What happened to Todd France being fired?

[ABQCOWBOY]

Your shot at Prescott's character didn't go overlooked.

Rich people problems.......

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Actually, they do if they brought them into the firm. Ad agencies and law firms operate the same way when someone splits. It is not unusual because of the relationship with the client is usually the person leaving.

It's not as much about the employee as it is the client. They're not going to do well keeping a client that wants to go with the employee/partner.

I can't speak for Lawyers or Agents but in business, this is not typical. The way it works is that the clients belong to the Business and not the Agent or Sales Person. It actually creates a great deal of liability because there are certain types of business that require very specific licenses and or certifications. What this type of policy allows for is a business entity to come in and hire away a successful agent or sales person for a great deal of money, in exchange for the rights to business but, a given startup may not be qualified to actually do the business. That lends itself to very dangerous alliances, especially if you are teaming with other business entities. You open yourself up to litigation and that's unwise. This is why you don't often see this practice exercised.

But, I'm not an agent or a Lawyer so I can't speak for how they actually do business. But even still, I'd be very surprised if this practice was adopted widely, especially in any agency. Law Firms are protected by things like the Standardized Bar Exam. This insulates them and there is also the fact that you don't have to be a part of a Law Firm in order to practice Law so I can see how that could apply. Perhaps it's the same for an agent, IDK. I don't know that they have a standardized test like the Bar, perhaps they do but I've never heard of it. Seems as if this idea that agents keep clients they bring into a firm is stupid. I can see them keeping clients that they bring into a deal but not Clients they acquire while they are employed by a firm. That would seem, to me, to be a bad practice in general.

Now, if a customer expressed a desire to stay with a given agent, that's different. The customer is always right and it never pays to ignore that. But to say agents keep clients no matter what, that's dumb IMO.

But there again, thats just my opinion.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

His job is to maximize his clients money and he's good at it

Actually, I kinda think the job of an agent is to look after the best interests of the Client. It's interesting to go back and review comments after the injury. Specifically, comments like Jason Hatcher's, who said that Dak should Fire his agent immediately, along with their team, for allowing him to be unprotected without a long term deal when he got injured. I thought that was very interesting.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Your are right its says football is a business owned by Billionaires negotiating the services of Millionaires.

So you better get someone that can negotiate with a Billionaire. Todd France has negotiated +1.5 Billion in contracts. So Billionaire negotiator knows Billionaires.

He also allowed one of his biggest clients to ride a one year deal and play on the tag and suffer a major injury without protection. So while I understand the idea of having capable people to represent you, this idea that Todd France is right on this thing, is full of holes IMO. Understand that both Jimmy Sexton and Tom Condon, also super agents who are on par with France in so far as status, thought France screwed the pooch on this deal and a few others. France deals fast and loose with his clients contract situations and exposes them to situations just like Prescott's, all too often. It's a very dangerous way to do business and could cost an agency their entire client base if one disastrous incident should occur. It only takes one high profile player to have a career ending injury to kill an agency. This is what France exposed CAA to and that's a real problem. So now France is on his own again but lets see how fast and loose he plays it when the risk is on his own ticket and not CAAs. Will be interesting to see if he changes how he conducts his business, going forward.

 

[CouchCoach]

Actually, I kinda think the job of an agent is to look after the best interests of the Client. It's interesting to go back and review comments after the injury. Specifically, comments like Jason Hatcher's, who said that Dak should Fire his agent immediately, along with their team, for allowing him to be unprotected without a long term deal when he got injured. I thought that was very interesting.

Players go into tags knowing exactly what's at stake, they can't blame an agent.

Prescott didn't have a long term deal because he didn't want the one the Cowboys were offering. France can offer his advice and counsel but he doesn't control Prescott. These are adults and responsible for themselves.

My question to Hatcher would be why does he think Prescott picked this particular agent? Prescott had the option of taking the long term deal which in part protects against financial loss from an injury and he chose to go on the tag. He took the risk.

 

[Rayman70]

 

[CouchCoach]

He also allowed one of his biggest clients to ride a one year deal and play on the tag and suffer a major injury without protection. So while I understand the idea of having capable people to represent you, this idea that Todd France is right on this thing, is full of holes IMO. Understand that both Jimmy Sexton and Tom Condon, also super agents who are on par with France in so far as status, thought France screwed the pooch on this deal and a few others. France deals fast and loose with his clients contract situations and exposes them to situations just like Prescott's, all too often. It's a very dangerous way to do business and could cost an agency their entire client base if one disastrous incident should occur. It only takes one high profile player to have a career ending injury to kill an agency. This is what France exposed CAA to and that's a real problem. So now France is on his own again but lets see how fast and loose he plays it when the risk is on his own ticket and not CAAs. Will be interesting to see if he changes how he conducts his business, going forward.

How do we know he played without protection? How large do you think his catastrophic injury insurance policy is? No player will go into a tag season without that in place and no agent would allow him to take that much risk.

France built his rep as a hardballer and he cannot back off on that, specifically now that he's no longer with a large agency. He's that guy that will stare down management and not even the NFLPA will do that for the players.

Part of the problem the Joneses have now may be that injury. His player got injured on the tag and it could nave been much worse. Is he more or less motivated now to get his client his deal? He gets Prescott a fat deal, no one is going to care about an injury on a tag. There's only room for a couple of the top dollar agents at a time and France is protecting his ground.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Pick your QB before you need him is the GB way. Pisses off the QB1 but they're all about the team. Favre wouldn't even acknowledge Rodgers presence in his first year.

PHL tried a little bit of that but I don't see the same results. Hurts is a good guy, not a great NFL QB.

As of right now, I would say the front office of the Cowboys is smarter than PHL and LAR, they both gave their brides new rings and then decided they were too ugly to keep around.

I think they actually rented their Brides new rings and then, when they tired of being married, they divorced and sent the rings back, so to speak. I think that this is the way teams are going to handle these big contract demands, going forward. All of this was just a big show, never designed to actually pay out in the end. I'm dead serious when I say that the offer Jerry gave Dak in the beginning was better then either deal Wentz or Goff got. But hey, the mob is never wrong so whatever.

Lets go with Jerry and Stephen are cheap and a bunch of rubes and all of these "Pay The Man" believers are much too smart for all of the rest of us. Oh well.........

 

[CouchCoach]

I can't speak for Lawyers or Agents but in business, this is not typical. The way it works is that the clients belong to the Business and not the Agent or Sales Person. It actually creates a great deal of liability because there are certain types of business that require very specific licenses and or certifications. What this type of policy allows for is a business entity to come in and hire away a successful agent or sales person for a great deal of money, in exchange for the rights to business but, a given startup may not be qualified to actually do the business. That lends itself to very dangerous alliances, especially if you are teaming with other business entities. You open yourself up to litigation and that's unwise. This is why you don't often see this practice exercised.

But, I'm not an agent or a Lawyer so I can't speak for how they actually do business. But even still, I'd be very surprised if this practice was adopted widely, especially in any agency. Law Firms are protected by things like the Standardized Bar Exam. This insulates them and there is also the fact that you don't have to be a part of a Law Firm in order to practice Law so I can see how that could apply. Perhaps it's the same for an agent, IDK. I don't know that they have a standardized test like the Bar, perhaps they do but I've never heard of it. Seems as if this idea that agents keep clients they bring into a firm is stupid. I can see them keeping clients that they bring into a deal but not Clients they acquire while they are employed by a firm. That would seem, to me, to be a bad practice in general.

Now, if a customer expressed a desire to stay with a given agent, that's different. The customer is always right and it never pays to ignore that. But to say agents keep clients no matter what, that's dumb IMO.

But there again, thats just my opinion.

I can only speak for the ones I know but I do know quite a few and it all depends on who the person is coming into the firm but a prenup kind of agreement is standard because anytime there are lawyers involved, the worst case scenario is never ignored.

And as you say, clients/customers can make their own choices even with a contract in place with the existing agency/firm.

I didn't know much about France before he joined CAA so I don't know what he brought to the party or how CAA is set up. Most of those have the agent dragging the large portion of the deal while the firm takes the smaller share. They're part of the whole but they act as independent contractors because it is not uncommon to split. They're supposed to bring clients into the firm but those clients are only the firm's as long as the agent is with the firm unless the client chooses to stay with the firm.

It was interesting that the large majority of this forum assumed Prescott would fire France for not getting the deal yet that was Prescott's deal, not France's. I think Prescott believes there's gold in them thar hills come 2024 and he wants to go prospecting.

The question I have now is if he is tagged, will he sign and play another tag year? I could see him sitting out. I know that sounds insane, 37.7M for 1 year. But he's already pocketed 31.4M for 1 year and from what I see has his eyes on the bigger prize like 100M+.

 

[805BoysInBlue]

Actually, I kinda think the job of an agent is to look after the best interests of the Client. It's interesting to go back and review comments after the injury. Specifically, comments like Jason Hatcher's, who said that Dak should Fire his agent immediately, along with their team, for allowing him to be unprotected without a long term deal when he got injured. I thought that was very interesting.

Isn't his client scheduled to make 38mill this year guaranteed and then a blockbuster deal after?

 

[CouchCoach]

I think they actually rented their Brides new rings and then, when they tired of being married, they divorced and sent the rings back, so to speak. I think that this is the way teams are going to handle these big contract demands, going forward. All of this was just a big show, never designed to actually pay out in the end. I'm dead serious when I say that the offer Jerry gave Dak in the beginning was better then either deal Wentz or Goff got. But hey, the mob is never wrong so whatever.

Lets go with Jerry and Stephen are cheap and a bunch of rubes and all of these "Pay The Man" believers are much too smart for all of the rest of us. Oh well.........

There is one major difference between these 3 situations and QBs and that favors Booger in his desire to re-sign Prescott. Neither Goff or Wentz showed themselves to be leaders, in fact Wentz started whining when he got benched and wanted a trade. Booger has a QB as good a leader as there is in the league and that has tremendous value to him and his coaching staff.

I believe it is that trait that has Booger smitten with Prescott, wants him to be that general on the field. I remember a comment Dan Mullen made about Prescott after he took over the QB1 job, he said he was a leader even as a backup. People are drawn and like to be around people like that. Because a good leader makes us feel good about ourselves.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Players go into tags knowing exactly what's at stake, they can't blame an agent.

Prescott didn't have a long term deal because he didn't want the one the Cowboys were offering. France can offer his advice and counsel but he doesn't control Prescott. These are adults and responsible for themselves.

My question to Hatcher would be why does he think Prescott picked this particular agent? Prescott had the option of taking the long term deal which in part protects against financial loss from an injury and he chose to go on the tag. He took the risk.

That's not how agents work and I think we both know that. Agents sell players on things and Agents direct a lot of negotiation strategies. If players knew all of this, there would be no need for agents so I don't buy this idea that Players are to blame and Agents are what they are. If that were the case, France would still be with CAA but he's not and that's not by his choice. CAA did fire France because of his risky business practices IMO but, I suppose that's here nor there. So, an agents job is to get the best possible deal for his client but the term "best" is not a direct translation to most money on paper.

I am on record that France would try this type of strategy with this negotiation for over two years now. This is how he operates and anybody who has paid attention to France knows this. Is it just France? Nope, it's Dak as well because Dak decides to hire France and he knew from the get go, who and what France was. I mean, France was Romo's agent so there is no way he didn't know and further, Dak also knew that Jerry hated dealing with France. So this is also on Dak because he made the decision to hire France. This is why I never agreed with the whole, ran out of time story we heard last year. All of this is scripted and has been employed over and over by France. There is no way that all of this went by the numbers, according to what France designed. But it's how he negotiates so you know what's coming.

As to insurance policies against injuries, well, lets assume that in order for a player to fully take advantage of such a policy, they would have to suffer a career ending injury. In the case of Dak, he didn't suffer such an injury so he doesn't really benefit at all from that policy but, he is at a severe disadvantage, in terms of future earnings potential. He and his agent have just potentially cost themselves a max deal in the open market. Uninjured, he is worth a lot more IMO. Injured, it's going to cost him money IMO. CAA cut ties because of this and because he was doing this with way too many clients. CAA bought Frances agency, lock stock and barrel in 2015. That means that they owned all his clients and all business brought in since France went to work at CAA. So if they allowed France to take his clients, that's probably based on something other then what the law supports. As I said in another post, the customer is always right so, if Dak decided to keep France, that's on Dak. No question about that, IMO. But, that still doesn't dispel responsibility from France. All of this is from the playbook of Todd France so he is definitely directing this. That's on him, these guys got fair offers from the Cowboys and by that, I mean they got offers that would have paid Dak more money, long term, then what Goff or Wentz got in their deals. I just feel as if it's the agents responsibility to get that deal done, if it's in the best interests of the Clients, regardless of if the Client agrees. I mean, if we are to believe that it's ultimately all up to Dak, then how do we coincide the words of Dak at the end of the negotiation window last year when Dak said, he wanted the deal on the table but just ran out of time to get the deal done. If we believe what Dak is saying, then doesn't that suggest that all of this was on France and that Dak was actually willing to take the deal the Cowboys had on the table? Now, I don't believe that this was the truth or the case, as I have said many times over but, I can't dismiss the idea that France has a lot of ownership in this deal. I'd say that both Dak and France are equally in on the responsibility of why we are where we are today. It's both of these guys that are playing this game IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I can only speak for the ones I know but I do know quite a few and it all depends on who the person is coming into the firm but a prenup kind of agreement is standard because anytime there are lawyers involved, the worst case scenario is never ignored.

And as you say, clients/customers can make their own choices even with a contract in place with the existing agency/firm.

I didn't know much about France before he joined CAA so I don't know what he brought to the party or how CAA is set up. Most of those have the agent dragging the large portion of the deal while the firm takes the smaller share. They're part of the whole but they act as independent contractors because it is not uncommon to split. They're supposed to bring clients into the firm but those clients are only the firm's as long as the agent is with the firm unless the client chooses to stay with the firm.

It was interesting that the large majority of this forum assumed Prescott would fire France for not getting the deal yet that was Prescott's deal, not France's. I think Prescott believes there's gold in them thar hills come 2024 and he wants to go prospecting.

The question I have now is if he is tagged, will he sign and play another tag year? I could see him sitting out. I know that sounds insane, 37.7M for 1 year. But he's already pocketed 31.4M for 1 year and from what I see has his eyes on the bigger prize like 100M+.

Depending on the state, agreements such as this are not legally binding but so we have a little background, prior to joining CAA, France had his own agency, which he sold to CAA for cash in 2015. So essentially, anything he had, he sold to CAA. I don't believe that he has any recourse legally, should CAA have demanded he leave his client base behind. But as I believe we both agree, the customer has the final say in things like this so if Dak says he wants to stick with France, that's what is likely to happen. So basically, he sold his business to CAA and then went to work for them so basically, he has no right to any of those clients legally. He was compensated for his Client Base and his business when he sold and anything he had after selling, he got while employed by CAA. I'm guessing that CAA basically fired him and allowed him to take specific clients they knew he would likely keep either way.


I think that if he signs, he will show up and play if he is physically able to. I think he sits his 8 games and then comes back, worst case. He will lose approximately 2.18 mil per game so at 8 games, it will cost him around 17.4 mil to sit out. But I'm not sure that's any real deterrent as Jerry, in the past, has made a habit of just allowing guys to skate on this penalty and pay in full. I am not real sure that this policy is wise, I think it only incents players to sit out in these situations but be that as it may, that's what it would cost if Jerry stuck to his guns. But I see no situation where Dak just sits out and doesn't play. That would only land him right back in the same situation he is currently in, the next season and puts him a good two years away from football.

I can say this, and I'm probably a bad opinion source on this because I never liked France. I was not sure what Dak would do and I was not sure what CAA would allow but once CAA allowed France to leave with his top clients, I was then keenly interested in seeing what Dak would do. I thought he would move to another agent at CAA and get a deal done. At least, I hoped that would happen. What we saw was that he elected to stick with France. But notice, there was no announcement made public, not news on it for a really long time so I feel like Dak decided to stick with France but didn't necessarily want to make that news public. I thought that was interesting.

I think that based on what we know of the situation, CAA seemed to be very generous in how they handled this thing with France.

JMO

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Isn't his client scheduled to make 38mill this year guaranteed and then a blockbuster deal after?

TBD. If he plays on the tag, that's correct but that's the thing right? What we saw last year could have been worse. That could have been the kind of injury that ends a career for a QB and to play on a contract that is simply a one year deal. That's a big risk to take when you have 35 AAV and 125 guaranteed offered.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

There is one major difference between these 3 situations and QBs and that favors Booger in his desire to re-sign Prescott. Neither Goff or Wentz showed themselves to be leaders, in fact Wentz started whining when he got benched and wanted a trade. Booger has a QB as good a leader as there is in the league and that has tremendous value to him and his coaching staff.

I believe it is that trait that has Booger smitten with Prescott, wants him to be that general on the field. I remember a comment Dan Mullen made about Prescott after he took over the QB1 job, he said he was a leader even as a backup. People are drawn and like to be around people like that. Because a good leader makes us feel good about ourselves.

Honestly Coach, I don't think the Wentz or Goff deal is about the football. It's all about the money. I think both of those teams signed these guys with the intent to get out of these deals once the big money came into play if they weren't winning championships. I don't think that's the case in Dallas for Dak. I think Jerry truly wanted him here long term.

JMO

 

[805BoysInBlue]

TBD. If he plays on the tag, that's correct but that's the thing right? What we saw last year could have been worse. That could have been the kind of injury that ends a career for a QB and to play on a contract that is simply a one year deal. That's a big risk to take when you have 35 AAV and 125 guaranteed offered.

Totally agree

 

[CWR]

Trust, France is not a loser. He's insanely successful at what he does, has a clientele list that is the envy of most agents and is swimming in money.
And he most likely enjoys what he does.

We define loser by if we like him or not. Don't start sprinkling facts into this debate. He's a loser.

 

[Corso]

We define loser by if we like him or not. Don't start sprinkling facts into this debate. He's a loser.

Lol. My badness.