College Players Should Be Forced To Pay Contract Buyout If They Transfer Under Revenue Sharing | Trey Wallace

The idea of revenue sharing in collegiate sports has been the hot-button topic around athletic departments and meetings between conference leaders across the country over the past year. But as much as this could be beneficial for the player, it could almost come at a price if contracts are signed with schools and the student athlete. 

While fans get caught up in the astronomical buyouts that coaches receive if they are fired from a school, there's another part of the upcoming decision that could play a major role regarding the transfer portal. There are folks inside the Texas A&M athletic department still shaking their heads at the amount of money it cost the school to fire Jimbo Fisher, which came out to a whopping $76 million, while Auburn officials have had to pay two different buyouts over the last four years to Gus Malzahn and Bryan Harsin. 

As we all know, this is just another layer to the investment schools make in high-profile sports, while a majority of the time the athletic department is passing around the offering plate to boosters who wanted these moves to be made in the first place. 

Obviously, if you have an agent that knows what they're doing, Jimmy Sexton please stand up, then the risk you are taking by signing these lucrative contracts or extensions could turn into an expensive firing if things go south. This is just part of the territory in businesses like college football, just as it is in professional sports. 

If Coaches Are Forced To Pay Buyouts, Then Shouldn't The Player? 

But as the train continues to roll down the tracks towards revenue sharing with college athletes, there is one part of this whole situation that hasn't been discussed enough so far. If a player decides to sign a deal with the school they are attending, shouldn't those players be held to the same ramifications as coaches within the building?  

If a school and the player enter into an agreement to pay the athlete a portion of what the institution is receiving in revenue from the conference, whether that be from television rights or ticket sales, we might start hearing about these players who decide to leave on their own having to pay the school some sort of buyout in the process. We are already at a point where players are signing with collectives for the rights to their name, image and likeness, being paid to participate in events that promote the NIL fund and, in return, the athlete is getting a monthly check for their services. 

Nico Iamaleava #8 of the Tennessee Volunteers looks on during warm ups before their game against the Vanderbilt Commodores at Neyland Stadium on November 25, 2023 in Knoxville, Tennessee. (Photo by Eakin Howard/Getty Images)

So what happens when that high-profile quarterback signs with a school, puts up massive numbers and then decides to transfer to a different school? Should the player have to compensate the school for the remaining years on their contract? Will the program that the quarterback transfers to have to foot the bill for what could remain on their previous deal? 

These are questions that are going to be discussed, and with the way contracts work for coaches in the business, it might only be fitting that players deciding to leave have to live-up to their deal, or pay for their way out. Don't shoot the messenger here, but if you don't think schools are already discussing this idea, you haven't been paying attention to what this will all look like under a revenue sharing model. 

Hugh Freeze Says Players Should Learn Life Lessons About Contracts

One coach who has recently touched on the subject is none other than Auburn's Hugh Freeze, who said athletes need to be prepared for these types of situations, just like coaches. How long do we have before these conversations will start being had? Freeze mentioned that his athletic director, John Cohen, is predicting 9–12 months. 

"I think it's 12 months, I'm hopeful. My AD thinks 9-12 months it's going to be on-campus hopefully, and the case will be settled in the 9th court in California. Then it will come down to how in the world do we get protected like the NFL, I think to do a contract you have to honor."

So, what about the idea of having players pay their own buyouts if they decide to leave one school for another, after signing a monetary contract with a particular school? Well, for Hugh Freeze, he likened it to his contract, and the buyout that comes with it, if he chose to leave. 

"It's like my contract. If I walked away from Auburn for another place, somebody's gotta pay that $3 million, or whatever it is," Hugh Freeze told The Next Round Live crew this week. "I'm not saying it's that, i don't know what my buyout is, but somebody's gotta pay it. So my point is that it should work the same. If a kid is going to sign a contract with us, he should honor it. Or if he's going to go to another school, somebody has to pay the remainder of that. 

"We're not ever going back from NIL not being part of it, but we can curtail all this portal stuff by teaching them real life lessons about contracts."

While I agree with what Hugh Freeze is implying in his comments, this move would obviously come with layers of details, and sometimes the player should not owe the school a dime. There's a massive difference between a player being fired or ‘processed’ and someone looking to take their talents to another school for a bigger paycheck. 

Would a player that signs a deal with a school when they initially sign be owed money if that school decides they are going to fire that athlete because they need to fill their roster spot with someone who they might think is a better player? 

I think you see where this is going, and for that reason alone there will be lawyers. 

A Complicated Matter That Will Have Lawyers Looking For Billable Hours

There are already lawyers studying these types of situations around every school in the country that is prepared to join in on this idea of revenue sharing. Not only that, but agents who represent players that carry enough weight with their name that will make money outside of the school are preparing for what is coming around the corner. 

The NIL Collectives will be fine, and there are a number of these organizations that do a fantastic job at putting together deals that find value for all parties involved. Even with the introduction of revenue sharing, a lot of high-profile athletes in all sports will still be compensated for their brand, and that's where collectives will continue to produce results. At the same time, lawyers will be combing through these deals with schools with a fine-tooth.  

INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA - MARCH 01: Laiatu Latu #DL42 of UCLA poses for portraits at the Indiana Convention Center on March 1, 2024 in Indianapolis, Indiana. (Photo by Todd Rosenberg/Getty Images)

How schools decide the amount of money each sport is worth will be fascinating to watch unfold. And once again, this is where lawyers will start racking up those hours, and I'm not talking about the ones who represent a school. 

Luckily for players, I would imagine that if you're agreeing to a deal with a particular school, that contract will also come with legal representation in the process. But as we've seen over the past few years, there are enough agents and ‘managers’ out there looking to make sure their client is taken care of. And this could lead to lawsuits or interactions that you see in the NFL, where players' rights are represented by the NFLPA. 

Obviously, every player brings a different monetary value to the athletic department, and navigating the waters of revenue sharing in sports across campuses will turn into a massive headache, with Title Nine also playing a massive role in this new era. 

This time next year we could be discussing the initial rollout of players being paid by the school they attend, and contracts being signed in the process. But the thought of athletes having to reimburse a school for their decision to move-on is not a bad idea, though it will take a lot of time to figure all of this out.