Any Free Market Economist has to love what Scott Boras was able to do in 1996. Typically, amateur baseball players are subject to the rules put in place jointly by the MLB owners and the MLBPA, and are subsequently prevented from getting fair market value compensation for their services. In 1996, however, Scott Boras found a loophole that granted free agency to four players: Travis Lee, Matt White, John Patterson and Bobby Seay. What resulted was a fair bidding for their services.
What happened with Andy Oliver may have far more impactful long term ramifications as the NCAA brought upon itself another opportunity for the legalities of their unfair and anti-competitive rules to be questioned in court.
Sports Agent Blog has an excellent post that describes the background of the Andy Oliver Incident. In the post, they print the following unsourced email that they received:
Andy Oliver’s family had an agent advising them while Andy was in high school leading up to the point he was drafted. His family recently started getting advice from a different agent (Boras) and it ticked the first group off because it became apparent they would not get his signature on a dotted line after his junior year(next year). The first agent firm decided to get even and billed the Oliver’s $90,000 for 300 plus hours of advice. The family told them to shove it because advice is free and that is how all agents get business. In this case the agent firm decided to get real scummy and turned in an allegation to the NCAA in which they alleged Andy accepted small items of value from them.
Surely the NCAA would provide a fair hearing to evaluate the validity of such allegations, right? From the Sandusky Register:
Oliver was ruled ineligible by the NCAA last spring, hours before a tournament game, for violating the NCAA’s rules governing agents and players. His former advisers — Tim and Robert Baratta — told the NCAA that Tim Baratta was present when Oliver negotiated a possible contract with the Minnesota Twins after the team drafted him in the 17th round of the 2006 draft. Oliver turned down a contract offer of $390,000 and decided to go to school. NCAA rules forbid agents from being present when money is discussed between players who still have NCAA eligibility and professional teams.
Is it really a surprise that Oliver decided to fight back, and sued the NCAA to become re-instated. From Sports Business Daily:
The lawsuit alleges breach of contract and tortious interference with Oliver’s contract with OSU by the NCAA. The lawsuit alleges the NCAA never gave Oliver due process before suspending him; failed to take into account Oliver’s defenses to charges never presented to him; failed to complete its investigation before suspending him; and used Oliver’s attorney-client privileged information, that was illegally obtained, against him. “We are not aware of the lawsuit and do not have any comment,” an NCAA spokesman said in an e-mail last night. The lawsuit also alleges breach of contract, constructive fraud, negligence and defamation against Oliver’s former advisors -- Baratta and his partner and brother Tim Baratta -- and their company, Baratta Partners. “It is a wholly frivolous piece of litigation,” said Andrew Entwistle, attorney for the Barattas. “The Baratta brothers and Baratta Partners are directly responsible only for Andy Oliver being able to have the opportunity to play professional ball and realize his full potential as an athlete. He does owe them for the time they put in over the years.”
And that brings us to the present. As summed up, again, in the Sandusky Register:
Erie County Common Pleas Judge Tygh Tone ordered the Vermilion High School graduate be fully reinstated to the Oklahoma State University baseball team and allowed him to compete in the upcoming season, which opens next week. Tone ruled the NCCA bylaw dealing with agents “void,” saying it was “arbitrary and capricious” and limits a player’s ability to effectively negotiate a contract.
You have to wonder how the NCAA continues to act like a disciplinary school teacher, even when dealing with adults who generate huge revenues to their universities / corporations. The Oliver lawsuit, for example, was clearly brought upon by the NCAA - how can they think it is ok to suspend a 20 year old from doing his job because he *may* have violated a rule that is designed to prevent him from effectively earning the living to which he is entitled? There was no due process, no fair hearing, no opportunity for appeal. So the end result, predictably, is the court interfering and declaring the rules themselves - not just the ruling - to be unfair.
I think that this ruling could lead to more lawsuits against the NCAA's practices. The idea that players can have an "advisor" but not an "agent" should be the first to go - but certainly not the last. This was just the first step in the path to get fair market opportunities for amateur players in the future. What Scott Boras was able to do for four players in 1996 was nothing compared to his role in the Oliver case which helped pave the way for free status of amateur players in the future.
Recent Comments