ROSENHAUS ADDRESSES BURRESS E-MAIL

As Sheil Kapadia of philly.com pointed out in a Wednesday night item posted while I was huddled in the storm cellar hoping that Auntie Em didn’t get whisked away to Munchkinland (where Jay Glazer spends the offseasons as the starting center of the local basketball team), the Giants are upset that agent Drew Rosenhaus sent an e-mail to all NFL teams mentioning that receiver Plaxico Burress is available via trade. The problem is that Burress hasn’t been given permission to shop himself. And this means that no other team may talk to Rosenhaus regarding the possibility of acquiring Burress. Rosenhaus addressed the situation on Thursday morning during a weekly radio visit with our pal Joe Rose of WQAM in Miami. “Let me just say in general that as an agent I can do whatever I want,” Rosenhaus told Rose. “Let me clarify the rules. Teams cannot talk to an agent about a player who is under contract, but there’s no limits on what an agent can try and do to help his client,” Rosenhaus explained. “You know, the bottom line is that I get paid by my clients to advance their agenda, not the teams’ agendas. And there’s no rule that prohibits me from talking to teams about any of my clients.” So, basically, Rosenhaus’s position is that, while it might be a violation of the league’s tampering rules for a team to talk to an agent of a player who is under contract with another team, the agent commits no violation of the rules by engaging in such a conversation. “The bottom line is they make it seem like it’s impermissible for an agent to talk to teams to communicate with teams about players who are under contract,” Rosenhaus said. “That’s not correct. I’m not violating any rules. “I’m not required to follow the rules of NFL teams. . . . [A]ccording to NFLPA rules, which I’m governed by, which is the players association, I’m permitted to talk to the teams about any of my clients. As long as they have a representation agreement with me and they’re my client, I can advance whatever agenda I want.” Rosenhaus also said that the e-mail mentioning Burress was part of a common practice in which the agent engages. “I send e-mails, probably 3, 4 times a week, year-round, which list my free agent clients, my pending free agent clients, my restricted free agent clients, my upcoming rookies in the draft, players that are potentially going to be released, and players who, you know, are interested or who desire a trade. . . . That’s what an agent does. I’m doing my job.” But while an agent might be immune from punishment via the NFL Players Association for instigating and/or participating in tampering, we wonder whether a team could take the position that such activites constitute on the part of the player conduct detrimental to the team. Let’s assume the Cardinals refuse to give receiver Anquan Boldin permission to shop his services via a trade, and then let’s assume that Rosenhaus spends the next few weeks sending faxes and e-mails and texts to executives from other teams cajoling them into making an offer. Under the rules as interpreted by Rosenhaus, such tactics are permissible. So if Rosenhaus isn’t violating any NFLPA rules by attempting to incite tampering, the question becomes whether, at some point, the player becomes responsible for the actions of his agent. We think it’s another issue that should be added to the laundry list of items for discussion between the NFL and the next Executive Director of the NFLPA. Because regardless of whether the rules currently permit Rosenhaus to shop his clients even when they’ve been told that they’re not allowed to be shopped, players and the people who work for them should be required to respect the terms of the contract between the player and his current team.