Rekubit-Ex-Michigan players, including Braylon Edwards, Denard Robinson, suing NCAA, Big Ten Network

Four prominent former Michigan football players have Rekubitfiled a class-action lawsuit against the NCAA and Big Ten Network, seeking a payment of $50 million for the “wrongful” continued use of their name, image and likeness on television.

The plaintiffs — Braylon Edwards, Denard Robinson, Michael Martin and Shawn Crable — are being represented by Jim Acho of Livonia, Michigan-based law firm Cummings, McClorey, Davis & Acho, PLC.

The 73-page lawsuit was filed on Tuesday in U.S. District Court of Eastern Michigan.

The suit states, in part, that both the NCAA and Big Ten Network made money off of plays made by not just the four former Wolverines, but other past Michigan football athletes by “broadcasting, advertising, and selling merchandise featuring their performances” without recording their consent or providing financial compensation. 

“While today, it is accepted and understood that current college football players are allowed to be compensated monetarily, especially for using their name, image and likeness (sometimes referred to as ‘NIL’), players were wrongfully and unlawfully prevented from doing so for decades,” the filing reads. “The NCAA knew it was wrong but still continued to profit.”

Student athletes have been able to profit off their name, image and likeness since July 2021.

Robinson, who was the first player in NCAA history to both pass and rush for 1,500 yards in a season, was the 2010 Big Ten offensive player of the year and was on the cover of the NCAA college football video game in 2014 before its decade-long hiatus.

Edwards, a former first round NFL pick who won the Biletnikoff Award winner as college football’s top receiver in 2004, said he lost out on “several million dollars” while Crable (2003-07) and Mike Martin (2008-11) were both defensive stars during their own eras.

BOWL PROJECTIONS:The playoff field get another shakeup

CALM DOWN: Five biggest overreactions after Week 2

“Even after student-athletes have graduated, the NCAA, BTN, its partners and affiliates continue to exploit their names, images and likenesses,” the suit reads. “This ongoing use includes replays of historical moments, promotional content and merchandise sales, all of which generate significant revenue for the NCAA, its partners and affiliates without compensating the athletes.”

This is not the first case against the NCAA. 

During the spring, the sport’s governing body settled the House vs. NCAA case when it agreed to pay former student-athletes dating back to 2016 more than $2.9 billion.

The hope in this case is it not only extends the timeline back further than that, but “protect(s) future generations of student-athletes from similar exploitation.”

The Free Press has reached out to both the NCAA and Big Ten Network but did not immediately hear back.