Drew Rosenhaus (@RosenhausSports) has quickly become a big fan of Twitter, updating his 23,000+ followers of the status of several of his numerous NFL clients, like announcing his firm’s signing of Bryant McKinnie or that Mike McKenzie is healthy, has worked out for the Seahawks, and expects to sign somewhere soon.
I wonder, though, how teams will start reacting to his updates, when they may impact their attempts to improve their team. For instance, this morning, Rosenhaus tweeted:
“The Vikings have informed me that they will be waiving receiver Aundrae Allison by 5pm today if he isn’t traded first.”
As far as I can see, this tweet effectively eliminates whatever little leverage the Vikings may have had in a trade situation–after all, why would a team that’s short on WR and kick return talent give up a late round draft pick for a guy who’s going to hit the waiver wire in a little more than 7 hours?
It makes sense from Rosenhaus’ perspective–if his client is traded, he has no control over the team he lands with, and there is no new contract signed, meaning Rosenhaus doesn’t get another commission.
But if you’re the Vikings, would you put up with Rosenhaus announcing their intentions to the world? They may have informed Allison/Rosenhause merely in good faith, so it was clear why he wouldn’t be on the practice field today, since they wouldn’t want him getting hurt after the roster decision had been made.
Now, if I were the Vikings, I would consider not waiving him until the end of camp, merely to spite Rosenhaus.
I guess what I am saying Andy P is that transparency is great, just doubt that it improves the results
So what do you mean where you say transparency?
Paul I don’t know what are you trying to say
Let’s say we had a lot more transparency during class of 2025 election - would it have changed outcome?
Paul what do you mean it doesn’t improves outcome