Well, this could be true of any pick, whether 1st rounder (Seymour) or 4th rounder (Asante Samuel). If a guy becomes a stud, he's going to jack up his price for his second contract. Whether his new asking price is reasonable depends on the player's attitude as much as the agent's attitude. Wilfork's new deal worked out okay. Personally, I wouldn't advocate that we avoid drafting potential studs because the negotiations of their second contracts might not go well.
As to the Condon thing, I'm not completely sold on the common wisdom that the Pats will never work with him again. I know that the Pats haven't acquired a player that he reps since the Watson debacle and I understand that, for a lot of folks, this (and Ian Rapoport's rumor from a "source") constitutes unequivocal proof that we won't ever again. But I have to think there are probably other agents who we've never had problems with but who we've also not dealt with in a long time simply because they weren't repping any players we particularly wanted. The same could apply to Condon and his clients. I haven't found an instance in which the Pats passed on a Condon client in favor of a player of equal or lesser talent who was repped by someone else. And I've researched it as thoroughly as I can.
I also have a difficult time believing that BB and Kraft would skip a high-character (by all accounts) potential stud who may fit our defense perfectly for a "lesser" player without at least attempting to bury the hatchet (if there is one) and work something out. They may not draft Watt after all - they may not want to trade up as high as #8 to get him; they may believe that another player is better - but I doubt that avoiding Condon would be their primary reason for not drafting him. Both BB and Kraft seem too rational and pragmatic to me to take that route.
