Was Rosenhaus given permission to trade Burress?

[BillsWatch]

In February his agent Rosenhaus (you know the guy who is completely above board and honest like with Willis) sends out mail saying Burress was available via trade. Giants still had Burress under contract. So unless he had permission tampering charges ought to be brought against the agent.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/11592334/2

After winning days after the shooting, the Giants suspended Burress for the final four weeks of the regular season, fined him and withheld a $1 million portion of his signing bonus that was due in December.

 

Allowed per NFLPA agreement but of course almost every time NFL attempts to enforce it agent files a suit.

 

Once the season ended, Reese said he would welcome Burress back under certain circumstances.

 

This implies it was their decision as contract states whether to keep him or not.

 

Tensions between the player and the team mounted when Burress' agent Drew Rosenhaus sent an e-mail in February saying Burress could be acquired in a trade.

 

This sound like tampering.

 

The Giants were willing to rework Burress' contract so he could earn most of the $30 million in non-guaranteed money left on the $35 million deal that he signed in September. However, they refused to throw in the money that he lost as a result of his suspension.

 

Reasonable since he did not earn that money and would be bad example to future incidents.

 

When Burress refused that deal and a settlement the team offered on the grievance of the signing bonus, the Giants' patience with Burress expired and he was released on Friday.

 

Released meaning he was still under contract coming back to original question - 'Should Rosenhaus be penalized for tampering?' If Rosenhaus got "feelers" from his fax saying another team was interested then that could affect Burress's decision to accept deal.

[kota]

No.

[Flbillsfan#1]

What team would trade for someone facing JAILTIME?