Michael Bennett discusses 2015 on NFL Network.

[Hawks46]

IIRC, didn't Bennett give the team a home town discount under the old rules of no contact renegotiation EARLY in a new contract, and didn't the the team break it's own rules with Marshawn? So what is wrong with Bennett asking for the same treatment as Marshawn? Bennett is merely protesting the double standard.

Bennett did not give the team a " home town discount".

He tested the market and got paid what he was worth. Now he wants more than the market thinks he is worth.

This, exactly. Bennett said before FA last year that he wasn't Walmart or Costco and wouldn't be giving the Hawks any kind of discount. Plus his agent is Drew Rosenhaus, there was no discount given to the Hawks. His market wasn't what he thought it should have been.

It's funny though, the Seahawks have been the only team in the NFL to actually value Bennett. Signed him as an UDFA, eventually cutting him where he landed with TB. TB let him walk, and he didn't get the kind of offers he wanted. Signed a one year prove it deal with Seattle, only to not get the type of attention he thought he deserved. Ended up re-signing a long term deal and still complain he's not valued enough.

Good post. It's funny, the Seahawks didn't instigate any of this. Bennett didn't get good money the first time he was a free agent, signed a deal with the Hawks, then didn't get the money he was after, signed again, now he's upset. Well, supposedly. I think he thinks he's being funny, and is trying to make an underlying point of "hey guys, I'd like more money if you were to find some laying aroudn" which is also one of the dumbest things I think I've heard. He signed a contract and the FO won't give him more money unless they have to. Bringing it up in public, in the form of a joke is a waste of time and everyone's patience.

Bennett looks like he's into the money a lot, but it's just a viewpoint. He mentioned he needed a raise. He mentioned Wilson was going to get a raise, he mentioned another player was going to need more money, and he included his brother as a guy who needed a raise badly. In almost every mention of other players, it was about getting more money. He might not be being selfish about it, it's just how he thinks.

 

[netskier]

To elaborate, here is how management has been "all over the road".

They had a clearly articulated policy that they never renegotiated existing contracts before their last year. This policy applied to all contracts, i.e., no exceptions, no matter who you are. During this period, Bennett signed his contract, giving the team a bit of a discount, for the good of the team, to allow management to retain talent, and obtain more good players, to support the goal of increasing wins.

Then Marshawn said he needed more money. Management said no way; our policy forbids this.

So he held out, and then management caved, saying something like "but only for this year". This was the first swerve on the road.

The next year he said he needed more money, and management said "no way, and we already told you that our policy forbids this, and last years caving was an exception, which is never to be repeated". This was the second swerve, this time to the original side of the road.

So he held out.

And then management caved a second time, the third swerve, this time to the caving side again.

Then they swerved back to their original position; this is the fourth swerve.

So four serves so far, or two swerves with returns, which I think qualifies for "being all over the road". Cops would stop you for just one swerve and return.

Meanwhile, Bennett, who has a great mind, is reading all of this, plus he is talking with the players, and getting lots of inside information, which is giving him reasons to reconsider the [virtual] home town discount which he earlier gave to management.

Then Russell's baseball agent, obviously with Russell's support, demands a baseball-type contract, with no discount whatsoever. Bennett notes this discrepancy too. And thinks about it.

Understanding that he is already on his last contract, he decides that he should consider puling a Marshawn style negotiation tactic to get a little more money while he can. Getting it while the getting is good. It will no longer be good when his contract expires.

I understand that NFL football is a business, and thus have no problem with either management or the players.

I do have a problem understanding why some fans here have a problem with Michael Bennett doing what Marshawn has already done twice. Is it because Bennett is an uppity lineman whose is doing what only backs are allowed to do, or only because Marshawn is consistent with his uppityness? And why can not Bennett do this too? Why is he discriminated against?

Why the double standards?

Actually this is mostly, if not entirely, incorrect. Lynch never got more money. The FO forwarded him some money that was due at the end of his contract to the year he was playing in now. Part of Lynch's concern was that the Hawks were going to cut him and he'd lose money that was on his contract now. So the FO front loaded (or forwarded for lack of a better term) money he was owed to the current year.

It wasn't a raise. It wasn't more money. It wasn't a new contract. Lynch was the one that caved on this, or he would've been paying fines which he didn't want to do.

Lynch did get more money, twice, in 2014, and again in 2015.. In the 2014 season, they moved 1.5M from his then 5.0 M salary from 2015 into 2014. Here's a quote from the story written 8/01/2014. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11296 ... ore-season

"The additional $1.5 million Lynch was given, bumping his guaranteed compensation from $5 million to $6.5 million this season, ..."

Then, in 2015, just after the Superbowl they increased his salary again.

"According to multiple reports, the Seattle Seahawks and the running back are negotiating a contract extension that would pay him up to $10 million more during the 2015 season than he is currently earning." This was written 2/02/2015, http://www.oregonlive.com/nfl/index.ssf ... ync_6.html. So the Seahawks caved to Lynch twice.

 

[Boycie]

IIRC, didn't Bennett give the team a home town discount under the old rules of no contact renegotiation EARLY in a new contract, and didn't the the team break it's own rules with Marshawn? So what is wrong with Bennett asking for the same treatment as Marshawn? Bennett is merely protesting the double standard.

Because he is no where near as important to this team as Beastmode is!

 

[netskier]

Your rule is for getting, and my rule is for asking. It is Bennett's job to ask, and Schneider's job to answer.

 

[bigwrm]

Danny Lee Connor in these obituaries (scroll down a bit) sure looks a lot like Michael Bennett:

https://afsobituaries.wordpress.com/page/37/

That is all.

 

[Hawks46]

To elaborate, here is how management has been "all over the road".

They had a clearly articulated policy that they never renegotiated existing contracts before their last year. This policy applied to all contracts, i.e., no exceptions, no matter who you are. During this period, Bennett signed his contract, giving the team a bit of a discount, for the good of the team, to allow management to retain talent, and obtain more good players, to support the goal of increasing wins.

Then Marshawn said he needed more money. Management said no way; our policy forbids this.

So he held out, and then management caved, saying something like "but only for this year". This was the first swerve on the road.

The next year he said he needed more money, and management said "no way, and we already told you that our policy forbids this, and last years caving was an exception, which is never to be repeated". This was the second swerve, this time to the original side of the road.

So he held out.

And then management caved a second time, the third swerve, this time to the caving side again.

Then they swerved back to their original position; this is the fourth swerve.

So four serves so far, or two swerves with returns, which I think qualifies for "being all over the road". Cops would stop you for just one swerve and return.

Meanwhile, Bennett, who has a great mind, is reading all of this, plus he is talking with the players, and getting lots of inside information, which is giving him reasons to reconsider the [virtual] home town discount which he earlier gave to management.

Then Russell's baseball agent, obviously with Russell's support, demands a baseball-type contract, with no discount whatsoever. Bennett notes this discrepancy too. And thinks about it.

Understanding that he is already on his last contract, he decides that he should consider puling a Marshawn style negotiation tactic to get a little more money while he can. Getting it while the getting is good. It will no longer be good when his contract expires.

I understand that NFL football is a business, and thus have no problem with either management or the players.

I do have a problem understanding why some fans here have a problem with Michael Bennett doing what Marshawn has already done twice. Is it because Bennett is an uppity lineman whose is doing what only backs are allowed to do, or only because Marshawn is consistent with his uppityness? And why can not Bennett do this too? Why is he discriminated against?

Why the double standards?

Actually this is mostly, if not entirely, incorrect. Lynch never got more money. The FO forwarded him some money that was due at the end of his contract to the year he was playing in now. Part of Lynch's concern was that the Hawks were going to cut him and he'd lose money that was on his contract now. So the FO front loaded (or forwarded for lack of a better term) money he was owed to the current year.

It wasn't a raise. It wasn't more money. It wasn't a new contract. Lynch was the one that caved on this, or he would've been paying fines which he didn't want to do.

Lynch did get more money, twice, in 2014, and again in 2015.. In the 2014 season, they moved 1.5M from his then 5.0 M salary from 2015 into 2014. Here's a quote from the story written 8/01/2014. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11296 ... ore-season

"The additional $1.5 million Lynch was given, bumping his guaranteed compensation from $5 million to $6.5 million this season, ..."

Then, in 2015, just after the Superbowl they increased his salary again.

"According to multiple reports, the Seattle Seahawks and the running back are negotiating a contract extension that would pay him up to $10 million more during the 2015 season than he is currently earning." This was written 2/02/2015, http://www.oregonlive.com/nfl/index.ssf ... ync_6.html. So the Seahawks caved to Lynch twice.

In the second instance, it was a contract extension, which isn't a "swerve" by the FO. He wasn't under contract after that year, so they needed to get something done. Also, it's pretty standard for teams to extend a guy a year before he becomes a Free Agent. The Hawks do it, and most other teams do it all the time. So, no, it's business as usual.

Per your link of his deal in 2014, here's the quote that followed yours:

"As for his contract, no money was added to Lynch's four-year, $30 million deal, which has two years remaining. His base salary this season was increased by $1 million by moving incentives to guaranteed money -- $500,000 in pregame roster bonuses and $500,000 if he rushes for 1,500 yards. The Seahawks also moved $500,000 of his 2015 base salary to this season."

They forwarded him money he was already owed and converted some bonuses. This helped Lynch get more money now, and it helped the team with his larger cap hit the following year. So yea, he got more money in THAT year, but it's pretty much like a restructure. Technically, he could've gotten a 500k raise...as he got an incentive converted that he doesn't usually hit....rushing for 1500 yards.

 

[pmedic920]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12981 ... skips-otas

 

[Blitzer88]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12981330/seattle-seahawks-dl-michael-bennett-wants-new-contract-skips-otas

smh........................... :34853_doh:

 

[Seafan]

He should have done a one year deal. Too bad for him. Now he looks like an ass.

 

[brimsalabim]

Even if he had done a one year deal I doubt he would be looking at a raise. He had an average season and poor numbers considering how he is being paid and the fact that he has the lob behind him in coverage.

 

[hawkfan68]

Bennett seems to think that the more offsides penalties he gets, the more money he should receive. Instead of focusing on money maybe he could use a little more focus on staying onside before the snap....no not a little, a lot of focus is needed here.

 

[onanygivensunday]

Part of Bennett's frustration might be the large number of snaps he had to play last year due to injuries.

When he signed his contract the Hawks were substituting more... and last year, not so much.

I'm not saying that he is justified in his actions... but ask yourself this... if your employer requires you to work 34% more hours the year after you negotiated a starting salary, wouldn't you want more money in year two and beyond?

Bennett's defensive snaps in 2013... 569.

In 2014... 763, a 34% increase.

 

[ivotuk]

Why do people care about athletes posturing for more money in the off season?

Some are acting personally affronted because Michael Bennett is trying to squeeze more money from the FO. But he's not going door to door asking for change from your kids college funds. I understad the sighs of boredom, but some of the vitriol and self righteous indignity about it is as silly as Bennett's actions.

Who cares. Its May. If he's missing off season work outs or looks even a percentage below his best on game day then you can pull out your super fan cards and start giving him tiny slices on his finger tips.

I just can't be bored any more by this stuff.

Ah, I see, the superior intellect. What I can't understand is why you would drag yourself out of your boredom to comment on the behavior of those of us not so emotionally advanced.

 

[hawknation2015]

Part of Bennett's frustration might be the large number of snaps he had to play last year due to injuries.

When he signed his contract the Hawks were substituting more... and last year, not so much.

I'm not saying that he is justified in his actions... but ask yourself this... if your employer requires you to work 34% more hours the year after you negotiated a starting salary, wouldn't you want more money in year two and beyond?

Bennett's defensive snaps in 2013... 569.

In 2014... 763, a 34% increase.

Bennett signed a contract a year ago that only a starter is worthy of receiving; there aren't any backup 4-3 DEs making over $7 million a year. To that end, we released Red Bryant beforehand to make room for Bennett's four year, $28.5 million contract. There should have been an foreseeable expectation on Bennett's end that he would be receiving a much greater workload to go along with his substantial raise and promotion to starter. That was a clear and reasonable expectation that created a preexisting duty of which he is now trying to renege by seeking to unilaterally change the agreement without proper consideration.

In addition, Bennett's advancing age and the recent signing of Frank Clark should give him an expectation of fewer snaps going forward. That is probably why Bennett wants to cash in now: before he turns 30, his snap count declines, and he never reaches the double-digit sack mark that the most highly-paid, 4-3 DEs attain. But that does NOT evidence an unforeseeable circumstance that might serve as consideration for a unilateral change to a preexisting duty. In fact, it evidences just the opposite, i.e. that Bennett's current contract is fair compensation for his anticipated level of play going forward.

 

[scutterhawk]

You told me why? Ok...

Again, who care's what side of the fence he's on. It's not an issue until it effects his play on the field. It's the off season. He's not all over any road except a slow news cycle.

But go on with your faux anger... I just don't see the big deal. Maybe he feels like he gave the Hawks a bargain deal, they're now looking at breaking the bank for the QB, traded for a high priced Tight End and gave a mercurial running back nearing 30 an extension and wants to see if he garners any extra coin? Again, who cares until August. Irvin was on TV saying he's leaving for the Falcons. It's posturing. If Bennett holds out, or starts stirring the pot at training camp, then crucify him (or cut him/trade him). But for now, its a business ploy. He's not waving pictures of PC and Wilson in compromising positions and threatening to expose a child slavery ring inside the Hawks equipment room.

And i'm not sure saying "most of us" in terms of any opinion on here is some sort of asset to your argument.

"Opinion"... isn't that what every single person is posting on this fan board, on every single thread? you've stated yours on this matter, and not everybody agrees with you.
I doubt there's many ways of wordsmithing a submission from most others here on .NET.
Some times it's better to just plant a seed, and hope that it takes root.
I for one am more concerned with seeing Russell Wilson get his FIRST contract taken care of, than I am with the squeaking wheel that is Michael Bennett.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Part of Bennett's frustration might be the large number of snaps he had to play last year due to injuries.

When he signed his contract the Hawks were substituting more... and last year, not so much.

I'm not saying that he is justified in his actions... but ask yourself this... if your employer requires you to work 34% more hours the year after you negotiated a starting salary, wouldn't you want more money in year two and beyond?

Bennett's defensive snaps in 2013... 569.

In 2014... 763, a 34% increase.

That's what agents are for, to advise their clients on the inner workings on leveraging their client's production into the overall success of the team AND project that forward to maximize the contract.

But that's not what Bennett and Rosenhaus did, they accepted a lower but fair deal because Bennett LOVED his team, his teammates and finally having a stable place to call home after bouncing around the league............even as far as to go on radio and say as such OVER AND OVER AND OVER to anyone that would listen.

 

[hawknation2015]

I will say that if Bennett goes on to have a season that is the equivalent of what Marshawn Lynch had in 2014, meaning 12+ sacks and 50+ tackles, then I think it might be fair to mutually agree to modify the agreement to increase Bennett's pay in 2016 or 2017. That would be an inordinate amount of production from Bennett that might warrant a contract adjustment at some point. Hopefully, Bennett is thinking more along those lines and will decide to attend training camp this year, as Lynch did before the 2014 season. Bennett needs to step up his game this year to earn any kind of contract modification, and that is more likely to happen for him if he attends practices and comes out of gate firing on all cylinders.

 

[McGruff]

Part of Bennett's frustration might be the large number of snaps he had to play last year due to injuries.

When he signed his contract the Hawks were substituting more... and last year, not so much.

I'm not saying that he is justified in his actions... but ask yourself this... if your employer requires you to work 34% more hours the year after you negotiated a starting salary, wouldn't you want more money in year two and beyond?

Bennett's defensive snaps in 2013... 569.

In 2014... 763, a 34% increase.

Bennett's income in 2013 . . . 5 million

Bennett's income in 2014 . . . 10 million, a 100% increase

In others words, Bennett got paid MORE per snap in 2014.

 

[McGruff]

Does anyone have a breakdown of how many snaps Bennett played at DT in 2014. I know it was probably less than in 2013 due to need at the DE position, but one of Bennett's "points of leverage" is his versatility (a point that the Seahawks are fairly unique in valuing).

As a DT, his salary this year would make him the 3rd highest paid at his position. Just sayin' that if you average the two positions he plays, he's probably pretty close to being where he should be. Undervalued as an end, but overvalued as a tackle.

 

[ivotuk]

My question for Bennett would be: "How was it that the defense fell apart when Avril left the game (Superbowl)? Cliff's not asking for more money, yet his impact on the game is obvious."