Jack’s Blog

Of the 19 games Top 25 teams played (against a non-Top 25 team), 13 were decided by a margin of 25 points or greater.  In each of the other six games, while the margin of victory was under 25, the higher ranked team still managed to prevail.

The only true upset (#21 LSU’s win over #18 UNC doesn’t count since, had the pollsters known the Tarheels would have so many key players suspended, there’s no way they’d have been ranked that high) was delivered by Jacksonville State who beat Ole Miss in double overtime, 49-48.  While no one predicted this game, it’s not that shocking, especially to those who consider team chemistry and distractions as major deterrents to success.

The Jeremiah Masoli soap opera that has been playing out for the past month or so certainly could have had a negative effect on the Rebels.  First, the ultra-talented QB who’d been dismissed by Oregon (following a couple errors in judgment, i.e. character, one for possession of an illegal substance, the other for theft) either 1) realized the error of his ways and found a graduate program he desired that Oregon didn’t offer or 2) discovered (or had help discovering) a loophole in the NCAA rulebook.  The rule states that if a student-athlete has completed degree requirements at the school in which he’s participating and has eligibility remaining, he can transfer to another institution and be immediately eligible - if the second institution offers a course of study his current university doesn’t.

First, Masoli deserves credit for having graduated from Oregon.  With graduation rates falling below desired standards, he must be congratulated for his accomplishment - which made his transfer possible in the first place.  However, the plot thickened when, after going through fall camp in Oxford, he was deemed ineligible.  The initial reported reason for the NCAA’s decision was that he was skirting the rules, i.e. not following the spirit of the law.  In this country, a person has the right to appeal and that’s exactly what Masoli, or his advisor(s) did.  In a shocking turn of events, the governing body of intercollegiate athletics, not known for doing so, reversed its decision, allowing him to be immediately eligible.

While the about face seemed to be a boost for Ole Miss, the timing of it had to affect the psyche of the squad - especially after coach Houston Nutt went public to say how ecstatic Jeremiah was, all the while coming across as just as excited himself.  Possibly in an effort to show compassion to Nathan Stanley, the quarterback who’d expected to lead the team, Nutt did start the young man.  Since quarterback is such a position of leadership, Stanley most certainly had his share of followers.  The sophomore played well - by many accounts better than Masoli did, yet the transfer was the one Coach Nutt decided to go with at game’s end.

The loss can’t be completely laid at the feet of Masoli who led the Rebels to two consecutive TD’s in the OT periods.  Neither Masoli nor Stanley can be blamed for giving up 49 points to the Gamecocks.  Yet, there will always be some - it’s the nature of the fan - who will claim that had Masoli never shown up on the Ole Miss campus, they would have been celebrating a victory in Oxford last night.

In many ways, this controversy is a good thing because without it, I’m not sure what anyone would have had to talk about after such a predictable Week One.  As far as Nutt’s decision, he violated coaching adage #1:

“A good coaching decision is one that works.”

It wasn’t so long ago that it seemed like the only schools that were investigated and punished by the NCAA were the little guys.  Cleveland State, Western Carolina and Centenary are three that come to mind.  Remember the line that began the war between Jerry Tarkanian and the NCAA?

Tark was approached by the Long Beach Press-Telegram to write a guest article.  He’s now admitted that he probably went too far in his criticism of college’s governing body and the hypocrisy that was going on, but many coaches told him then (and even now) that what he said was what everybody knew was going on but wouldn’t say in public.  That line was, “The NCAA is so mad (at the rules violations) at Kentucky, they decided to put Centenary on probation for another two years.”  While that might not be verbatim, it’s close enough.  Naturally, the NCAA wasn’t too fond of Tark for mocking their enforcement efforts.

Fast forward to today in college athletics and it’s the big boys who are the ones getting slapped and, in some cases, slapped hard.  “Back in the day” the smaller schools got nailed mainly because they weren’t as savvy at “working the system” or knowing the loopholes  that their bigger brethren did.  In addition, the “old” NCAA, as an enforcement agency - led by its “czar” Walter Byers - was much more corrupt, and lacked the integrity the new, kinder, gentler NCAA of today has.

North Carolina’s football team is headed into a game against LSU, a game in the past they’d have zero chance of winning.  But this season, the Tarheel program was thought to be on the rise, while there’s unrest in Bengal Tiger country, so the UNC faithful were hoping for a program-making W.  Then, adversity hit, partially from within, but also due to a party that some college football players, with eligibility remaining, attended.  Parties aren’t generally off-limits, but this particular gathering was hosted by an agent (or a runner for an agent), making it a major violation.

One area of violations that is classified as major comes under the heading of “extra benefits.”  This one’s a killer because many Division I athletes, after going through the recruiting process, which is more or less a glorified love fest - with the prospect being wooed by several suitors - develop a sense of entitlement early on and it can carry on throughout their careers.  There’s no shortage of people filling an 18-22 year old’s head with “facts” of how he’s being taken advantage of, used and mistreated.  Not surprisingly, nearly all of them are looking for something in return.

I’m on record as saying that college athletes should not be paid.  My reasons are numerous: getting a free ride is paramount to getting paid.  Ask any college student who’s working his or her way through college.  Also, there are avenues in which students can get additional money, e.g. Pell Grant (which nearly every non-foreign student-athlete qualifies for, the NCAA’s needy student-athlete fund - which every scholarship athlete is entitled to and other legal ways of earning additional income).  Add to all that the fact that, especially in the high-profile sports of football and basketball, players get to meet influential boosters - in an up close and personal manner, and every time they do, it serves as an impromptu “interview” for potential future employment opportunities.  And how about all the media requests in which an athlete has an opportunity to present him or herself in a positive light?

From a legal perspective, until it is challenged and overturned in the courts, if male athletes were paid, female athletes would have to be equally compensated, in essence, doubling the costs.  That sound you just heard is every director of athletics in the nation gasping.

Besides, if a rule passed where athletes would get paid, is anybody naive enough to think that extra benefits would cease?  Does anybody really believe that the reason for what went on that’s affecting the teams from UNC, Alabama, South Carolina, Florida and others undoubtedly “to be named later,” wouldn’t have occurred if players were given stipends?

In the case of the “party” that’s crippling the Tarheels, the unscrupulous agents are the ones who have avoided any sort of punishment.  Possibly because the NCAA has no control over agents, possibly because neither the NFL nor the NBA has joined with the NCAA to “send a strong message” to agents and their runners, possibly because the NCAA has no supoena power, or possibly because of some other reason, the NCAA has yet to get at the root of the problem.  Henry David Thoreau once said:

“For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, there’s one striking at the root.”

Many people in this country have made it their cause (hobby?) to take literal translations of the law and/or Constitution and see how far they can push them.  For seven years, I was employed at a workplace that was as petty, dysfunctional and contained more antagonists on “both sides of the aisle” than any other in the nation - the athletics department at Fresno State.

You may know FSU as the school that’s lost more cases (or at least, money) regarding lack of compliance for Title IX than any other school.  I was on the “executive council” of the athletics director.  At one meeting, we were told by the AD he arranged to bring in the foremost authority on Title IX in the country, a gentleman named Lamar Wright. 

The atmosphere in and around the office was electric as the day of his arrival approached.  Finally, the big day arrived and Lamar visited the campus.  For two days, he perused “the books” and on the third day, he addressed our group.  He pointed out a couple of, as he referred to them, minor items where the university could have done a better job. 

Then, he paused and said (I’m not sure this is verbatim - so please don’t sue me - but the gist of the quote is dead on with his analysis), “I’ve been all over the country doing studies such as these and I’ve never seen anything quite like what goes on here.  You people count beans!“  In all, Fresno State didn’t lose as much as it got out-lawyered (of course, isn’t that how most cases are won and lost - especially, it seems, in California)? 

What’s going on with the planned building of the mosque at the site of Ground Zero brings back all too familiar memories.  Is it really about the right to worship?  Or is there another agenda - in this country which has now embraced as its goal the exact opposite of that of any successful organization, group, team - or country: “What’s right is more important than who’s right?”

There’s no denying the people who are insistent the mosque be built are playing the “It’s our right” card.  When asked if the place of worship has to be built right there - on a parcel of land that offends so many people, people who lost loved ones in the 9/11 attack - the supporters deflect the criticism of the location.  “It’s not about where it’s built but that, if denied here, then who’s to say mosques elsewhere will face opposition?”  Oh please!  It’s all about winning and showing superiority - just like what transpired at Fresno State.  Only on a topic that’s of infinitely greater importance and meaning to everyone.

My first year of teaching in the Clovis Unified School District, the administration brought in a terrific speaker, Dr. Bertice Berry, for the General Session to kick off the school year. Dr. Berry made several statements and observations that day.  The one that had the greatest impact on me was:

“There’s a big difference between what you HAVE a right to do and what IS right to do.”

The first day of school for our district was today.  In past years, schools that capped freshmen English and math classes at 20 would receive reimbursement from the state.  If you’re up-to-date on what’s going on in California, you probably know money is a scarce commodity right about now.

This morning I was greeted by 38 bright, cheery faces in my first freshmen algebra class and 39 in the last one.  Many words come to mind with “exhausted” being near the top of the list.  Therefore, in order to give my mind sufficient recovery to face tomorrow, please enjoy an archived post from the first day of the 2008 school year (8/26/08).

As I’ve mentioned, I’m an avid reader.  One of the authors I truly admire is Stephen Covey.  I’ve also alluded to the fact I am a past member of the National Speakers Association.  While I think the content of Covey’s books are “pure gold,” I’m not as keen on him as a speaker.

As many books of his as I’ve read, I have nearly as many of the audio variety (mostly recordings of speeches he’s given).  His humor is evident (although he uses it sparingly) but I find his voice to be somewhat of a monotone.

However, this criticism is akin to finding fault with a light because it shines too brightly, especially when you take into account the content of his books and speeches.  I believe I saw where his book, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People set some kind of record for number of weeks at number one on the New York Times best seller list or number of weeks on the list or both.  I do know it’s one of the top three books I’ve ever read in terms of having a lasting impact in my life.  (Note: Increase that number to four, adding The Oz Principle, a book on accountability, which I finished this past summer).

It’s impossible, not mention foolish, to quarrel with any one of his Seven Habits.  In particular, two of them that have affected my life in an extremely powerful manner - numbers four (Think Win-Win) and five (Seek First to Understand, Then to Be Understood).  Living by these two alone has made life so much easier, more rewarding and alleviates even the most unsettling disagreements.

The conflict the first of these two habits presents is the fact that in America we are brought up in a win-lose culture.  Nowhere is this more evident than in athletics - especially team sports, where it’s mandatory there must be a winner and a loser.  I’m old enough to remember “ties.”  I’m also old enough to remember the saying, “A tie is like kissing your sister,” probably the reason there are no more ties.  Yet, if in one-on-one encounters with other people, you keep in mind they want to “win” as much as you do (if not more), approaching the problem from that vantage point gives you an ability to understand their next point well before they make it, thus allowing you time to defuse it.  In addition, it shows you have concern for their point of view and you’re not simply looking to “put one over” on them - which, even if you do, chances are you’ve shut the door on ever doing business with them again - and more importantly, you’ve lost the trust of a potential client, customer, or worse, a friend.

This works hand-in-hand with Habit #5.  If people would follow Covey’s suggestion that, prior to responding to someone, they need to repeat what that person just said, to their satisfaction, countless hours of misunderstandings would be avoided, thus cementing relationships as opposed to destroying them.  Having a conversation with some people is like playing double-dutch, where the person entering the game is swaying back and forth with the jump ropes, just waiting to jump in.  As you’re making your statement, you can visualize the person rocking as you speak, just waiting until the time you allow them (maybe as you take a breath), to jump in and pounce on whatever it you is said (or what their version is of what you said, often, not one in the same).

I do not know who Mary Field Belenky is, but her quote sums up this blog perfectly:

“Really listening and suspending one’s own judgment is necessary in order to understand other people on their own terms … this is a process that requires trust and builds trust.”

It doesn’t seem that long ago that I would hear my father, my coaches and others from their generation moan about where the players from “the good old days” had gone.  No one compared to DiMaggio, Red Grange or George Mikan.  Now, I (and the guys from my time) are the ones who complain about the new, hip-hop breed.  You know, the guys with the posses, mega-contracts and tattoos, who act like they care more about street cred, money and endorsements than winning.

If there’s anyone who can bridge the gap between this generation and those of the past, it’s Kevin Durant.  No one dislikes this guy.  In the era of “I want mine,” he’s on record as requesting a contract extension with the Oklahoma City Thunder, a team playing about as far from a major media market as there is in pro sports.  While he’s certainly not underpaid (and lockout or not), he could play out his contract and head into free agency where, if he decided to opt out, might sign a deal to dwarf all others.

Everything about Durant reeks of class.  While he’s not as comfortable speaking in front of a large group (as say, MJ or Shaq, are), he’ll find a way to connect with the crowd, whether it means staying for as long as necessary to sign every autograph request or, in the case of his Nike camp, throw himself into the drills with the campers.

On the floor, while many might argue with the statement he has no equal, there’s no way he takes a backseat to anyone either.  Listen to him with the current USA team - which he chose to play for rather than resting during his down time - and he not only says all the right things, but is so sincere saying them.

His work on the floor isn’t bad either, as he displayed by not only scoring, but coming up with two game-saving blocks to beat Spain yesterday.

Norman Vincent Peale once said - and feel free to add Kevin Durant to the list:

“Never talk defeat.  Use words like hope, belief, faith, victory.” 

With the college athletics landscape in its ever-changing state, who’d have thought that two non-BCS leagues would generate as much controversy as the recent defection of Fresno State and Nevada from the WAC to the MWC?  Allegedly, four days after agreeing to (and, as has been reported, signing in the case of FSU) a new solidarity agreement among WAC members, the Bulldogs and Wolfpack bolted for the greener (but not by much) pastures of the conference which used to be part of it (in fact, most of the Mountain West schools were the original WAC).  It’s been reported that Utah State was offered a spot as well but declined due to - the solidarity agreement.  Confused?

Oh, it gets murkier.  Apparently, WAC commissioner Karl Benson, who presided over the WAC when it was the first mega-conference (16 teams covering four time zones used to be its signature line), was planning a coup.  Benson was left out of the meeting and subsequent secession pulled by eight of the WAC schools (Air Force, BYU, Colorado State, New Mexico, San Diego State, Utah, UNLV and Wyoming) when they decided bigger wasn’t better and formed the nation’s youngest conference affiliated with the NCAA’s Division I FBS.  For those readers who are unaware of why there has been a “play-in” game, i.e. 65 teams in the NCAA D-I basketball tourney, that secret meeting and the conference that was born from it is the reason.

Naturally, there’s been bad blood between the two conferences ever since.  Comparisons over which is the better football or basketball league has been bantered since the break-up, but during the past few years, it’s been evident the MWC has displayed superiority over its former allies.

What’s most difficult for each conference is trying to be a “player” (when it comes to football) when they’re simply not.  For the WAC, Boise State has a been magnificent representative and Fresno State has won a great many games against the “majors” (most of them on the road, making those accomplishments ever more impressive) but each school has been trumped by the Mountain West, which boasts BYU, Utah and TCU - an added member who came to the MWC from Conference USA,  after having been in the WAC (I added that to further cloud this mess).  All three of those have been to a BCS bowl game (Utah & BYU twice each) while the WAC’s only participant in the BCS bowl picture is/was Boise State - who, earlier this year joined the trend of conference-jumping, from the WAC to the MWC.

Benson knew he had to do something - and that’s where the solidarity pact entered into the fray.  Supposedly, someone (Benson?) had convinced BYU it would be in their best interest to go independent in football, a move that wouldn’t exactly sit well with the conference office.  No problem.  Join the WAC - in all your other sports.  A major pick-up for the WAC, especially in men’s basketball because BYU has become somewhat of a powerhouse hoops club.  Since Utah had recently defected to the Pac-8, 10, 12, the addition of Boise helped but doesn’t mean nearly as much had the Utes remained.  Some speculation had UNLV and San Diego State moving back to the WAC - but only if they were solid as a group of schools.

Then, Fresno and Nevada turned the WAC’s plans upside down in a move called selfish by their current (soon-to-be former) commissioner - who apparently isn’t aware of the “pot calling the kettle black” philosophy.  Nothing about this blog has been particularly clear so why change now?

There is a $5 million buyout clause attached to that solidarity pact (talk about getting whacked), plus a $1 million fee in order to become a new member of the MWC.  Six million bucks to join a league that’s not even one of the BCS conferences!  Fresno State might have to drop wrestling and soccer - oh, forget that.  And consider these possibilities - 1) TCU (in the heart of football-crazed Texas) gets gobbled up by the Nebraska/Colorado-less Big 12 (in the future, it might be a good idea to forgo numbers when naming conferences), 2) UNLV and San Diego State get tired of all this tomfoolery - or decide to to increase it, and go back to the WAC after all (with the shape it’s in, there’s probably buy-in money), 3) one of the six remaining WAC schools left, Hawaii, who’s been threatening to go independent in football for years, actually does so (joining Notre Dame and BYU - hey, maybe they’ll find five more schools and form their own independent league - the GDI’s - one of the most popular fraternities on college campuses).

This would leave the Mountain West with seven schools.  Because of the defection of FSU and Nevada, the $5 mil buy-out clause is no longer in effect, so maybe Utah State would consider . . .  Or as Robert McCloskey so aptly put it:

“I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure that you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”

In case you haven’t heard, the latest out of Vikings’ training camp (as if Percy Harvin collapsing after suffering a migraine headache isn’t enough significant news) is “an unnamed” Minnesota player told Yahoo Sports that Brett Favre thinks head coach Brad Childress doesn’t have a clue about the offense, that the QB doesn’t trust the head man and that was the reason why Brett hesitated to come back.

First of all, did someone really say all that?  Yeah, I’d say so, because there’s so much out of their camp to report on, there’s no need to make stuff like that up.  However, with the zoo that is the Vikes’ training site, somebody could make it up and get away with it because the fans are at the point where nothing that is said about Favre won’t be taken seriously.  More likely, the squealer would be a friend of Yahoo Sports.  Having spent 30 years in intercollegiate athletics, I’ve known several reporters who had their “high ranking sources” within the athletics department or the team itself who’d gladly exchange inside information for a quid pro quo somewhere down the road.  Whatever the case, this “story” is one that, true or false, shouldn’t be given any space.  And yet, here I am doing just that.

Could the unnamed player be one of the “shunned” quarterbacks?  Who would feel more frustrated?  Nah, they’re too easy to point a finger at, and anybody who expects to lead a team would (probably) be smart enough not to do something that would derail a career before it started.

How about a friend of the jilted QB’s?  If so, the player would undoubtedly be someone waaaaaaay down on the depth chart.  A contributor would know they would be foolish, if not treasonous comments, should their author be exposed.

Certainly, whoever did pop off is someone who has an ax to grind with either Favre or Childress or both.  Such untimely and damaging remarks come from someone who doesn’t understand the meaning of the word “team.”  Absolutely nothing good can come of these remarks and the culprit is exactly the type of teammate the late Al McGuire was talking to when he said:

“There is an enemy - but it’s not in this locker room.”

Mets’ closer, Francisco Rodriguez, is done for the rest of this season and possibly beyond.  It seems something his girlfriend’s father said or did upset him so much, he hauled off and nailed the guy - after a game - at the stadium.  That totally undisciplined move cost the Mets’ fireballer a two-game suspension.

Turns out that was the least of his worries.  After having team physicians check out the hand that dealt what K-Rod surely thought at the time was “justice,” it was learned he’d injured it so badly that he’ll be shelved for the rest of this year’s campaign.

As all good professional athletes are taught, he showed contrition, apologizing to his team, the fans, the ownership and whomever else he was told - by his agent, advisers, etc.  Sorry if I’m cynical regarding these athletes’ “heartfelt” apologies, but if they truly felt that way, they wouldn’t have done something so stupid in the first place.  Didn’t it cross his mind prior to unloading on this guy, that getting into a fight at his place of employment would shed a negative light on those he subsequently apologized so profusely to?

It seems that the Mets are seriously looking into voiding the remainder of his contract - which happens to have the club on the hook for $11.5 million next year and $17.5 the following season.  Naturally, the Players’ Association will file a grievance.  On what grounds?  That players are volatile people following games, especially losses, and shouldn’t be held accountable for their actions if provoked?

The MLBPA won’t be K-Rod’s only ally.  Since his agent is due a small percentage of those large numbers above, he will do everything in his power to place some kind of non-negative spin to the public, while blackmailing the team (he undoubtedly represents others playing for the Mets or players elsewhere whom the team would like to obtain).

Really, it’s hard to blame him.  If he were to hold his player accountable, he’d be throwing away his own money and, probably of greater importance to him, would get fired by his client - who would then badmouth him to other potential (highly-paid) individuals.

It’s tough to make a living off of people who act how some pros do - and still maintain a value system.  I wonder what Rodriguez’s agent, as well as the head of the Players’ Association, tell their kids when they ask them why it seems the people they represent are held to less of a standard than the ones they fathered?

Ronald Reagan once said:

“We must reject the idea that every time a law is broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker.  It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”

File this blog under the category, “local boy makes good.”  After the third round of the U.S. Open at Whistling Straits (WI), former Fresno State golfer, Nick Watney, has a three-stroke lead.  Should he claim his first major, the San Joaquin Valley will receive publicity for something other than being the nation’s number one agricultural region.

Nick is more than just a Bulldog alum; he is, and always has been, a true role model for everyone who’s met, seen or followed him.  Soft-spoken, incredibly talented and a young man whose humility is in inverse proportion to his skill, he has made everyone in the Sacramento area, where he grew up, and the Valley, where he starred, quite proud.  Not only has he grown as a professional, he’s remained grounded - due mainly to his family.  I’ve never had the pleasure of meeting either of his parents, but I am lucky to have been a colleague of his uncle - Fresno State golf coach, Mike Watney.  Even though I’m no longer employed by the university, he and I regularly correspond - although I’m ashamed to admit that as much as I abhor communication through modern technology, it’s more of the email and text variety.

Mike was (and is, as far as I’m concerned) an accomplished golfer in his own right and a sensational coach (in 2007 he was inducted into the Golf Coaches Association of America Hall-of-Fame).  Besides having the Bulldogs in contention for a conference championship on an annual basis (he’s coached at FSU for 30 years), he, in one lesson (which I won in a Xmas staff luncheon and he insisted I take advantage of), watched me take two swings and rid me of my 20-year slice with a simple correction to my grip.  Unfortunately, I never won another lesson.  On that, I kid.  Mike offered additional lessons (at no charge), but my game was a lost cause - unlike those he tutors on the golf team.

Mike not only taught his nephew the finer points of the game, as he does the other golfers he’s mentored (several others of whom are on the Tour), but he is as fine a person as there is in college coaching today - regardless of gender or sport.  This message was conveyed loud and clear to Nick, who had the benefit of Mike’s impeccable character and guidance at family functions as well as Bulldog practice sessions.

Superlatives are overused, but I’ll go out on a limb and make the statement that there never will be any negative publicity concerning Nick Watney.  To date, there’s never been a hint of scandal in his career - which happens to be taking place during the Age of the Internet. Save your money if you’re planning on betting against my prediction.

If you believe that good things ought to happen to good people, join me in pulling for Nick Watney to win his first, but not his last, major.  As for what he ought to do to accomplish that, Abraham Lincoln summed it up best:

“I never had a policy; I have just tried to do my very best each and every day.”

Nearly every time a professional athlete is interviewed, he says how blessed (the new magic word for players) he is to be able to play a game for a living.  Yet, each year, several of these blessed individuals don’t show up to work on time.  Why would that be?

If I were given three guesses, all three of them would be . . . agents.  I’m not demeaning that profession - it does enough of that to itself.  In fact, I happen to know a few sports agents (each of whom is described as belonging in the legitimate category) and understand how difficult a business it is.  For the purposes of this blog, let’s limit our discussion of agents to only those who are legit.  The underhanded ones don’t deserve the space - and are such easy targets for criticism, this post would be reduced to an uninspiring “preaching to the choir” entry.

The day Mark McCormack (the “inventor” of the sports agent) broached the subject of representing his good friend, Arnold Palmer, is one that changed the entire landscape of professional athletics.  The idea of a sports agent makes so much sense, it’s a wonder someone hadn’t thought of it even earlier.  The concept of it is quite sound: 1) allow the athlete to give his (and now, her) total focus to his (her) trade and not to worry about distractions such as contract negotiations, 2) remove the athlete from having to deal with owners, who are multi-millionaires (except for the ones whose description exchanges the “m” with a “b”) and who made most, if not all of their money using the “buy low, sell high” philosophy, 3) create additional revenue streams through endorsements and, in the case of good agents 4) form a team of advisers, financial people, accountants, realtors, etc. to mentor the athletes and make certain their “lives after sport” will be provided for - since the window of earning power, while almost infinitely greater than the average Joe, is so much shorter. 

The major flaw in all of this is the agent’s livelihood is completely dependent on the client, i.e. the agent’s sole means of support is a small percentage (usually no more than 4% of the contract and 10% of the endorsement deals) of what the client makes.  Also, the agent is forced to become a master spin doctor (if not an out-and-out. blatant liar).  It’s hard for me to recall an agent representing a client who screwed up, whether a minor infraction or a blatant violation of the law, holding that client accountable for any misdeed.  After all, that’s their meal ticket!

As far as players not attending team practices goes, it would be comical, if it wasn’t so insulting, listening to the agents explain why holding out is the right thing to do - especially for a rookie.  Try as I might, I can’t imagine a player, if asked prior to his final year on the “amateur” circuit if he’d play for, say, a guaranteed $15 million, not responding with, “ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?”

Because it happens every year, it seems like agents have the knack of getting their client(s) to drink the Kool-Aid.  I simply can’t believe that, once again let’s talk about rookies, an untested player, regardless of stats, skill level or hype, doesn’t realize how holding out retards his development and is detrimental to the team (especially in terms of timing), not to mention what it does to team chemistry (especially if he’s making more than the veterans).

Like it or not, agents are here to stay.  There’s a great deal of money to be made (4% of a lot of money is more than enough to live on - quite comfortably), representing marquis clients usually means fame for agents as well and agents will be thought of as a major players, even if they’ve never suited up.  In the words of one of the best agents, Leigh Steinberg:

“Very narrow areas of expertise can be very productive.  Develop your own profile.  Develop your own niche.”