Posts: 3,313
Threads: 28
Reputation:
19451
Joined: Jan 2022
(Yesterday, 02:10 PM)Big Boss Wrote: If Mike Brown's giving an accurate summary of things, then Shemar's agent is a catastrophic moron.
And the thing is, very few Bengals fans have been all that excited about the Shemar pick to begin with. He is seen as a high-ceiling, low-floor, boom-or-bust candidate, rather than a sure thing -- certainly not the sure contributor many fans wanted for the 17th pick in the draft during Burrow and Chase's window. Talk about getting off to a poor start with the fans and the organization. This might be the first time the Bengals front office become the sympathetic party in these disputes.
Posts: 18,482
Threads: 241
Reputation:
154878
Joined: Oct 2015
(Yesterday, 02:10 PM)Big Boss Wrote: If Mike Brown's giving an accurate summary of things, then Shemar's agent is a catastrophic moron.
Lol... Mike Brown conveniently could ONLY think of violence against women as an instance of conduct detrimental. Why? Because now people are going to go "Stewart just wants to beat women and get paid!"
Also hilarious to think Mike Brown is trying to take a moral highground (even though it's really pure posturing and narrative control) on that topic after drafting Joe Mixon and Jermaine Burton.
____________________________________________________________
Posts: 2,403
Threads: 74
Reputation:
12330
Joined: May 2015
Location: Denver
I haven't ready all 47 pages of this thread but I don't think i'm alone when i say I honestly don't give a flying **** if we sign this guy anymore.
I'm kinda hoping we don't because the whole situation screams toxic player. I never thought he was going to make an immediate impact with the team anyways.
-The only bengals fan that has never set foot in Cincinnati 1-15-22
3
Posts: 3,580
Threads: 245
Reputation:
27727
Joined: May 2015
This guy doesnt realize that if he enters the draft again next year, hes not going in the 1st round and my guess probably 2nd round either. He's screwing himself over. His agent crying in public isnt a good look as well.
I personally thought the pick was horrible to begin with so chalk it up to another shit 1st round pick by the Bengals...
"If the most important thing is the financials' and the second most important thing is winning, then you don't have a chance. It's so important for ownership to do what it takes to win"
Posts: 1,144
Threads: 0
Reputation:
3601
Joined: Aug 2015
(10 hours ago)basballguy Wrote: I haven't ready all 47 pages of this thread but I don't think i'm alone when i say I honestly don't give a flying **** if we sign this guy anymore.
I'm kinda hoping we don't because the whole situation screams toxic player. I never thought he was going to make an immediate impact with the team anyways.
Think I'm here as well. Let him take his chances in next years draft. Don't even like talking about him as even though we have rights to him, he's not a member of this team and doesn't appear to want to be.
Posts: 1,144
Threads: 0
Reputation:
3601
Joined: Aug 2015
(11 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Lol... Mike Brown conveniently could ONLY think of violence against women as an instance of conduct detrimental. Why? Because now people are going to go "Stewart just wants to beat women and get paid!"
Also hilarious to think Mike Brown is trying to take a moral highground (even though it's really pure posturing and narrative control) on that topic after drafting Joe Mixon and Jermaine Burton.
Extreme but if he's not concerned about being able to abide by league rules it seems as if this wouldn't be an issue for him.
Posts: 18,482
Threads: 241
Reputation:
154878
Joined: Oct 2015
(9 hours ago)R3stangs Wrote: Extreme but if he's not concerned about being able to abide by league rules it seems as if this wouldn't be an issue for him.
If the Bengals weren't concerned about finagling ways to create minor faults in order to negate players guaranteed rookie contracts, it wouldn't be an issue for them.
Heck, if the Bengals would NEGOTITATE rather than dictate a change in a contract, it wouldn't be an issue for anyone. This is all because they want to change things for just 1 specific player for the worse, with no compromise concession in return.
- - - - -
Mike Brown's little soundbite there just did the equivalent of saying.... "having the police called on you could mean a lot of things, the details of which I am not going to get into, but one thing I know gets the police called on you is MURDER. I don't think it's fair that someone can MURDER someone and I have to pay them while they're in jail."
Sure Mike, and you know what else the police get called for? Noise complaints, mistaken identity, lies.
Conduct detrimental can mean literally anything the NFL wants it to mean. It doesn't mean you need to be guilty. Even if you're found not guilty, it can still be conduct detrimental. You can have done nothing wrong and there can still be conduct detrimental.
" It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime."
"Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players."
(Which is literally just a catchall of "it is because we say it is.")
____________________________________________________________
Posts: 1,144
Threads: 0
Reputation:
3601
Joined: Aug 2015
(9 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: If the Bengals weren't concerned about finagling ways to create minor faults in order to negate players guaranteed rookie contracts, it wouldn't be an issue for them.
Heck, if the Bengals would NEGOTITATE rather than dictate a change in a contract, it wouldn't be an issue for anyone. This is all because they want to change things for just 1 specific player for the worse, with no compromise concession in return.
- - - - -
Mike Brown's little soundbite there just did the equivalent of saying.... "having the police called on you could mean a lot of things, the details of which I am not going to get into, but one thing I know gets the police called on you is MURDER. I don't think it's fair that someone can MURDER someone and I have to pay them while they're in jail."
Sure Mike, and you know what else the police get called for? Noise complaints, mistaken identity, lies.
Conduct detrimental can mean literally anything the NFL wants it to mean. It doesn't mean you need to be guilty. Even if you're found not guilty, it can still be conduct detrimental. You can have done nothing wrong and there can still be conduct detrimental.
"It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime."
"Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players."
(Which is literally just a catchall of "it is because we say it is.")
No doubt theres a middle ground here. Does a speeding ticket for a few miles of the speed limit warrant losing guaranteed money? Of course not. But here should be some limitations imposed. I'm not educated enough on the contract or potential discussions to say who's more at fault here, but expecting that theres no repercussions for getting into true legal troubles is pretty unrealistic. That its taken the Bengals this long to implement something is more the surprising part.
Posts: 8,733
Threads: 102
Reputation:
23757
Joined: Nov 2015
(10 hours ago)basballguy Wrote: I haven't ready all 47 pages of this thread but I don't think i'm alone when i say I honestly don't give a flying **** if we sign this guy anymore.
I'm kinda hoping we don't because the whole situation screams toxic player. I never thought he was going to make an immediate impact with the team anyways.
As a player at A and M he had no issues and was praised by coaches, so I see this as more bad advice by agent, I actually think he will have a good rookie year
Posts: 1,554
Threads: 51
Reputation:
2853
Joined: Oct 2021
People that are buying the Bengals' shit has never worked in any corporate environment.
The rules aren't iron clad and pure. If someone wants to hurt you, or wants you gone, they'll stretch and spin the rules to justify ***** you over. It's not just "Don't go to prison". Putting it in that frame is disingenuous.
I will say, the shot at Duke Tobin the agent took was petty asf.
Posts: 3,313
Threads: 28
Reputation:
19451
Joined: Jan 2022
I ran across this tidbit on X (while searching for news on Trey). It was a clip from the Todd McShay show in April, prior to the draft. The clip was there on X, but I'll just post the poster's summary:
"McShay and rest of NFL seemingly knew Shemar's agent was going to be an issue & buzz was spreading across league circles.
#Bengals either didn't hear, or didn't care. But word was DEFINITELY out."
https://x.com/Ryan_sovah_Yunt/status/1947324570240741656?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Posts: 7,963
Threads: 3
Reputation:
13388
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: BurningArizona
so.. is Shemar from the ghetto? meaning poor education, no dad, low income, struggle but feel-good story to his belt?
Why are the bengals so intent on the wording? I'm sure there are already stipulations out there where they get their "guaranteed" money prorated if they get arrested or go to jail for crimes committed and the team is allowed to release and cancel the contract.
What am I missing here in this finely detailed lose your guaranteed $$$ debacle.
Posts: 2,315
Threads: 13
Reputation:
12544
Joined: Apr 2020
(9 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: ...Conduct detrimental can mean literally anything the NFL wants it to mean. It doesn't mean you need to be guilty. Even if you're found not guilty, it can still be conduct detrimental. You can have done nothing wrong and there can still be conduct detrimental.
"It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime."
"Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players."
(Which is literally just a catchall of "it is because we say it is.")
If other NFL teams have no specific language thats states exactly what detrimental conduct is then the Bengals are not doing anything the rest of the NFL isnt doing.
As far as having to be found guilty of a crime before the clause can kick in, that's ridiculous. Rashee Rice was just found guilty over something that happened more than a year ago. Anyone that watched the Rashee Rice video last year knew what he did was seriously wrong. Teams shouldnt have to wait over a year before they can execute the clause in the contract.
Remember Ray Rice knocking out his girlfriend in the elevator? He was never found guilty of that. The charges were dropped. If he had guarantees in his contract should teams have to pay that since he was never found guilty of assaulting his girlfriend?
Posts: 16,633
Threads: 2,262
Reputation:
91452
Joined: May 2015
(Yesterday, 02:10 PM)Big Boss Wrote: If Mike Brown's giving an accurate summary of things, then Shemar's agent is a catastrophic moron.
Choosing this clause as the hill to die on, is ridiculous. He is doing his client a disservice and getting his NFL career off to a really bad start. I would tell Stewart it is no reflection on him that the team is changing their contract language but don't screw up and it won't apply
This is an inexperienced young agent trying to make a name for himself but he doesn't have the right client, the right team, or the influence to do so
Life has no limitations except the ones you make-Paul Brown
Posts: 2,315
Threads: 13
Reputation:
12544
Joined: Apr 2020
(9 hours ago)Nepa Wrote: I ran across this tidbit on X (while searching for news on Trey). It was a clip from the Todd McShay show in April, prior to the draft. The clip was there on X, but I'll just post the poster's summary:
"McShay and rest of NFL seemingly knew Shemar's agent was going to be an issue & buzz was spreading across league circles.
#Bengals either didn't hear, or didn't care. But word was DEFINITELY out."
https://x.com/Ryan_sovah_Yunt/status/1947324570240741656?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
If that is true and teams were already leary of drafting Stewart, if he sits out this year, who will want to draft him next year when many teams already had concerns about him only to have Stewart prove they were right. It will be even worse for Stewart next year.
Posts: 4,098
Threads: 20
Reputation:
14055
Joined: Apr 2021
(8 hours ago)pally Wrote: Choosing this clause as the hill to die on, is ridiculous. He is doing his client a disservice and getting his NFL career off to a really bad start. I would tell Stewart it is no reflection on him that the team is changing their contract language but don't screw up and it won't apply
This is an inexperienced young agent trying to make a name for himself but he doesn't have the right client, the right team, or the influence to do so
I'm just curious if other teams have either given the same concessions he asking for or already have them in there contracts. If the signing bonus is paid up front in all other contracts it seems to favor the agents requests.
Posts: 18,482
Threads: 241
Reputation:
154878
Joined: Oct 2015
(8 hours ago)007BengalsFan Wrote: If other NFL teams have no specific language thats states exactly what detrimental conduct is then the Bengals are not doing anything the rest of the NFL isnt doing.
As far as having to be found guilty of a crime before the clause can kick in, that's ridiculous. Rashee Rice was just found guilty over something that happened more than a year ago. Anyone that watched the Rashee Rice video last year knew what he did was seriously wrong. Teams shouldnt have to wait over a year before they can execute the clause in the contract.
Remember Ray Rice knocking out his girlfriend in the elevator? He was never found guilty of that. The charges were dropped. If he had guarantees in his contract should teams have to pay that since he was never found guilty of assaulting his girlfriend?
Has been brought up many times already. The teams that have these clauses, have a more front-loaded payout of the signing bonuses. If it's front-loaded, you get it sooner and it can't be as much voided at the whim of your boss.
The problem with the Bengals is that they are trying to adopt the clause, but ALSO want to keep their original signing bonus payout plan that is more spread out and disadvantageous to the player.
They want to make the change with zero compromise.
- - - - -
Yeah! It's ridiculous that you should have to actually be proven to do something wrong before you can be stripped of $10-12m in guaranteed money! Preemptive punishments are the only non-ridiculous way to handle things!
....I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to sign up for that without getting anything in return. 
- - - - -
Ray Rice was under his second contract. It wasn't his rookie deal. The Bengals didn't try to put this clause in Chase's deal, or Tee's deal, or Burrow's deal, etc.
Heck, they didn't even put it in either of Mixon's deals and he WAS on video doing violence to a woman before they even drafted him. Same with Jermaine Burton.
All it really is about is somewhere down the road the Bengals FO is going to realize a player is a bust and they're going to turn over every stone to find cause to strip him of guarantees (even though he's done nothing wrong) so they can save money. It's about power and money. Not doing what's right.
____________________________________________________________
Posts: 16,633
Threads: 2,262
Reputation:
91452
Joined: May 2015
Shemar will have to decide what is more important to him...playing or this clause
Life has no limitations except the ones you make-Paul Brown
Posts: 41,402
Threads: 962
Reputation:
145817
Joined: May 2015
(8 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Has been brought up many times already. The teams that have these clauses, have a more front-loaded payout of the signing bonuses. If it's front-loaded, you get it sooner and it can't be voided at the whim of your boss.
The problem with the Bengals is that they are trying to adopt the clause, but ALSO want to keep their original signing bonus payout plan that is more spread out and disadvantageous to the player.
They want to make the change with zero compromise.
- - - - -
Yeah! It's ridiculous that you should have to actually be proven to do something wrong before you can be stripped of $10-12m in guaranteed money! Preemptive punishments are the only non-ridiculous way to handle things!
....I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to sign up for that without getting anything in return.
- - - - -
Ray Rice was under his second contract. It wasn't his rookie deal. The Bengals didn't try to put this clause in Chase's deal, or Tee's deal, or Burrow's deal, etc.
Heck, they didn't even put it in either of Mixon's deals and he WAS on video doing violence to a woman before they even drafted him. Same with Jermaine Burton.
All it really is about is somewhere down the road the Bengals FO is going to realize a player is a bust and they're going to turn over every stone to find cause to strip him of guarantees (even though he's done nothing wrong) so they can save money. It's about power and money. Not doing what's right.
Why would they do it with Burton? The only thing guaranteed in his contract is the signing bonus.
Shemur's contract will be 100% guaranteed. I see nothing wrong with getting a little "good conduct" assurance.
But as I've said, folk's minds are made up on this already.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
Posts: 16,289
Threads: 815
Reputation:
67870
Joined: Jun 2015
(8 hours ago)pally Wrote: Shemar will have to decide what is more important to him...playing or this clause
I agree
The shot on Duke hurt the slim chance the FO was going to give in. It is hard to know who to believe, but sounds like other teams had had the new language Bengala decided to add for years and Bengals are one of last in the league to put a clause into the guarantee if the draftee does something very stupid.
But others say it is all the Bengals fault. It seems the agent is an ass and over his head, but we will see who wins this battle.
Please use 2025 free agency to fix the trenches, not the draft!!!!!!!!
|
![[Image: atkins2.0.gif]](https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2439076/atkins2.0.gif)
