WILD WEST: Former Georgetown Guard Sues FSU Coach Over Unpaid NIL Fees

Primo Spears and five other plaintiffs allege they were stiffed $250k by Florida State

According to Yahoo Sports and Bloomberg Law, six former Florida State basketball players sued their coach, Leonard Hamilton, for breaching promises of $250,000 in NIL payments to each player, leading to a player boycott and highlighting the chaotic nature of the NIL era in college sports. Primo Spears, the former Georgetown Hoyas guard, is a plaintiff in the case and former Associate Head Coach Kevin Nickelberry—who is not named in the complaint—was on Hamilton’s staff during this time.

This alleged breach of contract, according to the lawsuit, led to a player-led boycott of a practice during the 2023-24 season and ultimately contributed to several players transferring from the university. The lawsuit, which includes claims of fraud and misrepresentation, underscores the growing concerns and challenges surrounding NIL compensation within college athletics, where a lack of clear regulations and oversight has created a chaotic and unpredictable environment for both athletes and institutions.

Florida State NIL Lawsuit Puts Spotlight on Unregulated System

The recent lawsuit filed by six former Florida State basketball players—Darin Green Jr., Josh Nickelberry, Primo Spears, Cam’Ron Fletcher, De’Ante Green and Jalen Warley—against their former coach, Leonard Hamilton, has brought to light the chaotic and unregulated nature of the NIL era in college athletics.

The lawsuit alleges that Hamilton promised each player $250,000 in NIL payments from his “business partners,” but the players claim they never received the money.

Why Coach Leonard Hamilton?

All Plaintiffs, members of the 2023-24 FSU men’s basketball team, allege that they were promised a $250,000 payment by Hamilton in exchange for their commitment to and continued enrollment at FSU.

This is no longer the era of McDonald’s bags filled with cash, but basketball fans still know deep down that at least some of this NIL-based recruiting is choreographed by the coaches organizing third-party payments to induce enrollment. The question here is whether the head coach actually made promises of payment and failed to keep those promises.

The complaint cites numerous text messages among players and between players and both Coach Hamilton and Will Cowen, an executive at an FSU NIL collective, as evidence of the promised NIL payments. The complaint frames the issue as Hamilton making promises and/or colluding with the NIL collective for the promised-but-not-delivered player payments.

The Primo Spears Connection

One of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit is former Florida State guard Primo Spears. Spears transferred to Florida State from Georgetown before the 2023-24 season. While parting ways was expected, the lawsuit suggests that, while in the portal, Spears’ decision to transfer to FSU was influenced by Hamilton’s alleged NIL promises.

Was Kevin Nickelberry Involved?

Another plaintiff in the lawsuit is guard Josh Nickelberry—a cousin/nephew of Kevin Nickelberry, a former assistant coach at Georgetown. While there is no indication that Kevin Nickelberry was directly involved in the alleged NIL promises, there is a familial connection. It is important to note that Kevin Nickelberry is not implicated in the lawsuit and never specifically mentioned.

Does a Contract Need to be in Writing?

“Get it in writing” is always a good mantra, but some of these negotiations are deliberately secretive. Contract law allows for a meeting of the minds without writing, but it’s difficult to determine promises and agreements that are not written.

Georgetown alum Michael McCann and the Sportico team write:

One hurdle for proving breach of contract is the apparent absence of a written agreement. Like other states, Florida has a “Statute of Frauds,” which holds that contracts generally must be in writing to be enforceable. However, there are exceptions that can make an oral agreement enforceable. One is if the contract can be performed within a year. The complaint stresses that Hamilton’s promises “could have been completed within one year” and that payment was in exchange for the players to play at FSU in the 2023-24 season.

The complaint also includes claims for promissory estoppel, which asserts that the players relied to their detriment on a $250,000 promise, and Hamilton should not be left off the hook. They could have enrolled at other colleges or transferred to them but pledged to FSU in anticipation of $250,000.

A Broken System

The lawsuit highlights the lack of transparency and enforcement within the NIL system. Coaches were never permitted to promise NIL payments directly, but the lines remain blurry. Schools are struggling to manage the financial aspects of NIL, and athletes are left caught in the middle with tax bills, car payments, family obligations, and more.

The Road Ahead

There are important questions of policy and precedent here regarding how a coach recruits a player and talks about NIL promises that would be paid by another organization. Likewise, if there is a disconnect in communication between the coach, the NIL organization, and the funders (“business partners”), then who is liable for payments to players?

Again, in the “wild, wild west” of NIL, this will reopen the discourse about whether all this collusion is acceptable for the NCAA and do they have any power to stop it.

Despite the secretive nature of the talks, it highlights how important it is to document such promises should there be a disagreement later.

The next six months are expected to be a challenging time for the NCAA as it transitions into athlete revenue sharing. Schools will be permitted to pay athletes directly, but there are concerns about how this will be funded and enforced. The Florida State lawsuit is a reminder of the need for clear regulations and oversight in the NIL era.