Tampering has been going on in college athletics since there have been college athletics. College football coaches have been more vocal than ever, complaining about it over the last few years. Now, one school is naming names. Wisconsin is suing Miami over the transfer of one player. Where does it get us going forward?
The Centerpiece
The player at the center of the issue is defensive back Xavier Lucas. He appeared in 12 games with the Badgers as a freshman in 2024. Lucas had 18 total tackles, including two tackles-for-loss and one sack. He also had one interception.
Photo courtesy: Mark Hoffman/Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
That “T” Word
Tampering used to be so much easier when everything was under the table. Boosters from School A would offer more under-the-table money to a player than his current school (School B), and the player would leave. But the NCAA controlled transferring rules back then. In most years, the player would have to sit out a year in exchange for being allowed to transfer.
Now, with the NCAA in charge of very little when it comes to college football, and player movement being nearly as free as any other transferring student, things are dramatically different.
The Logistics
Undergraduate players can put their name in the transfer portal during the designated window of opportunity (Graduate transfers can go whenever they want). They presumably get offered opportunities and the promise of greater financial opportunities elsewhere. But schools, in theory, are not supposed to talk to players about transferring while they are at other schools. Like that hasn’t happened for the last 100 years of college football. The portal was supposed to create a system that all could easily abide by. But in college sports, create a new rule and someone is just as quickly finding a way to break it.
Lucas did his paperwork to enter the portal in December. He would presumably enter it with a “No Contact” note on his filing. That tells schools not to reach out to him, because he has already decided where he will go. He is just going through the formalities. It is also a telltale sign that another school has come to an agreement with the transferring player before the logistics are even done.
The Contract At Issue
But Wisconsin football had a two-year Name/Image/Likeness contract with Lucas. The school’s collective, VC Connect, would pay Lucas an agreed sum of money. The school, in return, would get to use Lucas’ picture on promotional items. The contract had just been signed two weeks prior to Lucas’s decision to enter the portal.
The school refused to do its part of the portal process, which is to submit the player’s transcripts and verify his academic standing. There is no going into the portal without it.
Lucas momentarily shed his football persona and did what normal students do every day across the country. In January, he academically withdrew from the University of Wisconsin, and he enrolled at the University of Miami. He beat the system in a way that should have been an obvious option to players all along.
There was no getting him back for the Badgers. The recourse they chose was to go public and take the legal route. They have filed a lawsuit against the University of Miami, its athletic department, and its football program for tortious interference. The suit, filed in Dane County Circuit Court, alleges that by tampering with its player, Miami football interfered with an operative contract between the school and the player. They charge that if Miami had not contacted Lucas while he was still at Wisconsin, and under contract, the defensive back would still be in Madison getting ready for the 2025 season.
Old Story, New Angle
Coaches have been complaining about tampering for years. Former North Carolina head coach Mack Brown was among the most vocal. But Brown, like most others, always stopped short of naming names or itemizing the specifics.
Former Wake Forest head coach Dave Clawson once told us on the record that while he had players who were being tampered with, it was rarely, if ever, done by an official member of the football or athletic department. It was usually done by third-party representatives. Those improprieties were nowhere to be found in the NCAA rules.
Several coaches have also told us that a “new version” of the tampering process was the on-field post-game handshakes between players. Coaches would single out a player or two on the opposing team that they were interested in. As the players shook hands, sales pitches were being made on the virtues of transferring to the other school. Players have told Last Word about very specific conversations on the field after a game.
The Bright Lights
But Wisconsin has decided to put a bright light on the process. The court in which they filed is a state court. Any nationwide ramifications are limited, other than to provide a potential blueprint for other schools to follow.
But it is more than Miami’s actions that will come under scrutiny in the case. It is the contract Wisconsin had with Lucas, particularly as we enter a revenue-sharing era of college sports where all athletes are under some form of a contract.
The University of Wisconsin was certain in its wording in the claim that this was not a pay-for-play/employment contract. The lawsuit claims that, via the contract, Lucas agreed to only play for Wisconsin during those two years. The lawsuit also says that per the contract, Wisconsin has exclusive rights to Lucas’ NIL for those two years. Wisconsin alleges that Lucas has no authority to assign them to another school.
Potential Pitfalls
That “employment” word is a Pandora’s box in college sports. No school is prepared to deal with making the athletes employees. The athletes, lacking logistical assistance, rarely understand the pitfalls of becoming an employee. And the employment laws of the 50 states would now become an overriding topic on a daily basis.
Wisconsin claims it was a services contract with both sides having signed off on the language. The lawsuit alleges that Miami offered him a more lucrative contract than what he was getting at Wisconsin. Lucas is not a named defendant in the suit. Wisconsin and its attorneys have opted to focus specifically on the actions of the University of Miami. Attorneys for the defendant are expected to file motions to dismiss at any point now.
If a judge rules that NIL agreements, like the one signed by Lucas, are not enforceable, then there comes the possibility that the revenue-sharing agreements being signed in the wake of House v. NCAA are also not enforceable. If there are no ramifications for a player academically withdrawing from a school and enrolling in another, then tampering becomes legalized.
State Solutions
The state of Arkansas has already codified legislation to protect its schools from poachers. Statute § 4-75-1301 says schools within the state have a cause of action against any party that promises compensation for any purpose to any student athlete or prospective student-athlete, “…if the purpose is to recruit or induce the student-athlete to enroll at another institution.”
We can now expect other states to follow that guideline. It is a formative chance to protect their athletic programs. As long as it is not their athletic programs doing the tampering.