forums

Xavier Lucas in the portal

DrNovaCane said:
Hmmm maybe I missed it but what happened to X and his camp already having a lawyer and was contacting NCAA last week once offices opened back up? Glad he has someone now but that’s this morning not last week.
Click to expand...

The fact he has retained this attorney does not necessarily negate that he may have previously retained a different attorney. Or have personal counsel representing him, and now brought in more specialized counsel to represent him in this matter.

That, or the prior communications with the university/NCAA were through "representation," which could be an agent (but may have been misunderstood to be an attorney).
 
Advertisement
No_Fly_Zone said:
The fact he has retained this attorney does not necessarily negate that he may have previously retained a different attorney. Or have personal counsel representing him, and now brought in more specialized counsel to represent him in this matter.

That, or the prior communications with the university/NCAA were through "representation," which could be an agent (but may have been misunderstood to be an attorney).
Click to expand...


Yeah, I'd hazard a guess that there is some...escalation...involved here....
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
The fact he has retained this attorney does not necessarily negate that he may have previously retained a different attorney. Or have personal counsel representing him, and now brought in more specialized counsel to represent him in this matter.

That, or the prior communications with the university/NCAA were through "representation," which could be an agent (but may have been misunderstood to be an attorney).
Click to expand...
Okay great point. Thanks
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
Outside looking in, that's what I'd wager, too.
Click to expand...
Agreed but then that brings up the question on why is that? So far on here we have gotten one side of the story, one that heavily favors ours, while laughing at theirs. I’m inclined to believe based on what I do know is that our side of the matter should be the winning side but why is Wiscy doing this?

At first my thought was that they were just buying time and trying to convince the kid to stay put but I felt that ultimately this was a slam dunk situation where the NCAA forces their hand to release the kid. Now with a possible escalation, it makes you wonder if there is some angle from Wiscy we are missing here?
 
Advertisement
bobbydigius said:
Agreed but then that brings up the question on why is that? So far on here we have gotten one side of the story, one that heavily favors ours, while laughing at theirs. I’m inclined to believe based on what I do know is that our side of the matter should be the winning side but why is Wiscy doing this?

At first my thought was that they were just buying time and trying to convince the kid to stay put but I felt that ultimately this was a slam dunk situation where the NCAA forces their hand to release the kid. Now with a possible escalation, it makes you wonder if there is some angle from Wiscy we are missing here?
Click to expand...

If they had absolutely nothing, it wouldn't make sense for Wisky to continue fighting this out. They'd just be burning attorneys' fees/costs in exchange for more bad press and an ultimate L.

We'll see if Wisky blinks now that Heitner is on board and escalating the issue with the NCAA (and threatening litigation). If Wisky stays on its current course, I'd suspect they have an argument (not necessarily a meritorious one) they believe to be supported by some evidence.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
If they had absolutely nothing, it wouldn't make sense for Wisky to continue fighting this out. They'd just be burning attorneys' fees/costs in exchange for more bad press and an ultimate L.

We'll see if Wisky blinks now that Heitner is on board and escalating the issue with the NCAA (and threatening litigation). If Wisky stays on its current course, I'd suspect they have an argument (not necessarily a meritorious one) they believe to be supported by some evidence.
Click to expand...
We're all speculating from the outside w/o facts (but that's never been a block on CIS anyways), but let's assume Wisconsin has evidence that someone tried to lure him in the portal, how can that possibly be used to prevent him from entering the portal? Isn't his right to enter absolute?

Wouldn't their case(s) be against the parties that allegedly tried to lure him in and not the player?

Again, not a lawyer, but I'm thinking they're running a risk of him suing them for potential damages and lost income because the market isn't as robust as when he wanted to enter.
 
Advertisement
Wisconsin to their SFL recruiting coordinator(s).

200.gif


Shocked that Hill decided to xfer there when he saw what they did to Lucas.
 
lindend said:
We're all speculating from the outside w/o facts (but that's never been a block on CIS anyways), but let's assume Wisconsin has evidence that someone tried to lure him in the portal, how can that possibly be used to prevent him from entering the portal? Isn't his right to enter absolute?

Wouldn't their case(s) be against the parties that allegedly tried to lure him in and not the player?

Again, not a lawyer, but I'm thinking they're running a risk of him suing them for potential damages and lost income because the market isn't as robust as when he wanted to enter.
Click to expand...

There's speculation and then there's deductive reasoning. I'm simply pointing out that for Wisky to continue run the risk you've noted above, the university must believe it has a meritorious argument supported by evidence.

I won't speculate as to what that argument might be, much less how persuasive the NCAA or a court would find the argument.
 
DrNovaCane said:
Not an attorney so when you say escalation…what does that mean (in this scenario).
Click to expand...


It means that if the first one or two actions that you took have not fixed the situation, then you secure (and pay for) an even more expensive attorney.

I'd also imagine that the communication, previously, has been more civil and is now proceeding to more of an adversarial tone.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
There's speculation and then there's deductive reasoning.
Click to expand...

Do we know if the right to enter the portal is an absolute or are there scenarios where the school can deny entry? My understanding was it was an absolute right, but if they're behaving in this fashion, could we be mistaken?
 
Advertisement
lindend said:
Do we know if the right to enter the portal is an absolute or are there scenarios where the school can deny entry? My understanding was it was an absolute right, but if they're behaving in this fashion, could we be mistaken?
Click to expand...
I’m almost 100% it is the right of the student athlete to enter name into Portal. School then has two business days to enter. Entire point of Portal was to stop the bull**** blocking where could transfer.
 
lindend said:
Do we know if the right to enter the portal is an absolute or are there scenarios where the school can deny entry? My understanding was it was an absolute right, but if they're behaving in this fashion, could we be mistaken?
Click to expand...

It was my understanding that the only thing the student athlete needed to do was submit paperwork and then the school has 2 days to process the request, at which point the student athlete is in the transfer portal. I'm not aware of any right to deny or challenge the request, but I haven't studied up on those rules/docs/policies. It's possible such a mechanism exists, but it would be somewhat antithetical to the entire point of the transfer portal (streamlining the transfer process).
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top