Jack, that's a very interesting question. In fact, if you recall, when this all started, the way Boras was going to get his big numbers was by trumping up A-Rod's value to the television network. And Boras himself mentioned that if the Yankees weren't willing to put up the biggest bucks, they could get some help from their partners at Goldman Sachs, who owns 40 percent of the YES Network.
I think the fact that A-Rod himself contacted the folks at Goldman Sachs once again suggests that this wasn't part of Scott Boras' plan. Rodriguez would probably feel awkward about asking Boras for Levine's cell phone number. (Note: Probably the only number that I have that A-Rod apparently didn't.) So this was probably the best go-between method he had.
I don't believe the Yankees really believe that A-Rod is worth that much more to their television network. I guess if Goldman Sachs did believe A-Rod added value, they could technically chip in, but there's already been a sense that they are not in the YES Network for the long haul--beyond the six years they've been in it. Goldman has been testing the marketplace for the right offer in order to sell it and I doubt they'd be interested in adding debt to that investment any time soon.
I've also received questions concerning the union's gripe that A-Rod will negotiate without Boras. That's actually not the issue. The issue is the Yankees reportedly saying that they won't negotiate with Boras there. That's not allowed. But Alex Rodriguez, should he choose, could decide not to bring to negotiations.
The question would then become, will the union insist that Boras shows up as long as he's an A-Rod client? In other words, if A-Rod decides not to bring Boras even though the Yankees tell everyone they're fine with him (wink, wink, nod, nod) can the union still make a deal about it?
To reiterate, Boras told us today that he has been charged with negotiating for Rodriguez going forward, so this seems to be a non-isuse.
Questions? Comments? SportsBiz@cnbc.com