@immamac is correct that this particular NIL fail is a clown fiesta. Some of the fails here include:
Coaches directly negotiating and making promises
Direct inducement
Never papering a deal in advance
Lack of coordination between UNLV collective and team
Communication fails between coaches, team, agent, and player
Leaking to the media
Player/agent potentially trying to renegotiate mid-season
Player opting out of season to preserve his eligibility (which is his right) for "non-legit reasons" e.g. not getting paid what he thought he'd get paid via NIL - makes him look like a bitch
Also imma's assertion that NIL isn't pay-for-play is strictly, formally, contractually, and legally true as TOF and any NIL-rules compliant entity is papering deals today. It's also total bullshit, because as others pointed out, it's only Texas players or those Texas wants to be players that are getting inked to NIL deals. And if those players don't feel like their commitments by TOF or others aren't met, they aren't going to hire a lawyer to sue TOF; they're going to turn to their #1 leverage: sitting or threatening to transfer, just like X. Worthy did until he got paid off. While the contract is between TOF and player, there is an unnamed 3rd party that everyone knows is actually in there: the team. Imma sitting here shouting at everyone about how stupid we are that this isn't actually PfP makes me think of this:
Also if this isn't pay-for-play, why have I seen imma and ctj on threads talking about Sark's recruiting and how "yes he's a good recruiter, but really we need credit for setting up NIL/TOF/Burnt Ends because without that we wouldn't be getting/retaining the talent." ...wait a sec, I thought these were just general/random brand ambassador deals? Not anything that would induce someone to actually choose Texas? If these are just general name image likeness deals that have nothing to do with choosing Texas, why should anyone consider it having anything to do with recruiting then? Can't have it both ways.