Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by TRhit:
VC

I am sure you are

I live by my ethics you live by yours

What troubles me is that agents have enough trouble getting respect and you come on here and post that players should break the rules--- doesnt that tell me something about you as a person?

TRhit


The rule is ridiculous, wouldn't stand up in court as it is "restraint of trade".

Quite frankly, don't care what troubles you...I'm not a Shrink. I didn't post here for your approval. Would probably be more disappointed if I got it.
VC

I am not here to give approval or disapproval on your thoughts. I am more concerned with people making a mistake that can cost them dearly

You still are advocating that kids break a rule-- it is not a matter of whether the rule is right or wrong--that is a debate for another time and place--the fact is that it exists and you are telling people to break that rule because you say it is "ridiculous"--the NCAA does not see it that way and they happen to have the "HAMMER"

We have guys around here who are calling themselves "agents" and asking 15 and 16 year old kids in HS to sign "contracts" and telling them they can get drafted by this or that MLB team .

There are people out there being taken advantage of without knowing the ramifications of their actions.

You may be the best darned agent in the world but you are off base, at least in my mind, directing kids to break the rules that are in existence.

TRhit
quote:
Originally posted by TRhit:
VC

I am not here to give approval or disapproval on your thoughts. I am more concerned with people making a mistake that can cost them dearly

You still are advocating that kids break a rule-- it is not a matter of whether the rule is right or wrong--that is a debate for another time and place--the fact is that it exists and you are telling people to break that rule because you say it is "ridiculous"--the NCAA does not see it that way and they happen to have the "HAMMER"

We have guys around here who are calling themselves "agents" and asking 15 and 16 year old kids in HS to sign "contracts" and telling them they can get drafted by this or that MLB team .

There are people out there being taken advantage of without knowing the ramifications of their actions.

You may be the best darned agent in the world but you are off base, at least in my mind, directing kids to break the rules that are in existence.

TRhit


OK TR let's play it your way because you may be the best darned TRhitter in the world. All you Parents & Players, don't even talk to an Agent until you/your Son have signed his/your first professional contract. That way you will violate NONE of the sacred NCAA rules.

Be prepared however, to sign for about 50% of what you're really worth because that's what would happen if teams knew they wouldn't have to deal with Agents on draft choice contracts.

Just like the "good old days" TR before drafted players used Agents. Remember when Jeff Burroughs was the #1 pick in the draft? He signed for a whopping $80,000. He was MVP of the American League where he was finally paid what he was worth BECAUSE of the work of #1 Marvin Miller & #2 Jeff's Agent.

How much do you think he worried about the NCAA when his Son Sean was drafted #1 by the Padres?

There TR, now I hope you can sleep better tonight knowing that the uncorruptable NCAA can maintain it's hallowed, place in our society guarding the morals of our children while the NCAA makes BILLIONS of dollars exploiting them.
Welcome to the 21st century.
Last edited {1}
As much as ethics should play a role - the fact is ethics mean nothing to those "at the table".

If there is one marginal dollar to be made by challenging MLB and/or the NCAA - then you can bet your life that agents and lawyers will be all over this like flys on you know what.

Has nothing to do with ethics - or with what is best for the player. Has all to do with the opportunity to make incremental dollars for the decision makers IMO.
VC

I sleep well every night

What the NCAA is or is not in your eyes or my eyes matters not--it is the fact that they have the hammer and they have the rules

I never said I agree with it but I still say any agent instructing kids to break one rule is wrong ---it makes one wonder how many other rules they will have the player break.

TRhit
quote:
Originally posted by itsinthegame:
As much as ethics should play a role - the fact is ethics mean nothing to those "at the table".

If there is one marginal dollar to be made by challenging MLB and/or the NCAA - then you can bet your life that agents and lawyers will be all over this like flys on you know what.

Has nothing to do with ethics - or with what is best for the player. Has all to do with the opportunity to make incremental dollars for the decision makers IMO.


I take offense at you implying I would sacrifice the interests of my clients to make money for myself. My ethics are as sound as anyone that posts on this site & I ALWAYS inform my clients as to what is going on with ANY & EVERY aspect of their affairs in which I play a part.

In addition, I've been called many things in my life, but not stupid. Even if all I cared about was money, it would be world class stupid for me to sacrifice the interests of a client who potentially may pay me millions of dollars on a career worth of contracts for the small amount I get paid from their Signing Bonus when they're drafted.
Last edited {1}
Voodoo,

If that is the case - you should be commended and I applaud you. The opinion was not directed at you personally.

Unfortunately - my opinion about what is occurring on the business side of the sport remains unchanged.

I think - given your knowledge of the game and involvement in the game - you would be hard pressed to prove otherwise.

And you will be even more hard pressed to prove otherwise a year or two from now.

It's gonna be a "Lawsuits R Us" type of environment once the money gets flowing.

Tick tock.
Voodoo,

Sorry for the "cryptic" one-liners.

I think that once a "crack" appears in the stance taken by the NCAA (and MLB) - there will be a flood of situations - like Clarett.

If any of these anticpated situations result in a positive financial outcome for the athlete (and his agents/lawyers) - the flood will become a tidal wave.

I think it is just a matter of time before this occurs.

Additionally - and let me reiterate - I enjoy your posts - and the perspective they give. I also appreciate your responses. I find them all very interesting and hope you continue to offer your view.

The one thing I would say, however, is that the preface "in the best interest of my client" gets a bit old sometimes.
In many cases - that convenient preface doesnt really get to the heart of the issue IMO.

Like running over grandma because she was blocking your clients limo and he was gonna be late for a meeting. You know - "in the best interest of my client" we just had to run her over because my client would have been late.

I am curious - do you think that anyone on the business side of the table cares at all about the game anymore - or is it now purely 100% about the dollars?

Last edited {1}
[QUOTE]Originally posted by itsinthegame:
Voodoo,

"Sorry for the "cryptic" one-liners.

I think that once a "crack" appears in the stance taken by the NCAA (and MLB) - there will be a flood of situations - like Clarett.

If any of these anticpated situations result in a positive financial outcome for the athlete (and his agents/lawyers) - the flood will become a tidal wave.

I think it is just a matter of time before this occurs."

Can't speak to that issue. I wouldn't touch you touching Pro Football with you holding a 10 foot pole.

"Additionally - and let me reiterate - I enjoy your posts - and the perspective they give. I also appreciate your responses. I find them all very interesting and hope you continue to offer your view."

Well, if you insist.(LOL)

"Like running over grandma"

Never ran over any Grannies that I'm aware of.

"I am curious - do you think that anyone on the business side of the table cares at all about the game anymore - or is it now purely 100% about the dollars?"

Can only speak for myself on this issue. My clients don't hire me to worry about "the game" any more than you hire a lawyer to worry about "the legal system". I'm an advocate for my clients first & last.

I think you need to talk to masquerading Commisioner Kennesaw "Molehill" Selig about looking out for the game.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by itsinthegame:
You answered all of my questions. On my behalf - and on behalf of all the grannies that dont have really good footspeed - I thank you. LOL

And thanks for the 10 foot thing too - I thought you were going to say at least 1,000 feet.
Wink


1)Check my post in the general section re:Speed training.
2)1,000 ft. poles tend to be difficult at best.
Its,

quote:
I am curious - do you think that anyone on the business side of the table cares at all about the game anymore - or is it now purely 100% about the dollars?



I just think that the reality of the situation is that managment is hired to wear 2 hats. One being to build a winning team(in some programs) and 2 to manage the money like a greedy mogul. The guys who wear both hats well do pretty well. Steinbrenner has the Luxury of buying what he needs to win and being baseball first. Most teams do not have that luxury. I have always admired George's "I need to win attitude".

If you don't have an agent at the table with the same motivation, then you are at a disadvantage. I find it disgusting when management comes out and makes comments about players during negotiations about not caring about the game, the fans, etc. e all know that guys like Boras go overboard. I also know that players need an advocate. JMO

the Florida Bombers
"I love the HSBBW"
Last edited {1}
Bighit,

I agree with you in most cases - but at the same time I also think it is refreshing to see some high profile players starting to put a value on things other than squeezing the last possible penny out of each organization. After all - we pay for it.

I hope that guys, like Schilling, multiply and prosper - although I am sure they will be attacked and villified by those in the agent community.
Bighit is correct. If you tell a team you love the game and you'll play for (almost) free, the team will not object. Loving and respecting the game, and earning a living at the game are not mutually exclusive. To the contrary they go hand in hand.

I don't think Schilling loves the game anymore than he used to just because he did not squeeze the Red Sox for a couple extra million per year. He's getting his cake and eating it too, as he should being one of the best in a profession, as is Pettitte. I think they are both getting around $10M per year.

Plenty of people are criticizing IRod for (maybe) signing with Detroit for $40M. Maybe they are competitive in 3 years. They have good young pitching. Maybe they turn it around.

The D-Rays will win more game this year, in spite of terrible ownership. Maybe Detroit can turn it with a few more bucks spent.

http://www.ragincajuns.com/Baseball/baseball.htm
Schilling said "Hey, we're talking about my childrens childrens childrens money now. I'm not going to fight over a few bucks", but is easier to say that if you have to do the squabling yourself with out an agent. JMO

Don't begrudge guys like Hampton his Rockies contract, I guess unless they stuck somewhere lame like ARod. Then again, I know of about a thousand shortstops that would swap spots with him though. There I go shootin' off at the key board again.

http://www.ragincajuns.com/Baseball/baseball.htm
quote:
I agree with you in most cases - but at the same time I also think it is refreshing to see some high profile players starting to put a value on things other than squeezing the last possible penny out of each organization. After all - we pay for it.



It would also be refreshing for a club to say "ya know, we know that you can command 14,000,000 dollars on the opend market. We are so grateful that you have been a good trooper, that we are gonna give you 16 mill".

The organization tries to squeeze every penny out of the players, fans, cable, advertisers, etc. Why would you apply one standard to the player and want him to be warm and fuzzy. Yet not apply that standard to the boss who is a business man and hording every dollar. I think that an agent is a needed entity for the protection of the player. Let us face it. There is little loyalty on either side. The agents did not do that. The players and owners did.

the Florida Bombers
"I love the HSBBW"
If players across the board agreed to a unilateral 25% reduction in their salaries, on average a roughly $15 million decrease, how much of that $15 million would go to lower ticket prices, media contracts, parking fees, popcorn, beer etc.? NOT ONE DIME.

Do you think the owners would match their 25% reduction by taking 25% less in their salaries or selling their teams for 25% less? HELL NO!

Bottom line the plyers are taking what they can get during their brief career. The owners are keeping what they can. HOORAY FOR CAPITALISM!
Big and VC,

I am sure that you can do "what ifs" from now until kingdom come to support your view - and rail against the owners as well. Owners would certainly be a tough bunch to defend. LOL

But I still admire what Schilling did. It was a refreshing change - as I stated before - and one that I am sure will not be appreciated by alot of folks in the rep. business.

A slightly different angle - The flip side of Capitalism: I can recall - 3 years in a row - one of the NBA teams I worked for - lost money - every year.
Every year - the salaries went up dramatically - and every year the ticket prices went up. And every year the cost of concessions went up. And they were locked into a long term television agreement - so virtually no added revenue there.
And every year - they lost money. Were the owners greedy in that case? Stupid maybe - but greedy? Shoot - they were holed up like rats in a corner. Pay the salaries - or watch your franchise fall apart. End of story.

Are we now to believe that salary levels do not affect the cost of viewership?

I do think players deserve whatever someone is willing to pay them - and I also think owners deserve to make a return on their investment. Pretty basic stuff.
But someone has to be paying for that stuff right? The money doesnt just materialize.

MY MAIN POINT:
If both owner and player can be satisfied (ala Schilling) without the middleman getting a piece - I'm all for it. That, also, is an example of Capitalism. Some would argue - at its most efficient.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by itsinthegame:
Big and VC,

"Owners would certainly be a tough bunch to defend."

But it's lucrative to do so. Just ask their Lawyers.

"But I still admire what Schilling did. It was a refreshing change - as I stated before - and one that I am sure will not be appreciated by alot of folks in the rep. business."

As previously stated my gripe with Schilling was the fact that he said he can do as good a job as an Agent...in a very public way so he could tell the world how great he was. Then he didn't do it. But knowing what I know about the guy, just getting to flex his ego on a national stage was worth millions to him so maybe in a weird way he broke even. Plus he did save that all important 5% he didn't pay an Agent.

"A slightly different angle - The flip side of Capitalism: I can recall - 3 years in a row - one of the NBA teams I worked for - lost money -every year.
Every year - the salaries went up dramatically -and every year the ticket prices went up. And every year the cost of concessions went up. And they were locked into a long term television agreement - so virtually no added revenue there.
And every year - they lost money. Were the owners greedy in that case? Stupid maybe - but greedy? Shoot - they were holed up like rats in a corner. Pay the salaries - or watch your franchise fall apart. End of story."

It's great when Pro franchises generate positive cash flow. However, the REAL money is in:
1) return on investment when the team is sold
2) the tax benefits of depreciation of equipment & contracts.
I don't think the owners of the NBA team you mentioned had to apply for welfare. AT WORST, they could always sell the team for what they paid for it, write the losses off against gains in their other businesses & cry all the way to the bank.

"Are we now to believe that salary levels do not affect the cost of viewership?"

Of course they do. The salaries of EVERYONE... including what they pay their children/wives/in-laws/ outlaws etc. who work for the teams they own, how much they pay themselves etc.

"MY MAIN POINT:
If both owner and player can be satisfied (ala Schilling) without the middleman getting a piece - I'm all for it. That, also, is an example of Capitalism. Some would argue - at its most efficient."

Yes, ownership has always been so fair to players. Certainly no reason to think that Players need the MLBPA & Agents any more.
Well there are not many "what ifs" to defend the owners, that is my point. The bone yard is littered with players who were duped into a feeling of loyalty to the teams.

If owners want a return on their investment, then they ought to be good business men.

quote:
Every year - the salaries went up dramatically - and every year the ticket prices went up. And every year the cost of concessions went up. And they were locked into a long term television agreement - so virtually no added revenue there.
And every year - they lost money. Were the owners greedy in that case? Stupid maybe - but greedy? Shoot - they were holed up like rats in a corner. Pay the salaries - or watch your franchise fall apart. End of story.



Well, can't blame the players because the owners are poor businessmen or bought a bad franchise. Most of these guys take their tax loses to their billion dollar companies anyway.

I appreciate what Shilling did also, I guess! If undermining an up and coming players abilitlity to baragain in the future is noble. Then he is noble. It is easy for him to be noble. He has all he could want. What about the next guy.

Let us not stick our head in the sand here. It is a tough business and it is about capitalism as well as sport. Maybe once upon a time it was great to be a total loyalist to a team. It sure was easier considering the players had no rights. Now it is just business. Sad but true. I wouldn't demonize either group, just TCB.

the Florida Bombers
"I love the HSBBW"

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×