Trey Hendrickson Update

[*PhilHos*]

(7 hours ago)Sled21 Wrote: Stop with the Burrow should just not show up crap. Those are wholly different scenarios. Everyone knew Chase would get paid. Tee played out his contract and then was tagged once. Hendrickson still has a year on his contract. Joe is not going to "Sit out" to make a point while Trey is still under contract. I don't want to sound like I'm trashing Trey, he has been one of my favorites, but he is acting very childish whining to the press about this situation. HE signed his contract extension he so badly wanted. If he wants to be mad about it, he should be mad at himself and his incompetent agent, and quit trashing the Bengals. Then he says things like he needs to take care of his family. Dude, you're a multi-millionaire, unless you just throw money away your family is taken care of. 

I don't know, Sled. Have you seen the cost of eggs lately?

[*PhilHos*]

(7 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: Trey's performance is likely to dip soon. That's why i've been saying pay him up front and give him the years, but with outs or at a lower salary to mitigate. Who knows...with the Chase and Tee contracts not being done the way most teams do them--low early numbers--maybe they're kind of hamstrung on what they can pay Trey in yrs 1 and 2. 

This is the way. Give him a contract extension with a huge upfront cost then just give him the years he wants with the last year either being a team option and/or heavily incentive-laden. So unless the Bengals gave him a 1 year extension and said take it or leave it, I don't understand why there's no compromise (unless it's Trey that doesn't want to compromise)

[*rfaulk34*]

(7 hours ago)PhilHos Wrote: This is the way. Give him a contract extension with a huge upfront cost then just give him the years he wants with the last year either being a team option and/or heavily incentive-laden. So unless the Bengals gave him a 1 year extension and said take it or leave it, I don't understand why there's no compromise (unless it's Trey that doesn't want to compromise)

Yessir. And i'm not saying Trey is completely in the right here. Maybe he's looking for 4 or 5 years because he believes in himself. 

If that's the case...no bueno. 

[BenZoo2]

I’m getting a little confused by treys comments. When he says if I only get 4 sacks they would want money back, this sounds like someone who would accept some incentives in his contract. If he really believes in himself, and the incentives are reasonable, then what’s the hold up?

It would be nice to know what the offer is vis a vis the demands. I still believe the bengals made their offer and that’s it. No need for communication until he accepts. And he’s not willing to take it. This will drag up to and including camp imho

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(7 hours ago)PhilHos Wrote: This is the way. Give him a contract extension with a huge upfront cost then just give him the years he wants with the last year either being a team option and/or heavily incentive-laden. So unless the Bengals gave him a 1 year extension and said take it or leave it, I don't understand why there's no compromise (unless it's Trey that doesn't want to compromise)

I agree with Rfaulk and you on this one Phil. Pay him big upfront money while he is still a top pass rusher, if he wants more years in his extension
that is fine as long as he is paid as a rotational pass rusher later on in his career.

[Luvnit2]

(4 hours ago)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I agree with Rfaulk and you on this one Phil. Pay him big upfront money while he is still a top pass rusher, if he wants more years in his extension
that is fine as long as he is paid as a rotational pass rusher later on in his career.

Wouldn't incentives be more fair for both parties? It seems Trey wants to be paid for his past accomplishments.

The NFL is a what have you done lately business. Like others have said, if he believes in himself, he will hit the same numbers in the future he is hitting now. If he does or exceeds them the incentive should reward him for it whether in year 1 (existing contract) or year 3.

I don't think Trey is going to take an offer that does not pay him in years 2 and 3. Why would he?

[*rfaulk34*]

(3 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: Wouldn't incentives be more fair for both parties? It seems Trey wants to be paid for his past accomplisgments.

The NFL is a what have you done lately business. Like others have said, if he believes in himself, he will hit the same numbers in the future he is hitting now. If he does or exceeds them the incentive should reward him for it whether in year 1 (existing contract) or year 3.

I don't think Trey is going to take an offer that does not pay him in years 2 and 3. Why would he?

Yep. What have you done for me lately? Oh, just 35 sacks over the last 2 years. 

Why would he? Because it's not about your base salary year by year. It's about the status of APY, signing bonus and guaranteed money. 

[Sled21]

(7 hours ago)PhilHos Wrote: I don't know, Sled. Have you seen the cost of eggs lately?

Falling so fast half of every carton is broken.....

[Essex Johnson]

(3 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yep. What have you done for me lately? Oh, just 35 sacks over the last 2 years. 

Why would he? Because it's not about your base salary year by year. It's about the status of APY, signing bonus and guaranteed money. 

after one year after signing his contract, he wanted out of it, the Bengals choose to sign Higgins over Trey, knowing it was unlikely they could meet Trey demand plus he is still under contract, if he sits out he sits out... we move on.. this is not unique to the bengals, other teams have had same issue especially players entering in their 30s still playing at a high level and debating the length and amount of contract... 

[Luvnit2]

(3 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yep. What have you done for me lately? Oh, just 35 sacks over the last 2 years. 

Why would he? Because it's not about your base salary year by year. It's about the status of APY, signing bonus and guaranteed money. 

OK, it is great for Tee.

Why would also be great for the team to assume he will keep up that perfromance as he head to his mid 30?s

If he believes he will keep up his high level of play, he should gladly accept an incentivized deal or be open to the conversation.

My idea of a fair deal for both sides is as follows:

Give him a bonus of 10 million (all guaranteed) for 2025. That would take his compensation if factoring in the 2022 signing bonus 28.6 million in 2025.


Bengals could take the 10 million bonus and spread over years 2 and 3 or all in year 3. So, no cap hit in 2025.

In 2026 give him a base salary of 24 million (60% or 14.4 million guaranteed), then give him a roster bonus (In March, 2026) of 5 million and then 500K per sack. If he is healthy, he gets the 5 million bonus on March (paid earlier than a game check), so now 19.4 million guaranteed. If he gets 16 sacks, he earns an additional 8 million and plays all of 2026, he gets the other 9.6 million. If he gets 16 sacks (less than he has been doing), his total compensation in 2026 = 37 million dollars.

In 2027, he gets a base salary of 15 million + 500K per sack. He gets a 10 million roster bonus in March. None is guaranteed, but he can know by March if team is going to pay hiim the option. If he plays and gets 16 sacks, he makes 33 million in 2027.

There are lots of ways to do this, I think this is more than fair. If he can get 20 sacks, he gets more money.

He walks away with a lot more than his currecnt guarantee of only 15.8 million, he has guarantees of 41 million and possible 98.6 million if he averages 16 sacks a year the next 3 years.

[*rfaulk34*]

(3 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: OK, it is great foe Tee.

Why would also be great for the team to assume he will keep up that perfromance as he head to his mid 30?s

If he believes he will keep up his high level of play, he should gladly accept an incentivized deal or be open to the conversation.

My idea of a fair deal for both sides is as follows:

Give him a bonus of 10 million (all guaranteed) for 2025. That would take his compensation if factoring in the 2022 signing bonus 28.6 million in 2025.


Bengals could take the 10 million bonus and spread over years 2 and 3 or all in year 3. So, no cap hit in 2025.

In 2026 give him a base salary of 24 million (60% or 14.4 million guaranteed), then give him a roster bonus (In March, 2026) of 5 million and then 500K per sack. If he is healthy, he gets the 5 million bonus on March (paid earlier than a game check), so now 19.4 million guaranteed. If he gets 16 sacks, he earns an additional 8 million and plays all of 2026, he gets the other 9.6 million. If he gets 16 sacks (less than he has been doing), his total compensation in 2026 = 37 million dollars.

In 2027, he gets a base salary of 15 million + 500K per sack. He gets a 10 million roster bonus in March. None is guaranteed, but he can know by March if team is going to pay hiim the option. If he plays and gets 16 sacks, he makes 33 million in 2027.

There are lots of ways to do this, I think this is more than fair. If he can get 20 sacks, he gets more money.

He walks away with a lot more than his currecnt guarantee of only 15.8 million, he has guarantees of 41 million and possible 98.6 million if he averages 16 sacks a year the next 3 years.

Looks good. Good work.

[*PhilHos*]

(2 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: Looks good. Good work.

Quick someone leak Luvnit's plan to the Bengals front office.

[*bfine32*]

I think folks assume there's always drama because Chase started his drama one year too early. I'd love to give Trey a new three-year contract with the first two years guaranteed.

[*Nately120*]

(3 hours ago)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yep. What have you done for me lately? Oh, just 35 sacks over the last 2 years. 

Why would he? Because it's not about your base salary year by year. It's about the status of APY, signing bonus and guaranteed money. 

Keep in mind too that we as fans are hoping that our new DC is going to be so much better than Lou that players who have shown very little ability to play defense are going to looked markedly better.  Shouldn't we assume that Trey who managed to lead the league in sacks under Lou's player-killing leadership is going to be much better as well?

The guy lead the league in sacks playing for Lou while Lou was supposedly making our players worse.

[samhain]

This predicament exposes one of the biggest disadvantages this front office has. Unlike other teams with elite qbs, they have failed at every attempt to replace a valued starter with young, controllable talent.  

Trey has been great here, but you can't keep them all.  There's there's absolutely nobody there to fill the hole he'll leave.  If Murphy or even Ossai realized half of the potential they saw in them, then moving on from 91 would be much easier.  

The 9-1-5 gold rush nearly brought a title to Cincinnati.  Since then the drafts have leaned toward abysmal.  That can't be sustained, and it's not all just bad luck.  Philly and KC both replaced big chunks of their secondaries in their title years.  KC especially lost major contributors on both sides.  Even when their replacements didn't cut it, they added talent to level up other parts of the roster.

Trey's scenario is a symptom of a much larger issue.

People say he has no leverage, but if you think this team is a title contender minus the league leader in sacks, then I don't know what to say.  There were times when this defense was arguably the worst in the league last year.  You don't fix that by letting proven talent go.  If they can't get him to suit up then we are likely in for another excruciating season.  The family can exercise their contractual power, but the on-field product will suffer for it.

[BengalsBong]

(1 hour ago)Nately120 Wrote: Keep in mind too that we as fans are hoping that our new DC is going to be so much better than Lou that players who have shown very little ability to play defense are going to looked markedly better.  Shouldn't we assume that Trey who managed to lead the league in sacks under Lou's player-killing leadership is going to be much better as well?

The guy lead the league in sacks playing for Lou while Lou was supposedly making our players worse.

There is a big difference between LB and Safety that need to read and react to plays in an over complicated system as opposed to a guy that pins his ears back and just gets after the QB.

One relies on the system more while the other is purely athletic ability and beating the guy across from you.

The big issue with Lou and the last D-line coach was not developing the young guys coming out of college on the D-line.

Lou was not willing to change his system to fit the players, and the D-line coach was not getting progress out of the D-linemen developing.