Whose side on you on? Trey, the Bengals or none?

[Sled21]

(05-30-2025, 05:56 PM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: I do tend to lean a little towards the players in my Fandom. So perhaps not shocking that I side with Trey and think the Bengals FO is at fault for this mess. I think they always want to try and get a bargain. Which worked out with Trey but now he wants to reap the rewards of being top 10 at his position. I honestly think he just wants a pay rate that puts him well within the top 10 and atleast a few years in length so he can put the money part behind him and just focus on his play in what is most likely his last multi-year deal.

I blame the Bengals because I don't think they ever took signing him seriously. I think they always try and get the bargain and while they probably did offer him something it either wasn't long enough or high enough possibly both. The way they did the other contracts didn't leave enough room to really get the kind of deal done that Trey would want. Then they draft a DE in the 1st rd which also points to them not wanting to sign him to what he wants. There is a reason we are the Bungles can we pick if it's because the FO or Trey?

Are you kidding? They signed him for 60 million. Then he wanted an extension, and they gave it to him. Then he wanted another extension even though he wasn't eligible for one. It's not like he's got 3 more years left on his contract. He can play this year at his contract rate, or accept the Bengals very generous offer of a 12 million dollar raise they don't have to offer and he makes 28 million. Then next year he can go where he wants and get paid whatever he can get. If they cave to him, guess what happens after this years crop of WR's get paid.... Chase and Higgins will all of a sudden have the same argument (Chase mostly) and say they are underpaid. Are we going to redo his deal too?