Seahawks to Meet w/Michael Bennett's Agent About New Deal

[NewJerseyHawk]

Bennett is going to get a new deal that is revised but not extended.....you can argue that Schneider could cut Jimmy Graham and spread that money around to Bennett, Avril and potentially still sign a veteran offensive lineman that may become available, if the young draft picks struggle badly in camp.

Schneider has to make this happen now and if an emergency comes up then you have to make a tough decision on Graham, not because he's not talented, but similar to Harvin, if he's not buying in and blocking, then there isn't much else to expect other than his pass-catching ability and footspeed....right now, Graham's footspeed is in question after this injury, he becomes a player in name only you then have on a contract that demands he produce, but may be healthy enough to do so.

Jefferson, Reed, Clemons etc are all there to reduce Bennett's snap count....if you played Bennett as many snaps this year vs last year, he's not worth the extra money you may him. At the same time, premier pressures are more critical than WR's, QB's and RB's in some cases.....you can't equate what he means to the secondary, pass rush, locker room and personality of the team.

Schneider has prepared and drafted against the potential hole of missing Lynch, Bennett and Graham.....unlike last year, we then had to trade for a safety to help against Kam's hold out, we had Rawls tucked away and now have others to help at RB........right now, we have enough unproven depth to offset Bennett not being there or not being healthy.....just the same way our TE position is much better off now with depth vs last year and 2 years ago.

I'd rather cave and win another Super Bowl this year and deal with cap complaints for the next 3 years from our veterans vs not caving and not paying and still being in place with the same potential complaints anyway.

 

[kf3339]

The way I see it is that Bennett although unhappy last off-season showed up on time and played really well for the team. He didn't keep harping on his pay during the season from what I can recall.

So the fact the team is making a statement by meeting with his rep shows they have put him in the same category as Beastmode to a degree. The difference though is that while Beast was perfectly willing to retire and have his playing days be finished, Bennett on the other hand still has a few good years left at a potential high end playing ability. So how much is that worth, and does it warrant doing anything with a contract he willingly signed two years ago. Also remember not that many other teams were chasing him to sign with them at that time. That is the issue.

For me I would only do something that guarantees this years pay and perhaps next years no matter what happens. That is about $10M in guaranteed pay. Next I would structure a guaranteed bonus of $10M +/- to be paid next spring which would not affect the cap this year, if possible. I think that can be done. Last, I would add two more years onto his current contract with that bonus spread over those three years, if possible. If not, stretch it over the four years, which the team can easily afford on the cap this year. Those last two years would be at a $10M per year non guaranteed level. This gives him something to shoot for, and the team the ability to restructure or cut him if they need the money elsewhere.

I think it's fair for both sides and keeps with their pledge of not changing current contracts with two or more years to go. If he doesn't agree have him play out this year as is, but give him an out clause next off-season so he can find a team that will trade for him on a new contract. He will still play hard because he will need to prove his value to the rest of the league for next off-season. Makes sense to me.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

If there's a player who's done everything right despite being grossly underpaid for his production I'd like to know.

I don't have any problem with making an exception for Bennett. Dude has clearly outperformed his deal. And I'm not swayed in the least by the 'he signed a deal, he should honor it' argument. Since that premise only works one way (contracts aren't guaranteed), it's a stupid and weak argument.

Only way I consider that viewpoint is if teams have to pay what they sign as well. Otherwise I reject the idea in whole.

 

[bighawk]

Anyone suggesting cutting Bennett or getting rid of him doesn't know football he is clearly our best lineman hands down he single handedly pressured Brady he if you can do it for Lynch they should do it for Bennett. He is just as important than Thomas, Sherman. He deserves a raise within the 10-14 a year.

 

[Basis4day]

By no means am i trying to imply or argue for giving Bennett more money in this post.

But so many other teams do acquiesce to contract demands for certain players, and it doesn't lead to every other player holding out. I think is is short-sided to assume that if they give into Bennett that it automatically leads to holdouts for Sherman, Thomas, Avril etc.

Does it risk it? Absolutely. But it does not guarantee it.

 

[BadgerVid]

I always wondered why people get so mad when a player is trying to get more money. This is his job. He is vastly underpaid. Yes people can call subjective or whatever but nobody reasonable feels he is paid near his value in this league. He has complained a lot but still showed up and performed. Why is he wrong??? Just because he plays for a football team we like he should just suck it up and deal s with making millions less than he deserves.
Also people say "he signed a contract be a man and live up to it". Well the owners hold all the cards in the CBA and holding out is about the only thing he can do. He cant quit and go to another league. Plus that is the way of thing in the NFL and has been for a loooong time. Not a recent phenomenon. IT IS THE CULTURE OF THE LEAGUE.
Do the people who think it is noble to live out a crappy contract also think it should be honorable for the team to pay a player what he deserves???

I dont personally like it when a player holds out when he is so valuable because it could hurt the team but I wont hate on the player personally when they try to do right for themselves.. Remember these players did not grow up rooting and loving this team (most likely some other team). It will be their only opportunity to make this kind of money.

And I have always wondered why people want to blame the team when a player signing a contract to play 4 years for a schedule of payments and, after 1 or 2 years, feels "disrespected" if the team won't tear up that contract and give them a new one. Possibly if players were willing to take a chance on themselves and negotiate less guaranteed money and more performance based accelerators they could assure that they would not "outplay their contracts". Unfortunately, more and more want the chunk of guaranteed money and then start feeling underpaid when they start playing better than they did when they agreed to the schedule.

JMO...YMMV

The answer to your question is,,, It's just business. Basically. Players are looking out for number 1. The Org is doing the same. We just hope that they can figure it all out and put a good product on the field.

As Seinfeld famously said, sports fans just root for the laundry.

So business is now defined as not abiding by a contract you signed? I'm glad I'm retired.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

If there's a player who's done everything right despite being grossly underpaid for his production I'd like to know.

I don't have any problem with making an exception for Bennett. Dude has clearly outperformed his deal. And I'm not swayed in the least by the 'he signed a deal, he should honor it' argument. Since that premise only works one way (contracts aren't guaranteed), it's a stupid and weak argument.

Only way I consider that viewpoint is if teams have to pay what they sign as well. Otherwise I reject the idea in whole.

Sorry but I disagree given I am under the impression that if you sign a contract or enter an agreement of employment you honor the terms or leave. Bennett should man up or get out. It's just that simple. This is a bad precedent that will cost the Seahawks dearly. You never redo a deal with 2 years left it's sports contract 101.

 

[TwistedHusky]

It is actually really difficult to "break" a contract.

Most contracts have provisions in them for when you do not perform. That is part of the contract. When you walk away the penalty for doing that is right in the contract.

But realistically businesses walk away from contracts ALL THE TIME. They then pay the cost of not complying to the original agreement. The people that treat written contracts like gold, usually get the shaft because those same people often end up signing contracts that later on end up costing them.

Part of doing business is walking away from or renegotiating a bad deal. Sports is a business (as people often say). Honor has nothing to do with it.

(PS I am pretty sure I just "broke" a contract this week. Nobody in my industry is going to think less of me for that, they would however think I am a sap if I went through with it. Back in the day, I even broke contracts as a kid because I am pretty sure I never bought all those CDs at the regular price when I got 12 of them for a penny or whatever it was.)

 

[kearly]

I'm not worried about our cap. Even after allotting $5 million for rookies, IR and settlements, Seattle still would have $3 million in extra cash to spend right now without having to cut anybody or rework any contracts. That wiggle room is likely the reason why Seattle is interested in making a deal with Bennett. Even if they wanted to give him a deal last year, the money just wasn't there. This year, there's some extra money lying around.

It's similar to the reason why Seattle designated Marshawn's retirement pre-June 1st. They could have done it post-June 1st and split his dead money over two years instead of one, but instead they just ate the whole thing immediately because they had the cash to do it.

 

[JSeahawks]

Pay the man. He's earned it.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Pay the man. He's earned it.

He has earned nothing beyond his contract Duck and Kelly fan. Nothing.

 

[BuZzB28]

Michael Bennet was not happy for contract moneys last year? Its true? Then why michael bennet is looking for contract moneys again this year? Whats wrong with him?

 

[Hawk Finn]

Michael Bennet was not happy for contract moneys last year? Its true? Then why michael bennet is looking for contract moneys again this year? Whats wrong with him?

Don't ever change, Buzzybee. :179417:

 

[dogorama]

...that the Seahawks should do something w/Bennett now because after RW he is the most important player. I can't say I disagree. Over 35 defensive linemen w/more guaranteed money than Bennett.

 

[edogg23]

...that the Seahawks should do something w/Bennett now because after RW he is the most important player. I can't say I disagree. Over 35 defensive linemen w/more guaranteed money than Bennett.

What if they pay Bennett and Russ has a career year. Stafford gets a new contract bigger than Wilson. Now you have to pay Wilson more money and other players get mad. It will never end.

 

[Rob12]

He deserves a raise.

Next year - after he has another great season in 2016.

And looking at sack numbers doesn't tell the story. Name me a handful of defensive linemen in this league that line up on the inside and outside like he does. He has 292 pressures over the past four seasons. That's insane. Behind Watt, he's the most disruptive defensive player in the league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dogorama]

He deserves a raise.

Next year - after he has another great season in 2016.

And looking at sack numbers doesn't tell the story. Name me a handful of defensive linemen in this league that line up on the inside and outside like he does. He has 292 pressures over the past four seasons. That's insane. Behind Watt, he's the most disruptive defensive player in the league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally understandable but he has ZERO security, all his guaranteed money is gone. So, over 35 linemen have more security than he does? It makes no sense.

 

[Seafan]

99.9% of the time I would say no. I was against doing it for Lynch. (I was right). It sets a bad precedent.

Michael Bennett won't re-sign / do an extension with Seattle if they don't do anything with him now. He will be so pissed off he would just play out his deal, and sign somewhere else to spite the front office.

That's what I'm hoping. He becomes a free agent after playing hard for the next two years and commands a huge contract from another team and nets the Hawks a 3rd round pick.

 

[Seafan]

He deserves a raise.

Next year - after he has another great season in 2016.

And looking at sack numbers doesn't tell the story. Name me a handful of defensive linemen in this league that line up on the inside and outside like he does. He has 292 pressures over the past four seasons. That's insane. Behind Watt, he's the most disruptive defensive player in the league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally understandable but he has ZERO security, all his guaranteed money is gone. So, over 35 linemen have more security than he does? It makes no sense.

He has the security of his 4 year contract, he received what he bargained. That's how contracts work. How many other players have no more guarantees in their contracts? Hundreds. What if he had blown out his knee in his first game. The Hawks were still on the hook for all his guarantees. That's how contracts work.

 

[dogorama]

That's how contracts work.

Really? Contracts are restructured every year in the NFL. If what you are saying is correct that wouldn't be the case would it?