Class of 2024 - TE Michael Smith (GA) TRANSFERRING TO SYRACUSE (1/4/26) | Page 10 | Syracusefan.com

Class of 2024 TE Michael Smith (GA) TRANSFERRING TO SYRACUSE (1/4/26)

GIF by Sesame Street
 
Chip said:
I get it about holding people to their contract. A broken system just blows up even further if you don't.

But I guess I'd just want to pick my battles or make sure that the pay is really for play. We don't have unlimited resources, so I'd hate to spend the money and then this kid just quit, or not show up, or be a team cancer. If there's clawback of the money for that stuff, then great.
Expand...
We should make SC pay us his NIL contract amount to us then we will release him...seems fair...
 
SU94 said:
I think you know, but second sources in journalism are (unfortunately) an obsolete concept. One source now works, as long as it is direct/first-hand/unbiased. Most editors (and consumers) are worried about zero source/fictitious reporting. The bar has been decidedly lowered, but especially for a "story" like this. Two sources ain't necessary. This is the CFB Portal, not Watergate.
Expand...
Agree with everything except I know for a fact if this was Mike or Donna on the basketball side they would have went the extra mile and done their due diligence here.
 
orangeinohio said:
The 247 post was basically saying there’s rumblings that he may want to stay at SC.
There is no indication that he has said anything.
It’s possible that he will stay but all of this is based on rumors. Thats not how to be a journalist.
Expand...
And 247 message board guy even a staff member doesn’t have same sourcing requirements. He hears it from
One guy. And as bnoro says they may just be putting out their side to appease fans. Doesn’t mean it’s the truth.
 
tep624 said:
If he signed a contract with us, the contract is enforceable. So not really sure what SC can even do here legally. If we stick to our guns he either plays for us or sits out I’d think.
Expand...
At what point could tampering lawsuits begin to unfold in situations like this I wonder? IF this is true SC have now intentionally unsettled a contracted employee there would be legal recourse. Also puts the kid himself in a horrible situation as he is now caught in the middle of a case that could set precedent.

Also, if the guy is trying to reenroll in classes at SC why would they stop him? He can certainly pay his own way and not play football if that is in fact where he wants an education. The classes thing is the "smoking gun" here but I honestly don't think it makes sense.
 
CbusCuse said:
I absolutely hate morons who feel the need to create a burner account to post idiotic things behind anonymity.

He even tagged our Toledo transfers. A hole.
Expand...
Prob a UConn coach/fan that is mad the Toledo recruits didn’t follow candel haha
 
So here are the options so far as I can tell

A) This a nothing burger and Smith goes to SU as he intends. Plays a year or more, transfers after 1 year, or declares for the draft.

B) Smith had "buyers remore" and decides he really wants to stay at USC. It is a big cultural shift after all for a southerner. Presumably contracts are football related and he could simply stay as a student albeit of no worth to the USC coaches and fanbase at that point.

C) USC struck out on other TEs that they thought were better than Smith. At that point they circle back and begin tampering. "We actually will throw the ball to you now and we will pay you whatever it takes". They are SEC after all so money is of no object as pertains to football. They surely could have pitched that when he announced his intention to enter the portal but he's now exponentially more valuable to them. He never really wanted to leave but was shown the open door and walked through it.

Now, if C, this is problematic on many levels. The tampering, the disregard for the players well being (except when convenient), the libelous part where he and/or his new school get drug for nothing of their own doing, and the precedent it sets moving forward. "Hey go sign somewhere else to secure a spot BUT we may comeback for you if our better options fall through". OKAY at that point his and all players contracts are useless. If they don't have to honor them, do the schools?

From the Syracuse side, we stopped recruiting tight ends. All the players USC whiffed on are signed elsewhere (if signings mean something) and were left scrambling through fewer options that will likely cost more OR not have the same potential. Don't want a kid at Cuse if he doesn't want to be there BUT you almost have to hold him for a year where he will potentially be unmotivated prior to transferring out again. Now nobody wins but especially the player who USC could have taken home from the bar at 10pm but only noticed isn't there at 2am when the bar empies out and the other 4 they were trying to chat up left with others. It's a pathetic look from USC and shows zero concern for the players well being and undue drama for the new school he selected.

IF true Syracuse pretty much has to sue right? Even if Smith begrudgingly honors his agreement and finds out he loves Cuse and balls out you can't put the rest of it back in the box because it'll happen again.
 
ImperialOrange said:
At what point could tampering lawsuits begin to unfold in situations like this I wonder? IF this is true SC have now intentionally unsettled a contracted employee there would be legal recourse. Also puts the kid himself in a horrible situation as he is now caught in the middle of a case that could set precedent.

Also, if the guy is trying to reenroll in classes at SC why would they stop him? He can certainly pay his own way and not play football if that is in fact where he wants an education. The classes thing is the "smoking gun" here but I honestly don't think it makes sense.
Expand...

There was just a random poster that said he tried to enroll in classes. This was not a 247 staff member or anything like that.

So take that for what’s it worth as well
 
JRHEETER said:
There was just a random poster that said he tried to enroll in classes. This was not a 247 staff member or anything like that.

So take that for what’s it worth as well
Expand...
Oh great. That's even worse. Just a heads up, if Javon cites MSOrange as a source in any of his articles, you probably want to take it with a grain of salt.
 
ImperialOrange said:
At what point could tampering lawsuits begin to unfold in situations like this I wonder? IF this is true SC have now intentionally unsettled a contracted employee there would be legal recourse. Also puts the kid himself in a horrible situation as he is now caught in the middle of a case that could set precedent.

Also, if the guy is trying to reenroll in classes at SC why would they stop him? He can certainly pay his own way and not play football if that is in fact where he wants an education. The classes thing is the "smoking gun" here but I honestly don't think it makes sense.
Expand...
I’d have to think that if we signed a NIL contract with him, and their tampering resulted in him not playing for us, then we would have suffered a loss and they would be liable for damages as a result of that loss. I’m not an attorney but I know enough about contract law to get me in trouble lol.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
175,852
Messages
5,271,422
Members
6,191
Latest member
OldBartman

Online statistics

Members online
248
Guests online
2,069
Total visitors
2,317
Totals may include hidden visitors.


P
Top Bottom