I am definitely not the first person to cover the story on sports agent, Scott Boras, lobbying the MLB to change the World Series format to a best of 9 series with the first 2 games played at a neutral site. I personally have held off on discussing the matter, because while it does include a sports agent (Boras), I did not quite believe that the story fit on this site. It has become such a big issue; however, that it may be time to touch on it for a moment.
Will a World Series Weekend (dubbed WSW) really create a “marketing bonanza that would rival the Super Bowl?” [Back to a best-of-nine World Series?]. I have my doubts. But instead, will Boras’ new publicity outside of the sports agent spectrum, result in positive results for Scott Boras Corp? Most likely.
Sports agents find themselves in the paper usually for 1 of 3 things. They have either done something illegal or shady (stealing clients), they holdout their clients or get them big time money (which the public often frowns upon), or they are talking for their clients, often giving little to nothing of a response when asked questions. Looking at the standard relationship between agents and the media, it seems like Scott Boras is a genius for breaking the mold and not hurting his image (actually gaining popularity among demographics that have never heard of him).
In all honesty, why does Scott Boras care so much about this issue? Does he really care about Bud Selig getting MLB more corporate endorsements centered on the World Series? Does he care about making money for the city who wins the right to host the first 2 games in the new format? Once again, I have my doubts.
Rick Karcher of Sports Law Blog believes that Boras has crossed the line into an area that he does not belong:
“By sending this letter to Selig and, more specifically, requesting to meet with Selig to discuss his proposal, Boras has crossed the line and is going way beyond the authority delegated to him by the union — which is limited to representing players in player contract negotiations. He’s even using the term “we” when discussing this issue, as if to suggest that he speaks on behalf of all of the players collectively.” [Is Boras Getting Too Big for His….Wallet?]
I agree that he has not been given authority to speak on behalf of all unionized MLB players; however, I do not think that he has done so by using the word “we”. I think that he is playing the situation brilliantly, even though I do not agree that the World Series format should be changed in the manner that Boras has proposed. I agree with Karcher when he says that IF Selig meets with Boras, it will truly show how much power Boras yields in the sport. Such a meeting could be drastic for competing sports agents, and would continue to boost Scott Boras Corp as an representative entity in baseball. What are your feelings on the issue?