sparky151

That's sort of the point. As a team employee, his duty was to the owners. He was among the shareholders but the Knowltons owned more of the team than he did. But he wanted to squeeze them out so he stopped paying dividends to pressure the widow and to have a stockpile of cash to pay himself once he obtained control. It's what's known as the agent-principal problem. Yes, the IRS challenged the sale of Brown's shares to Sawyer, Nippert, and others with the repurchase option as an estate tax avoidance scheme. Which it certainly was, but the court found it wasn't an illegal one. There are other possibilities too. He might be traded, he might get a new contract, or he could hold in and half ass it while collecting his pay and completing his contract. Yeah, it's not only fans of other teams, it's other teams themselves who think Bengals management isn't very good. Generally they keep it to themselves as they don't want things to change in Cincinnati but it slips out now and then.

It's a certainty he wouldn't agree to a structure that only pays him if he hits a lot of incentives. He complained about just that a couple months ago.

He's already a fully vested veteran. His NFL pension will increase if he plays longer but he should be set for life financially already. He's earned a gross total of more than 60 mil in his career. Taxes will take a lot of that but he doesn't seem like the sort to throw money away on frivolous luxuries. He probably has 20 mil or more saved up. That will produce an annual income of $800K or more even if just put in T-bills. The contract dispute is about respect and being lied to. He wanted an extension last year and the team told him things they apparently don't want to live up to this year. Offering a sub market value deal isn't taking care of him. Regarding his buyout, his contract for 2025 has a cap number of 18.67 mil. That's composed of his salary of 15.8 mil, plus LTBE per game roster bonuses of 200K plus the prorated share of his 8 mil signing bonus from 2023. It's split over the 3 years of his contracts, thus 2.67 mil this year. Besides saving his salary and roster bonus, that's the limit of the team's rights vs Trey if he retires. They can't sue him for specific performance due to the CBA. All they can do is require him to repay the 2.67 mil. If he's prepared to pay it back, that's the limit of his obligations to the Bengals. If he shows up and half asses it for 10 games, he could then retire and owe the team a much smaller refund. They can't tag him if he's not active and he can unretire whenever he wants, ie the day after the franchise tag deadline next February. That would make him a free agent before the start of the league year. You think he wouldn't have a market? The preseason odds have the Bengals as underdogs at Minnesota and Denver. No, the Bengals weren't going to keep Tee. That's why they didn't make him an offer on a multi-year deal in 2024. Chase tied their hands by saying he wouldn't sign until Tee was signed. If the team lost both Higgins and Chase, they would have probably lost Burrow too. So they were boxed in and knew it and resented it. Seems like they are taking it out on Hendrickson. It's not as if they don't have the money to pay him a fair market value deal as they had previously promised. Indeed. That leverage will only grow if the defense struggles in his absence. On the other hand if the defense plays well without him doing much, the team might be more likely to trade him. Er, why SHOULD we win a pair of road games at playoff teams?

It goes back years and has been reported in the Enquirer and other places. Part of Paul Brown's estate planning was selling his shares to some of his partners but his heirs having an option to repurchase them at a fixed price. In the meantime various Brown family members, notably Mike, were guaranteed not only jobs and paychecks but the powers of the office. So Mike and his brother ran the team for their benefit even though they didn't own much of it at all. The NFL was profitable back then too but the team didn't pay dividends and built up a cash trove. Mike and Pete Brown paid themselves nice salaries while living frugally. After the IRS case ended, the brothers bought back shares from some of the partners at the predetermined price. The Knowltons were holdouts though on their original shares which Mike Brown wanted. So using his control, he simply discontinued the dividends and let the cash pile up until the widow Knowlton sold her shares as she needed money.

He told the team after the 2010 season that he was planning to retire. He didn't file the paperwork for that with the league but dropped communication with the team and they put him on the reserve/did not report list when they opened training camp and he wasn't there in 2011. Then midseason, Oakland lost their QB and traded for him.

Gabriel was drafted to be a backup QB. Sanders is more likely to be the Elves starter than DG. Pickett is probably the odd man out for the roster. I'll guess we see Flacco on week 1 and Sanders at the end of the year.

The first two should be easy wins. Vikings have a good homefield advantage, some playmakers and a decent defense. Broncos have a good defense, altitude, and a limited but efficient offense. I'll guess 3-1 if Hendrickson is playing. If he's out, it will be a long year. He's said he's not going to play on his current deal. The team doesn't seem to be making any effort to negotiate a new deal with him. That spells impasse. He can in effect buy out his current deal for 2.67 mil but that doesn't make him a free agent, just relieves him of any obligations to the Bengals. A holdout during minicamp, training camp, and preseason would cost a lot more than 2.67 mil. Striking a new deal at the market rate would easily recoup the 2.67 mil, whether with the Bengals or some other team.

Fan opinion doesn't matter much to either the team or player. Joey B's opinion does seem to matter to the decision makers so let's see if he gets involved on Trey's behalf the way he did for his pass catchers. Bengals promised him last year a fair market deal this year. Now they don't want to deliver. They didn't expect the pass rusher market to move as much as it did but there they are. Same thing with Chase, they probably expected to pay him the dollar more than Jefferson got but they dragged it out and ended up having to match the Garrett contract. It's not a gamble against oneself for a player to sign a contract or for a player to want an extension or new deal. It happens every day and most teams are happy to reward their top players. The Bengals are apparently not one of those teams though. Trey is hardly the first player to find the team unwilling to pay the going rate for his performance. Yes, the question is whether it will be with the Bengals or someone else.

He's not going to retire for real, but he could easily do a Palmeresque "retirement", where he retires from the Bengals and unretires for another team (one willing to pay fair market value). Last year the Bengals gave him assurances about a new contract so he would rescind his trade request and go through training camp and the season without the extension he wanted then. You seem to be saying he's a fool for believing them. Was Burrow a fool and knave to want a new contract as soon as he was eligible for an extension? This is entirely about dollars and guarantees. Length of contract can always be finessed since they get renegotiated so frequently. No, that's a veto. Control is making someone do what you want them to do.

Plus the home games vs the Browns and Stealers look easy at the moment.

Why do you think you're in position to guarantee anything? If he gets a new deal, he'll be out there (barring injury) but in the absence of a new deal, I'd say the chances are less than 50%. NFL teams are good investments. He's buying .1% or a thousandth of the team. Probably cost him 6 or 7 million dollars.

Yep, completely agree. The Bengals seem to act like they think if they sign someone to a deal, they're stuck with it. So, above all things, they don't want to have dead money (Duke's even said this). Of course as we saw with Moss and Stone this year or Mixon a couple years ago, they don't feel unable to ask for a reduction in pay. NFL contracts aren't very binding on either team or player and a team can certainly get out of a contract they don't like by just releasing the player (or trading him if he has trade value, as Trey does).

And according to Google's AI, the source for that claim is a Facebook post by someone named Bruce Davis. You can do better than that.

Eh, the Ravens should have played in Cincinnati on a Thursday. Other than that no complaints. Week 10 is a good time for a bye. We have the fewest travel miles of any team. We're favored in 10 games at the moment.

He's publicly said he's not asking for top of the market money. So nothing that starts with a 4. Part of the Brown's eagerness to do a deal with Garrett was self-image. They didn't want their best player lobbying for a trade. And part was cap manipulation, his extension actually lowered his cap number for this year as they wait for the Watson contract to expire.

He may very well "retire". If he does the team is entitled to recover previously advanced signing bonus attributable to unplayed seasons. This is the last year of his contract so he would potentially owe $2.66 million. The team was entitled to recover money from Hubbard when he retired but didn't. In Trey's case, they almost certainly would go after it. But he doesn't have to send them a check for a lump sum, it would be returned week by week over the course of the season. He'd get a refund on his taxes for it as well. The reason he might do that is the penalties for holding out would cost more. There's a per-day fine for holding out during training camp and missing preseason games costs regular season game checks. Those would add up to more than the refund. The Bengals would still hold his rights for a season if he unretires and the contract year would toll if he held out all season. If he did unretire, the team could get a 2 week roster exemption for him so he should time a return allowing for that. Bengals have lots of cap space so they aren't in any danger of cap troubles if Trey unretired at an inconvenient time for them, as opposed to the Saints and David Carr. If he doesn't want to play on this current contract and the Bengals don't make an offer he considers acceptable, then retiring makes the most sense for him. Other than the 2.66 mil, he saves wear and tear on his body, his market value doesn't go down, and his leverage increases if the team gets off to a poor start with the defense struggling to get pressure on opposing QBs. And if Murphy/Stewart/Ossai get off to a great start, the Bengals can trade him to a team that will pay him. Some teams are owned by largely self-made men. Mike Brown's version of that was withholding dividend payments from Dutch Knowlton's widow until she sold her shares. Not sure we have the worst nepo babies but they are probably bottom 5. Other team's fans laugh at the Bengals because our ownership is penny wise and pound foolish. Lucking (or stinking) into Burrow has covered for a multitude of sins thus far. The 85/3 with 40 was a hypothetical that Go threw out. But even at those numbers, they are valuing Hendrickson at less than Higgins, which seems off. Trey isn't a good run defender. He charges upfield at the snap and teams can run inside of him on passing downs. But getting the other team to run on passing downs isn't a terrible problem as long as your LBs and safeties are good tacklers. Ours weren't last year. He batted down more passes than Myles Garrett or Nick Bosa last year, he's pretty good at that. Not sure how you can say he isn't an all round great DE. He was voted by his peers as first team all-pro and finished higher than all other pass rushers in the DPOY voting (the winner was a CB). Tautologically a fair contract is one both sides would be happy to sign. IMO that means raising his average pay to the mid 30s, guaranteeing money in 2026, and letting the team take it year by year after that. So something like 4 additional years, 150 mil in new money plus his current year's salary. A 25 mil signing bonus with annual salaries of 16 mil, 25, 30, 35, and 40 mil. Full guarantees of this year's salary (they aren't cutting him anyway and a roster bonus next year, say 10 mil on the first day of the league year with a salary of 15 mil paid over the season. It would raise his cap hit for the team by 5 mil this year. He'd take home 41 mil this year, have 51 mil in total guarantees, and the team could get out of the deal as soon as next year if he absolutely stinks this season. Assuming his play falls off gradually while his cost rises, they might move on after 2027 with a cap space gain of 25 mil and having paid Trey 86 mil for 3 years which is not far from what Go proposed. Er, what's his fault? Lots of players and team redo deals before they expire. Hendrickson during his time with the Bengals has received less guaranteed money than Carl Lawson got with the Jets and Cowboys. Nobody, anywhere would say Lawson is a better player.

Lol. That's not "control". He can't play for another team as long as the Bengals hold his rights. But they can't make him show up for minicamp or play on his current deal or sign their tender offer if they tag him. They can't stop him from "retiring" if they don't strike a new deal before training camp. As a Rams fan put it on another message board (in a discussion about Derrick Henry's new deal) "Odd to me that no one has brought up that Henry only having 1 year left means he was highly likely to hold out or be otherwise disgruntled. Given how good he was and the Ravens are trying to win, he had a decent chunk of leverage. And generally teams don't want to be the Bengals. Signing a FA, then having them outperform their deal means they should get a new one so that the next rebound FA wants to sign."

The early lines have Bengals favored in 10 games and underdogs in 7. CBS Sportsline guy is predicting a 9-8 record for us.

PFT reported it about a month ago, presumably getting it from his agent. Where did you see the Bengals were offering 30-32? Trey's agent told the Bengals he thought he could get another team to offer a first round pick in trade for Trey. So Bengals let Trey shop himself around. Some of the national reports said teams had offered over 30 for his services on a multi-year extension but none offered more than a 2nd round pick for him. Commanders were considered a possibility to give up their first until they traded most of their picks for Deebo Samuel and Laremy Tunsil.

If they screwed up the Whitworth extension, a fortiori they can screw up the Hendrickson extension and seem intent on doing so.

This is on a par with Kelsey Conway is a hooker. You're just making stuff up. Do you enjoy your heel turn? I doubt Trey enjoys his but Ross Tucker was saying that nice guys finish last and Trey should be a lot more outspoken.

He's coming off a better season than those 3 gentlemen. He also not only led the NFL in sacks last year, he has the most in the league over the last 2 year period. There's a rule that contracts can only be done once per 12 months (with some exceptions). That didn't prevent team and player from signing a new contract last year, would have just had to be 12 months after his 2023 extension. Yeah, the Crosby contract was pretty unusual. He still had a couple years left on his previous contract and the deal didn't come with a signing bonus, all the additional money is in the additional years. Trey had more sacks than Nick Bosa and Maxx Crosby combined last year. What would be really stupid is losing his services.

But he's so old

Various places are saying Bengals will be at Browns week 1.

The Bengals offered him 28 mil per year. That's not close to market value. He was offered more than 30 mil in March and that was before the top of the market moved up with Garrett, Crosby, and Hunter's new deals. Parsons will probably pass Garrett and Hutchinson might.