Meyer's $26M Contract Includes $9M to Stay Home

The Ohio State University Football Head Coach Urban Meyer addresses a group during a press conference at the Woody Hayes Athletic Center in Columbus, Ohio on March 13, 2012. (Columbus Dispatch photo by Brooke LaValley)

I'm gonna go out on a limb, and say that Ohio State Football Coach Urban Meyer didn't get his new $26M contract from legalzoom.com. It has nothing to do with the fact that it's a high-dollar contract, either. The reason I know that the contract was not created from some computer database is that the terms of the contract are tailored to the specific circumstances that are important to the contracting parties.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Legal Zoom. If you need a will, and you have no children or substantial assets, I'm sure that whatever they have may suffice. If you need a simple power of attorney, a bill of sale for that old refrigerator you're selling out of your basement, or maybe even an operating agreement for your single-member LLC, then I could see using Legal Zoom. But I wouldn't trust them with a document that has the possibility of affecting another person's livelihood, or the potential to be litigated.

Last November, Urban Meyer shocked the college football world when Ohio State introduced him as their new head football coach in the wake of the Tattoo-gate scandal, which cost the Buckeyes several players, including quarterback Terrelle Pryor, and once-beloved coach Jim Tressel. Meyer won two national championships at the University of Florida, and then resigned, citing health conditions, before essentially coming out of early retirement to take the job in Columbus. Although Meyer's $4.4M annual compensation makes him far and away the highest paid coach in the Big Ten Conference, the brilliance of his contract isn't reflected in that number.

When Ohio State released the details of Meyer's contract last week, we learned about a special provision that—if the NCAA levies more sanctions against the school arising out of the Tressel-ball era—allows Meyer to get out of the deal, AND still pays him $1.5M per year for the remainder of the six-year term. That contractual provision is essentially an insurance policy for Urban Meyer, so he doesn't get stuck living in Columbus, Ohio, and coaching a dead-end team because of what happened during Jim Tressel's watch. This type of a contract clause can't come from some antiquated legal form. It can only be the product of a skilled contract drafter, someone who has taken the time to understand the parties' true interests and objectives, which many times are a lot more complicated than dollars and cents.

You might think that you have to make Urban Meyer money to be able to get a contract that good, but you'd be wrong. Before you enter into any agreement for employment, or to buy or sell anything of significant value, it's worth the cost of a one-hour consultation with an attorney to discuss what's on the table, and address any potential issues or concerns that are on your mind. At the end of that consultation, the attorney will either tell you that you'll be fine with the basic contract, or what the pitfalls lie ahead in relying on a standard document. In most cases, it's like the old adage, pay a little now, or pay a lot later: If you and a buddy enter into a business deal based on some chicken scratch on a cocktail napkin, if and when things go south, you could find yourself in the middle of a contentious (expensive) lawsuit.

NB: The above statements are not intended to be construed as an endorsement of any online or other provider of legal documents or forms.

Photo credit: Brooke LaValley, Columbus Dispatch

Earlier:

University Paid Nearly $142K in Football Players' Legal Fees

Will NCAA Sanction Tressel If They Determine He Withheld Information

Consequences If Buckeyes Break Promise To Return

NJ Says 'Yes' to Sports Betting, But Why?

Scarlet Knights Stadium at Night.jpg

A lot of folks might not have even realized that Tuesday was Election Day. As an aside, I find it unfortunate that people don't take the extra few minutes to stop and vote on every election day — not just when there's a presidential race, or some other consequence of great magnitude — but I'll leave that topic alone, at least for now. Despite the fact that there weren't many high-profile races going on across the nation, there were a lot of big issues at stake in several states.

For example, Mississippi voters rejected a bill that would have changed the "meaning of life," for purposes of abortion and related issues; Ohio voters rebuked GOP Governor John Kasich's bid to rewrite state labor law, which would have substantially limited collective bargaining; and the people of New Jersey voted resoundingly to allow sports betting in the state. The only problem here is that federal law (which, of course, trumps any state's law) prohibits sports betting in all states except Nevada, Delaware, Oregon, Montana.

So why did proponents of sports betting bother to go through all the trouble of getting the referendum on the ballot? According to the Star-Ledger, State Senator Ray Lesniak (D–Union), who "spearheaded the effort for sports wagering" in NJ, plans to get another law passed authorizing the state's Casino Control Commission to issue sports betting licenses to casinos and racetracks. The idea is that once the state has such a law in place, the administration can sue the federal government to declare the federal ban on sports betting unconstitutional.

Getting an issue on the ballot isn't easy, so it seems like an awful lot of trouble to go through for something that, even if successful, depends on so many contingencies. Nonetheless, Lesniak says he's hoping to have sports betting legalized in NJ in time for the start of the 2012 NFL season. Even if it all goes smoothly, it would still be illegal to bet on college games that take place in NJ, and on NJ college teams, regardless of where they're playing.

University Paid Nearly $142K in Football Players' Legal Fees

Terrelle Pryor in the pocket_v Iowa_2009.jpg

Who do you think foots the bill when a university hires attorneys to defend its student–athletes?

Ohio State University's student newspaper—The Lantern—ran a story earlier this week about the outrageous legal fees the school has paid thus far in defending various football players against alleged NCAA rules infractions.

The "Sports Illustrated 9" refers to nine current players, separate from the six players suspended for "Tattoo-gate," "whose alleged wrongdoing might fall within the NCAA's four-year statute of limitations," according to a June 6 SI article.

OSU's athletics department paid the fees out of its general operations fund, which student fees do not go toward, said Dan Wallenberg, associate athletics director for communications.

[Wallenberg] also said the funds for similar services could come out of the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund, which was created by the NCAA in 2003 to provide direct benefits to student–athletes or their families, and is generated by NCAA basketball tournament revenue.

The benefactor of this particular transaction is the Columbus law firm of Crabbe Brown & James LLP, which has reportedly received "$141,814.30 as of mid-September." That number is quite small compared with, for example, the amount Ohio State paid the Vorys law firm from 2004–2008 to defend them against former basketball coach Jim O'Brien's wrongful termination lawsuit (well over a million bucks).

By comparison, Auburn University paid $170K in legal fees while the NCAA investigated 2010 Heisman trophy winner Cam Newton's eligibility. And the University of Michigan paid over $600,000 in legal fees in an NCAA infractions case involving former head football coach Rich Rodriguez.

As Alex Antonetz's Lantern article points out, this is all legit—schools can pay outside counsel to represent their student–athletes when they get themselves into trouble. Perhaps its unfortunate that the schools can't help them out when they can't pay their phone bills, can't buy groceries, or can't afford to fly home for holidays, because if the student–athletes had some financial assistance in that regard they might not have to resort to earning money other ways (ways that get them into trouble). Having lived with two scholarship athletes (one All-American) during my freshman year of college, I have first-hand knowledge about student–athletes' financial woes.

New Season, New Rules, Bad Uni's

maryland-uniforms.jpgAnother college football season is upon us, and to make sure that everyone at home can keep up with all the suspensions and other mysterious or unexplained absences from their favorite college team, the NCAA has conveniently released its most recent rules manual.

It's a whopping 439 pages, and after reading it cover to cover, I couldn't find a single thing about tattoos. Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure they're banned—unless, of course, The student–athlete can prove that their tattoo was free or discounted.

What I find even more puzzling than the tattoo omission is how it isn't a major rules infraction to show up to a nationally-televised primetime season opener dressed the way Maryland Terps did on Monday night.

Working From the Firm's Columbus OH Office this Week

Despite being wired in with most of the latest technology, since my firm has offices in both Ohio and New Jersey, it's inevitable that I travel between the two states from time to time. This week I'm in the Columbus office, and made it a point to attend a lunchtime seminar on legal blogging, at the Columbus Bar Association offices. I like going to events like this because I can always learn something. It's also a great way to meet other creative, successful, and like-minded attorneys, to steal their secrets (just kidding about the last part). 

The speaker was attorney Brad Wrightsel, who has authored the Ohio Estate Planning, Trust & Probate Law blog since 2006. For whatever reason (my guess is that it was a Microsoft issue), there was an Internet connectivity problem during Brad's presentation, and he couldn't access many of the blogs that he intended to use as examples. So he ended up using this blog during the demonstration—what a bonus.

And speaking of bonuses, I recently received word from the American Bar Association that they've included this blog in their prestigious directory of legal "blawgs." I'm honored.

Will the NCAA Sanction Tressel if he Withheld Information?

I don't care about motivation. I care about credibility. —Eliot Spitzer

This is less about the law and probably Tressel_Fear the Vest_2010_10_13.jpgmuch less about college football than it is about credibility. First of all, does Yahoo! Sports have any credibility as an investigative news publication? More importantly, however, if it is true that Tressel received information that players sold Buckeye memorabilia to the owner of a tattoo parlor eight months before Ohio State reported it to the NCAA, how credible was that alleged information?

Jim Tressel is one of the highest paid and highest profile figures in collegiate sports. Despite his generous philanthropy, he's still worth millions, and he runs one of the most successful sports programs in the nation. He has over 100 players on his team, and he teaches in a school with a student body of roughly 65,000. He also has at least one weekly radio talk show, in addition to the countless other interviews and public appearances he attends on a regular basis. What's my point? Jim Tressel has a lot of people in his ear all the time.

Anyone who's ever been to Columbus, Ohio can attest to the viral fanaticism over Buckeyes Football. And then there's this sort of expatriate faction, who hate the Buckeyes just so they can be different. Regardless of their affliction, these fans are constantly emailing and writing letters to the paper (and to Tressel, personally), calling radio talk shows, local and national, and getting on any soapbox they can to tell Tressel what's wrong with his team (i.e., why they're not winning a national championship every year).

So the question is—assuming that Tressel doesn't admit to the allegations in Yahoo's report—who is this person that allegedly told Tressel about the players selling memorabilia? What were the circumstances of the alleged conversation? And what, if anything, did Tressel do after receiving this information?

Now to the law. For all intents and purposes, the NCAA is the league in college sports (think of the individual conferences as divisions). The relevant difference here from pro sports is that there is no players' union. Since, in college sports, the players can't organize, the league wields a lot more power than even the NFL. Even so, although the NCAA oftentimes appears to act randomly or arbitrarily with respect to the sanctions they choose to mete out, they do have an actual set of written rules, known as the Constitution and Bylaws (whether they follow those rules uniformly is an entirely different discussion).

A basic purpose of this Association is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body and, by so doing, retain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports.

So it says on page one of the 431-page Division I manual. (Each division has its own version of the bylaws, which you can download for free from the NCAA Publications website.)

According to the Yahoo! Sports probe, "if Tressel failed to inform [Athletic Director Gene] Smith or the Ohio State compliance department about the players’ dealings," the NCAA could charge him with violations for unethical conduct, failure to monitor, and failure to promote an atmosphere of compliance. The latter two allegations refer to the NCAA's draconian compliance rules.

One of the most basic of these rules is that each school, including its coaches and athletics director, has a duty to self-report rules infractions to the NCAA (see Article 22.2.1 Governance & Commitment to Rules Compliance). It is incredibly difficult to comply with this rule, however, because it is oftentimes subjective at best whether a rules infraction has occurred. This is why any school with a large athletic program typically has a separate department, staffed with a team of lawyers, who work full-time, year-round, to ensure that the school doesn't run afoul of the NCAA's rules.

As this relates to Tressel, if he did in fact receive information about an alleged infraction, he would have been required to look into the allegations further, and then determine whether it was likely that an infraction occurred. If Tressel did make a reasonable inquiry into the matter—the depth of which would be determined by the credibility of the source of the allegation—and then determined that no violation occurred, then he wouldn't have any duty to report it to the NCAA.

Moving to the supposed unethical conduct, which is governed by Article 10.1 of the Bylaws, and provides as follows:

Unethical conduct by a…current or former institutional staff member (e.g., coach…) may include, but is not limited to, the following: 

(a) Refusal to furnish information relevant to an investigation of a possible violation of an NCAA regulation when requested to do so by the NCAA or the individual’s institution;

(j) Failure to provide complete and accurate information to the NCAA…or the institution’s athletics department regarding an individual’s amateur status.

Subsection (a) clearly cannot apply unless the NCAA asked Tressel, prior to December 7th, for information regarding the violations. Subsection (j) cannot apply unless Tressel knew about the incident(s), investigated, and determined that there was a possible violation, but then chose not to tell anybody about it.

 

Although the NCAA may, at its own discretion, apply a much looser interpretation of these rules (or make up new ones), we're still back to credibility. Who is the NCAA going to find as more credible—Jim Tressel, or the unknown individual who allegedly told Tressel about the violations back in April 2010?

 

In some ways, credibility reigns supreme over even integrity. Not to say that integrity is bad; it mainly speaks to a person's general character, and moral and ethical values. Credibility, on the other hand, speaks to a person's honesty and trustworthiness. In trials, juries weigh the credibility of witness and evidence, in close cases, appellate courts often weigh the credibility of counsel, and attorneys size up their adversary's credibility when negotiating. Don't underestimate the value of credibility—it's much easier to keep than it is to regain.

Consequences if Buckeyes Break Promise to Return

9170242-standard.jpg

Last night, the Ohio State Buckeyes beat the Arkansas Razorbacks 31–26 in the Allstate Sugar Bowl. The games's MVP was junior quarterback Terrelle Pryor, who, along with four other Buckeyes, was suspended by the NCAA on Dec. 23, 2010 for allegedly receiving improper benefits (NCAA Press Release pdf). The so-called improper benefits were cash proceeds from the sale of memorabilia items, including their Big Ten Championship rings, which the five players admitted to selling, for between $1000 and $2500.

But because the NCAA found that "it was reasonable at the time the student-athletes were not aware they were committing violations," a loophole in the rules allowed all five Buckeyes to play in the upcoming bowl game. "The policy for suspending withholding conditions for bowl games or NCAA championship competition recognizes the unique opportunity these events provide at the end of a season, and they are evaluated differently from a withholding perspective."

ESPN-nation erupted, over what the public perceived as the NCAA giving Ohio State preferential treatment. Then, on Dec. 30—the day after the Buckeyes returned from their 4-day x'mas break—Jim Tressel announced that he had requested verbal commitments from each of the suspended players, to return for their senior seasons at Ohio State if allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl. All five players agreed, which seemed to quiet much of the public outcry. Columbus Dispatch's Rob Oller called Tressel's move, "a masterful flanking maneuver that puts him back in charge and quiets critics who have questioned his leadership."

But Tressel's deal didn't satisfy everyone; the new topic du jour was speculation over whether those five players would actually keep their promises to return. Critics argued that if they decided not to honor their promises, and instead declared for the 2011 NFL Draft, then those players wouldn't have to suffer any consequences for their impermissible conduct. Oller even referred to the players' agreement as "nonbinding." Although I believe it would be a supreme waste of time to, say, try to enforce the players' promises using judicial means—not to mention, a public relations nightmare—I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the players' promises as nonbinding.

Some will inevitably refer to Jim Tressel's gentleman's agreement as his deal with the devil, especially given the way all five players contributed immensely to the Buckeyes' Sugar Bowl win. Prior to last night, the Buckeyes had a 32-year winless streak against SEC football teams in bowl games. This morning, I bet that some of those same fans who criticized Tressel for his deal, are silently rejoicing.

Next—Part II: What is a contract?