Recently, a story broke from Lubbock’s KXAN television station that Tampa Bay Buccaneers Quarterback Baker Mayfield and his wife, Emily, had filed a petition with the Travis County, Texas District Court for more information from their Austin-based financial advisors on the potential misappropriation of $12 million.

While the general information is in the petition, it is not publicly known how the situation reached this point, what specific information the Mayfields are seeking, and why they’re asking for it now.

Unfortunately, however, there are plenty of similar examples we can look to for those answers.

An Ernst & Young report from 2018 (full disclosure: I co-wrote the study) identified ~$600m of known financial fraud with athletes as the victims; the total amount is likely much higher, because all parties have a vested interest to keep the matter private.

What compounds and complicates the issue is that the financial advisors in question include two entities that were founded by James Mayfield, Baker’s father. Baker’s brother, Matt, oversees investments in their Venture Capital arm, Camwood Ventures. High-profile athletes prefer to avoid messy public legal filings, and the involvement of family only exacerbates that desire.

So, the Mayfields embarking on a formal legal process likely means that the petition was their last resort. As Baker Mayfield himself commented afterwards, “it’s been a long time coming.”

It may surprise the average fan, but despite the millions – or even hundreds of millions – of dollars at stake, the information business managers provide their clients (or their representatives) can often be sub-standard and/or irregular.

Even in situations where data is provided, it’s often on a summary or consolidated level. Think total cash, total investments, and, for the true high-achievers, maybe a categorization of expenses. These summaries might look similar to the income statements and balance sheets public companies file; unlike public companies, it’s rare this information is audited, though a well-constructed agreement may give clients the right to audit.

What business managers won’t usually provide is a detailed listing of how that summary information has been calculated. Accountants call that detail transactional information, and it’s critical for identifying potential fraud, waste or abuse.

For example, if an athlete’s cash position shrunk significantly month-over-month, it would be important to know the specific cash inflows or outflows that generated that change, as well as a reconciliation to third-party information such as original copies of bank statements.

And yet, business managers are unlikely to provide bank statements or other external documents. Consider for instance an athlete that invested in a real estate venture. Supporting documentation might be a copy of the remittance paid to the entity, some sort of signed legal agreement and proof that the properties exist, none of which are common in business manager-to-client reporting.

It’s not just outflows. Managers often fail to provide a detailed-enough breakdown of earnings or returns from investments to determine if the cash inflows are complete.

Investments also carry a heightened risk of potential co-mingling of funds between athlete and manager. That’s because many management agreements allow tag-along investment rights; athletes get to invest in a start-up, but so do the managers at a similarly preferred valuation.

All of the above may be the type of detailed information the Mayfields have requested, but not received. It shouldn’t be difficult to provide, and so the lengthy timeline may indicate something nefarious is at play.

Whenever these stories surface, there is an undercurrent of victim-blaming. Baker Mayfield has earned $48 million in career earnings, after all.

But that’s backwards. Professional athletes hire professional business managers so that they can focus on honing their craft and earning that money.

And while $48 million – plus endorsements, plus Emily Mayfield’s earnings – may seem substantial, consider it in the context of the potentially misappropriated amount. Once taxes and management fees are accounted for (40% at reasonable estimates), that leaves with the Mayfields with $28.8 million in take-home cash for the past 6 years, before considering expenses, asset purchases and gifts.

The amount in question is $12 million. A large chunk.

45% of Mayfield’s career earnings were earned as part of his 2018 signing bonus. As yearly earnings begin to slow down, the effects of potential misappropriation intensifies.

A 2019 profile of Mayfield by the Athletic highlighted a team of individuals at his father’s firm tasked with not just marketing Mayfield or managing his finances, but also investing his earnings in vehicles including Camwood Ventures, the Venture Capital arm of the firm.

Venture Capital has high upside, however it targets higher-risk, earlier-stage companies that may not provide a return for years, if at all. That can put a strain on cash flow and stretch the fundamental trust between client and advisor in the best of times, never mind the thunderstorms of the current venture markets.

That same profile portends an individual relentlessly focused on managing his finances and avoiding “money catastrophes.” If there was fraud, waste or abuse, hopefully the Mayfields have caught it before the situation reaches a catastrophic level.