between $404 and $1,107 between Nov. 2016-Sept. 2017. My own supposition is those previously-disclosed payments look more like true “reimbursement” amounts for travel expenses related to the sponsorship of Zion’s AAU team, whereas these payments are more difficult to explain.

3. The major ambiguity I see is in Wiseman's assertion that "Anderson ran the Adidas-sponsored S.C. Supreme summer-league team in 2017 and payments from Adidas to him for team expenses are permitted under NCAA rules. But the [newly disclosed $5,000] payments from Rivers’ company to Williamson’s family appear to violate those rules, which would have made Williamson ineligible during his one season playing for Duke."

4. As I understand it, there is a very large gray area around whether a shoe company that sponsors an AAU team can pay for more than just reimbursement of "team expenses." At least according to the widespread reporting several years ago about Marvin Bagley's father (from Nike) and Josh Jackson's mother (from Under Armour), among others, receiving undifferentiated "sponsorship" payments from shoe companies that were not tied directly to reimbursement of team expenses, that appeared to arguably straddle the line of permissible -- even though everyone understood how fishy it was.

5. The revelation that the Adidas rep made payments into a furniture store account opened by Zion's stepfather within a week of the account being opened is very damning. It's hard to see how that can possibly be related to sponsorship of the AAU team and really does look like laundering payments simply to avoid detection. Also, it greatly undermines the claims about the thoroughness of Duke's eligibility evaluation (and the NCAA Clearinghouse's).

6. I'm struck by how small these amounts appear to be compared to what appears to be the accepted fact that Adidas paid Bowen $100,000.

[budwom]

The other silver lining is that we don't have a ff / title banner at risk of being taken down.

As for Frank Jackson, it is pretty evident that some of these guys don't care about the consequences of their actions and how it reflects on the institution.

agreed. I guess that's what happens when you have a lot of six month relationships, the attachment to Duke is limited.

[DavidBenAkiva]

Thanks for laying this out. I read the article and was struck by 1) the relationship between the step-father that was running the AAU team, and 2) the amount of the payments. If someone were to throw $5000 or $10000 my way, I'm not going to say that was nothing. Then again, we're seeing other families regularly get six figure payments. This must have been a smaller portion of a payment from Rivers to the Williamson family if it was to pay them off. Or it all could have been reimbursement for AAU expenses (still very fishy IMO).

The simplest explanation is usually the best: this was a smaller piece of a bigger payment that was all for naught. Zion is with Team Jordan these days. Thanks for playing, Adidas.

[proelitedota]

That team won the ACC Championship.

one of like 21.

[cato]

As for Frank Jackson.

I won’t go so far as to ask who Frank Jackson is, but I did have to look up which team he played on. Looks like it was the Tatum/Kennard team that won the ACC and then wilted in the NCAA against an inspired SC team. At any rate, I sure hope no ACC banners are at stake. I’m not sure where we are in terms of enforcement of these types things.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The simplest explanation is usually the best: this was a smaller piece of a bigger payment that was all for naught. Zion is with Team Jordan these days. Thanks for playing, Adidas.

Well...

What I'm reading in less Duke-centric media is the even simpler explanation is that Adidas paid $X.XX and Nike clearly paid more.

Not advocating that perspective, but I can see the logic.

[Bluedog]

Well...

What I'm reading in less Duke-centric media is the even simpler explanation is that Adidas paid $X.XX and Nike clearly paid more.

Not advocating that perspective, but I can see the logic.

That's what Michael Avenatti claimed (I think...).

It seems like all this shoe company to high schooler money is a TERRIBLE client acquisition strategy and doesn't end up garnering good will in their endorsement decision-making process.

I agree that I am much more understanding if it's a third party where the institution had no involvement or knowledge of said payment, than if the payment originated from someone at the university. With NIL upcoming, it's basically going to be allowed anyways...

I have no idea the authenticity of the bank records, but I think I recall fraudulent Zion driver's license before that the marketing team was trying to use as evidence. So, impossible to know at this point.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

That's what Michael Avenatti claimed (I think...).


Ew. Now I feel gross. I will go back and rethink my everything.

[duke79]

The other silver lining is that we don't have a ff / title banner at risk of being taken down.

As for Frank Jackson, it is pretty evident that some of these guys don't care about the consequences of their actions and how it reflects on the institution.


Is it bad that I just can't really care about this stuff? There was a time when these kinds of things would bother me terribly because of how they might reflect on Duke. Those days are gone. With transfers in and transfers out, and one and dones, and roster turnover and rebuilding, and NIL money, and TV money, and shoe money, and beer money, and promos playing instead of the band, because money... well you get the picture. Does it even matter anymore?

Yea, IF the NCAA does decide to take action, you can argue that Duke doesn't really have much to lose - no final four appearance or national title at stake (but an ACC title and it would hurt a little to lose that) BUT I do think it would be an embarrassment to the university and to Coach K and the entire basketball program and athletic department (especially after the athletic department's statement that they thoroughly vetted Zion and his family before offering him the scholarship - again, this assumes the recent allegations are true), plus it would just give all of the Duke haters out there another reason to trash Duke and Coach K (which is already happening on the IC board).

I gave up a long time ago caring about all of this stuff. I have assumed for years that much, if not all of Div. 1 college basketball (and football) is more or less corrupt, including Duke (see, e.g., the fake classes at UNC). It doesn't surprise me in the least that this might have happened. Given that many of the players on the teams come from poor or lower middle-class backgrounds and that there is now hundreds of millions of dollars sloshing around the system, it is almost inevitable that the players and their families are going to want some of that money, for their essential services. And why not? They're the oil that makes the wheel go round. Everyone else is just feasting on their talents.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Yea, IF the NCAA does decide to take action, you can argue that Duke doesn't really have much to lose - no final four appearance or national title at stake (but an ACC title and it would hurt a little to lose that) BUT I do think it would be an embarrassment to the university and to Coach K and the entire basketball program and athletic department (especially after the athletic department's statement that they thoroughly vetted Zion and his family before offering him the scholarship - again, this assumes the recent allegations are true), plus it would just give all of the Duke haters out there another reason to trash Duke and Coach K (which is already happening on the IC board).

I gave up a long time ago caring about all of this stuff. I have assumed for years that much, if not all of Div. 1 college basketball (and football) is more or less corrupt, including Duke (see, e.g., the fake classes at UNC). It doesn't surprise me in the least that this might have happened. Given that many of the players on the teams come from poor or lower middle-class backgrounds and that there is now hundreds of millions of dollars sloshing around the system, it is almost inevitable that the players and their families are going to want some of that money, for their essential services. And why not? They're the oil that makes the wheel go round. Everyone else is just feasting on their talents.

I also assume some level of this happens everywhere now. It doesn't mean that if it comes full circle and it's proven that Duke had some knowledge, that I won't be extremely disappointed.

Just another nail in the coffin of "college" athletics, from my perspective.

I won't think differently of Zion. But it would definitely taint my perspective of Duke if they have lied.

[CameronBornAndBred]

See this new article from Steve Wiseman. Not good. "Bank records show payments from ex-Adidas exec to Zion Williamson’s mom and stepfather" https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251473183.html

As a Duke fan who doesn't want to see Duke dragged in, I say "So what?"
And obviously if it turns out to be true, then Duke's name will be brought up, but unless the above says and shows "Bank records show payments from a Duke rep to blahblahblah", then it doesn't affect the university.
If true, it's between Adidas (not Duke's Nike), and Zion and his family. Or maybe just between Adidas and his family. I don't know. I don't care.

Because Duke itself is not implicated.

[chrishoke]

If it is true, wouldn't it mean that Zion and his family lied to Duke? Again, if true.

[hibby91]

But it would definitely taint my perspective of Duke if they have lied.

I agree, but I have a difficult time believing that Coach K would allow (or encourage) his staff to be part of improprieties when his staff is made up of former players that he has known since they were teenagers. They are basically family and not assistant coaches that bounce from school to school. He isn't going to throw them under the bus and claim ignorance. Not that anyone on this board cares, but I will stop watching or rooting for them entirely if Duke is somehow directly linked.

[proelitedota]

This exact situation already happened with Maggette. It's not a big deal for the university, but it'll be bad optics for the NCAA if they're going to vacate wins for $5k given the current atmosphere in regards to supporting paying players.

[AGDukesky]

This exact situation already happened with Maggette. It's not a big deal for the university, but it'll be bad optics for the NCAA if they're going to vacate wins for $5k given the current atmosphere in regards to supporting paying players.

It’s not the same if payments were made while Zion was at Duke. Maggette was only accused of taking money before college. Either way I’m not that worried...

[Nugget]

As a Duke fan who doesn't want to see Duke dragged in, I say "So what?"
And obviously if it turns out to be true, then Duke's name will be brought up, but unless the above says and shows "Bank records show payments from a Duke rep to blahblahblah", then it doesn't affect the university.
If true, it's between Adidas (not Duke's Nike), and Zion and his family. Or maybe just between Adidas and his family. I don't know. I don't care.

Because Duke itself is not implicated.


As a Duke fan who doesn't want to see Duke dragged in, I say "So what?"
And obviously if it turns out to be true, then Duke's name will be brought up, but unless the above says and shows "Bank records show payments from a Duke rep to blahblahblah", then it doesn't affect the university.
If true, it's between Adidas (not Duke's Nike), and Zion and his family. Or maybe just between Adidas and his family. I don't know. I don't care.

Because Duke itself is not implicated.

I disagree strongly with this -- if it's true, and it's deemed an NCAA violation for the Adidas rep to have made the (alleged) payments to Zion's mother/step-father (i.e., they are deemed not to be legitimately related to Adidas' sponsorship of Zion's AAU team) then it absolutely does "affect" Duke and Duke is "implicated" -- simply by virtue of playing someone who was ineligible Duke is exposed to NCAA consequences (e.g., vacating the 32 wins from that season, forfeiting the NCAA tournament win shares). Further, the NCAA rules are clear that this kind of issue isn't avoided merely by routing payments to a player's family -- the player would still be deemed ineligible.

You may choose not to care about those consequences, but they would exist nonetheless.

Also, if this is true, Duke's having been loud wrong about the proclamations that Zion's eligibility issues had been fully vetted absolutely "implicates" and "affects" Duke - at least reputationally.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I disagree strongly with this -- if it's true, and it's deemed an NCAA violation for the Adidas rep to have made the (alleged) payments to Zion's mother/step-father (i.e., they are deemed not to be legitimately related to Adidas' sponsorship of Zion's AAU team) then it absolutely does "affect" Duke and Duke is "implicated" -- simply by virtue of playing someone who was ineligible Duke is exposed to NCAA consequences (e.g., vacating the 32 wins from that season, forfeiting the NCAA tournament win shares). Further, the NCAA rules are clear that this kind of issue isn't avoided merely by routing payments to a player's family -- the player would still be deemed ineligible.

You may choose not to care about those consequences, but they would exist nonetheless.

Also, if this is true, Duke's having been loud wrong about the proclamations that Zion's eligibility issues had been fully vetted absolutely "implicates" and "affects" Duke - at least reputationally.

I'd care more if they had a snowball's chance of sticking. As I said, this is (very likely) way more on Zion and his family than it is on Duke.

[Nugget]

If it is true, wouldn't it mean that Zion and his family lied to Duke? Again, if true.

Maybe, but maybe not. I suppose it's possible that these payments -- during what appears from the timing (Nov. 2016 to Sept. 2017) to be Zion's Junior year of HS and continuing to early into his Senior year in HS -- were disclosed to the NCAA/Duke and deemed to be sufficiently related to Adidas' sponsorship of Zion's AAU team and his step-father's running of that program so as to be legit (again, in the same way that payments of similar amounts to Marvin Bagley's father by Nike for running his AAU team were deemed legit).

There is the stray payment into Zion's step-father's furniture store account in Jan. 2019, but per the story they don't know where that came from. It would be odd that they did know the 2016-2017 payment came from the Adidas guy but not know that for the 2019 payment. So, perhaps that was just Zion's step-father paying off his bill (so not an issue). Insufficient information to tell.

[sagegrouse]

I disagree strongly with this -- if it's true, and it's deemed an NCAA violation for the Adidas rep to have made the (alleged) payments to Zion's mother/step-father (i.e., they are deemed not to be legitimately related to Adidas' sponsorship of Zion's AAU team) then it absolutely does "affect" Duke and Duke is "implicated" -- simply by virtue of playing someone who was ineligible Duke is exposed to NCAA consequences (e.g., vacating the 32 wins from that season, forfeiting the NCAA tournament win shares). Further, the NCAA rules are clear that this kind of issue isn't avoided merely by routing payments to a player's family -- the player would still be deemed ineligible.

You may choose not to care about those consequences, but they would exist nonetheless.

Also, if this is true, Duke's having been loud wrong about the proclamations that Zion's eligibility issues had been fully vetted absolutely "implicates" and "affects" Duke - at least reputationally.

We're talking about $5K in payments? Plus some in the same range likely connected to the AAU team. And the party leaking this information has a huge lawsuit against Zion. I would like to hear from the defense before I get too worked up over this.

[ice-9]

Maybe the Adidas guy bought some furniture? Is that a violation?

[chrishoke]

Steve Wiseman is reporting that this latest suit has now been dismissed with prejudice by the federal judge.

Here is the article linked in Steve's tweet. https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article251684993.html

[Buredemon]

If you want to hear the appeal argument about Zion’s appeal, it is here: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/OAarchive/mp3/22-1793-20231024.mp3. Including some UVA jokes from a judge with clear allegiances.

[AZLA]

So basically Zion was protected because the law looks at him as for lack of a better word, young and dumb, incapable of making an enforceable contract in the first place in the eyes of the law because he was an amateur college player and the onus was on Ford to satisfy 3 criteria which wasn’t met, but was required of her. Therefore she was the party committing the illegal activity in the first place not only making the contract null and void, but also making any further legal inquiry into whether potential student-amateur-athlete violations took place meaningless to the court. So essentially Ford had absolutely no leverage any more over Zion since her behavior snd actions were illegal in the first place. And without an enforceable contract and exchange of $$$ it’s a nothing burger, and Zion dodges a close one. Case closed. Zion goes to NBA not soon enough. Yadda yadda…

[bundabergdevil]

So basically Zion was protected because the law looks at him as for lack of a better word, young and dumb, incapable of making an enforceable contract in the first place in the eyes of the law because he was an amateur college player and the onus was on Ford to satisfy 3 criteria which wasn’t met, but was required of her. Therefore she was the party committing the illegal activity in the first place not only making the contract null and void, but also making any further legal inquiry into whether potential student-amateur-athlete violations took place meaningless to the court. So essentially Ford had absolutely no leverage any more over Zion since her behavior snd actions were illegal in the first place. And without an enforceable contract and exchange of $$$ it’s a nothing burger, and Zion dodges a close one. Case closed. Zion goes to NBA not soon enough. Yadda yadda…

Paired with other stories since his arrival in the NBA, it paints a picture of a young man who needs to get more worldly fast or at least make sure he’s got folks in his corner with a lot of good sense and intentions.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Paired with other stories since his arrival in the NBA, it paints a picture of a young man who needs to get more worldly fast or at least make sure he’s got folks in his corner with a lot of good sense and intentions.

I mentioned elaeah6- this really feels like an important season for Zion and Ja. For different reasons, but with similar impact.

When they rolled into the league, the assumption was we would see them square off in late playoff matchups for a decade or so. Now they need to stay on the court and out of negative headlines.

Here's hoping both young men get their heads and bodies right and can wow us with some basketball.

[rocketeli]

I know we are all supposed to be Duke homers here, but frankly this just always looked like a case to me of Zion signing a deal then getting a better offer and trying to weasel out of the first deal, pure and simple. As for lacking any capacity to sign, he didn't seem to lack any capacity to sign a contract to play basketball at Duke, or to play in the NBA.

[sagegrouse]

I know we are all supposed to be Duke homers here, but frankly this just always looked like a case to me of Zion signing a deal then getting a better offer and trying to weasel out of the first deal, pure and simple. As for lacking any capacity to sign, he didn't seem to lack any capacity to sign a contract to play basketball at Duke, or to play in the NBA.

Yep. But I wouldn't go along with "weasel out." He signed a deal with a bit player and IIRC his stepfather ended up with a job or something; then CAA came along. Turns out the original contract with a small Fla. entity, was not consistent with NC law. In other words, the original agent was incompetent. Weasel out? No -- escaped safely.

[Bluedog]

Yep. But I wouldn't go along with "weasel out." He signed a deal with a bit player and IIRC his stepfather ended up with a job or something; then CAA came along. Turns out the original contract with a small Fla. entity, was not consistent with NC law. In other words, the original agent was incompetent. Weasel out? No -- escaped safely.

Yep, it's a lot to ask for most 19-year olds to navigate and they rely on their advisors/agents. I would characterize it perhaps as being a bit naive and as you said, selecting a poor agent. Still, he was clearly fortunate that there was a NC law on the books that his attorneys were able to point to to legally invalidate the contract. So, poor decisions were made, as to whose "fault" it was it completely open to debate. I think Zion by nature is a trusting guy.

[cato]

Yep, it's a lot to ask for most 19-year olds to navigate and they rely on their advisors/agents. I would characterize it perhaps as being a bit naive and as you said, selecting a poor agent. Still, he was clearly fortunate that there was a NC law on the books that his attorneys were able to point to to legally invalidate the contract. So, poor decisions were made, as to whose "fault" it was it completely open to debate. I think Zion by nature is a trusting guy.

I am no expert in the area, but this NC law seems to have served its purpose here. Someone upthread noted that that law didn’t prevent him from singing enforceable documents with Duke and NO Pelicans, but in each case there are some structures in place to provide some protection for the athlete (NCAA regulations and oversight; NBA CBA and players’ association).

I’m sure the agent feels wronged here, but (a) it’s their obligation to know and comply with applicable law, and (b) there is no way they would have landed Zion but for his youth and naïveté.

Mr. Williamson is no longer so young, so hopefully he’s growing up fast — in a good way.

[Bluedog]

I am no expert in the area, but this NC law seems to have served its purpose here. Someone upthread noted that that law didn’t prevent him from singing enforceable documents with Duke and NO Pelicans, but in each case there are some structures in place to provide some protection for the athlete (NCAA regulations and oversight; NBA CBA and players’ association).

I’m sure the agent feels wronged here, but (a) it’s their obligation to know and comply with applicable law, and (b) there is no way they would have landed Zion but for his youth and naïveté.

Mr. Williamson is no longer so young, so hopefully he’s growing up fast — in a good way.

Sure, but to be clear, the law that wasn't followed by Prime Sports is they neglected to fill out a form with the State of North Carolina and pay $200. Agents are simply supposed to register with the state before contacting amateur athletes and it's an easy (and cheap) process. It's not like it's a very "protective" law...There are no exams or vetting of the agents -- they [agencies] just need to make their presence known by the state. Prime Sports just didn't do their homework. Zion's lawyers were smart to point out they didn't register as that was a good "out" from the contract.

[Smitty1911]

Sure, but to be clear, the law that wasn't followed by Prime Sports is they neglected to fill out a form with the State of North Carolina and pay $200. Agents are simply supposed to register with the state before contacting amateur athletes and it's an easy (and cheap) process. It's not like it's a very "protective" law...There are no exams or vetting of the agents -- they [agencies] just need to make their presence known by the state. Prime Sports just didn't do their homework. Zion's lawyers were smart to point out they didn't register as that was a good "out" from the contract.

That’s one of the violations that led to voiding the contract, but the bigger issue was Prime didn’t include legally required contract language, most notably that he would lose his student-athlete eligibility. That would certainly be considered “protective” right?

[Bluedog]

That’s one of the violations that led to voiding the contract, but the bigger issue was Prime didn’t include legally required contract language, most notably that he would lose his student-athlete eligibility. That would certainly be considered “protective” right?

Yes, that is true. My only point is that the hurdle for Prime to do these two things was very low -- they just messed up by not doing them. It wouldn't have changed anything from Zion's perspective as it relates to signing with them, and he was fortunate they were sloppy, so his attorneys could point to those things to void it. I guess by virtue of having these requirements though, it avoids having agencies in NC that don't do their simple homework...which is probably not an agency student athletes should be signing with in the first place if they can't follow the fine print in established law/regulations of the state for contracting athletes.