Anybody seen any updates on Hugley & Aikens?

phil95 wrote:

Anybody seen any updates on Hugley & Aikens?

No Hugley. Dom warming up

I really don’t like scheduling games against teams like Cleary. 
We can win without discipline and develop bad habits and poor shot selection that would destroy us in conference.

Last edited by coffee (12/27/2025 3:08 pm)

phil95 wrote:

I agree. There are plenty of 180-250 rates teams that would offer a much greater challenge.

Though, today's game left me feeling better that the D-II/NAIA matchups normally do.

-The Dukes maintained great energy & ball sharing from wire to wire.

-This was a second, longer opportunity to try the point guardless lineup in a real game situation.

-Jake got good run with the starters & showed much livelier legs.

-Bus got in for long stretches & took advantage of the opportunity.

Jellum's dad killed with the national anthem again.

coffee wrote:

I really don’t like scheduling games against teams like Cleary.
We can win without discipline and develop bad habits and poor shot selection that would destroy us in conference.

I agree with you, Phil.  The team maintained a high level of teamwork through plenty of different player combinations.  It would have been easy to get sloppy at times against an overmatched opponent but they didn't.  Balanced scoring and the coaches got good looks at everyone.

As for the national anthem, when the cheering was over I said to my friend that his voice was absolutely operatic and that I hope Frederik stays for four more years so that we get ti hear him at least four more times.  Then I found this. https://en.perjellum.com/
 

Trib article:
https://triblive.com/sports/again-without-big-man-hugley-duquesne-men-roll-to-another-victory/

Pittsburgh Sports Now article and press conference video:
https://www.on3.com/sites/pitt-sports-news/news/duquesne-mbb-turns-page-to-a-10-play/

Yes, Cleary may be bad… But SLU is currently beating “Principia College” 66-13 at half. Jeez.

Bsduq2008 wrote:

I might be the minority, but I believe Coach Dru needs to come out and let the season ticket holders and fans know what is going on with Hughley.  I thought he could have been our difference maker this year and with the NIL and kids getting paid, I believe we, as fans, need to know what is going on.  I don't understand being secretive about it.  Hughley is a 24-year old Grad Student.  I want to know if he is done or not.

I get it 100%—I'm not a season ticket holde, but like everyone else, I'm dying to know what's going on with Hugley. He was supposed to be that difference-maker in the paint, and his absence the last few games has us all wondering if he's done for the season or what.That said, in this NIL era with agents, lawyers, and basically mini-contracts involved, it's not as simple as just cutting a guy or going public with details. Coach Dru has called it a "coach's decision" and gone "no comment" since—probably the smartest move legally and for the program. A full statement could open up all kinds of issues.As fans who pay good money, we absolutely deserve transparency when possible, but sometimes silence protects everyone involved (player included). Hoping whatever it is gets resolved and we see him back, but if not, the team's been rolling without him lately. Go Dukes 🏀

Over the Christmas holiday I was in a conversation with an A-10 university president, (that I don't know well), & an A-10 athletics director, (that I have known for more than 40 years).

We talked about Hugley & they commented on this being an unusual situation in that it has gone on for a couple of weeks with the player not around the team. After hearing their explanations, I walked away with the impression that both players & schools can terminate the NIL relationship pretty easily with little possibility of legal struggles.

I also learned that it has become common for schools to work through defection and/or dismissal issues with a player or 2 at the end of the first semester & that some of these dramas never see the light of day because nothing comes of them.

Unfortunately, this information doesn't shed light on the Hugley situation. I just thought it was insight that other posters would like to have.

Last edited by phil95 (12/29/2025 12:39 pm)

CLK wrote:

Phil, I appreciate the insight from your conversation with A-10 leaders. i am not a NIL expert, but I do have significant experience with contracts and litigation in my working days, and therefore I respectfully disagree that terminating NIL relationships—especially for highly compensated players—is generally simple or low-risk legally.NIL deals are binding contracts, often with complex clauses like morality provisions, buyouts, repayment requirements on transfer, or one-sided termination rights favoring the school/collective. Recent examples (e.g., schools suing transferring players for breach, like Georgia's case against Damon Wilson) show disputes can escalate to litigation. Contracts are increasingly drafted to protect institutional interests, including penalties for early exit or performance ties disguised as NIL value.Quiet resolutions may happen in lower-profile cases, but for high-value players, risks of lawsuits, eligibility issues, or financial clawbacks are real and growing post-House settlement. It's not as straightforward as described. Personally I still believe that the smart play for Dru and the school until the Hugley situation is resolved is "No Comment".

CLK you make many sound and rational points.  You would have been a hell of an attorney👍

So the post begins with CLK admitting his lack of expertise on NIL matters & then goes on to dismiss the experiences of 2 university administrators from 2 different A-10 member schools who routinely deal with NIL issues as a significant part of their job responsibilities.  Both sources hold PhDs from distinguished universities, with one also holding a JD & having been the dean of a law school. However, I am sure the vast amount of Googling he did on the subject makes CLK's the final word on this matter.

In what way is that sound and/or rational point-making?

CLK wrote:

phil95 wrote:

So the post begins with CLK admitting his lack of expertise on NIL matters & then goes on to dismiss the experiences of 2 university administrators from 2 different A-10 member schools who routinely deal with NIL issues as a significant part of their job responsibilities.  Both sources hold PhDs from distinguished universities, with one also holding a JD & having been the dean of a law school. However, I am sure the vast amount of Googling he did on the subject makes CLK's the final word on this matter.

In what way is that sound and/or rational point-making?

Why the personal attack? There's zero excuse for personal attacks or mischaracterizing my posts as "dismissing" anything, I was simply offering my opinion based on my experience with contrat disputes and litigation. Go back and read my post again. I did not dispute what these gentlemen told you, but as the recent Georgia case I cited, the law on this subject is continually being challenged.  Hence my conclusion that the smart play by Dru and the school is to offer no comment at this time.

I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt that your post was not meant as a apersonal attack although it felt that way. We all meed to keep it civil on this Board.