In the wake of the University of Georgia Athletic Association (UGAA) recently suing him for $390,000 over a breached NIL deal, Missouri defensive end Damon Wilson II—who played for the Bulldogs in 2023 and 2024—sued UGAA and others on Tuesday. Wilson insists his NIL deal wasn’t a contract and thus isn’t enforceable, and that UGAA falsely told other schools he had to pay a $1.2 million buyout to transfer.

Wilson’s complaint was filed in Boone County (Mo.) Circuit Court, a potentially friendlier forum for the Tigers star than Athens-Clarke County (Ga.) Superior Court, where UGAA sued him in October.

Advertisement

More from Sportico.com

As detailed by Sportico, UGAA seeks a court order to compel arbitration. On Dec. 21, 2024, Wilson signed what UGAA says was a 13-month, $500,000 NIL deal with Classic City Collective (CCC)—a Georgia-aligned former NIL collective that shut down after U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the House settlement. In that process, CCC assigned its Wilson contract to UGAA, meaning the athletic association has the legal right to enforce the contract.

Four days after he signed the original agreement—Christmas Day 2024—CCC paid Wilson $30,000. In early January, the player entered the transfer portal and then joined Missouri. UGAA contends that Wilson breached his NIL deal by entering the transfer portal and that the deal contains a $390,000 liquidated damages provision. In general, a liquidated damages provision is designed to clarify the amount of money a contracting party owes in the event of a breach.

Through Jeff Jensen, Bogdan Susan and other attorneys from Torridon Law and Holder Susan Slusher, Wilson offers a very different retelling of events.

Advertisement

Wilson argues he only signed a term sheet that “contained a non-binding list of key terms” that “would be used to create a legally binding document.” The term sheet, Wilson says, went so far as to say it “precedes” a “full License and Option Agreement” that would reflect a “full legal contract.” The term sheet also allegedly directs Wilson to “seek legal counsel” before signing a “full License and Option Agreement.” Wilson says CCC didn’t present him with the full agreement and thus he wasn’t in contract with CCC.

Wilson’s complaint implies he was surprised when, four days after signing the term sheet, he was paid $30,000. When CCC later demanded he pay $390,000, Wilson says that was part of UGAA’s “coordinated effort” to “strong-arm” the player and “punish” him for entering the portal. Wilson contends that UGAA has violated confidentiality provisions in the term sheet by leaking term sheet provisions “to sympathetic news outlets and affiliates to tarnish Wilson’s reputation.”

Further, Wilson claims that UGAA has no right to compel arbitration since—he says—he never agreed to mandatory arbitration. As described by Wilson, the term sheet ambiguously references “arbitration” and omits key details including the method for appointing an arbitrator, the applicable procedure for arbitration and a specific scope of topics subject to arbitration.

Wilson describes UGAA and by extension “sophisticated and prominent universities like Georgia” as “exploiting their bargaining power” in the aftermath of the House settlement. Among other features, the settlement allows participating colleges to directly pay athletes a share of up to 22% of the average power conference athletic media, ticket and sponsorship revenue. Wilson points out this new framework means schools can “directly enter into NIL agreements” with athletes and “thus no longer rely on a collective or similar intermediary to arrange NIL deals.” He contends schools are abusing this newfound power to convince athletes “to sign NIL agreements with unconscionable and unenforceable provisions that the universities can use to threaten a student-athlete who is considering transferring and prevent the student-athlete from realizing the benefits of free and open competition for their athletic services.”

Advertisement

Much of Wilson’s complaint rebukes the liquidated damages provision. Wilson claims UGAA “weaponized this provision” by “falsely representing” to coaches of at least three other schools where Wilson “actively discussed potentially transferring” that he would be liable for a $1.2 million buyout.” These alleged representations, Wilson argues, financially harmed him since it denied him a chance to realize “the benefits of free and open competition for his athletic services and his NIL licensing rights.”

The Missouri DE also attacks the structure of the liquidated damages provision. He argues it “makes no attempt” to connect what he would have to pay with a “reasonable estimate of the harm to CCC that would result from a breach.” In other words, Wilson describes the provision as imposing an excessive penalty that is more about punishing him than compensating CCC. Wilson says the provision is “masquerading” under the moniker “liquidated damages” when it should be better understood as an unconscionable “penalty provision” designed to retaliate against him for entering the transfer portal.

Wilson’s complaint seeks a judicial declaration that the term sheet is unenforceable, or if it is enforceable, the arbitration and liquidated damages provisions within it are unenforceable. Claims for tortious interference, civil conspiracy, defamation and breach of confidentiality are included, too.

“Damon never had a contract with them,” Jensen, Wilson’s attorney, said in a statement. “I don’t see how Georgia thinks intimidation and litigation will help their recruitment efforts—maybe players could bring lawyers with them to practice.”

Advertisement

In the coming days and weeks, expect attorneys for UGAA to raise several counterarguments.

They will assert the dispute should be heard in Georgia, not Missouri, since UGAA filed first and the center of the controversy arguably occurred in Georgia. UGAA attorneys will also contend that Wilson and CCC signed an enforceable contract that contains the basic elements of a contract, including offer, acceptance and, with Wilson accepting the $30,000 payment, a bargained-for exchange.

Similarly, UGAA will insist the arbitration and liquidated damages provisions are reasonable in the context of NIL at a power conference school and binding. To that end, expect UGAA to note that Wilson was an adult when he signed the NIL contract/term sheet—he was 19 years old and thus not a minor—and that CCC’s recommendation he hire an attorney didn’t create an obligation on the part of CCC to stop negotiating with him if he hadn’t secured an attorney.

Best of Sportico.com

Advertisement

Sign up for Sportico’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

Amateurism in college sports has all but disappeared. The speed at which the landscape has changed could give even the most die-hard fan whiplash.

In a new ESPN E60 special, “Paid to Play: Understanding College Sports in 2025,” Jeremy Schaap delves into how the idea of playing for school pride, tradition and the love of the game has morphed into a high-stakes name, image and likeness marketplace where athletes can play for the highest bidder — receiving direct payments from schools — and have the freedom to bolt through free agency in the form of the NCAA transfer portal.

Here are key facts about the new ESPN E60 special:

When will ‘Paid to Play: Understanding College Sports in 2025’ air?

The one-hour report debuts Sunday, Dec. 28, at 8:30 p.m. ET.

How can fans watch?

Fans can watch the debut on ESPN. The program will be available in the ESPN App immediately following the television premiere. Watch it and other reports in the E60 streaming hub.

Do you have what it takes to be an AD?

Related to the subject of the new E60 special, ESPN has an original interactive game that puts fans in the role of a college athletic director, guiding them through decisions around name, image and likeness, the transfer portal and more, and offering a dynamic and engaging look at the ever-evolving landscape of college sports.

What is ESPN E60?

Founded in 2007, E60 is ESPN’s storytelling brand that features a mix of revealing profiles, hard-hitting investigations and exclusive interviews. It has received numerous awards and accolades, including the Sports Emmy for Outstanding Hosted Edited Series for the fifth time in 2025.

How can fans access more college sports coverage from ESPN?

Check out the ESPN college football, men’s college basketball, women’s college basketball and college sports hub pages for more content.

With a spot in the College Football Playoff Semifinals on the line, No. 4 Texas Tech and No. 5 Oregon will clash in the Capital One Orange Bowl on Jan. 1. The Ducks are seeking their first appearance in the Semifinals since they made a run to the National Championship in the inaugural CFP (2014), while Texas Tech is seeking its first ever CFP victory.

Both programs are great success stories of the Transfer Portal era, as many players that will suit up for either Texas Tech or Oregon in the matchup began their careers elsewhere.

Advertisement

High-level players such as Oregon quarterback Dante Moore (UCLA), Texas Tech linebacker Jacob Rodriguez (Virginia), Oregon running back Noah Whittington (Western Kentucky), and Texas Tech wide receiver Caleb Douglas (Florida) have all made their way to their respective programs by way of the Transfer Portal and have been immediate impact pieces.

Dan Lanning commends Joey McGuire and Texas Tech for mastering Transfer Portal

This past offseason, Texas Tech hauled in 21 players from the Portal, earning the No. 1 spot in On3’s 2025 College Football Team Transfer Portal Rankings. Their class boasted an estimated $7 million in adjusted NIL value, more than almost any other program in the sport.

Prior to the Ducks’ clash with Joey McGuire‘s Texas Tech program, Oregon head coach Dan Lanning commended him on building such a great roster with their strong NIL resources.

Advertisement

“He’s built a great roster,” Lanning said on Monday. “College football is about adapting. This is obviously a program that’s done an unbelievable job adapting and saying ‘let’s make our team the best it can possibly be’. They’ve done that this year. They deserve credit for how they’ve evaluated. There’s a lot of teams that take players out of the portal. There’s not a lot of those teams that necessarily have success evaluating that talent, getting them to play together, and creating a team that does that. This is a team that’s done that.”

As Lanning touched on, mastering the Portal is a very thin line. Five of the top-ten transfer classes this offseason helped their programs reach the College Football Playoff (No. 1 Texas Tech, No. 3 Ole Miss, No. 4 Oregon, No. 5 Miami, and No. 10 Ohio State), while three of the top-ten classes missed the postseason completely (No. 7 Auburn, No. 8 North Carolina, and No. 9 Rutgers).

The Orange Bowl matchup between No. 4 Texas Tech and No. 5 Oregon will surely be one of the most entertaining games in the entire College Football Playoff. Kick-off on Jan. 1 is scheduled for 12:00 PM on ESPN.

• Indiana University’s football program has a long history of losses and disappointments.
• New coach Curt Cignetti has revitalized the team using transfers and NIL funds.
• IU is now the No. 1 seed in the college football playoffs and will play in the Rose Bowl.

BLOOMINGTON — On Sept. 14, 2024, Indiana University’s football team was scheduled to play UCLA in Pasadena. In a stadium called the Rose Bowl.

The week before, I sat at the bar in Binkley’s Kitchen in Broad Ripple and watched the Hoosiers blast Western Illinois 77-3. I pondered, should I book a flight to LAX to watch, perhaps for the only time in my life, the Hoosiers play in the Rose Bowl?

As a tormented sports fan, I had overcome dozens of forlorn seasons to witness my Chicago Bears and Indianapolis Colts win Super Bowls in 1986 and 2007, and in 2005, the seeming impossible, a World Series title for my winning ugly Chicago White Sox.