Trey Hendrickson Update

[*ochocincos*]

(Yesterday, 02:54 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I think if the organization fires their O-line coach and hires a new one, and their new hire says he likes a player and can fix him, then he deserves to have that opportunity. Otherwise you are just disenfranchising the new coach before the season ever starts.

That's fair.
At the end of the day, this is Volson's last year though under contract.
I would hope he's not retained if he ends up performing poorly again this season.

[Soonerpeace]

(Yesterday, 12:28 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You could certainly claim they're better on paper and i doubt you'd get much if any argument. It remains to be seen if that translates to on the field. 

I guess my feeling is, if the SB line was a 2 out of 10 and this line ends up being a 4 or 5 out of 10...sure it's improvement but it's still sorely lacking. 

Well I’m not suggesting this is a SB roster. The offense I think will be. But the defense just doesn’t have any all pro level players except for Trey. But on paper the OL is improved.

[NotBigzo]

(Yesterday, 08:02 AM)Sled21 Wrote: So since this line has never played together and there is no way to say they're better than the Super Bowl line, then how can one say "We aren't winning the Super Bowl with this line? If one is an unknown, certainly the other is as well. 

People have said the same thing year after year since 2015. "This line will be better than last year's" only for there to be slight, marginal improvement at best. 

That's what 11 years of shit O lines get you. Can't beleive people still give it the benefit of the doubt. 

Could it be better than the SB line? Sure, but that's not that big a hurdle. Wouldn't count on it because of a decade-long pattern though.

[Essex Johnson]

(Yesterday, 11:13 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The projected starting 5 are:

OBJ - Fairchild - Karras - Patrick - Mims

So no, the starters have not played together yet. It’s literally 2 brand new guards.

Yes 3 have and a projection i saw was Ford is also in running so the idea the majority have not played together is 100% false

[Essex Johnson]

(Yesterday, 12:08 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The actual cap space remaining, which is $32.6 mill, per Spotrac. That's 8th highest remaining in the league.

Hendrickson won't really care what the cap space itself is, just that he gets his money.
And he likely wants it either frontloaded or more guaranteed in event he may get moved before the end of his potential new deal.

If Bengals don't want to guarantee as much, they should restructure and plan to frontload up to an extra $20-25 mill this year and drop down the subsequent years.
They have the cap space this year to bump up Trey's 2025 cap hit from $18.67 mill to $35-45 mill without going over.

Still does not address my point of value, trey seems to have a higher value than bengals, cap space is secondary, also can't bengals carry over cap for next year which can impact next year signings? 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(Today, 12:58 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Still does not address my point of value, trey seems to have a higher value than bengals, cap space is secondary, also can't bengals carry over cap for next year which can impact next year signings? 

Are we trying to win this year or are we trying to win next year?

[Bronxbengal]

(Today, 01:44 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Are we trying to win this year or are we trying to win next year?

Neither….Katie is only concerned about winning an argument.  A Super Bowl win does not matter as long as she lives up to the reputation her old man has which is as a myopic leader.

[Essex Johnson]

(Today, 01:44 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Are we trying to win this year or are we trying to win next year?

We have him under contract this year and can keep him next year, if he attempts to try extortion by holding out, that won't need well 

[*ochocincos*]

(Today, 12:58 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Still does not address my point of value, trey seems to have a higher value than bengals, cap space is secondary, also can't bengals carry over cap for next year which can impact next year signings? 

I'm sure there is a difference of opinion in "value" when it comes to dollars and cents between the two parties...or at least how they agree to get there.
For example, Bengals might have offered a good AAV for the contract, but Hendrickson may want more in guaranteed $$ because of worry of ever being cut.
Bengals have gotten less and less willing to keep guys in the final year of their contracts, either cutting or restructuring for less, which may sway Hendrickson to demand more guaranteed to offset any chance of that ever happening.

And yes, the Bengals can carry over to next year, but how does that help them get back to the Super Bowl this year?
They could have done (much) more in FA this year to help bolster the 2025 Bengals.

[Luvnit2]

(7 hours ago)Bronxbengal Wrote: Neither….Katie is only concerned about winning an argument.  A Super Bowl win does not matter as long as she lives up to the reputation her old man has which is as a myopic leader.

This is silly and unless you have been involved in the talks between Trey and Katie, you have no idea why they can't come together for a new deal.

 I would argue her Dad would have said sorry you are under contract and not even discuss a new deal. He was consistent though as he also rarely cut or took money away from those under contract.

We know Katie offered him a new extension, we don't know the numbers.

[TecmoBengals]

(6 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: This is silly and unless you have been involved in the talks between Trey and Katie, you have no idea why they can't come together for a new deal.

 I would argue her Dad would have said sorry you are under contract and not even discuss a new deal. He was consistent though as he also rarely cut or took money away from those under contract.

We know Katie offered him a new extension, we don't know the numbers.

Ummmm. You just called him silly for speculating about the negotiations - which seems like a reasonable thing to do on a message board - and then made up your own speculative comment about what Mike Brown likely said.

[TecmoBengals]

(6 hours ago)Essex Johnson Wrote: We have him under contract this year and can keep him next year, if he attempts to try extortion by holding out, that won't need well 

Your response only addresses the impact on Trey and didn't answer his question about trying to win it all or not. Trey holding out doesn't hurt the Brown family wallet, but it will cost the team success.

[Luvnit2]

(6 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: Ummmm. You just called him silly for speculating about the negotiations - which seems like a reasonable thing to do on a message board - and then made up your own speculative comment about what Mike Brown likely said.

Maybe i misread it, but I speculated, he was very direct and did not say may, he did not speculate.

[TecmoBengals]

(5 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: Maybe i misread it, but I speculated, he was vey direct and did not say may, he did not speculate.

I get what you're saying based on how he worded his comment.

[Luvnit2]

(5 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: Your response only addresses the impact on Trey and didn't answer his question about trying to win it all or not. Trey holding out doesn't hurt the Brown family wallet, but it will cost the team success.

It is informed opinion, but we have no idea really. Your opinion may be correct or Trey may blow his knee out midseason so not available for the playoffs or the Super Bowl.

I want the 2 sides to work something out, but we see it differnently. If Bengals FO was all about the Borwn wallet, why offer him an extension at all?

Maybe the truth lies someonone in the middle and maybe both sides have some blame, not just the Bengals.

[Sled21]

(7 hours ago)Bronxbengal Wrote: Neither….Katie is only concerned about winning an argument.  A Super Bowl win does not matter as long as she lives up to the reputation her old man has which is as a myopic leader.

Ok Shemar.....  Nice to have you here I guess

[TecmoBengals]

(5 hours ago)Luvnit2 Wrote: It is informed opinion, but we have no idea really. Your opinion may be correct or Trey may blow his knee out midseason so not available for the playoffs or the Super Bowl.

I want the 2 sides to work something out, but we see it differnently. If Bengals FO was all about the Borwn wallet, why offer him an extension at all?

Maybe the truth lies someonone in the middle and maybe both sides have some blame, not just the Bengals.

I agree that we have no idea really, but decades of the Brown family taking the hard route with player contracts is all I need to stick with my opinions about them as owners. 

[Essex Johnson]

(5 hours ago)TecmoBengals Wrote: Your response only addresses the impact on Trey and didn't answer his question about trying to win it all or not. Trey holding out doesn't hurt the Brown family wallet, but it will cost the team success.

well he is under contract and bengals expect him to honor contract, in someways it is out of their control how any player is going to perform but sure  could impact this year, we won;t know that till after the season but with the signings of Burrow, Chase and Higgins if we have to move on from Tre  are window of success is still in good shape and lets see what benefits we could gain from either trading him or using those $$ for other signings etc. 

[BFritz21]

(45 minutes ago)Essex Johnson Wrote: well he is under contract and bengals expect him to honor contract, in someways it is out of their control how any player is going to perform but sure  could impact this year, we won;t know that till after the season but with the signings of Burrow, Chase and Higgins if we have to move on from Tre  are window of success is still in good shape and lets see what benefits we could gain from either trading him or using those $$ for other signings etc. 

We hold all the cards here. It sucks for Trey, but it's the nature of the business. 

He's 30, so he's wrong if he thinks that other teams are going to throw big money at him and he's sonly hurting himself if he doesn't sign because then we can just franchise him twice after this season and he has no long-term stability.