Skip to content

Freeney, Suggs claim they weren't given money by Wichard

As the name Josh Luchs replaces Jenn Sterger as the dominant NFL news figure who isn’t the player, coach, or owner of an NFL team, clients of the man targeted by Luchs are stepping up to say that they weren’t paid by Wichard.

Colts defensive end Dwight Freeney said he got nothing from the California-based agent.

“I’ve never seen personally, knowing Gary for as long as I’ve known him,
he never gave me money,” Freeney said, per Justin Cohn of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette.  “I wish he would have given me money.  But seriously, I hadn’t seen or heard of any situations
where he’s given any of his guys money.”

Ravens linebacker Terrell Suggs was more concise.  “He didn’t give me shit,” Suggs told Aaron Wilson of the Carroll County Times.

Frankly, it’s hard to take anything anyone says on this matter at face value.  Wichard landed for both players gigantic contracts, and both are smart enough to know that admitting they were paid by Wichard would get him into even more trouble than he currently faces as a result of the Marvin Austin investigation. 

So whether they were paid or not, their decision to deny it comes as no surprise.

Permalink 21 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Baltimore Ravens, Indianapolis Colts, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
21 Responses to “Freeney, Suggs claim they weren't given money by Wichard”
  1. Big Pimpin' Spendin' Cheese says: Oct 13, 2010 3:05 PM

    Well since Luchs claimed he never paid anyone anything while working at that particular agency, they may be telling the truth. At least they didn’t get paid anything by him, specifically.

  2. jj jones says: Oct 13, 2010 3:15 PM

    Wichard reportedly told both Freeney and Suggs that before they were done playing, they’d be wearing gold-plated diapers.

  3. mr_snrub says: Oct 13, 2010 3:16 PM

    I thought I read the article and I thought the article said Luchs stopped paying people when he started working with Wichard. Was there a part in the article I missed where Luchs reeled Wichard to the dark side?

  4. ThatGuy says: Oct 13, 2010 3:17 PM

    Luchs says right in the story he stopped paying players when he teamed up with Wichard. Here is the line.
    ‘Immediately, Gary told me that he recruited differently and that the Wild West way I learned under Doc wasn’t going to fly. He said I needed to be “reprogrammed.” There would be no more partying with players, no more paying players. That was music to my ears.’

  5. JRG3 says: Oct 13, 2010 3:18 PM

    while this article was interesting, with all the investigations currently happening and more on the way, no one is going to say anything about accepting $$. almost seems silly to ask

  6. paladinfes says: Oct 13, 2010 3:44 PM

    I often wondered and asked several “expert” columnists how college football and basketball players can wear all the “bling” they display. Also, how can they have cars (inexpensive or not). Especially when these guys are 18 or 19. Especially when many of them come from poor backgrounds.
    I never got any replies … go figure.
    These young men get a free education (at least, they have the opportunity to do so) and receive free on-campus housing and meals.
    How can their families travel to away games when they have trouble paying their rent?
    I know (and am sure you do too) many fine young men & women who would love to get that deal.
    What ever happened to being an ameteur and/or a student-athlete?

  7. jcjets says: Oct 13, 2010 3:54 PM

    I totally believe these payments happened, but since there’s no proof or money trail, why would anyone admit it?

  8. CowboysFansAreAllBandwagonFans says: Oct 13, 2010 3:59 PM

    “I’ve never seen personally, knowing Gary for as long as I’ve known him, he never gave me money,” Freeney said, per Justin Cohn of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette. “I wish he would have given me money. But seriously, I hadn’t seen or heard of any situations where he’s given any of his guys money.”
    ——
    I wish these guys would have gone to class more so they could be a little more articulate..

  9. iampats says: Oct 13, 2010 4:01 PM

    paladinfes asks,
    What ever happened to being an amateur and/or student-athlete?
    I believe its called high school.
    You make a great point.

  10. cleanface says: Oct 13, 2010 4:12 PM

    @paladinfes………the schools are generating millions and millions from these kids and then using it to fund the their budgets. It’s hard to feel like you’re an amateur when there are 90,000 screaming (and paying) fans showing up on Saturday afternoon. I don’t blame these kids for feeling entitled to a few bucks on the side. What the universities give them back is miniscule relative to what they generate. The NCAA and these universities are a business. They’ve just set up the rules so they only have to pay their employees minimum wage.

  11. Chitown says: Oct 13, 2010 4:15 PM

    paladinfes it must be nice to live in your world of gumballs and lollipops.
    The term student athlete died when NCAA football and basketball became billion dollar businesses. A free college education isn’t really worth much to someone who barely received a high school education. Do you think Dexter Manley got a lot out of his free Oklahoma State University Degree?
    The NCAA is the most corrupt business in the country.

  12. Real Football Fan says: Oct 13, 2010 5:38 PM

    paladinfes,
    Maybe you should tell the NCAA to stop negotiating multi-billion, not million, dollar contracts to televise amateur sports.
    I don’t think multi-billion, not million, dollar TV contracts are necessary to pay for those 4 year scholarships. But you’re right, they need to let the NCAA not only exploit them on the field, but also allow them to continue to sell jerseys and other memorabilia on the strength of their performances because they’re getting that valuable 4 year scholarship and are allowed to stay in the pathetic student dorms for free.
    What was the rest of us thinking? I love the stickler for rules guy who overlooks that the corrupt people who made the rules up in the first place just might be wrong. The government once endorsed slavery, women once were thought of as second class citizens, and gay people were once thought to be clinically insane by respected professionals. Just a few instances where the people who laid the ground rules were kind of wrong.

  13. gameday says: Oct 13, 2010 6:55 PM

    I would love to play college football at a Div I program and get a free $100,000 plus education, free room and board, free drinks at the local bars, all the vajayjay I wanted, and not have a problem at all if the U made money.
    Geez, some of you people are just plain greedy.
    Just cause you can play football doesn’t mean you should get “paid” by the U.
    There are millions and millions of great young minds in this country that will never get the opportunity these spoiled punk athletes are getting because the parents can’t afford to send their kids to college and they aren’t good athletes.
    The talk from some of you idiots is the exact reason these athletes act like jackasses and feel entitled

  14. dabbflappy says: Oct 13, 2010 6:59 PM

    Why is it that a football player claiming he didn’t take under-the-table payments sounds a little like a Tour de France bicyclist saying he didn’t dope?

  15. gameday says: Oct 13, 2010 7:48 PM

    I work for a Fortune 100 company.
    I am paid my salary do do a job for the company.
    The company earned billions in profits last year.
    What do you think they would do if I demanded a slice of the profits?
    What do you think would happen if I broke my contract by working on the side with a competitor?
    Some of you people are such simpletons.
    A student athlete accepts a scholorship for a free education and free room and board. In return he is expected to play for his team and abide by the rules of the NCAA and his school.
    If he thinks he is being used by the NCAA and his school, then don’t accept the scholorship. Go straight to the CFL, USFL, or some other minor league circuit.

  16. glen907 says: Oct 13, 2010 8:02 PM

    Geez, some of you people are just plain greedy.
    Just cause you can play football doesn’t mean you should get “paid” by the U.
    There are millions and millions of great young minds in this country that will never get the opportunity these spoiled punk athletes are getting because the parents can’t afford to send their kids to college and they aren’t good athletes.
    The talk from some of you idiots is the exact reason these athletes act like jackasses and feel entitled
    ===========
    So the kids are the ones being greedy because they see universities making millions off their talent and abilities and they have the nerve to ask for a piece.
    Ever think that most of the elite players would just rather skip the the 3 year endentured servitude altogether if they could, I know b-ball prospects sure was until once again powers that be changed the rules to force them to attend at least 1 year. The only reason half the players is on campus is because their athletic ability and the money they make the school.
    And it’s kind of hypocrtical to call the athletes entitled when everybody except the athletes are profiting off their talents.

  17. paladinfes says: Oct 13, 2010 8:15 PM

    You are right. It is wrong that schools, coaches and sports organizations to make great amount of monies WITHOUT returning a fair portion to other students and facilities.
    But you cannot and should not commit another wrong to offset the first wrong.
    Fix the problem. Do not commit more wrongs.
    We did not fix slavery by enslaving others.
    We did not fix the womaen’s right to vote by denying others the right to vote.
    Dexter Manley did not complain about his “college degree” until he could no longer make a living at pro ball … and then he tried to sue the schools when he knew all along that he was not learning. And who’s fault is that … his. At any time he could have said, “No.” But he did not.
    If my boss is making more money than I think he deserves, I do not have the right to cheat/steal to make up for what I think I deserve.
    I think we have confused the issues.
    I think the real problems need to be corrected.

  18. DemocratsAreStupid says: Oct 13, 2010 10:52 PM

    Terrell Suggs is hilarious!

  19. glen907 says: Oct 13, 2010 11:16 PM

    Yeah that’s right tell the kid with nothing to turn that money down all the while universities rake it in hand over fist. Why not start by treating scholarship athletes like other students on scholarship and let them have jobs, Oh I forgot their job is to get on the field and play. You want to put an end to these underhanded tactics that agents use then let schools pay the kids or create an developmental league, unfortunately there is no incentive for the NCAA or NFL to do either as long as they both greatly benefit from the status quo until then I don’t blame the athletes for doing what’s in their best interest.

  20. glen907 says: Oct 13, 2010 11:19 PM

    Yeah that’s right tell the kid with nothing to turn that money down all the while universities rake it in hand over fist. Why not start by treating scholarship athletes like other students on scholarship and let them have jobs, Oh I forgot their job is to get on the field and play. You want to put an end to these underhanded tactics that agents use then let schools pay the kids or create an developmental league, unfortunately there is no incentive for the NCAA or NFL to do either as long as they both greatly benefit from the status quo until then I don’t blame the athletes for doing what’s in their best interest, everybody else does

  21. Real Football Fan says: Oct 14, 2010 3:35 AM

    Lol, again apples compared to oranges. Just like when you try to strike down players in the league for wanting more money in a league where they are the sole reason the revenue is generated, comparing your job, which you are free to shop around for an alternative who will pay you more to a college student who can, ummmm, go to another school and get the exact same deal….play for a scholarship that’s 1/10 of your value to the school while we use you to make exponentially more money, is a rather absurd correlation to make.
    But by all means, keep showing the rest of us how dumb you are because you like to overvalue your worth to your company. Even if you were a Fortune 500 CEO, you’re replaceable, much less the obvious low level angry, pencil pushers who regularly post at this site. However, there is a finite number of players with the athletic ability that drives eyeballs to the TV screen, which directly correlates to advertising revenue. Get the difference, morons?
    Like I said before, if it’s so important to preserve the integrity of amateur sports by vilifying these kids, why don’t you get on the actual grown ups in this situation, the college administration and the NCAA who’s negotiating multi-billion dollar contracts to televise these “fun and games.” I don’t know any professors at my alma mater who were paid 7 figure salaries, but yet basketball and football coaches sure get them, on a multi-year basis to boot.
    Not to mention the apparel deals the colleges individually have, the coaches individually have, the TV/radio deals the coaches have…dummies you have no idea how deep the rabbit hole goes. No, you’d rather get on these 18-21 year olds for looking for money from people more than willing to shell it out because you have a stick up your butt from when some jock stuffed you in a locker 10 years ago.
    If it’s that important, why don’t you endorse these kids being able to play in the UFL or some other developmental league before the NFL teams call them up, because as you moral gentleman point out, we need to preserve the integrity of those scholarships. I know i think that the resources would be better allocated to America’s brightest, although there won’t be much to go around because those students won’t be generating any money.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!