OT: SI article on player agents

[MoLewisrocks]

Dale mentioned this on WEEI a while ago and it's being twittered as a must read. Just underscores what a scummy, cutthroat, unprincipled business it is and nobody that gets ahead in the game got there for all the right reasons... And they all have enough skeletons in the closet to take each other out, from the league to the players to their college coaches to the media to the NFLPA.

Confessions of former NFL agent Josh Luchs - SI.com - Magazine

 

[Bella*chick]

That was an EXCELLENT article. "Show me the money", indeed.

Thanks for posting. I need a shower now.

 

[Goal_Line_Stand]

Wow! Thanks, great read!

 

[Nikolai]

Great article. You don't see that kind of content very much anymore.

 

[ALP]

Yup, incredible read

 

[WhiteWesWelker88]

so I ask you..... are there any Boras like agents in the NFL?


Scott Borassshopefully is one of a kind.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I loved the "responses" at the end of the article, excellent supporting remarks.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Wow. Just wow. I shouldn't be so naieve.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If true, shame on Kiper.

 

[upstater1]

My perspective is a little different. I come at this from two angles. One, I think he's fluffing things up to sell books. Another of his scams. Why do I say this? Because he talks about the pre-Jerry Maguire days as an era of agent/hustlers.

Well, I worked at ProServ back in the 1980s, a huge Washington, DC based sports agency that specialized in tennis, but also had guys like David Falk, Bill Strickland, and even Andy Brandt, who was a young agent at the time. I was in their media department. The clients were incredibly well known--Michael Jordan among them. I worked hard and only left the agency when I decided to take my career another route (and after the agency offered to pay for my law school degree). The point is, even during the 70s you had a bunch of well polished and professional agents. The offices were plush, thoroughly corporate. It wasn't skeezy at all. I'm pointing this out only because there's a right way to do it and remain very successful at the same time.

That being said, I don't doubt that agents and boosters are shoveling cash to players.

As someone employed by universities now, I've come to the conclusion that college sports needs to be ended. We should go to minor leagues. Sports are extracting way too much from schools and have become a monumental headache for universities. I predict it's going to happen for the vast majority of schools regardless, but it would be better if the NBA and NFL just got on with the process and developed their own minor league.

 

[BSR]

I almost forgot what journalism looked like.

 

[upstater1]

I almost forgot what journalism looked like.

That's not journalism.

 

[BSR]

That's not journalism.

It absolutely is. The story is verified and confirmed with actual evidence. It is also objective in its telling and gives everyone in the story the opportunity to comment. Its actually one of the best sports articles I've read in a long while. Some of the sport writers in this town should take notes.

Also, having read your previous posts, I'll also disagree and say that the article does portray the differences between the different type of sports agencies.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

gripping one! Will it cause heads to roll?

 

[Wolfpack]

It absolutely is. The story is verified and confirmed with actual evidence. It is also objective in its telling and gives everyone in the story the opportunity to comment. Its actually one of the best sports articles I've read in a long while. Some of the sport writers in this town should take notes.

Also, having read your previous posts, I'll also disagree and say that the article does portray the differences between the different type of sports agencies.

I will say this about the article: I'm very impressed by the writer's (and magazine's) willingness to name names. So many articles of this sort say "I funneled cash to a well known college QB in 1997" instead of "I funneled cash to Ryan Leaf."

To me that adds a great deal of authenticity.

 

[upstater1]

It absolutely is. The story is verified and confirmed with actual evidence. It is also objective in its telling and gives everyone in the story the opportunity to comment. Its actually one of the best sports articles I've read in a long while. Some of the sport writers in this town should take notes.

Also, having read your previous posts, I'll also disagree and say that the article does portray the differences between the different type of sports agencies.

All I'm saying is that a first person testimonial by a guy I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him is NOT journalism. I should know, as I directed a J. program at an AAU school. I see it for its promotional value. The guy is ostracized from his profession, and he took a lot of people down with him.

That doesn't mean this isn't 99% more informative than the vast majority of so-called journalism today.

About my previous post--I was talking about the agents that predated him. I mentioned they were very professional in many cases. Not the sports agents today. He seemed to believe that today the agents are a lot slicker/more corporate than they used to be. It's not true. IMG has been around for a very long time.

 

[BSR]

I read the article differently. I didn't read it as they were all con men back then and now they are corporate. His reference to Jerry Maguire had do to with the glamor of the profession and not whether or not it was corporate. Here is the quote:

"This was pre-Jerry Maguire, before football agents became as famous as their clients. It was not a glamorous profession and was full of guys who had fallen into it."

Additionally, I think the article comes off very credible considering how many of the ex players verified his story. Of course, there isn't 100% verification but I doubt that would be the case. And the writer even states in the side bar that the guy had all sorts of pictures and receipts to verify his story. Frankly, I am shocked that this hasn't gotten more buzz.

 

[DaBruinz]

First off, I think that the NFLPA (also known as Tom Condon's lap dog) "ostracized him" in a BS manner. Putting a check in to a trust when you don't know what to do with it due to pending litigation is not a breach of fiduciary duty to the person who gave you the check.

I also think that Mel Kiper just lost a TON of credibility with this article. I wouldn't be surprised if he's gently moved out over the next couple of years.

As for Upstarter's comments, sorry, but just because you worked in the media department of an agent's office doesn't mean you have any insight or knowledge of what went on when agents met players outside the office or in closed door meetings. If you honestly believe that no one at the company you worked at violated any NCAA rule on money/benefits, I have some Ocean Front Property in New Mexico to sell you.

As for mentioning Michael Jordan, please don't think that it gives the company any credibility. Remember, Jordan is the one who "retired" (read suspended) from the NBA and went to play Baseball. The NBA didn't want to be perceived like MLB in having one of it's all time greats hit with gambling charges. Instead, it swept the incident under the rug and allowed Jordan to "retire" for a year or whatever it was and then it allowed him back.

Also, there is enough confirmation by the players mentioned to give this story credibility. Especially in light of the recent scandal at UNC (which I don't think is a coincidence) .

The reality is that these schools have made billions of dollars off of their college athletes (particularly football) and the college athletes get a pittance in return, if they get anything at all. Plus there are unrealistic expectations about living expenses that are not addressed by the NCAA. And, on top of it all, the NCAA bullies these kids if there is a hint of anything wrong. I believe that has been shown by recent events involving Dez Bryant and Michael Oher, just to name a few.

 

[patchick]

I will say this about the article: I'm very impressed by the writer's (and magazine's) willingness to name names. So many articles of this sort say "I funneled cash to a well known college QB in 1997" instead of "I funneled cash to Ryan Leaf."

To me that adds a great deal of authenticity.

That's the key to the whole piece. If what he wrote isn't true, it's libel. (Upstater, having experience in a top-tier agency that won recruits by wowing them with their amazing client list in no way contradicts the article. The writer himself makes that clear, that when he moved up from the world of hustling smaller agents to the "name brand" guys he didn't have to pay out anymore.)

So I think the author is credible. I also think he's a self-serving SOB who was motivated by nothing but base revenge. Look at how he talks about the stories he used to spin for himself to justify his dirty dealings...then tries to claim that he's telling all now to set the record straight because this is the honorable view he wants his children to have about him. Right buddy, you're telling about how daddy used to procure women and offer up fake urine samples for players to make your little daughter proud.

He played the game, played it ugly, it screwed him over and now he's extracting his pound of flesh. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[ALP]

note:

mel kiper was on espn 2 (?) this morning, and was defending himself, so this story has obviously gotten some attention

also, nice to see SI step it up a notch