Philly.com-Westbrook and Sheppard fire agents

[Boysboy]

IT'S ALL TO'S FAULT! HE'S A LOCKER ROOM CANCER!

http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/new...eppard__Eagles_Westbrook_hires_new_agent.html

Like Sheppard, Eagles’ Westbrook hires new agent
By Bob Brookover
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

Now Brian Westbrook has a new agent, too.
One day after Eagles cornerback Lito Sheppard fired his agent and hired Drew Rosenhaus, The Inquirer has learned that Westbrook, the team's superstar running back, has fired agent Fletcher Smith, who also represents quarterback Donovan McNabb.

Smith and the Eagles had been in negotiations for the last nine months in an attempt to upgrade the running back's current contract, which has three years remaining. It is believed Westbrook fired Smith Monday, which means he cannot officially hire a new agent until Saturday.

A source close to the situation indicated that Westbrook may end up hiring All Pro Sports & Entertainment Inc., the group that includes agents Peter Schaffer and Lamont Smith. That is the same group that represented Sheppard before he hired Rosenhaus earlier this week. Agent John Rickert is also part of the All Pro group and represents Eagles running back Correll Buckhalter, another former client of Fletcher Smith.

Westbrook, in a recent interview with The Inquirer, made some strong comments about how dissatisfied he was with his current deal.
"When I signed my contract with the Eagles 2½ years ago, they paid me for the level of play I was playing at the time," Westbrook said. "I'm not at that level no more. I'm at a higher level of play. There's no question about that. The numbers don't lie. My numbers have steadily increased from that point until now. Now, I'm at the point where I'm one of the elite backs in the NFL, and I should be compensated that way."

It's difficult to argue that point. In the two full seasons since Westbrook signed his extension, he has compiled 4,020 yards from scrimmage, including a team record 2,104 last season when he led the NFL. Only San Diego's LaDainian Tomlinson has more yards from scrimmage (4,272) in the last two seasons. Westbrook wants to be paid like Tomlinson, who received an eight-year extension worth $60 million, including $21 million guaranteed, before the 2004 season.

A team source said the Eagles agree that Westbrook should be better compensated for his services over the final three years of his current deal and that they initiated the contract talks with the running back late last season.

Fletcher Smith, during an interview yesterday, confirmed that he was in negotiations with the Eagles, but he did not reveal that he had been fired by Westbrook.

"We haven't been able to come to a meeting of the minds," Smith said.
And now, another agent will take a shot at getting something done with the Eagles.

All Pro Sports & Entertainment will be the third agent representing Westbrook during his seven-year career. Anthony Agnone and Eastern Athletic Services of Hunt Valley, Md., negotiated Westbrook's rookie contract but were fired by the running back and replaced by Smith in 2005. Smith negotiated a five-year, $24.9 million contract extension for Westbrook during the 2005 season but only after the running back staged a holdout from training camp.
Asked last week if he would consider holding out from this year's training camp, Westbrook said, "to be honest with you, I don't know. I don't foresee me holding out of this training camp, but . . ."

Fletcher Smith said he didn't think it would be a wise move for Westbrook to hold out of camp, but he, of course, is no longer the running back's agent.
Westbrook and most of the Eagles veterans are scheduled to report to training camp a week from today.

 

[Longboysfan]

These times they are a changin.....:laugh1:

 

[YosemiteSam]

Westbrook, in a recent interview with The Inquirer, made some strong comments about how dissatisfied he was with his current deal.
"When I signed my contract with the Eagles 2½ years ago, they paid me for the level of play I was playing at the time," Westbrook said. "I'm not at that level no more. I'm at a higher level of play. There's no question about that. The numbers don't lie. My numbers have steadily increased from that point until now. Now, I'm at the point where I'm one of the elite backs in the NFL, and I should be compensated that way."

No, no you shouldn't. You made the mistake of signing a long term deal now you can live with it just like the teams live with mistakes they make when signing players to large contract. (Roy Williams)

 

[theebs]

These times they are a changin.....:laugh1:

not really. The eagles are frugal. They dont pay anybody.

Lurie and banner grew up red sox fans in the 60s and watched them sign all the big names and lose. They still cite that as the reason they like no name young players with small contracts and alot to play for.

Play in philly and you wont get paid. Simple as that. Luckily for them they have an outstanding coaching staff and a very good eye for talent. As long as that stays the same the team will continue with its program and bring in young talent and a mid level free agent here and there. Owens, Kearse and samuels are the exceptions. They got burned big time on kearse and owens went nuts after one great year. They must expect samuels to be a different kind of guy or they wouldnt have given them the money.

If i were an eagle I would be looking cross eyed at the front office after the money they gave samuels having let their own home grown players walk in the past.

 

[sago1]

Does anyone notice that Cowboy players don't demand new contracts (like so many other players throughout the NFL seem to do) just because they perceive the contract has outlived the quality of their play? Oh, forgot about Ellis but even he doesn't talk about possibility of holdilng out.

 

[Yeagermeister]

No, no you shouldn't. You made the mistake of signing a long term deal now you can live with it just like the teams live with mistakes they make when signing players to large contract. (Roy Williams)

Then he should sign a one year deal so he can get market value each year. :laugh2:

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

No, no you shouldn't. You made the mistake of signing a long term deal now you can live with it just like the teams live with mistakes they make when signing players to large contract. (Roy Williams)

What are you talking about? The Cowboys will cut Roy Williams at the drop of a hat if he has another piss poor year. That's not exactly "living with the mistake". So basically the team can end the mistake anytime they feel like it but the player can't. Sounds fair eh?

Westbrook is the second best running back in the NFL to me and he deserves to be paid accordingly. Why do people have such a hard time grasping this concept? Meanwhile Donovan continues to ride on Westbrooks coattail all the while getting paid alot more. The Eagles are STUPID if they haven't learned from the TO situation. Other teams pay their star players like Carolina gave Steve Smith his extension after he proved to be a top 2 wide reciever in this league. Thats called good business.

 

[Pick6TerenceNewman]

Another NFC team with distractions! Sweeeeet!

 

[CrazyCowboy]

hold out until next year........that is what I really feel Westbrook should do.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Then he should sign a one year deal so he can get market value each year. :laugh2:

Damn skippy! High risk, high reward!

What are you talking about? The Cowboys will cut Roy Williams at the drop of a hat if he has another piss poor year. That's not exactly "living with the mistake". So basically the team can end the mistake anytime they feel like it but the player can't. Sounds fair eh?

Westbrook is the second best running back in the NFL to me and he deserves to be paid accordingly. Why do people have such a hard time grasping this concept? Meanwhile Donovan continues to ride on Westbrooks coattail all the while getting paid alot more. The Eagles are STUPID if they haven't learned from the TO situation. Other teams pay their star players like Carolina gave Steve Smith his extension after he proved to be a top 2 wide reciever in this league. Thats called good business.

If the Cowboys cut Roy Williams they eat his guaranteed money which in total was $11.1 million bucks. The Cowboys can cut me every freakin day for the rest of my life if they are going to pay me $11.1 million each time they do it. Now here is the part you missed. The Cowboys signed the contract just like Roy did. They too are BINDED by the terms. The terms say, the Cowboys can cut Roy Williams, but they must pay his guaranteed money. The Eagles and Westbrook both signed their contract. They BOTH are supposed to be BINDED by the agreement they signed. If Westbrook wanted more money, he shouldn't have signed the freaking contract.

Westbrook, shutup and play.

 

[kevwun]

This is the side effect of non-guaranteed contracts. The owners like it when they can get out of paying someone their full contract. They can grin and bear it when a player doesn't like his deal and holds out.

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

Damn skippy! High risk, high reward!


If the Cowboys cut Roy Williams they eat his guaranteed money which in total was $11.1 million bucks. The Cowboys can cut me every freakin day for the rest of my life if they are going to pay me $11.1 million each time they do it. Now here is the part you missed. The Cowboys signed the contract just like Roy did. They too are BINDED by the terms. The terms say, the Cowboys can cut Roy Williams, but they must pay his guaranteed money. The Eagles and Westbrook both signed their contract. They BOTH are supposed to be BINDED by the agreement they signed. If Westbrook wanted more money, he shouldn't have signed the freaking contract.

Westbrook, shutup and play.

You are missing the point. 11 million dollars? If thats what Roy Williams total contract is worth you would have a point. But, from what i recall it was worth in total about 30 million plus so regardless of how happy u would be if you would get 11 million that doesn't erase the fact that they signed him for 30 MILLION and are only going to give him 11 of that. You can bring up terms all you want to, I could careless. At some point you have to realize as a business what is right and what is wrong. Jerry Jones knows what is right and what is wrong these days. He paid Mr. Owens unlike the Eagles. You are playing it by the book when the NFL is known for not playing by the book. You sound like the typical company man with no spine. Just my opinion

 

[Boysboy]

You are missing the point. 11 million dollars? If thats what Roy Williams total contract is worth you would have a point. But, from what i recall it was worth in total about 30 million plus so regardless of how happy u would be if you would get 11 million that doesn't erase the fact that they signed him for 30 MILLION and are only going to give him 11 of that. You can bring up terms all you want to, I could careless. At some point you have to realize as a business what is right and what is wrong. Jerry Jones knows what is right and what is wrong these days. He paid Mr. Owens unlike the Eagles. You are playing it by the book when the NFL is known for not playing by the book. You sound like the typical company man with no spine. Just my opinion

Roy isn't even worth 11 DOLLARS.

Again-you missed this poster's point-as overpaid Roy may be, we STILL have a LEGALLY BINDING contract with him. If we cut him, we'll have to take the cap hit. However-we CAN'T FORCE him to take a pay cut in order to cut him.

Same with Westbrook and the Eagles FO. Westbrook happily signed that contract in '05. So fair or unfair as that contract may have been, he nonetheless signed a LEGALLY BINDING agreement to FULFILL that contract.

So if Jerry Jones and the Cowboys' organization has to suck it up with Roy, so does Westbrook.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I guess some people don't understand what signing a contract means. Players and posters.

Like Yeager said, these players should know that the cap and their play can go up in the future. If they're going to cry about it, they should just sign a series of one-year deals.

 

[kevwun]

Why should the owners be able to void contracts when it suits their interests, but not the players? It's a two way street.

 

[YosemiteSam]

You are missing the point.

No, YOU are missing the point. The terms of the contract are stated. The Cowboys CAN cut him because the contract ALLOWS IT!!! If they do, as stated IN THE CONTRACT, they have to pay him the guaranteed portion of the money. Why do you there there is GUARANTEED MONEY in the first place?

Jesus! :bang2:

 

[links18]

Why should the owners be able to void contracts when it suits their interests, but not the players? It's a two way street.

Because the terms of the contract say they can void the contract. A contract is just that, a legally binding agreement. People can't get out of their mortgage contracts just because the value of their house dropped (unless the bank agrees or they file bankruptcy), same thing with these players, just because your production increases doesn't mean you can tear up the contract YOU signed. Of course, you can try to get public opinion on your side and pressure the owner to agree to renegotiate the terms, which is what Westbrook is trying to do.

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

Roy isn't even worth 11 DOLLARS.

Again-you missed this poster's point-as overpaid Roy may be, we STILL have a LEGALLY BINDING contract with him. If we cut him, we'll have to take the cap hit. However-we CAN'T FORCE him to take a pay cut in order to cut him.

Same with Westbrook and the Eagles FO. Westbrook happily signed that contract in '05. So fair or unfair as that contract may have been, he nonetheless signed a LEGALLY BINDING agreement to FULFILL that contract.

So if Jerry Jones and the Cowboys' organization has to suck it up with Roy, so does Westbrook.

I understand exactly what he is saying. He is going by the letter of the law. What I am saying is that resigning Westbrook is in the best interest of their team. If you can't see that than you are just a lost cause.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Why should the owners be able to void contracts when it suits their interests, but not the players? It's a two way street.

They can't unless the contract says they can. When they cut a player, their not voiding the contract per se. They are opting out of portions not guaranteed. They are still binded by the applicable parts of the contract.

In Major League Baseball, they don't have that option because it's ALL guaranteed. If they cut a player, they still owe him every single penny agreed upon in the contract.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Why should the owners be able to void contracts when it suits their interests, but not the players? It's a two way street.

simple, the player has received his signing bonus and the contracts are not guaranteed.

If you get guaranteed contracts, say bye bye to the signing bonus