Michael Bennett fires agent Drew Rosenhaus

[Tech Worlds]

I am worth more than I'm being paid too. I need to fire my agent.

 

[onanygivensunday]

Here comes off-season distraction #1.

However this plays out, I hope that it is not prolonged.

 

[firebee]

Here comes off-season distraction #1.

However this plays out, I hope that it is not prolonged.

Enter reason #1 why I'm hounding on the renegotiation of Graham's contract being the 1st priority. As long as we keep him on the roster at 9 million a year, we're setting a precedent for the other players like Bennett, Kam and Baldwin. If Graham is getting 9 million this year, any one of them getting less than Graham is going to be a hard pill to swallow. Renegotiating him to a 2-3 year deal at 6 million a year with 6 million guaranteed spread out over the next 2-3 years allows us to give him this season to see where he's at. If he's not the same, we can release him next year and call it a wash. We won't free up any cap, but we won't have to pay against the cap space to release him either. It frees up 3 million this year and 4 million next year to put towards Bennett, Kam and Baldwin; and most importantly, it eliminates the 9 million dollar salary that will be used by Bennett, Kam and Baldwin as a measure of what they think their value to the team should be. If Graham is getting 9 million, they're certainly going to want around the same amount, at least. We don't want Graham's 9 million dollar salary hanging over our heads this offseason when we're trying to renegotiate or resign our guys and keep things somewhat together.

 

[twisted_steel2]

I hope the Seahawks reward him. He's playing great right now, way above his contract. I don't see the harm in rewarding him with more $$. And give Baldwin a bump too.

Did he hold out? Nope.
Did he show up on time and ball out? Yep.

Reward him. It sets a good precedent with other players.

 

[volsunghawk]

He's worth more than what he's being paid.

With that said, he signed the damn contract. He's got two years left. Ball out in 2016, and then we can talk. I respect the fact that he showed up to work when he was only making more money than I will earn in my lifetime (I know, apples and oranges). I wouldn't hate it if the Seahawks worked some more money into his deal somehow, but I really want this charade to stop. We all know you want more money, Mike. Let the process play out.

Ha. He's going to turn 31 in the middle of the 2016 season. How likely is it that John Schneider gives Bennett one last payday at that age?

Bennett has played for us for under market value year in and year out since returning to Seattle, and even though he's made noise about holding out, he's never missed significant time. Yeah, he's got a problem with jumping the snap, but even with that notable issue, he's been our most versatile D-lineman and most consistent disruptor.

And this board regularly craps all over him for having the gall to want to earn more money. :34853_doh:

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Reward him. It sets a good precedent with other players.

It also sets a bad precedent that any player can complain and even hold out with two or more years left on their contract.

If we tear up Bennett's deal, what's to keep Sherm, Earl, Wagner, KJ and many others from asking for more?

If we're going to pay Bennett more, it's gotta be like what we did with Lynch, moving around bonus money or adding in a ton of performance incentives that don't change the base salary.

Just ripping up his deal with two years left? That's a very dangerous precedent to set.

 

[twisted_steel2]

Reward him. It sets a good precedent with other players.

It also sets a bad precedent that any player can complain and even hold out with two or more years left on their contract.

No, that's the thing. Reward him for showing up on time, & not missing practice and playing well.

Don't reward Kam for holding out, and not showing up and not playing as well as he has in the past.

I see a distinct difference.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Reward him. It sets a good precedent with other players.

It also sets a bad precedent that any player can complain and even hold out with two or more years left on their contract.

No, that's the thing. Reward him for showing up on time, & not missing practice and playing well.

Don't reward Kam for holding out, and not showing up and not playing as well as he has in the past.

I see a distinct difference.

I think we're saying the same thing, practice and/or performance bonus ADDED into current contract.

But players don't like that, they want a new contract with another signing bonus and base..........which I assume is what guys like Kam and Bennett wanted last year.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I don't understand the notion of rewarding him just because he showed up and played, that's what a player is supposed to do.

I'd have no problem maybe shuffling around some of his guaranteed money to this year as a reward for his play, but not for simply being the anti-Kam.. that makes no sense. 51 other guys probably wish they made more too and still showed up to play and participate in OTA's, training camp, etc.

 

[AVL]

I'm going to resent the hell out of this for Bennett and his lovely derriered wife. He hasn't said a damn thing, yet.




edit; I have never seen Mrs. Bennett or any image of her. I'm taking the man at his Word.

 

[HawkMeat]

I don't understand the notion of rewarding him just because he showed up and played, that's what a player is supposed to do.

I'd have no problem maybe shuffling around some of his guaranteed money to this year as a reward for his play, but not for simply being the anti-Kam.. that makes no sense. 51 other guys probably wish they made more too and still showed up to play and participate in OTA's, training camp, etc.

I agree. Perhaps make a bit more guaranteed.

He mentioned he will always ask for more money too, so even giving him another contract won't aleviate the talk for a raise every year.

 

[twisted_steel2]

I don't understand the notion of rewarding him just because he showed up and played, that's what a player is supposed to do.

I'd have no problem maybe shuffling around some of his guaranteed money to this year as a reward for his play, but not for simply being the anti-Kam.. that makes no sense. 51 other guys probably wish they made more too and still showed up to play and participate in OTA's, training camp, etc.

And sometimes a player shows up and plays, and then gets cut. unno:

And you're not rewarding him because he 'just showed up and played'. You're rewarding him because he's become one of the best DE's in the NFL, and despite everyone knowing (including the Seahawk management) that he's outplayed his contract, he comes in on time and is a trooper.

Until all players total contracts are guaranteed, and the balance of power is equal to the teams ability to cut him, I'll support players who are vocal about their contracts when they play above the $$$ of the contract.

If a team feels a player is not playing to the $$$ level of the contract they can be cut/waived right?

And in the case of Bennett I think it sets a great precedent and incentive to players on the roster and potential free agents. "Wow the Seahawks really take care of their players, if you play really well, and be a good team mate, look how they reward you!"

Not hard to understand.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Agree +++++ with TwistedSteel

Watching this thread careen down the same road the Kam threads did. Exact same template.

"But he signed a contract!!" is always followed by righteous indignation that a player signs a contact and then would have the gall to not show up. Nevermind that teams cut guys that have "signed" contracts regularly. Then the righteous indignation is mysteriously absent. Then it is "just business".

Bennett has an obligation to get fair market value or at least as close as he can get. Exhibit #1 is Zach Miller. Exhibit #2 might be Jimmy Graham (if he cannot come back healthy).

I support Bennett, if he makes that decision, for the same reason I supported Kam.

 

[ivotuk]

You guys act like a player gets screwed out of promised money if they get cut. Not true.

When a player signs a contract, he asks for guaranteed money. Why? Because that is a known amount that he will receive whether he plays out the contract, gets cut, or has a career ending injury his first play back.

The player knows what he is going to get, and the team knows what they are going to pay out. Beyond that, there are no guarantees, and both parties know this. To say that some player getting cut somehow "screws" them is incorrect.

 

[Our Man in Chicago]

Hopefully it's just a case of Bennett thinking he can save a few bucks on a possible extension this offseason by negotiating it himself (as misguided as that might be), rather than being a sign of deep discontentment.

I wish I could agree.

DR: Dude, you signed a deal.
MB: That YOU hosed me on.
DR: You were happy at the time, until you saw the "hometown discount" ledes in the papers.
MB: Man, I'm OUT.

 

[Basis4day]

You guys act like a player gets screwed out of promised money if they get cut. Not true.

When a player signs a contract, he asks for guaranteed money. Why? Because that is a known amount that he will receive whether he plays out the contract, gets cut, or has a career ending injury his first play back.

The player knows what he is going to get, and the team knows what they are going to pay out. Beyond that, there are no guarantees, and both parties know this. To say that some player getting cut somehow "screws" them is incorrect.

The team also is aware that a player who has outplayed a contract has the potential to hold out. And if it's an irreplaceable player it often works. The teams know this when they sign a talented player to a reasonable deal or bargain deal.

It doesn't have to be a players or FO argument. We as fans can recognize both realities.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I don't understand the notion of rewarding him just because he showed up and played, that's what a player is supposed to do.

I'd have no problem maybe shuffling around some of his guaranteed money to this year as a reward for his play, but not for simply being the anti-Kam.. that makes no sense. 51 other guys probably wish they made more too and still showed up to play and participate in OTA's, training camp, etc.

And sometimes a player shows up and plays, and then gets cut. unno:

And you're not rewarding him because he 'just showed up and played'. You're rewarding him because he's become one of the best DE's in the NFL, and despite everyone knowing (including the Seahawk management) that he's outplayed his contract, he comes in on time and is a trooper.

Until all players total contracts are guaranteed, and the balance of power is equal to the teams ability to cut him, I'll support players who are vocal about their contracts when they play above the $$$ of the contract.

If a team feels a player is not playing to the $$$ level of the contract they can be cut/waived right?

And in the case of Bennett I think it sets a great precedent and incentive to players on the roster and potential free agents. "Wow the Seahawks really take care of their players, if you play really well, and be a good team mate, look how they reward you!"

Not hard to understand.

In a perfect world every player would be paid according to their performance. Unfortunately the salary cap exists.

And I never said "don't give him anything" .. if there is guaranteed money that can be pushed up to this year, by all means do that.. otherwise you're going down the same dangerous road you would with giving Kam more money.

 

[Rob12]

He's worth more than what he's being paid.

With that said, he signed the damn contract. He's got two years left. Ball out in 2016, and then we can talk. I respect the fact that he showed up to work when he was only making more money than I will earn in my lifetime (I know, apples and oranges). I wouldn't hate it if the Seahawks worked some more money into his deal somehow, but I really want this charade to stop. We all know you want more money, Mike. Let the process play out.

Ha. He's going to turn 31 in the middle of the 2016 season. How likely is it that John Schneider gives Bennett one last payday at that age?

Bennett has played for us for under market value year in and year out since returning to Seattle, and even though he's made noise about holding out, he's never missed significant time. Yeah, he's got a problem with jumping the snap, but even with that notable issue, he's been our most versatile D-lineman and most consistent disruptor.

And this board regularly craps all over him for having the gall to want to earn more money. :34853_doh:

You're being a bit touchy here. I don't see anyone in this thread "crapping" on Bennett. Further, I've been a bit bored tonight and have been looking for some posts "crapping" on Bennett and am coming up empty. There's going to be some annoyance going on when the guy has been talking about wanting more money before the ink even dried on the contract he signed two years ago. Yes, he showed up and fulfilled the duties of his contract, and he played great. That's what he is supposed to do. He's one of the key cogs to this defense. But he also did so while never missing an opportunity to talk about how he wanted more money, or calling out Paul Allen on national television during a post game interview with Kam. That was embarrassing. It's almost as if he doesn't understand that a salary cap exists, as evidenced by his comment that Allen was one the richest men on the planet.

Bennett signed a contract for under market value. He took less money to play in Seattle. That's a fact. That's a choice he made. Again Vol, that's a choice he made because reportedly, there was more money on the table for him elsewhere. I'm not against the FO working some more money into his deal (nor have I met a Seahawks fan that is). I'm appreciative of him showing up to work when he committed to do so for a price that he agreed on in the not so distant past. In that way, he's kind of like the rest of us. But more than a year later, I'm just growing a bit tired of his shtick when it comes to wanting more money.

I love Michael Bennett, BTW. I just don't like his act too much. It really does get old, no? I mean, we all know he has outplayed his contract, but does he need to blast it every chance he gets? Or can he let things play out, and handle things behind closed doors without throwing the FO under the bus in the media? If this FO has ever shown anything, it's that they take care of their own. They could have went after Marshawn's bonus money but they didn't. In the end, I think Bennett will walk away from his time as a Hawk a happy man. What more does the man want or expect?

I mean really, if he's smart, he can walk away from his 10 year NFL career after his contract expires and never work a day again in his life if he chooses - at age 32. I mean holy ****, I wish I could I say the same thing. So pardon me if I'm not feeling that bad for Michael Bennett, as I will spend the next 20+ years working for a tiny fraction of what he makes in a more dangerous job, missing years with my wife and young sons along the way. I'm not complaining, but even as a fan of this team and this game, sometimes you have to put things in a healthy perspective, even when it's an an apples and oranges comparison. I hope Mike does that at some point. He's an extremely rich man, and should always be an extremely rich man.