With college sports just a few days away from entering a new era following the approval of the House vs. NCAA settlement, schools are preparing to begin paying athletes directly.
The approval of the settlement allows universities to enter into revenue-sharing agreements with their student-athletes. However, questions are being raised about the language used in Florida State’s contracts.
CBSSports.com obtained a copy of FSU’s revenue-sharing contract with student-athletes, sharing what some may consider the document’s aggressive language.
How FSU athletic director Michael Alford, and every other NCAA school for that matter, plans to handle the new era of college athletics will no longer be a mystery on July 1.
What are some of the issues with Florida State’s revenue-sharing contract
Sports’ article highlighted one clause stating that FSU can extend players at the end of their contract without negotiating with the player.
Injuries and illnesses are also factored into the contract. If a player is dealing with a serious injury or illness, it could affect the value, allowing FSU to renegotiate or cancel the player’s contract, especially in football.
Here’s the exact language in FSU’s clause as seen in the CBS report.
Illness or Injury Impacting Value of NIL Rights.
Student-Athlete experiences any illness or injury which is serious enough to affect the value of the rights granted to [school] under this Agreement; provided, however, that nothing herein shall affect or limit [school]’s obligations to provide Student-Athletes with medical coverage of injuries sustained as a result of participation in [school] Athletics as required by Section 16.4 of the NCAA Division I Bylaws, where applicable.”
It also includes a maximum fine of $2,500 on the first offense for loss of team equipment, and $1,000 for the first offense of using a controlled substance.
Agents and experts have spoken out about FSU’s detailed contract. One NIL agent stated, “They’re throwing everything they can and the kitchen sink.” Other experts expressed differing opinions about FSU’s approach to protecting its brand.
“Some of the concepts are pretty standard,” one agent who represents at least one FSU player said in the CBS Sports piece.
“But FSU is going about this far more aggressively than any school I’ve seen. I’m disappointed by the adversarial nature of these contracts.”
Florida State issues statement on questionable revenue-sharing contract
Florida State’s spokesperson offered a statement via CBS Sports that was also shared with the Tallahassee Democrat about the questions and concerns regarding the provisions of the revenue-sharing contract:
“As we enter into a new age of collegiate athletics, Florida State has put together an agreement that provides deliverables and expectations for all parties. Each individual situation will be unique and the hypotheticals are impossible to predict. However, we are committed to continuing to provide an elite experience for our student-athletes in all aspects of their collegiate career. Florida State is looking forward to the mutually beneficial partnerships with our student-athletes in this new era.”
As an FBS conference, FSU is permitted to share $20.5 million in revenue. Some football programs are expected to receive 75% of the budget, with men’s basketball expected to receive the second biggest share of funds. The remaining will be split among each university’s respective sports.
This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Is Florida State’s revenue-sharing contract excessive? Some experts seem to think so
Reporting by Peter Holland Jr., Tallahassee Democrat / Tallahassee Democrat
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
