- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,097
- Liked Posts:
- 38,108
The objective of the NFLPA in implementing these Regulations is to enable players to make an informed selection of a Contract Advisor and to help assure that the Contract Advisor will provide effective representation at fair, reasonable, and uniformly applicable rates to those individual players the Contract Advisor represents, and to avoid any conflict of interest which could potentially compromise the best interests of NFL players.
(17) Act at all times in a fiduciary capacity on behalf of players;
(12) Concealing material facts from any player whom the Contract Advisor is representing which relate to the subject of the player’s individual contract negotiation;
https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/Agents/RegulationsAmendedAugust2016.pdf
It is a clear conflict of interest of an agent to steer one client away from a team to benefit not that player but another player he represents. It is also a violation of his fiduciary responsibilities to said player and if not disclosed to Mariota would be concealing a material fact from him relative to his negotiations.
When you are negotiating for a given player, the only thing you should be considering is what is in the best interests of that player. So all that matters is the best interests of Mariota if he is negotiating on his behalf. The only time he should concern himself with Trubs best interest is if he is currently negotiating on behalf of Trubs which he isn't because Trubs already has a contract and is not in extension talks.
Now could a shady agent try to work around this? Sure. But again, it would be a violation and he would be subject to losing his license if found out.
(17) Act at all times in a fiduciary capacity on behalf of players;
(12) Concealing material facts from any player whom the Contract Advisor is representing which relate to the subject of the player’s individual contract negotiation;
https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/Agents/RegulationsAmendedAugust2016.pdf
It is a clear conflict of interest of an agent to steer one client away from a team to benefit not that player but another player he represents. It is also a violation of his fiduciary responsibilities to said player and if not disclosed to Mariota would be concealing a material fact from him relative to his negotiations.
When you are negotiating for a given player, the only thing you should be considering is what is in the best interests of that player. So all that matters is the best interests of Mariota if he is negotiating on his behalf. The only time he should concern himself with Trubs best interest is if he is currently negotiating on behalf of Trubs which he isn't because Trubs already has a contract and is not in extension talks.
Now could a shady agent try to work around this? Sure. But again, it would be a violation and he would be subject to losing his license if found out.