RiverDog wrote:He has his ring. Now he's looking for as much scratch as a he can get before the clock strikes 12 and his carriage turns into a pumpkin. Can't say as I blame him. Slap the FT on him and keep him another year.
RiverDog wrote:He has his ring. Now he's looking for as much scratch as a he can get before the clock strikes 12 and his carriage turns into a pumpkin. Can't say as I blame him. Slap the FT on him and keep him another year.
Hawktawk wrote:RE Bennet I seem to remember something about a partial tear in his rotator cuff. What happened to that story? Im halfway through rehabbing a shoulder repair and it is miserable. What if Bennett signs the deal and then has the surgery? He would be out most of a season IMO.
Eaglehawk wrote:Hawktawk wrote:RE Bennet I seem to remember something about a partial tear in his rotator cuff. What happened to that story? Im halfway through rehabbing a shoulder repair and it is miserable. What if Bennett signs the deal and then has the surgery? He would be out most of a season IMO.
Man, that would be fatal.Check that. He would get a chance to get healed up at our expense then show up late in the season to play a few games? Sounds familiar. But then, that worked out okay as well! (Harvin).
kalibane wrote:Can't tag him. Tagging Bennett would cost 12.6 million against the cap. Need that money for Earl's extension. If he prices himself out, he prices himself out. Seahawks have to move on. They knew that was a possibility when they signed him for a 1 year mercenary deal.
kalibane wrote:Bennett is just a bit of a wise ass personality. Knowing what I've heard from him and how he's talked I would assume it was meant as half joke, not with any animosity. Besides would you rather have someone who was honest or played the game in the media and then behind closed doors driving a hard line that wasn't consistant with his press releases?
I don't blame him.
Riv,
You're right it COULD happen. I didn't mean it was impossible, perhaps I should have said, they shouldn't use the tag and maybe I shouldn't have put it all on Earl. Tagging Bennett at that price creates ripple effects. I for one don't want them to cut Bryant. Miller, Rice and Clem I think should be gone. But if they extend Thomas and tag Bennet that's pretty much the cap once they sign draft choices. Getting Tate back becomes extremely hard. They still have to replace Clem, Miller and Rice. And you can forget about even entertaining Sherman's contract until next year. Tag is just too restrictive. I want Bennet back but not at the cost of the cap flexibility and also do you really want to go into next offseason having to deal with Bennett, Sherman and Wilson's contracts all at once? Ifthey are willing to hamstring that much of the cap to fill that role, you might as well go all out and get the Krakon (assuming he's not tagged).
It's not like it's an obligation to sign for less 'cause we signed him as an UDFA .
burrrton wrote:It's not like it's an obligation to sign for less 'cause we signed him as an UDFA .
Well, that's kinda why I thought the crack was odd. Again, maybe he was just being a wiseacre like Kal said, but nobody was *asking* him to give the team a discount, at least that I know of.
Eh, either way, I hope we're able to work him into our cap- he was outstanding for us. If not, though, good luck to him and hope he enjoys watching his former team rack up another SB win next year.
RiverDog wrote:kalibane wrote:Bennett is just a bit of a wise ass personality. Knowing what I've heard from him and how he's talked I would assume it was meant as half joke, not with any animosity. Besides would you rather have someone who was honest or played the game in the media and then behind closed doors driving a hard line that wasn't consistant with his press releases?
I don't blame him.
Riv,
You're right it COULD happen. I didn't mean it was impossible, perhaps I should have said, they shouldn't use the tag and maybe I shouldn't have put it all on Earl. Tagging Bennett at that price creates ripple effects. I for one don't want them to cut Bryant. Miller, Rice and Clem I think should be gone. But if they extend Thomas and tag Bennet that's pretty much the cap once they sign draft choices. Getting Tate back becomes extremely hard. They still have to replace Clem, Miller and Rice. And you can forget about even entertaining Sherman's contract until next year. Tag is just too restrictive. I want Bennet back but not at the cost of the cap flexibility and also do you really want to go into next offseason having to deal with Bennett, Sherman and Wilson's contracts all at once? Ifthey are willing to hamstring that much of the cap to fill that role, you might as well go all out and get the Krakon (assuming he's not tagged).
IMO we do need to tie up Earl first, but after that, keeping Bennett in the fold for at least one more year is our biggest off season priority, before Tate and before tying up Sherman. I'm not advocating that we cut any of the players I indicated (and I missed Clemons, too), but I am saying that we have a lot of leeway considering the number of players we have on the roster that are not performing up to their contracts.
I guess I'm of the "let's cross one bridge at a time" philosophy. I want to give ourselves the best possible chance of winning the SB next season if that means we can't tie up Thomas, Sherman, Tate, et al all in the same year, and bringing back Bennett gives us that best chance. There's a danger in looking too far down the road (injuries, performance drop offs, etc). I think it's going to be almost impossible to keep our entire team together for 4-5 years anyway. Let's get Ring #2 before we think of 3, 4, and 5.
I wasn't put off by the Costco crack, either.
I-5 wrote:The 'discount' comment was probably in reference to a reporter asking him about Golden Tate's hasty remark about hometown discount. Bennett is a funny guy and no one's fool, so I totally took his comment that way.
NorthHawk wrote:If we let him go, how do we replace the pressure up the middle?
It's something we have needed for a few years now and considering he can also be effective on the edge, it's a lot of ability to have to replace.
I just hope they can come to an agreement that works for him and the team.
River, you don't really think Bennett would do a one year deal right?
Zorn76 wrote:NorthHawk wrote:If we let him go, how do we replace the pressure up the middle?
It's something we have needed for a few years now and considering he can also be effective on the edge, it's a lot of ability to have to replace.
I just hope they can come to an agreement that works for him and the team.
The Draft.
And this upcoming one is key, because it gives the Seahawks the opportunity to build for the future while keeping this current football machine rolling for 2014. All drafts are important, obviously, but this is the first one we've had going into as SB Champs.
Bennett's 29 anyway, so you gotta start thinking about his replacement anyhow. If he walks, he walks. IMO, he doesn't have half the leverage he thinks he does.
Futureite wrote:Ok normally I wouldn't say this as it will be construed as "trollish", but are there really 10+ replies about Bennett's comnent? What happened to the whole "He was just being honest" or "But it's TRUE" line of thought? LolI guess the truth does piss people off when it's phrased a certain way.
I actually liked what Bennett said. He said he has played the last 2 yrs trying to prove himself, and now he has. Also said that he did not give the Seahawks a discount when he played, but gave 100%. I thought that was a very intelligent insight. I think he could be replaced though with a similar vet, maybe Peppers? Not sure if Raji fits the mold (although he may for a 4-3), but I wonder who takes a look at him.
Eaglehawk wrote:Costco statement is funny.
I don't take offense.
Bennett should get paid as much as he can. If its 10 million, so be it. Maybe not with this team though.
It was a nice ride but family is first, and he has to put his family before anything. The guy is approaching 30 years old. Good for him, but he has to take the money NOW.
4XPIPS wrote:Well according to this post he wants 10 mil a year. I just don't see us paying a "rotational d-lineman" that much loot. He is part of a committee, and quite frankly he is darn good and I would love to keep him, but at the end of the day I say let him make his 10 mil somewhere else and get fresh legs in there.
http://mynorthwest.com/?nid=292&sid=2457211
RiverDog wrote:Eaglehawk wrote:Costco statement is funny.
I don't take offense.
Bennett should get paid as much as he can. If its 10 million, so be it. Maybe not with this team though.
It was a nice ride but family is first, and he has to put his family before anything. The guy is approaching 30 years old. Good for him, but he has to take the money NOW.
I just read an article in My Northwest that noted how deep the FA market is for DE's this season. There may not be very many teams out there willing to pay Bennett the $10M or so he's seeking, and if he does find a greener pasture, there's other options out there for about the same price we signed Bennett for last season that could mitigate the effects of him leaving. One they spoke of was Griffen from Minnesota, a player Pete coached at USC, that's been playing behind Jared Allen. So we'll see. It may not cost us a Nordstrom's price tag to resign him.
RiverDog wrote:Eaglehawk wrote:Costco statement is funny.
I don't take offense.
Bennett should get paid as much as he can. If its 10 million, so be it. Maybe not with this team though.
It was a nice ride but family is first, and he has to put his family before anything. The guy is approaching 30 years old. Good for him, but he has to take the money NOW.
I just read an article in My Northwest that noted how deep the FA market is for DE's this season. There may not be very many teams out there willing to pay Bennett the $10M or so he's seeking, and if he does find a greener pasture, there's other options out there for about the same price we signed Bennett for last season that could mitigate the effects of him leaving. One they spoke of was Griffen from Minnesota, a player Pete coached at USC, that's been playing behind Jared Allen. So we'll see. It may not cost us a Nordstrom's price tag to resign him.
Futureite wrote:Ok normally I wouldn't say this as it will be construed as "trollish", but are there really 10+ replies about Bennett's comnent? What happened to the whole "He was just being honest" or "But it's TRUE" line of thought? LolI guess the truth does piss people off when it's phrased a certain way.
RiverDog wrote:Futureite wrote:Ok normally I wouldn't say this as it will be construed as "trollish", but are there really 10+ replies about Bennett's comnent? What happened to the whole "He was just being honest" or "But it's TRUE" line of thought? LolI guess the truth does piss people off when it's phrased a certain way.
I actually liked what Bennett said. He said he has played the last 2 yrs trying to prove himself, and now he has. Also said that he did not give the Seahawks a discount when he played, but gave 100%. I thought that was a very intelligent insight. I think he could be replaced though with a similar vet, maybe Peppers? Not sure if Raji fits the mold (although he may for a 4-3), but I wonder who takes a look at him.
I'm not sure what your point is, Future. A few of us might have raised our eyebrows at Bennett's Costco line, but it seems to me that it's not a big deal with the majority of us as most either didn't comment or stated that it wasn't something they took offense to.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests