Football

• A big-time Gator is on the market [Taylor, set to make $6M, cut by Jags].
• A lot of talk that Thomas Mills got Hayden a really nice deal [Hayden, Colts strike deal].

Baseball

• The guy is only 26-years-old and averages a strikeout per inning pitched [Santana avoids arbitration with Angels].
• Gotta love the amount of deals that are struck in the final hour [Pirates, McLouth agree to 3-year deal].
• Should we be blaming the MLBPA instead? [Commish doesn't want steroids blame]

Sports Agents

• For our readers overseas [Superagents” reality TV show to launch in UK this week].
• Doug Eldridge of DLE Sports Management Group is trying to raise $100k [Reginald T. Dogan: Racer makes strides for wounded vets].

Basketball

• The story on Anthony Randolph switching agents made the latest Carnival [Carnival of the NBA #63: Stress Relief].
• The Chicago Bulls have been very active lately [Knicks trade for Bulls' Hughes].

The Braves were under the impression that Furcal was going to be representing the tomahawk next year in Atlanta, GA, but last Thursday, the Furcal signed a deal with the LA Dodgers.  Arn Tellem of WMG said that Furcal and the Braves never reached a deal.  The Braves said that Paul Kinzer, who along with Tellem represents Furcal for WMG, agreed to a deal with the Braves on Monday.  So who was telling the truth?  The Braves were confused, WMG was confused, and baseball fans in general had no idea what was going on.  What could be done to make the situation more clear?  Finger pointing!

This was said on Thursday by John Schuerholz, President of the Braves:

“Having been in this business for 40-some years, I’ve never seen anybody treated like that. The Atlanta Braves will no longer do business with that company — ever. I told [agent] Arn Tellem that we can’t trust them to be honest and forthright. I told him that in all my years, I’ve never seen any [agency] act in such a despicable manner.

“It was disgusting and unprofessional. We’re a proud organization, and we won’t allow ourselves to be treated that way. I advised Arn Tellem that whatever players he represents, just scratch us off the list. Take the name of the Atlanta Braves off their speed dial. They can deal with the other 29 clubs, and we’ll deal with the other hundred agents.”

WMG being completely cut off from a professional club?  Those were pretty powerful words spoken by Schuerholz and directed at the company with the #1 position in Jason Belzer’s 2008 Sports Agency Power Rankings.  Arn Tellem could not let Schuerholz make a statement like that without submitting a rebuttal.  His statement included seven main points:

1. There was never an agreement reached between Rafael Furcal and the Atlanta Braves.

2. In fact, the Braves were fully aware that Furcal was not prepared to make a decision but had requested an opportunity to sleep on it, before deciding.

3. Moreover, the Baseball rules which all agents and teams operate under are clear that no deal exists between a player and a team unless and until: (i) there is a signed and executed player agreement or; (ii) the Player’s Union and the Commissioner’s office have otherwise confirmed the deal.  Neither occurred here.

4. Furcal ultimately decided to accept the Dodgers’ offer, taking into consideration a number of factors the most important of which was his desire to continue playing short-stop and not make the position change to second base that the Braves were requiring.

5. Losing out on an all-star player like Furcal is always disappointing, and we understand the Braves’ frustration with the outcome of this negotiation, but it does not change in any way the fact that we conducted ourselves with integrity and complied with all rules of major league baseball throughout this process.

6. Our primary obligation is to serve our client’s best interests, and we will continue to do so in accordance with all relevant rules governing MLB negotiations and the utmost integrity.

7. If it serves our clients we will continue to present opportunities to the Braves, which in accordance with the rules governing Major League Baseball, the Braves must entertain. We hope that once emotions have subsided, the Braves will act in a manner consistent with not only their obligations under the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the National Labor Relations Act, but also the best interests of the franchise. In short, we would not want this incident to color their better judgment.

Without taking sides, I think that Tellem made a very well crafted statement.  It is very easy to read, cuts straight to the point, and was timely made.  Will it make Braves executives any more willing to deal with WMG and its agents in the future?  It depends on how limited of a memory Schuerholz and others in the organization have.  After Schuerholz’s statement, though, you better expect the MLBPA to keep a close eye on the Braves’ actions concerning WMG clients in the future.  If there is even a slight inclination that the Braves do not sign a WMG client based on the fact that said player is represented by Tellem or Kinzer, the MLBPA will be right on the case.

Will Brinson of AOL Fanhouse believes that the Braves should sue Arn Tellem for fraudulent trade practices.  I say that both sides decide to take this into a closed room, away from the media, and somehow come to an understanding over what transpired, how it may be corrected in the future, and how both entities can work together amicably.  The finger pointing, name calling, and public outcries need to stop.  It’s not good for either party, and does nothing to build the image of baseball or sports agents.

As of yesterday, baseball executives and MLBPA agents had crawled up into the Ritz and glitz of Las Vegas, but this trip is not to enjoy the blackjack tables, luxurious pool decks, and clubs that stay open all hours of the night.  The agents and executives are in Vegas for one of the most important baseball events of the year, the Winter Meetings.  Everyone will be “vacationing” in Vegas until Thursday, with many deals going down before that point-in-time.  Before the meetings officially kicked off, there was word of signing talks.  Of the twenty-four players offered arbitration prior to the deadline, only two accepted (David Weathers and Darren Oliver).  You better believe that the other twenty-two players and their agents are on hand in Las Vegas, talking to a variety of GMs and front-office execs.

One guy getting everything comped is the head of Boras Corp., Mr. Scott Boras.  Equipped with an army of aids and a plethora of statistical sheets by his side, he is looking to find over fifteen free-agent clients jobs this offseason.  Derek Lowe believes in Mr. Boras.  But the week is not all about Boras and his legion of clients.  If you are an MLBPA certified agent (meaning you have at least one player on a 40-man roster), it is likely that you have headed to Sin City to partake in the festivities.  The man with the most talked about free-agent player, C.C. Sabathia, is Greg Genske of Legacy Sports Group.  Brad Penny and Pat Burrell are among the other free-agents that Genske is shopping over at the Bellagio.  There has also been a lot of talk about two free-agents managed by the same agent.  Raphael Furcal and Fransisco Rodriguez (K-Rod) are represented by Paul Kinzer.  And as I said, this group makes up a very small portion of the players and agents in attendance.

But the Winter Meetings actually have a purpose besides allowing agents and GMs to meet up to discuss potential deals.  In fact, the original purpose was for it to serve as a yearly meeting for baseball execs to discuss the state of the sport amongst themselves.  One topic for concern this year is the slumping state of the economy.  Minor League teams are especially worried about taking a hit in sponsorship dollars.  I hope that we do not see the economy torment Minor League baseball like it has done to some “minor leagues” in other sports.

Anyway, soon enough, Dynasty will have the chance to show face at the Winter Meetings.  I am told by many agent friends that I should be thankful that I do not have to be a participant yet.  Apparently all agents dread this time of the year.  Drink some coffee and get some rest my boys!

Sports Business

• HHR continues its excellent interview series with young sports entrepreneurs by talking to Yardbarker’s Marketing Coordinator, Diana Iakoubova [So You Want to Work in Sports?: Diana Iakoubova, Marketing Coordinator, Yardbarker Network].
• Jimmie Johnson = Roger Federer of NASCAR? [Why isn’t Jimmie Johnson more marketable?]

Basketball

• Brandon Jennings has a blog [When in Rome].

Baseball

• $52 million for a 17-game winner [Cubs, Dempster agree to four-year contract].
• Dustin Pedroia is counting down the days until he is arbitration eligible [An MVP Season for the Bargain Basement Price of $457K].
• The MLBPA tightens its grip on agents when it comes to arbitration [Union requires pre-arbitration update].

Football

• Should we start taking this kind of speak seriously? [Berthelsen predicts lockout in court testimony]
• About a dozen candidates remain in the search to replace the late Gene Upshaw [NFLPA narrows search for next executive director].

As hard as it is to believe, it’s not all about the money. For some players, staying on their current team, or going to play for their hometown team is worth taking a pay cut (see Darren’s most recent post for a good example). Let’s not forget that regardless where C.C signs, he’s going to sign for a ton of money. I understand $140 million is an extraordinary amount of cash, but $100 million and playing on the team of your choice is a pretty good gig also.

Furthermore, let’s not forget what happened to other big name players that came to New York for the money. Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, Giambi, A-Rod, Kevin Brown…none of these players had, or in A-Rod’s case have, a smooth, successful duration in pinstripes. New York is a different beast and for some, something they don’t want to deal with.

While I believe it’s way out of bounds for the MLBPA to try and dictate where a player should play, it’s even more egregious that it would suggest money is the end all for the American Pastime.

The first two paragraphs of Article XX Section E of the 2007-2011 MLB Basic Agreement reads as follows:

(1) The utilization or non-utilization of rights under Article XIX(A)(2) and Article XX is an individual matter to be determined solely by each Player and each Club for his or its own benefit. Players shall not act in concert with other Players and Clubs shall not act in concert with other Clubs.

(2) Upon any finding of a violation of Section E(1) of this Article XX by two or more Clubs, any injured Player (or Players) shall be entitled to recover in monetary damages three (3) times the lost baseball income, he (or they) would have had but for the violation. Such lost baseball income shall be limited to lost salary and other lost contractual terms, including lost additional contract years, lost signing bonuses, lost trade restriction provisions, lost option buyout provisions, and lost incentive bonuses (e.g., performance, awards, attendance and weight bonuses). Damages (and fees and interest) may be recovered only from the Clubs found to have violated Section E(1) of this Article XX.

So but for the violation, what would have Bonds made this past season?  It depends on what an arbitrator would find to be the proper amount.  Bonds made more than $15 million in his final season with the Giants.  Do you use that figure and multiply it by three, or do you use the minimum major league salary that Borris was pushing for ($390,000), which no team would offer to pay?

Yesterday, the situation took a turn when reports noted that Pedro Alvarez and camp Boras agreed to a 4-year, major league contract with a $6.355 million bonus (ESPN prefers to round up to $6.4 million).  Surprised that this bonus is for more than Posey’s?  Does it all boil down to an ego issue?  Maybe, but at least Alvarez and Hosmer may be able to take the field again soon.  A source cited in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette believes that this new deal will put an end to the pending MLBPA grievance against the MLB.

I think John Manuel of BaseballAmerica.com says in the first line of his piece what we are all thinking right now: So the Aug. 15 signing deadline really isn’t a deadline after all.

Collective bargaining agreements are as worthless as the paper they are printed on if they are not adhered to by both negotiating parties. If Pedro Alvarez is given 45 minutes, then next year’s 2nd pick will try to get 90 minutes. Where does it end?

Before I expand on my two-sentences that were featured in Foley’s blog, lets get into some background behind the whole Alvarez situation.  Pedro Alvarez was selected #2 overall by the Pittsburgh Pirates.  A day before the signing deadline, Zak Kurtz, pointed out that Boras was looking for $7 million from the Pirates and that the club would probably not pay that kind of money.  The deadline came, and Pirates fans were surprised that the organization paid big money on some players, including Robbie Grossman in the sixth round ($1 million) and Pedro Alvarez, the #2 overall pick ($6 million).  But $6 million is a whole $1 million short of the $7 million demanded.  Did the deal work itself out legitimately?

Scott Boras says no and he has the MLBPA behind him.  The claim is that Alvarez refused to sign a deal with the Pirates until forty-five minutes after the signing deadline, at which time Alvarez signed for a $6 million bonus.  Additionally, rumor has it that Alvarez signed late because Boras was busy negotiating a deal for another client, Eric Hosmer, right before the deadline.  Alvarez is now on the restricted list.

A few things:

• Is anyone surprised that Scott Boras is involved in a media-hyped baseball controversy?
• Why would Boras and Alvarez sign a deal at all if they were going to be the party to go to the MLBPA to file a grievance against Major League Baseball?
• If Boras knew that the Pirates were violating MLB rules by extending the deadline, was he not an accomplice to the act by being a party of the action?  If he had knowledge of the violation, did he have a duty to say something at the time of the breach?
• If it is true that Boras was so busy negotiating Eric Hosmer’s deal that he could not focus on Pedro Alvarez getting signed on time, will this deter future first-rounders from going with Boras because they believe he already has his hands full with enough clients on his plate?

Now, on to the quote that I offered Foley for his piece.  I truly do believe that if CBAs (Collective Bargaining Agreements) are to be made in any industry, they must be followed by both parties to the agreement.  While I am currently enrolled in Labor Law, and will learn much more about CBAs in a later class session, I understand that they embody formal rules between a union and owners.  If either side breaches the agreement, there must be some sort of penalty.  In this case, I am not sold that the Pirates are entirely at fault.  Scott Boras is an MLBPA licensed agent, therefore, he represents the union in all of his actions.  Again, if he had knowledge at the time that he and the Pirates were negotiating beyond the deadline, then he and the union may be at fault as well.

In the end, I would hope to make this issue a clean wash and have all parties learn some valuable lessons.  It is great when agents/advisors do all that they can for their clients to gain an edge, as long as it is done within the confines of the rules.  This situation is way too shady.  If you intentionally break the deadline and sign a $6 million deal, do not cry foul afterward because you believe your client was undervalued, and then bring up a rules violation to the MLBPA.

Will the Pirates ever draft another Boras client?  While potential Boras clients be turned off by the fact that at least one team probably won’t be looking at acquiring them?

The press sheet got me excited to crack the book open. Oral accounts of eight pivotal developments in the game of baseball told through stars like A-Rod, Jeter, Ichiro, Ripkin, etc. But honestly, it took me a while of reading before I actually started enjoying the book. In fact, there were times in the first third of the book where I almost put it aside and said, the hell with it. In the end, I am glad that I stuck it out, because some of the later chapters have actually made me a bigger fan of baseball than prior to reading Change Up. Without a doubt, I am more knowledgeable about the sport I love.

I think that a major hurdle that I had to get past was the unorthodox style of authors Larry Burke and Peter Thomas Fornatale. Before opening Change Up, I had never read a book that was 95% narrated by other people. The stories do a little jumping all over the place, which originally made it a little difficult for me to follow. Once I got the hang of it, I was conquering the book at a faster pace and enjoying the stories much more.

That being said, I did not get interested in Change Up, until Chapter 4, which was probably my favorite chapter of the book. In fact, if you purchase Change Up and run into the same issues that I initially did, do not allow yourself to give up and put the book aside. Instead, make sure to read Chapter 4, which is titled, The Birth of the Players’ Union. As an agent or future agent, it is important for you to understand how and why the MLBPA was created and who was instrumental in its creation. Even if you have no plans of becoming an MLBPA certified agent, the chapter gives great insight into what it takes for a successful players’ union to survive in any sport or industry.

Maybe you will be more interested in the 1962 Mets (I was not alive at the time) and you quite possibly will find the detailed look into Ball Four enthralling. If so, you should enjoy Change Up from start to finish. If not, I believe that you will enjoy the following chapters on the MLBPA, the DH, Frank Robinson, Cal Ripkin Jr., and finally, Ichiro and his Japanese friends going against all odds and finding success in American baseball.

What gives? Baseball’s historically hard-nosed union has not only resisted arguably invasive drug testing (not that management ever really pushed for it) over the years, but more importantly has also eschewed any mention of a salary cap, meaning theoretically, its players’ revenue sharing potential was infinite. Moreover, how do football players, who can be cut on a whim, whose salaries (aside from some bonuses such as signing bonuses) are not guaranteed, and whose Players Association’s executive director Gene Upshaw is buddy-buddy with League management, make out with the most?

The article notes that Manfred provides two reasons for the players’ percentage plummet. One is the luxury tax and revenue sharing provisions of the 2002 and 2006 CBAs. It’s important to remember, he says, that the players’ share peaked at 63%, just after the League and union agreed on a luxury tax revised CBA. And second, Manfred points out, player compensation has not kept pace with revenue growth, which has increased 65% (3.7 in 2003 to 6.1 billion in 2007).

As to the NFL, the percentage increase can be attributed to the PA’s decision to take 59 percent of all revenue in lieu of 60 percent of designated gross revenue, which didn’t include a lot of team-generated local revenue and in hindsight would have amounted to only 54 percent of total revenue.

So if the percentage of league revenue paid to players is “the best measure of a sports union’s effectiveness,” how should we grade out MLBPA executive director Donald Fehr (pictured)? What can be done, by the union, by arbitrators, and by player representatives, to help bring baseball players back into the competitive fray?