The Big Ten’s decision to postpone the fall football season officially has its first lawsuit in the making.
Earlier Thursday, Buckeyes Wire reported the involvement of well-known attorney and collegiate athlete advocate Tom Mars in regard to the Big Ten football parent movement. Mars has already sent FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) letters to all public Big Ten institutions requesting communications around the decision-making process between the university leaders and the conference.
And now, a report has also surfaced from the Omaha World-Herald that eight Nebraska football players have filed a lawsuit against the Big Ten over the postponed season as well. The suit was filed in the District Court of Lancaster County and represents Husker players Garrett Snodgrass, Garrett Nelson, Ethan Piper, Noa Pola-Gates, Alante Brown, Brant Banks, Brig Banks and Jackson Hannah. The attorney involved in the process is Mike Flood.
“Our Clients want to know whether there was a vote and the details of any vote, and whether the Big Ten followed its own rules in reaching its decision,” Flood told the Omaha World-Herald. “Sadly, these student-athletes have no other recourse than filing a lawsuit against their conference.”
Eight Nebraska football players filed a lawsuit against the Big Ten seeking a reversal of its decision to postpone the fall sports season. https://t.co/mBWfllfI3z
— Omaha World-Herald (@OWHnews) August 27, 2020
Flood went on to tell the World-Herald that the lawsuit is “not about the money or damages, but about real-life relief.”
According to the report, the filing focuses on three counts against the Big Ten.
Next … The three legal counts against the Big Ten
The basis for the lawsuit against the Big Ten
From the World-Herald:
» Wrongful interference with business expectations. For football student-athletes, the season represents a chance to work toward a career as a professional player as well as develop personal brands for eventual monetary gain under name/image/likeness legislation. Canceling the fall campaign based on what is now outdated or inaccurate medical information — while not taking into account why players are actually safer in a team environment that tests them regularly — cannot be justified.
» Breach of contract. The league — through reputation, public statements and its own documents — has established it exists in part to benefit its student-athletes. It potentially violated that contract by not holding an actual vote within its Council of Presidents and Chancellors.
» Declaratory judgment. The Big Ten not actually voting on the decision, or at least being unwilling and/or unable to produce records of such a vote, violates its governing documents. The decision should be invalid and unenforceable.
This is a developing story and we’ll have more as it pertains to Big Ten football and its impacts on Ohio State as things progress.
Contact/Follow us @BuckeyesWire on Twitter, and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Ohio State news, notes and opinion.
We have a forum and message board now. Get in on the conversation about Ohio State athletics by joining the Buckeyes Wire Forum.
