I agree with Jeremy because....

Well put.

Bottom line here is that Wariner is greedy. If he can't part with 10% for a good coach, it's simply driven by greed.

I won't be rooting for Wariner either. This guy reminds me of my old friends from college who subtract the tax from the bill before calculating the tip.

Track guys have always been tight, this just further proves the point.

schiefer

www.runschief.com

if you win fewer meets, then say goodbye to your 'coach savings'. he might get away with another great year on the fumes and old workouts of his coach, plus the continuity from the disciple, but watch out in 2009. to me, this is a red flag over and above the coach issue, as well.

mooola wrote:

wejo,

Please explain the flat rate for an agen benefitting an athlete. I always assumed that with a flat rate an agent will do the same work no matter what (ex: if JW gets 20k or 50k at a meet, agent still gets $10k). whereas if the agent has a % he ALWAYS wants to do the extra work get more, therefore JW getting more. just my thoughts on the subject, but honestly please explain the flat rate benefitting either the athlete or the agent (in my mind it benefits the agent before the athlete)?

So I see the ex 400 m runner Deon Minor is Wariner's "manager". Someone please explain what the "manager" does. Does he work for the agent?

Anyway, as for the flat rate say you're an agent for an athlete. He is a good runner and say is making $10,000 an appearance. You're making your $1500 for every time you pick up the phone and book a meet.

Now say he hits it big. It's Asafa Powell. Say you can get $100,000 an appearance. Now every time you pick up the phone you're getting $15,000 for basically the same work.

So the athlete says "why should I pay more for the same work and says "I'll pay you X per hour" to be my agent. (Or perhaps I'll pay you $2,000 for every meet you book me.)

Now of course the agent has less incentive to get the athlete the highest appearance. But the agent already has conflicts of interest in other areas.

Agents don't usually call up and represent 1 athlete. They might be representing 10 at a meet or with a shoe rep. So I'm sure there is some packaged deals, etc and all the agent really cares about is the total amount for all his guys not the individual amount for each athlete.

The flat fee works best in sports say like the NBA where there is a league maximum. Why pay the athlete a percentage when your salary is pretty much set. So some athletes are just hiring lawyers to do their contracts.

The agents should get a higher cut of shoe contracts and appearance fees in my mind than prize money. The prize money is there regardless of the agent or not. I'd give the highest cut to any non running endorsements but I think at least in other sports things work like this.

I think that we've all been there. After 3 or 4 years of coaching we thought that we knew all there was too it. Even to the point of second guessing our HS and College coaches on a regular basis. It only took a short while on our own to realize that they do and did add tremendous value. No doubt JW will realize this fact of life but not at the expense of his potential.I agree with the notion of fixing the agents costs also. The point here being that JW is as close to receiving a "set payscale" as you can get in T&F. He is a star and is not as beholden to "earning his keep". Did he have to reimburse his appearance fee at that meet last year where he "slipped"?I can't for the life of me wonder why there are some out there that are cursing him for this move. Sure curse the timing but the runner? I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised though this is an emotional sport with emotional followers. Here’s to JW moving up to the 800!

wejo wrote:

The key word here is CLOSE. He is competing in a sport where wins and losses and hundreds of thousands of dollards are determined by fractions of a second.

Fortunately Jeremy is about half a second faster than the rest of the world, but he still doesn't have too much room for error. If he doesn't think his coach makes that much of a difference then fine.

But the same logic for taking a coach off a percentage basis exists for the agent as well. He does no more work if Jeremy gets $20,000 for a meet or $50,000.

It's why Grant Hill went for a flat fee for his agen. Makes a lot of since in sports with a set payscale.

Accord, and well said "Dick Gregory"!

Jefe in the CO wrote:

But the same logic for taking a coach off a percentage basis exists for the agent as well. He does no more work if Jeremy gets $20,000 for a meet or $50,000.

But is JEREMY doing more work per appearance now than before?

greedy? a dick? wrote:

If you are naturally the best then how much coaching does it take? You just have to make sure you don't screw it up.

You are an idiot. You obviously know NOTHING whatsoever about sprinting, anyway. While you're considering what a moron you are, find out how many elite sprinters have no coach.

maybe hart calls in wkouts and is rarely present.

rumors that I will coach Wariner are false , it will be assistant Baylor coach FORD so will train at Waco as before.

Where can I get 9% interest? I need some of that. The highest interest I've seen is 4.25% on a Roth IRA, which is a great deal. And 4.25% on a CD.