I am a sports agent, but I am also a fan of my home teams.  That’s why, to this day, I have a problem with Nick Saban.  He bailed out on my Dolphins after he said there was no way that he was leaving.  I should have known not to trust him, since he did the same thing to LSU before leaving the Tigers for the Fins.  Anyway, Jimmy Sexton, a very popular and successful agent, is Saban’s agent.  He also represents many other high profile NFL coaches, NFL players, and a few baseball players.  His company is Athletic Resource Management, and his website is http://www.sextonsports.com/.

Sexton recently granted an interview to Kevin Scarbinsky of The Birmingham News.  Sexton says phrases like “they’re gonna take you out boots first in a pine box,” which is something that would never ever come out of my mouth.  I guess I have no hope recruiting clients in states like Alabama.  Lane Kiffin does not call Sexton, “sir”, and I am not surprised.  An interesting note is that Sexton represents two of Bobby Bowden’s assistant coaches.  Think he wants the University to push the old coach to retirement?  Sexton also has the pleasure of repping the head coach of the Dolphins and the Jets.  No bad blood between those two teams.

This article is posted in the hope that it provides athletes with a way to more accurately assess the skills of an offer from various types of agents.

For example, anyone doing any research on me will quickly see that I have a strong background in the law, so one would expect my skills to be strong apropos contracts, negotiation, drafting, professionalism and presentation.  But does that make me a good agent?  Is the agent who is a former player without as much formal education and experience necessarily a weaker negotiator than me? Is he less well-versed in the nuances of contract law?  Can he pick out a future star as well as me simply because he has played professionally for many years?  Am I any less able to find the diamond in the rough simply because I spent my formative working years in Court rather than on the rainy, muddy and wind-swept soccer pitches of England?

I will readily concede that one of my weaknesses on which I have worked very hard is identifying young players who may have what it takes to play professionally at some point in the future.  Unearthing young talent is a key component of any agent’s practice.  But there is a vast difference between noticing a player who is playing well in that game and in spotting someone who has the raw materials and can go on to forge a career.  When coupled with the myriad factors involved in making it professionally then, this can suddenly seem a daunting task.

My solutions have been two-fold.  Firstly, there is no substitute for actually getting out there and watching as many games as possible.  DVDs only take one so far.  Being present during the game is vital.  The more games one watches, with one’s agent hat on rather than punter, the more I have been able to build up an accurate picture of youth soccer and, over time, been able to make more accurate and informed judgments on players.

Secondly, being humble enough to ask the opinion of others – namely, coaches.  My company currently represents a number of coaches, some of whom are experts in youth development.  I have done a good job for them in the past and they are delighted to receive DVDs of players on whom I would like their feedback.  It can really mean the difference between investing time and resources into a player who may never make it and, on the other side of that chain of reasoning, between having a reliable and experienced 2^nd opinion to back up my own thoughts on the player.

So, what can a former player who is now acting as an agent offer?  You can expect him to have a lot more contacts earlier on his career than someone like me who had to build everything up from the bottom over a period of time.  He may or may not have the same presentation skills and may place less emphasis on the quality of the written work.  He will most likely have greater access to better young players earlier on due to the fact he has just finished his playing career and is making the transition from playing to representation, so if you’re an unknown young player then he may already have a complete portfolio of young players and be less willing to take a chance on you.  Whilst there is the prestige of being represented by a former big name, does this mean that you will get the personal touch you as a player want and deserve?  Equally, there is no guarantee that someone without a playing background will give you the requisite attention.

I’ve had players come to me from other agents with stories about what took place which led to them leaving.  I have no doubt that the player is telling the truth and, equally, that the other agent was doing his job properly and professionally but it didn’t work out based on a number of factors…but mainly chemistry.  What works for one player and one agent may not be appropriate for the agent and the second player.  Likewise, I’ve had 1 or 2 of my clients ask if they could leave the agency or speak to other agents.  There is never bad blood, because as much as this is a personal relationship based on trust, it’s also a business deal and there’s no sense in preventing a client from looking elsewhere.

For me, the absolute bottom line is chemistry with my clients.  If we’re not getting along well, then I will have no hesitation in terminating the contract and allowing both parties to walk away.  I love this game too much, and am deeply fortunate to be able to earn a living doing something I love, to allow it to be hindered by a client with an attitude problem.  If it’s not working out, as sometimes happens, then there’s nothing wrong with walking away.  Neither party should be unhappy when the excitement of building a successful career together can be incredibly fulfilling.

In summary, I would say that there are really no sure things and perhaps this article has achieved the opposite of what I set out to accomplish – to pose more questions than provide answers!  But I hope it’s helped somebody, somewhere, if they are weighing up which type of agent to appoint.

Max Eppel is a soccer Players’ Agent Licensed by The FA. His company is Max Eppel Soccer Agency LLC and has offices in Newport Beach, CA and London, UK.  For further information click on www.maxeppelsocceragency.com.

The agent-related article of last week that generated a lot of buzz in the sports agent community was a very long piece written by ESPN.com’s Andy Katz.  While I was not able to put aside the time to give it a thorough read until several days after it was written, I am glad that I kept that tab hanging around and finally read it.  So if you have not yet read the piece, Agents and coaches battle for prospects, go ahead and give it a try.

Adding a player as a friend on Facebook is an interesting tactic for an agent to employ.  As Cameron Schuh, the Associate Director for Public and Media Relations for the NCAA, once told me, there are no restrictions between agents and student-athletes in the NCAA rules/bylaws as far as communicating through social networking … AS LONG AS no oral and/or written agreement has been made.  Katz basically echos that statement in his piece.

Additionally, SPARTA and other laws are not particularly well-suited for online communication.  So it seems as though an agent is not violating any particular rule by communicating with a student-athlete over a site like Facebook.  And if an athlete is so bothered by agents contacting him on a social networking site, that athlete always has the option of not adding the agent as one of his contacts, or not having a profile on that site at all.

Coaches do hate it when agents have contact with their players, even if the agents are taking actions that are 100% legal.  I will not mention any names, but I have already had an experience with a college coach leaving me a 3 minute phone message, screaming expletives at me and basically telling me that he would make sure I never sign another college basketball player again in the future.  Was he out of line?  Of course.  Especially because he did not know that his player actually contacted me and asked that he be the one to break the news to his coach that he would be leaving early to play ball professionally.  It was not my fault when the player did not tell the coach until a couple of days before leaving school.

That’s why I am not surprised at all when Katz writes that Wake Forest coach Dino Gaudio said to him, “Anybody that I find who goes behind my back to get my kids, I’ll do everything in my power to see that they’re not involved in the process.”

But is it any better if an agent goes through a coach instead of going directly to the player?  Coaches might refer a particular agent to their players even if that agent is not necessarily the right fit for the particular player.  Then we have to worry about shady coach/agent relationships…is the coach getting a cut of the action?

And yes, AAU coaches have taken the spot of college coaches as the emphasis for agents in building relationships for all the reasons mentioned by Katz.  But many college coaches still have very tight relationships with various agents.

The moral of the story is that basketball is pretty dirty.  There are a lot of different actors looking to benefit from an athlete’s talent.  There is a lot of money in the game of basketball, so the fact that there is so much shadiness behind the scenes should not surprise anybody.

Baseball

• Dan Leatherman – Last night, he picked up the win for the Potomac Nationals.  His final line was: 3.2 IP, 5 hits, 2 ER, 0 BB, 1 K.  This improves him to 2-0 with a 5.32 ERA on the season with the High A Potomac Nationals.  Leatherman has not walked a batter in his last 7 outings, which spans 12.2 innings.
• Pete Parise – Parise threw 2 perfect innings (1 K) in Springfield’s loss last night.  Parise has now thrown 11.1 consecutive scoreless frames over his last 8 outings and has a 0.59 ERA over his last 10 outings.  His season ERA is 2.86 in 34.2 IP (26 K’s).  We showed you a powerpoint slide on him yesterday.  His stat line has only gotten better since.
• Kyle Gunderson – Recently, Hi-A Jupiter placed Kyle on the reserve list.  Kyle is healthy and looking forward to returning back to the active list soon.  The Marlins put him on the reserve list as a precautionary measure to give his back some rest.  Since joining the Jupiter Hammerheads in a trade for Logan Kensing, Gunderson has a WHIP and ERA of 0.90 in 10 IP.
• Kyle McPherson – In his last 4 starts, McPherson has 3 wins and 1 no-decision. In the 22.1 IP over that span, Kyle has racked up 13 K’s and only walked 2 batters.  His overall record on the year with the West Virginia Power is 4-1.
• Ryan Kelly – R.Kelly has provided solid relief for the West Virginia Power thus far.  His ERA is sitting at 3.06.  When A-Rod was making his way back to the majors with rehab assignments, he could not get a hit off of R. Kelly.
• Brendan Murphy – Brendan got off to a scorching hot start with the Kalamazoo Kings of the Frontier League, but has cooled off a bit ever since.  He still has 2 HR in 8 games played, along with 6 RBI.
• The rest of our boys: Tommy Johnson, Nick Czyz, Ben Billingsley, and Zach Rosenbaum are doing very well in Extended Spring Training and will be on their respective teams’ Short Season A teams.

Bowling

• Our latest bowling client is Jason Belmonte.  He is currently in his home of Australia making the rounds with the press, but will be back in the U.S. shortly to bowl in the PBA’s Summer Series.  We have big plans for Belmo.  In the meantime, become a fan on his Facebook page.

Football

• Rulon Davis is doing well with the Denver Broncos.  The team needs all the help it can get on Defense and Rulon is just the type of guy who can give them that edge they so desperately need.
• Andrew Johnson had a very successful mini-camp tryout with the Cleveland Browns, but unfortunately, was not retained by the team.  We are now searching for other options for Drew.
• Kevin Grant is considering various options, but we still believe that he belongs in the NFL.  We continue to find the right fit for the former 4-year Akron LB.

Basketball

• We have recently added a bunch of new clients including, Terrrance Woodbury (leading scorer at UGA for the past 2 years), John Gilchrist (former standout at University of Maryland), and Jamarcus Ellis (University of Indiana – named Honorable Mention All Big-Ten).  All of them are receiving considerable interest in the United States (NBA/NBDL) and overseas.

Coaches

• Been working on a new website.  Jason and I have been given important positions in a particular coaches association.  More information will be posted in the near future.

Entertainment

• Hopefully you know about the new EntertainmentAgentBlog.com.  The new site alone, has allowed us to receive more leads for our clients.  Additionally, we are starting to move away from being “agents” to our clients, to taking on more of a managerial role.

Keathley has been in the coaching industry for 10 seasons now, and has yet to record a losing record. He is an innovator of the game and is best known for his extreme version of the Run-N-Gun offensive which was responsible for his team averaging an absurd 111 points per game in the 2007-2008 season.  It is a true rarity to find such a young coach with such a vast knowledge and passion for the game. With that combination, the sky is the limit for Coach Keathley.

The NCAA has formally approved the use of Twitter for recruiting purposes.  This is definitely big news for college coaches, who will use Twitter to sent direct messages to high school recruits.  But what about agents?  Agents are bound by strict NCAA regulations that prohibit contact with a student athletes until a certain point of their collegiate careers (depending on the sport).  Now, can agents, like college coaches, use sites like Twitter and Facebook to talk to athletes of any age, as long as they follow specific instructions?  These are the instructions for coaches:

1. On Twitter, stay away from @ comments.  Instead of reaching out to student-athletes by sending a message via @ reply, send it in a direct message.  This way, the conversation is 2-way and not open for all to see.
2. On Facebook, stay away from wall posts.  Send messages to individuals, instead.  Again, this creates the 2-way convo and does not allow others to chime in.
3. No problem being an athlete’s Friend on Facebook or Follower on Twitter.

Such Facebook messages and Twitter direct messages are considered to be the equivalent of an e-mail or blog post.  Interestingly, Instant Messages and text messages are still prohibited.  Almost anyone who uses Twitter on a phone receives Facebook and Twitter messages as texts…why make the distinction when there really is none?  A text is also kept private like a Direct Message on Twitter.  Is it because Facebook messages and Twitter DMs leave a trail, whereas texts are not kept on any type of server?  This way, just in case, the NCAA could sweep in and take over a student-athlete’s account and check on the messages going back and forth; something you cannot do with texts, which are often times deleted from a phone after roughly 15 days.

Anyway, NCAA Division I Bylaw 13.4.1.2 does not make it clear as to whether or not agents now have the same rights as coaches.  Anyone at the NCAA reading this that can fill us in?

Chris Layne

Track is not a sport that I am very familiar with, but I do know one of the names on the Total Sports client list: Xavier “X-Man” Carter.  He has done a lot of training at UF.  Anyway, the video is below.  Enjoy.

Where: Florida Coastal School of Law Room 405

When: Friday, April 17 (10:30 a.m. – 2:30 p.m.)

Schedule:

10:30 am – Noon: Ethnic and Gender Issues in NCAA Hiring

• Moderator, Roger Groves – Associate Professor of Law, Florida Coastal School of Law
• Kristen Galles – Civil rights attorney and Title IX expert
• Floyd A. Keith – Executive Director, Black Coaches and Administrators
• Kenneth L. Shropshire – The David W. Hauck Professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

Noon – 1:00: Lunch provided

1:00 – 2:30 pm: Maximizing Value for the Coach

• Moderator, Rick Karcher – Associate Professor of Law and Director, Florida Coastal School of Law Center for Law and Sports
• Robert H. Lattinville – Partner, Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP
• Terry Don Phillips – Athletic Director, Clemson University
• Randall W. Spetman – Athletic Director, Florida State University
• Bennett H. Speyer – Member, Eastman & Smith LTD

Cost: Free.  To register, please call (904) 680-7743 or email rkarcher@fcsl.edu.

For full speaker bios, click here.

Earlier this week, Andy Katz of ESPN wrote about a subject that I have covered many times on this blog: the proliferation of runners in the college basketball community.  The main subject of the article was Blake Griffin, who every analyst and self-proclaimed analyst has being picked by whatever team ends up with the #1 overall pick in the 2009 NBA Draft.  While Blake and his family have warded off runners and the agents who employ them, many top athletes and their families do not make the same intelligent decision.  I believe that education is the answer, and as more high-profile writers at the largest media empires begin to discuss the state of college athlete recruiting, perhaps more athletes and their families will begin to see the light and place the important decision of picking an agent back in their own hands.

Coaches can also be a major help or burden to an athlete’s education.  Coaches like Jeff Capel at the University of Oklahoma are doing their due diligence by actually helping his players on and off the court.  Instead of being an accomplice in “the game” and strengthening certain runners’ and agents’ abilities to access his players early, Capel tells his players to be aware of any new friends that try to come into their life.  Good advice.

Not to be outdone by ESPN, Yahoo! Sports had its big dogs do some investigative reporting (it took six months of research) and came up with quite the interesting story concerning recruiting of college athletes by agents and their runners.  Adrian Wojnarowski and Dan Wetzel wrote the story that shocked the nation yesterday: Probe: UConn violated NCAA rules.  It all started with Josh Nochimson, the former basketball agent who was decertified by the NBPA in 2008.  In his hayday, Nochimson was team manager for UConn and possibly stole $500,000 from Rip Hamilton.  Wojnarowski and Wetzel report that Nochimson also funded lodging, transportation, and restaurant meals for Nate Miles while Miles was a student-athlete at the University of Connecticut.  That’s a big no-no according to NCAA rules and Section 14 of the Uniform Athlete Agent Act (which Connecticut has adopted).

In the Yahoo! article, Rip Hamilton is quoted as saying,

“[Josh Nochimson] admitted to stealing…I always remember my agent saying, ‘Rip, don’t put your hands on him because he’ll be able to sue you. [Nochimson] was doing everything off of me. He looks like a high roller. It’s hard for a kid because you may not have anything and you see this guy.”

I have to think to myself, how many other talented student-athletes think the same thing when an agent or his runners approach the athlete blinged out with a nice car and offer to take the athlete to an expensive dinner at a high class steakhouse (which would be a violation if the athlete is still a student)?  Nochimson is not the only one out there putting up a facade.

And agents are not the only ones to blame for this terrible state of recruiting.  As always, Marc Isenberg put his valuable two-cents into the recruiting issue.

The NCAA, college programs and coaches can shift the blame to the agents, but ultimately it takes two to tango. What’s so damning in this investigation is the volume of calls between the agent and the UConn coaching staff. According to Yahoo!, there were “1,565 phone and text communications with Nochimson, including 16 from head coach Jim Calhoun.

The agents and their runners need to be threatened against committing violations, not egged on by NCAA institutions.  Besides that point, though, I remain in my statement earlier this month, the answer to these recruiting problems is education.  If you are a talented student-athlete that possesses the attributes to make it in professional basketball (overseas you can make a ton of money, as well), then why take the risk of working with guys like Josh Nochimson who are only going to threaten your brand?  There is nothing wrong with listening to people you trust, but in the end, the decision you make on an agent should be your own.  It all starts with the athletes.  If the top picks in each draft begin to ward off runners and wait to make agent decisions until their college eligibility has expired, NCAA institutions will find no need to work hand-in-hand with agents, and runners will no longer be on agents’ payrolls.  It all starts with the athletes.  It all starts with education.

Defeating the number #1 team in the nation in the fifth most watched regular season game in history to advance to a #2 national ranking, and finishing the season with a share of a division title are accomplishments that almost any college football program would love to have.  Most programs would likely do anything to keep the man that lead them there; however, Texas Tech is on the verge of losing the captain of its high powered passing attack. Mike Leach’s offensive attack and football philosophy has introduced Tech to a national spotlight that the program has never experienced before.  Under his tenure, coach Leach has produced award wining offenses, quarterbacks, and the nation’s first-ever two time Biletnikoff winner, Michael Crabtree.  Leach and his revolutionary coaching style have been featured in both the New York Times and 60 minutes. Leach has also garnered the support of celebrities such as Donald Trump.  The Red Raiders success has been steadily improving over Leach’s time with 9 straight bowl appearances.  Leach’s interest in pirate history has developed a pop culture phenomenon in Lubbock.  Next to every Tech flag flying in the West Texas wind is a pirate flag.  In fact, the school’s band conducted several half time performances to a pirate theme, and many students are proud to call themselves members of Leach’s pirate school.  In anticipation for their match up against the then ranked #1 Texas Longhorns, several thousand students camped out in front of the stadium, establishing their colony of fans and a new tradition at Texas Tech known as Raiderville.  The Raiderville campers were not the only fans competing for prime space.  Hotel rooms in Lubbock were booked and many late arrivals were forced to stay nearly 100 miles outside of town   Despite his recent success, coach Leach and the Texas Tech administration (TTU) have been unable to negotiate a contract extension, since negotiations began over 10 months ago.

April 16, 2008: Leach’s representatives from International Marketing Group (IMG) contacted the TTU administration asking to negotiate an extension on Leach’s current contract; however, the administration preferred to wait until the end of the 2008 season.  After the Red Raiders dream season that any other year would have resulted in a BCS bowl appearance, TTU offered Leach a 5 year extension at $12.1 million dollars.  The negotiations then began in typical fashion as IMG counter offered with $14.25 million dollars over 5 years; however, after Tech’s loss to Ole Miss in the Cotton Bowl, TTU counter offered with $12.7 million dollar base salary with $600,000 in bonus.  Leach and IMG explained that the base salary offered by the TTU administration was “acceptable,” but 4 other points of the contract became an issue.

1. Penalty for Interviewing without permission. TTU requested that Leach ask permission to interview for future opportunities, and if he is denied permission but still contacts the other employer, TTU can terminate him with cause.  In this situation, Leach would owe the university, 1.5 Million (Similar to Boston College situation).
2. The amount of money Leach would receive if fired without cause by TTU. Under his current contract Leach would receive around 40% of his guaranteed money if fired without cause, about the lowest in the Big 12; however, under TTU’s latest offer, Leach would only receive about 11.7% of the guaranteed money, the lowest in the nation among D1 coaches.
3. Leach’s buy out clause. Under the current agreement, Leach has $500,000 buyout clause, $240,000 below the Big 12 average for coaches.  In the new offer, TTU would require Leach to agree to a $1.5 million dollar buyout.
4. Leach’s personal property rights. As it stands now, Leach controls his own personal property rights, but TTU’s new offer gives the university control of these same rights.

TTU explained that their reasoning behind the penalty for interviewing clause was a result of IMG shopping Leach around for other coaching positions and denying it in the past.  IMG then offended the TTU administration by sending an email to the Board of Regents but leaving out the University President, Athletic Director, and the Chancellor, arguing that IMG has not shopped Leach around.  Since then, TTU has given IMG and Leach until February 17^th to agree to these terms.  In an attempt to reach some middle ground, IMG has countered by offering to work under the same clauses as Leach’s current contract, with a $500,000 buyout agreement and 40% compensation if terminated without cause to remain, despite the fact that the 40% is about the lowest in the Big 12.  Leach and Tech have operated well under those terms for 4.5 years.  IMG cited their research and felt that these offers were comparable to other Big 12 Coaches and very reasonable.  However, the TTU administration declined the offer and restated its position that Leach had until the 17^th of February to accept the offered contract.

TTU’s decision to maintain its stated reservation point (walk away point) and give Leach an ultimatum is considered a power technique in the world of negotiations.  In this adversarial approach, a party treats the process as a zero sum game in which one side’s gain is another side’s loss, or put in other words, there must be a winner and a loser in the end.  Using this mind frame has some benefits, but if used at the wrong time or in bad faith, can severally impede a negotiation.  Power tactics can work if the party making the move convinces his opponent that his walk away point is lower than they believe it is; this would occur if TTU successfully argues to IMG that Leach’s value is worth less than IMG first believes.  Conversely, using a power move can negatively effect your reputation, and the party making the move will be seen as uncooperative.  This may cause your current business partner or future candidates to avoid conducting business with you because your reputation precedes you.  Also, power tactics can offend the other party when they interpret the move as unfair or contrary to the norms of that business.  Finally, if a party uses a power move but misjudges the other side’s walk away point, than the negotiation will likely end in an impasse (where no negotiation is reached).  For instance if TTU believes that IMG and Leach’s walk away point is below the offer presented, but they misjudge this estimation, Leach will pass on the offer no agreement will be reached.

In the present case, the TTU administration only cites fairness between TTU and Leach for its reason to offer Leach a contract that contains clauses below the Big 12 average.  TTU explained in a statement that Leach’s latest offer is not fair because Leach would be able to quit in the first year and only owe the university $500,000 while the University would be required to pay Leach $4.4 million of it if it chose to terminate Leach in that same year.  This statement however, contradicts TTU’s previous statements that they were committed to having Leach be their coach in the future.  If this is the case, TTU would not have any reason to terminate Leach’s contract without cause in the next few seasons.  By making a fairness argument, TTU is inferring that terminating coach Leach without cause after next year is an option, which conflicts with the idea that they are committed to retaining Leach as the future coach of TTU football.  Saying one thing and doing another may create a reputation of being uncooperative for the TTU administration.

The Red Raiders have already felt some of the backlash from this long, drawn out process, with losses of top ranked recruit Emory Blake and Tech’s best recruiter and running backs coach Seth Littrell.  Both Blake and Littrell cited the contract issues as affecting their decisions.  Additionally, where Raider fans anticipate a disappointing season, TTU will likely suffer in the number of season tickets sold and the number of sold out games in a stadium that just began one of two more expansion plans.   TTU must be aware that they are making a decision that affects the football program, the fans, and future of all Texas Tech athletics.  TTU may have invoked these power tactics because they were so offended by IMG’s emails or maybe it’s their inexperience in negotiating a high profile contract, but their methods of negotiation will likely result in an impasse, can possibly severe the idea of future contract extension with Tech’s soon to be winningest coach ever, and create a reputation as an uncooperative party to future coaches.  As the February 17^th deadline approaches (tonight), Leach will likely turn down TTU’s offer and coach under his existing contract as a lame duck coach.  For the sake of the program and all the fans, hopefully at the end of the 2009 season, the administration and Leach will approach the negotiation table in a different fashion, or Leach will feel the administration does not respect his accomplishments and leave on his own accord.