+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? (/thread-40583.html)
Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - Luvnit2 - 05-29-2025
The Trey saga continues. I was originally trying to undertand and accept Trey's reasons for a reasonabe contract. No more, I personally think his going public was a childish move and will hurt his chances to get a new deal....from the Bengals and maybe anyone as Bengals are stubborn when players and agents have tried to strong arm them.
This poll is not what about you hope happens. This poll is to pick a side to get the temperature as of almost June 2025 on how they fans view the 2 sides.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - KillerGoose - 05-29-2025
I'm not on either side.
From the Bengals perspective, data indicates that pass rushers tend to fall off rapidly after they pass the age of 30. They don't want to give him a new contract and get caught in a decline.
From Trey's perspective, he is trying to maximize his earnings.
It's all business at the end of the day.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - bfine32 - 05-29-2025
Trey Hendrickson is my favorite Bengal and is grossly underpaid. But I cannot pick a side unless I know what is asked and what is offered. If reports of a $30 MIL a year are correct and Trey is still acting as he is, then I lay the blame on him. WTS, It's still only May, but for the sake of the thread I'll lay blame on Trey
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - jj22 - 05-29-2025
Neither. They both are wrong. Bengals for not trading him and letting this linger, and Trey for always having a contract issue (even after extensions) and being on the verge of retirement. The act is old.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - ERIC1 - 05-29-2025
It would appear that the team...and other teams in the league..do not feel that Hendrickson is worth the money he is demanding..only time will tell..I dont believe for one second is being cheap....Sometimes things are what they are
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - jason - 05-29-2025
(05-29-2025, 10:17 PM)jj22 Wrote: Neither. They both are wrong. Bengals for not trading him and letting this linger, and Trey for always having a contract issue (even after extensions) and being on the verge of retirement. The act is old.
This is the right answer. I don't think they should've just traded him though.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - QueenCity - 05-29-2025
I'm on the Bengals side... Trey and his agent have been botching deals for several years now. He should of hired an agent that was competent you can go look at who he reps and the players outside of Trey are not impressive.
From the Bengals point of view they've already given Trey life changing money and he continues to come back to the well year after year. He's hit the age where players fall of a cliff and is rejecting 28 million dollars. He has zero leverage and if he sits out he will be fined and will continue to get older.
Lastly Trey, agent, and the media seem to ignore the fact that he isn't great at the run. Also if we want to get really into the weeds 7.5 of his sacks came in two games last season. Also in 7 games he didn't even have a sack.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - Mer - 05-29-2025
(05-29-2025, 10:59 PM)QueenCity Wrote: I'm on the Bengals side... Trey and his agent have been botching deals for several years now. He should of hired an agent that was competent you can go look at who he reps and the players outside of Trey are not impressive.
From the Bengals point of view they've already given Trey life changing money and he continues to come back to the well year after year. He's hit the age where players fall of a cliff and is rejecting 28 million dollars. He has zero leverage and if he sits out he will be fined and will continue to get older.
Lastly Trey, agent, and the media seem to ignore the fact that he isn't great at the run. Also if we want to get really into the weeds 7.5 of his sacks came in two games last season. Also in 7 games he didn't even have a sack.
This about sums up how I feel. Nice post.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - BFritz21 - 05-29-2025
I'm on the Bengals side.
Like other people have said, so many of his sacks game in two games last year, he's not great against the run, and players seem to fall off after age 30.
I'd say the only compromise I can think of is to give him an incentive laden contract and, if he denies it, say "ok, feel free to not sign and then see what kind of deal you can get in free agency."
If he threatens to sit out after three games so he gets credit for a full season, say "ok, good luck in finding an organization that will sign you to a big deal knowing you have that kind of ethic, even in this league."
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 05-30-2025
Until there is a known contract I am on neither's side. Trey's agent is a dumbass and I don't like Trey crying about money every year but he
deserves more money being as great of a pass rusher as he is. He was offered a contract, we just don't know the details so we cannot blame
either party there but go off assumptions honestly.
Still think Trey ought to fire his agent and get Ja'Marr's like Tee did.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - SunsetBengal - 05-30-2025
Side? I'm on the side that wants to see Hendrickson signed, happy and crushing QBs for the Bengals on their way to hoisting the Lombardi.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - TecmoBengals - 05-30-2025
I'm going to side with the player based on the decades of watching how the Brown family operates their organization. They take the difficult path when it comes to signing draft picks, negotiating contractions, and the such.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - Sled21 - 05-30-2025
(05-29-2025, 10:17 PM)jj22 Wrote: Neither. They both are wrong. Bengals for not trading him and letting this linger, and Trey for always having a contract issue (even after extensions) and being on the verge of retirement. The act is old.
Except the Bengals allowed him to seek a trade and no team wanted to pay him what he wants and give up a 1st round draft pick. That's not on the Bengals.
I'd be more forgiving of Trey's stance if the Bengals were making him play out his contract as it was signed. Instead, they are offering him a 12 million dollar raise that they don't have to. He's become a greedy Primadonna.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - ochocincos - 05-30-2025
I wish "both" was an option, as I see both sides.
I am firm believer that if you are under contract, you should be required to participate in all team activities and not be eligible to skip a certain number of games and still have your season count to determine when contract ends.
And I also support the Bengals' stance that the player signed said contract, so that's on them.
But I also understand Hendrickson's side that he wants $30+ mill and a multi-year deal because 1) he has performed at that level for the past 2 seasons, and 2) this next contract will likely be his last, as he will be 31 years old next season when he potentially hits FA.
I do think the Bengals are lowballing him at $28 mill APY, even if he is 30 years old.
And their DE depth behind him is atrocious, adding leverage for Hendrickson.
And if I'm Hendrickson, I would be wondering why the team is prioritized a (good) WR2 over me, a DPOY candidate in back-to-back years.
Yes, 30 years old vs 26 years old, but performance last year was elite regardless of age.
Myles Garrett just signed a 4-year, $160 mill contract and he turns 30 this December.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - WeezyBengal - 05-30-2025
The front office never gets the benefit of the doubt with me.
Sounds like things were promised, communication has sucked, and the Bengals aren't making Trey feel super valued.
At the same time, I really don't love how Trey has gone about things either. I think both parties have kind of been lame in this entire process.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - Sled21 - 05-30-2025
According to this, Trey thinks he should get 35.5 million.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/bengals-trey-hendrickson-gets-35-5-million-contract-update-after-support-from-joe-burrow/ar-AA1FK3LQ?cmp_prftch=2&ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=b6fcc36d50854d1e83e60d290d23f88e&ei=19
Quote:Hendrickson has been offered $28 million per year in an extension, according to Pro Football Talk.
But PFT also reports that Hendrickson is seeking a bigger number: $35.5 million per year.
That's what the Raiders are paying Maxx Crosby.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - SunsetBengal - 05-30-2025
(05-30-2025, 09:50 AM)Sled21 Wrote: According to this, Trey thinks he should get 35.5 million.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/bengals-trey-hendrickson-gets-35-5-million-contract-update-after-support-from-joe-burrow/ar-AA1FK3LQ?cmp_prftch=2&ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=b6fcc36d50854d1e83e60d290d23f88e&ei=19
Great, since the team has been rumored to have offered $28M, they're not that far apart. Seems like a middle ground of around $32M/per should be able to get the deal done.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - samhain - 05-30-2025
Hard to say without factual details.
Trey absolutely deserves a raise. He also failed to bet on himself when he had the chance.
I still think the Tee switch-up played a part here. IMO, Trey would have been given a raise if the pressure to sign 5 was not heavily applied later in the season.
So I guess I blame both. I'd throw him 32 mil if I were them. If he's not good with that, then he needs to be more realistic about the role his decision to sign the last extension plays in the situation.
I criticize the Bengals a lot for constantly being behind the market when it comes to extending players. They actually did that in this case. The player bears some responsibility and needs to have some self-awareness.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - Luvnit2 - 05-30-2025
(05-30-2025, 10:10 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Great, since the team has been rumored to have offered $28M, they're not that far apart. Seems like a middle ground of around $32M/per should be able to get the deal done.
They started and will always start is Trey at 15.8 million in 2025. So, Bengals if the report is true offered him 12.2 million for 2025, we have no idea if anything was offered longer term.
I know you want Trey signed, but why should team give him 16.2 million or more than double his 2025 contract salary?
If he was offered 28 million and then also 30 to 32 million in years 2026 and 2027, that is a great offer by he Bengals who HAVE HIM UNDER CONTRACT.
I think your zest to overlook Trey's actions (going publc) and demands are tainting your opinion.
RE: Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none? - Joelist - 05-30-2025
Just remember Trey signed a new contract then proceeded to stomp his feet for a new deal before the team under league rules could even offer one. And he pulls this every year. Yes he’s good and yes the DE market has moved since he did his deal but this is getting ridiculous. 28 million is not bad. Just add an accelerator clause based on him improving his run defense while not losing the pass rush. If he meets the targets that 28 becomes 35.