Money Players

Selling hoop dreams to minors

College basketball and the NCAA are talking about stopping the practice of coaches offering scholarships to 8th graders. NCAA prez Myles Brand depicts this practice as "untoward." The problems are many: Most 14-year old boys can't make up their mind which way to part their hair, let alone what college to attend. Like a lot of things in college athletics, the elders have the upper hand. The scholarship offer is contingent on many one-sided factors, including the fulfillment of ridiculously high expectations, the coach still being the coach, qualifying academically and no embarrassing character flaws.

Reggie Minton, National Association of Basketball Coaches associate executive director (and one of the really good guys in all of sports) makes the case to the Lexington Herald-Leader against this practice:

“Do [these 14-year olds] have enough knowledge to make such a decision? Two or three years from now, when it's time to enter (college), are they the same prospect and same person you thought they were four years earlier?"

The next step for the NABC? According to Reggie, “We'll probably ask our coaches to refrain from it. If that doesn't cut the mustard, we'll go to the next step: (NCAA) legislation.” Ordinarily I have a gag reflex at the thought of more NCAA rules so let's hope that coaches can self regulate.

And to the broader topic frequently discussed on the Money Players blog: What's more wrong: a college coach who sells an 8th grade phenom-on-training-wheels a college scholarship or a sports agent who sells a career in the NBA? The simple answer is that both are selling powerful hoop dreams. And in defense of sports agents, it's far easier to predict an NBA career (or not) of an 18, 19- year old than a college career of a 14-year old.

I'll close with a line from the movie Shaft: "We all on the hustle. I sell broads and dope and numbers. You sell crap and blue sky. It's all the same game." And you know these runners, recruiters and agents don't want to get out-hustled.

--Marc Isenberg

More O.J., agents, runners and baseball draft

Jason Whitlock, the love-him-or-hate sportswriter, offers some interesting points about how the media and the public view college basketball and baseball players.and their interactions with agents. Writes Whitlock:

When the NCAA enacted its new, get-tough Academic Progress Report standards, a little-known fact that the media ignored is that college baseball programs traditionally performed far below basketball programs. Let me translate that for you: Baseball players were less likely to graduate from college than basketball players. The APR forced baseball coaches to bring their kids back to campus for summer school rather than allowing them to audition in front of scouts and agents in the Cape Cod League. Yeah, the "cesspool" of street agents, runners, handlers, scouts and agents we love to rail against in basketball co-mingle in baseball at high school All-American games without raising a word of dissent.

Conquest Chronicles, a USC fan blog, weaves some of my earlier comments on agents and the baseball draft to make his case that college athletics could be improved if we "Make it above board!". Writes Conquest Chronicles:

I am not naive enough to think that this sort of thinking work have stopped the alleged benefits that an O.J. Mayo might have received but instead of being a watch dog why not consider some sort of partnership with the pro leagues and agents with stiff penalties for those that break the rules.

The product would be so much better if the "minimum" requirements helped nurture the players into more responsible solid citizens that can also play at that level. I also agree that rookies should play one year in the "D" league before getting to the big dance. Surely some legitimate compromise can be made..

Money Players reader and frequent commenter Garrett Sanders emails some interesting points:

Guillory allegedly was given $250k to recruit OJ by BDA, but "only"30k ended up in his pocket. Clearly, if OJ took money from Guillory, he was wrong for this...but the larger point is that there is economic system that compensates people who have deep relationships with top players. For college coaches, the market determines what college coaches can are paid. For runners, agents can have them on the payroll (even if the practice is generally frowned upon). And then for the players, the ones who create economic value for both sports agents and athletic departments, are conveniently cut out of the deal. I am not sure I want college athletes to be paid, the  schools and the NCAA are the ones who have turned this into a big money game. So if they take the one and done players, they're telling the public it's about the money, not the education. And if they don't pay them, someone else will step in. Everyone can do their typical hand wringing, but should anyone expect a different outcome.

The unintended consequences of trying to protect athletes

Darren Heitner, who is on top of all things agent related, provides an excellent analysis about yet-another- college athlete/agent situation. It is definitely not as high profile as O.J. Mayo, but it does raise some interesting issues. It involves Oklahoma State University sophomore star pitcher Andy Oliver, who was declared ineligible in the middle of the College World Series. Rather than set up the situation, read Darren's story and analysis.

Let the judgment begin...except here
The facts surrounding Andy Oliver's are not clear to take sides, but my views expressed in the O.J. Mayo situation apply here: Don't rush to judgment, wait for the facts to come out and let the appropriate authorities conduct their investigation.

My analysis will focus on amateur baseball players and their involvement with so-called "family advisers" and NCAA rules governing these relationships. For most student-athletes agent prohibitions make sense. However, baseball players drafted by MLB teams are unique from other college athletes because they are automatically entered in MLB's amateur draft (rather than declaring for the draft like basketball and football players). While I am a big fan of MLB's system for drafting players, drafted ballplayers should have the opportunity to receive quality representation in negotiating their first professional contract. Maybe I am alone on this, but I think everyone's interests (players, schools, NCAA, agents) would be well served if the system for "advising" amateur baseball players is brought above board, rather than devising ways around NCAA rules (athletes and agents certainly aren't the only ones figuring out loopholes).

Not all agents wear horns
The intersection of amateur athletes, agents and the NCAA is complex. There are bad agents out there. The overarching question is, How can we come up with ways to improve the system? I would love to think that education is the primary tool to deal with the "agent problem," especially since my book, Money Players, would, of course, be an essential part of the solution. But it will take more than just well-constructed educational programs laced with strong admonitions to refrain from taking money from agents and runners. (No, I am not advocating that athletes be paid.) I'm actually not sure what the solution is for college basketball and football. But I firmly believe the rules governing agents for amateur baseball players need to be restructured.

NCAA rules are supposed to protect student-athletes. And for the most part they do. NCAA rules prohibit an NCAA athlete from having any oral or written agreement for representation by an agent. They also prohibit an athlete from retaining an agent to represent his athletic interests. These rules make sense for amateur football and basketball players. But baseball players drafted by MLB teams are in a completely different situation, yet governed by the same agent prohibitions.

IMO, amateur baseball players absolutely need above-board, expert representation by someone who is not only well versed in the legalese of MLB contracts, but also understands the marketplace. And who possesses these skills? Agents! But student-athletes who wish to retain their amateur status are not allowed to retain agents. A baseball player drafted by a MLB team, even with the help of his family, is unlikely to be capable of effectively negotiating a contract, let alone obtaining full market value. It would be so sensible -- and truly demonstrate that the NCAA is more "kinder, gentler" these days -- if they would allow a small window for agents to negotiate MLB deals on behalf of drafted baseball players.

So-called family advisers
In doing research for my book Money Players, I spoke to a several baseball agents. They all agree that the concept of "family adviser" is a sham. Baseball players selected by major league teams need some form of professional counsel. What they really need is an agent, but NCAA rules prohibit amateur athletes from retaining. So these advisers work behind the scenes, but they do not sit at the negotiating table (probably the most essential agent function). Good, reputable agents won't do anything to jeopardize an athlete's collegiate eligibility. They'll do whatever they possibly can to assist an athlete and their families, but they won't "agent" an amateur athlete. Of course, that's all a fine line and open to wide interpretation. My primary advice to athletes is: Don't break NCAA rules. Secondary: Don't scorn a b-list agent!

Who says it doesn't pay to be an alleged student-athlete?
Interestingly NCAA rules empower individuals from members institutions to negotiate with professional sports teams. There are obvious conflict of interests, although I find most coaches and athletic directors honorable when it comes to advising athletes on the decision to stay or go pro. But baseball is different: For players drafted after their senior year in high school and/or their college junior year, they are in the unique and enviable situation where they can negotiate with a MLB team and use the leverage of another offer (the opportunity to go to college) against the MLB team. And, magic, baseball teams offer more money rather than risk losing the rights to a coveted draft pick.

Fiduciary responsibility of those negotiating professional sports contracts

NCAA bylaws empower athletic departments to act as agents.

12.2.4.3 Negotiations. An individual may request information about professional market value without affecting his or her amateur status. Further, the individual, his or her legal guardians or the institution's professional sports counseling panel may enter into negotiations with a professional sports organization without the loss of the individual's amateur status. An individual who retains an agent shall lose amateur status.

Let's look at the concept of fiduciary. The word comes from the Latin fides, meaning faith. It has been said that fiduciaries must conduct themselves "at a level higher than that trodden by the crowd." A fiduciary is legally required to put their clients' interests above all else, and is certainly not allowed to profit at the expense of his or her clients.

I am not familiar enough with baseball to know if it is commonplace for a representative from a school's professional sports counseling panel to negotiate with MLB teams, but is hard to fathom that a university employee, even with impeccable academic and practical experience, could be a fiduciary for a student-athlete. Knowing the potential liability, would a school's legal counsel even allow? And what about players associations' regulations that stipulate that only "certified" agents negotiate playing contracts?

The early analysis
The only reason the public knows about Andy Oliver's alleged involvement with an agent is because one agent was left at the altar for another agent (the fact that it is Scott Boras certainly gives this story added juice). What about all the other baseball agents who acted as "family advisers"? The only difference is they typically do not send 6-figure invoices. And to compound the issue, it probably was not a good idea to have Boras's deputies intervene on behalf of an amateur ballplayer in the middle of his college baseball season. Scott Boras, George Vujovich and Ryan Lubner are attorneys and, I assume, licensed to provide legal services. Keep in mind this issue is over a legal bill, not whether an agency relationship has or has not be established.

Of course, there's an alternative approach to this problem...

"Agents, please keep away from our student-athletes!"

--Marc Isenberg

Building a better mouse-release

In an article on the "one and done" phenomena in the The Athens Banner-Herald, Tennessee basketball coach Bruce Pearl is quoted:

"It's not working. Both the NBA and the NCAA coaches, we all want a good system that gives the players an opportunity and the colleges some sanity and let the NBA be able to have the best players that can play. We know that what we have now isn't working for us and we don't think it's working for the players."

Amen, my fellow lonsman. The current system that doesn't work. This issue is not that complicated, folks. Players who want to go to college and play basketball should. And players who don't should have viable options. This whole issue has been often framed in absolute terms by the stakeholders: Players believe they should have the right to earn a living whenever the market signals they are ready. The NBA wants mature, pre-marketed players entering the Association. The NCAA wants real student athletes. Boosters just want to win. And athletic departments have to find the proper balance: Keep well-heeled boosters happy without completely abandoning their academic mission.

It's like Baseketball, but better
The amateur baseball draft is the best system. Players are eligible to be drafted after their senior year of high school. They don't declare for the draft. They are simply drafted. Then if a Major League team offers them enough money, they sign. Otherwise, if they are not offered a sufficient contract they can go to an NCAA school...BUT THE PLAYERS MUST AGREE TO A 3-YEAR ENLISTMENT. Perhaps the NBA should consider this approach.

The marketplace decides who's ready. What a concept! And players don't have to rely on an agent or runner promises and hype. Everybody wins. Why not hold a supplemental NBA draft for high school players? NBA teams select players they think are worth signing. Drafted players either sign according to a rookie scale or they go to college. If a player signs, he goes to the NBDL for at least one season. If he opts to go to an NCAA school, he is not eligible for the NBA draft for three years. And to boot we can rid  "declaring for the draft," "testing the waters" and "agent/outside influence" from our sports vernacular.

Feasting on agents and runners
And finally...along with James Tanner, David Thorpe, and Jason Levien, I participated in TrueHoop's "Runners and Recruiting: A Roundtable." There's so much to chew on, it took two sittings. Second helping is expected on Thursday.

--Marc Isenberg

The Agent Riddler strikes again

In the last couple weeks basketball agent David "The Riddler" Falk has floated a couple rumors to demonstrate just how dirty the agent business is. He first told CNBC's Darren Rovell that an unnamed agent paid an unnamed college player $500,000. I questioned the whole point of putting unsubstantiated rumors out there. But wait, there's more: Falk's next riddle, as told to Darren Rovell:

“A guy who has been in the sports business for 40 years, and was basically cryogenically frozen, resurfaced last year,” Falk said. “And we both competed for the same player this year. The player eventually went with me, but three days after this player told this agent he selected me, this agent told him, ‘You’ve made a terrible mistake. David is a really bad person. I’m here for you if you change your mind.’"

"The joke is that this was a person I once worked for and later he worked for me," Falk continued. "Then I find out from this player that this agent told him that he did Michael Jordan’s first Nike deal. That’s ridiculous. That’s like Pluto saying he invented the Polio vaccine that everyone knows was invented by Jonas Salk. So I told this player, ‘All you have to do is call Michael and he’ll tell you David did the deal.'"

Extra demerits for Falk referring to himself in the first person and also suggesting that Pluto, the already-down-on-its-luck planet, is spreading scurrilous rumors about Jonas Salk.

Whom is David Falk referring to? Most assume Falk is talking about his former partner Donald Dell. So I emailed a sports lawyer friend for confirmation. This person, who worked at ProServ, answers Falk's riddle with a riddle:

"I was there, but this is a question of ego and point of view.  Of course, at the time, Donald was trying to promote Falk as the go to guy for [Michael] Jordan and Falk took the reins and ran with them, but Donald handed him the reins. So, who did the deal? You tell me!"

And continued:

"Falk HATES Dell which is most unfortunate. Falk acts as if he is immune from criticism. He is so arrogant it is difficult to believe he can recruit anyone. And his hatred of Donald colors his views and his comments."

Note to David Falk: If you truly want to improve the sports agent industry, donating $5 million to Syracuse University to found the David B. Falk Center for Sport Management is a good start, but I also suggest you stop planting rumors in the media. If you've got the goods on fellow agents, then go to the proper authorities.

--Marc Isenberg

More OJ...responding to a True Hoop comment

TrueHoop's Henry Abbott (my go-to guy for NBA info) thinks in my previous post that I "let BDA more or less entirely off the hook." That was certainly not my intention. In fact, I wrote: "Guillory, Mayo, BDA and USC may be guilty as sin, but they all deserve an opportunity to state their case to the NCAA and whatever other authorities may have an interest in this case." Our judicial process is supposed to provide individuals with the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. No question, Duffy and Andrews have serious allegations before them:

• Was there a real or implied relationship between BDA and Guillory?
• Was there a verbal (of course, this is hard to prove) or actual signed (highly doubtful, but not impossible) agreement between BDA and OJ?
• Are there any California agent laws that may have been broken? (See below for further analysis by agent regulation expert Joshua Golka)

My defense of BDA is based on two factors:

1) I am friends with Duffy and Andrews, something I disclosed the very first time I wrote on this matter.  I am still quite capable of criticizing friends. I believe they are both honorable agents, but of course I don't know with absolute certainty.

2) Since this story first aired on ESPN's Outside the Lines, the rush to judgment has been swift and fierce. ESPN's Kelly Naqi did a good job telling the story through Johnson's eyes. I didn't come away from Naqi's investigative report thinking this would be an open and shut case against BDA.

This whole situation has generated great discussion -- and I anticipate there will ultimately be significant fallout. I also hope this will bring about positive regulatory (doubtful) and structural change (more optimistic, especially if there is compromise between the NCAA and the NBA that would provide certain elite players with viable, constructive options).

Of course, I think the best outcome that could -- and hopefully should -- come from all this is that elite athletes (and their families) become more savvy, sophisticated and skeptical about ALL people involved in their lives and that they demand complete disclosure.

I am in San Fransisco attending the Sports Lawyers Association Conference. Joshua Golka, an expert on state agent regulation, is also here. I asked him to comment on possible legal implications regarding BDA and its principals:

If BDA, its agents or employees are involved: There are certainly possible violations of California's athlete agent act, the Miller-Ayala Athlete Agent Act. When I last checked, Duffy was registered in CA as an agent, but I'm not sure about BDA as an entity or Andrews. Failure to register would be a violation. The major violation would be a violation of the prohibition against the direct or indirect provision of anything of value. There may also be violations of notice requirements. In addition to the potential for criminal (misdemeanor) penalties, a court could suspend or revoke the privilege of someone convicted to conduct the business of an agent. The athlete, school, league, conference, association, etc. may bring a civil suit for damages. There could also be punitive damages, court costs and attorney fees. Finally, if Andrews or Duffy is an attorney licensed in CA, they may also be subject to discipline by the state bar.

Read Golka's "scary" explanation of California's Miller-Ayala Agent Act.

Hold the Mayo judgment

Our sports-obsessed nation is all over the O.J. Mayo story. ESPN got the ball rolling with its explosive investigative report by Kelly Naqi; the LA Times quickly followed with the eerily similar story of Rodney Guillory's relationships with Tito Maddox and Jeff Trapagnier. Even NCAA president Myles Brand can't resist letting us know that the NCAA has "new information."

Many are calling for the firing of USC's coach, athletic director, compliance staff, and school president for lack of institutional control. Most extreme, ESPN's Pat Forde called for USC to get the death penalty.

There's also the cumulative effect the yet-to-be-resolved Reggie Bush case taking place at the same school.

Look, Guillory, Mayo, BDA and USC may be guilty as sin, but they all deserve an opportunity to state their case to the NCAA and whatever other authorities may have an interest in this case.

For anyone who wants a break from the 24/7 cycle of deciding the appropriate penalty, here's a lifeline thrown by Michael Wilbon followed by questions I have about the case and then a link to an interview radio I did on the subject.

Michael Wilbon on meeting O.J. Mayo at the Laker-Jazz playoff game:

"He was the nicest, sweetest kid you could hope to meet. Said hello and then hugged me, even though he'd seen me call him a 'punk' on television. He was polite, engaging, answered every question with 'Yes, sir' or 'No, sir.' He said: 'I would just love for you to spend some time with me, just talking. . . . Could I have your card and just be able to call or talk to you? I've got the pre-draft camp [in Chicago] coming up, a whole new world.' I realized instantly I was wrong for attacking Mayo the way I had. While Mayo isn't an innocent, he's absolutely the product of a subculture in which the ability to play basketball at an elite level is valued more than being a good father, more than formal education, more than almost anything that appears to be within his grasp. Mayo, like so many who've come before him, simply is doing the only thing he knows to negotiate the road before him."

Questions I have before I am ready to decide in my own court of opinion...
1) Why did Johnson go to media? I assume there was some kind of falling out involving Johnson and Guillory. Was there an attempt to reconcile privately? Did Johnson ask for or demand money before unloading on ESPN  (similar to Lloyd Lake in the Reggie Bush case)? I think Louis Johnson's motives are absolutely fair game.
2) Louis Johnson GUESSED that OJ got $30,000 from Guillory. He produced some receipts, but several were expenses related to Johnson and Guillory courting OJ, which is not an NCAA violation.
3) Show me the money trail between BDA and OJ. Remember, it is not remotely illegal for a sports agency to employ a runner. The $250,000 figure Johnson threw out there sounds like a lot of money, but it's really not in the grand scheme of the business of professional basketball. I would have a problem if Guillory did not disclose his relationship with BDA to OJ, but that's a private matter and definitely not an NCAA issue.
4) Regarding the cell phone and other receipts--that might be damaging evidence, but there are several instances where the NCAA has restored eligibility after an athlete serves a suspension and repays the benefit or makes a charitable donation (as OJ was required to do when he received free NBA tickets from Carmelo Anthony).
5) Is it possible that Bill Duffy and Calvin Andrews were duped by Guillory? Duffy is a smart guy. Until I see how this shakes out, I will give the benefit to Bill and Calvin that they would not so blatantly jeopardize their sports empire. It's not like OJ is BDA's breakthrough client. They represent some of the NBA's biggest stars: Yao Ming, Steve Nash, Melo, Greg Oden, etc.

Lastly I was a guest yesterday on the Petros and Money Show discussing the situation.

ESPN investigates OJ Mayo and Rodney Guillory

Last week, I was critical of people who came forward with secondhand, flimsy information alleging agent impropriety. Well, Louis Johnson, a former business associate of Rodney Guillory, blew the whistle on alleged improper relationships involving O.J. Mayo, Rodney Guillory (an LA-based promoter with a questionable past) and Bill Duffy & Associates, a sports agency. Johnson, who does have some character issues, spoke at length with ESPN’s Kelly Naqi.

A disclaimer: I am friends with Bill Duffy and Calvin Andrews. In fact, Bill gave me a nice endorsement quote for my book. I would be disappointed if it is proven that BDA was bankrolling Guillory, particularly without Mayo’s knowledge. I also know the whistleblower, Louis Johnson.

I’ve written a lot about the specter of agents providing direct and indirect benefits to high school and college players. While there are relevant issues related to NCAA rules and amateurism, I doubt I have anything new to add. Definitely read Yahoo!'s Dan Wetzel. And listen to Dan Patrick's interview with Sonny Vaccaro. My focus is on elite athletes negatively impacted by agents and their intermediaries who use money to buy them on the cheap.

I tell athletes, hypothetically, if the NCAA said tomorrow it was no longer a violation to take extra benefits from agents and runners, I would still argue strongly that they absolutely should not accept agents' money. The reasons have been discussed ad nauseam on this blog. Most important, when it comes time to select an agent, I want athletes choosing the best agents based on merit, not illicit relationships and benefits. 

A few interesting exchanges and tidbits from Kelly Naqi's investigation:

Mother's intuition
Kelly Naqi interviewed O.J.'s mother in February 2008
Naqi: Do you trust Rodney?
O.J.'s mother: No.
Naqi: Why?
O.J.'s mother: It's a mama feeling. I don't  know yet. If Rodney's intentions are good, fine. If it ever plays out that it's not, it's going to go be terrible.

Selling O.J. on the cheap
Lous Johnson on how much money BDA provided to Guillory
"I know there were roughly anywhere between $200 and $250,000 in cash and other benefits that came from the relationship with BDA.
On how much went directly to O.J.
"My best estimate would be maybe $30,000 max for him and the people that were associated him. Most of that stuff never really made it to O.J. OJ really saw a lot of the scraps. The fact of the matter is OJ has been pimped by Rodney."

Complicity
On whether O.J. was complicit in his dealings
Johnson: O.J. wasn't as complicit in some of the things that happened. And I think I've proven that because he wasn't the direct beneficiary of a lot of things that was happening.
Naqi: But he got something he wouldn't have access to he wouldn't to otherwise and he got what he wanted.
Johnson: Yeah, but at the same time, how can you, I or anyone else really sit here and blame him when his circumstances?...He played within the rules of the game. And this is the game: runners, agents, shoe companies, other elements. This is the game. He had no choice but to play it considering his circumstance, considering what was going on in his life, considering how he was living.

The most direct, damning evidence
In an ESPN Chat on Monday, Kelly Naqi wrote, "OJ told [ESPN's Andy] Katz last night that he did not 'receive any money from Calvin or Rodney or anything.' However, the cell phone number that Katz used to get that quote from Mayo was the same number that shows up on Mayo's September cell phone bill, which we obtained, which shows that that number was billed to Guillory's non-profit organization in California called the ICR Foundation. We also obtained proof that Guillory made the initial purchase of that particular cell phone of OJ's."

Best warning since, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States"
In an October 2006 article CBSSportsline's Greg Doyel forewarned: "Burned by Bush, Southern California should be of wary Mayo."

The fallout
While Johnson's claim that he is trying to save O.J. is dubious, I think basketball on many levels will benefit from these poorly-kept secrets being exposed. Kelly Nagy said in an ESPN chat earlier today, "The NCAA has already contacted me about my report. Based on that conversation, I suspect they'll be looking into this." Stay tuned.

--Marc Isenberg

Whistleblowing ain't easy

David Falk, famed agent of Michael Jordan and many other NBA stars, accused an unnamed agent of paying a top unnamed college player $500,000. Falk's rumors, which may be absolutely true, led to tremendous speculation about which player and powerbroker he was talking about.

After reading my original post on the subject, a former D1 basketball coach e-mailed what I think is an excellent parallel, "In coaching, assistant coaches often say 'They bought him!' when they lose a recruit to another institution. I always told assistant coaches who said that to me, 'Bring me proof and I will blind copy you with the letter I will send to the NCAA, the Director of Athletics, the Head Coach and the violating Assistant Coach.' I feel the same way about agents making these claims. While the claims may be true, it is simply too easy to drop these bombs and do so without accountability."

Being a whistleblower comes at great risk, so I understand someone's reluctance to come forward in these situations, particularly if they don't have ironclad evidence. And even if true, there's a long history of people who have tried to tell the truth, only to have their reputations and careers destroyed. Hopefully having the subject matter out there will be good for the game. We're all talking and reading about it, right?

True Hoop's Henry Abbott has done a phenomenal job covering this story. He also has written extensively about Worldwide Wes, a fascinating basketball figure. Naturally, many connected the dots, including Falk's close friendship with Wes, and concluded that Wes was basketball's equivalent of "Deep Throat."

In an interview with Abbott, Falk clarified his original comments. Definitely read the entire interview, but a few comments desconstructed below.

Falk: I'm not a guy to comment on the identity of a certain player. It was intended as a state-of-the-union comment about this industry.

Ok, we know most believe the agent business is dirty. How do we fix it? If athletes and agents are cheating, wouldn't the larger interests be well-served by exposing this?

Falk: It's not competition based on merit. It's competition based on improper inducements. I think it's an abomination as it is. There are a number of ways to fix it, if people really wanted to. My days as an activist are probably behind me.

Yes, there are a number of ways to fix it. Start by explaining to athletes and their families why it's in their self-interest not to take money from agents, even if the temptations are high. Falk makes a good case: "If you pay people $500,000 to get to represent them at the draft -- the minute you have to pay them is the minute you can no longer advise them as an impartial agent." That message needs to get out. Next, we need to root out agents who are cheating. Of course, that's not so easy. If one of the most powerful basketball agents of all time won't name names, it's doubtful others will step forward.

--Marc Isenberg
 

Cheating accusations are not cheating...

and why college athlete cheaters won't prosper

Earlier I posted on CNBC's Darren Rovell interview with sports agent David Falk. Falk laments that the "sports agent business has become so corrupt." Falk made a vague accusation that an unnamed agent paid an unspecified player college player $500,000. Now that the rumor is out there it will undoubtedly pick up steam quickly, particularly since there are only a few likely candidates.

Cheating explains a lot, especially when some event doesn't quite make sense. Examples: A 170-pound shortstop hits 30 home runs; ergo he took steroids. A McDonald's All-American signs with Podunk State U; ergo he was paid. It's like the old joke explaining why Sam Bowie stayed at Kentucky five years. Answer: He didn't want to take a pay cut.  It gets a laugh, but was there ever any proof?

Falk's friend says this kid took money from an agent, but why put it out there as rumor rather than produce hard evidence? For sure we know it is an NCAA violation for a college athlete and his family to receive $500,000. There's also a 72% chance that this is a violation of a state's Uniform Athletes Agent Act (UAAA), since it is now against the law in 36 states. The next to last thing I want is for rumors to turn into witchhunts. The last thing I want, however, is for cheating agents to prosper.

I do not agree with every NCAA rule. I have spoken and written extensively about things the NCAA and its members can do to improve college athletics, BUT...I still tell any athlete or parent who listens that it is absolutely foolish to take money from an agent or their representatives.

My reasons:
1) Whatever benefit that is offered is not sufficient compensation to risk their college eligibility. That agent is knowingly exposing an athlete to a minefield of potential hazards (no eligibility = no opportunity to impress pro scouts, lawsuits, etc.)
2) I don't like blanket statements, but here's one: a cheating agent is a bad agent. He can't compete by selling vague concepts such as competency and ethics, so he diverts attention from the real issues and, instead, focuses on cold, hard cash.
3) Payments by agents are not gifts, but loans that must be repaid. $500k might sound like a lot, especially to an unpaid "amateur," but even at a 10% interest rate, this is a $50,000 annual benefit. Chump change to an athlete about to turn pro.
4) Taking money from an agent is a sure-fire way to either sign with a bad agent and/or become a victim of blackmail (see Marcus Camby, Reggie Bush). Cheaters cheat because they believe they won't get caught. However, as the media, rival fans and the Internet become more aggressive, the chances of getting caught, I believe, are increasing. You too can be an NCAA sleuth!!

--Marc Isenberg

UPDATE: David Falk explains his "$500,000 and three years too late" comment to Henry Abbott's True Hoop.