Seahawks DE Bennett Rips Tannehill + 'Mediocre QB's', Contract

In 3 crunch time games last year after a good performance against Denver, the offense scored 16, 13 and 13. Defense held in that first one, a win. Didn't hold in the last two. Was Tanny spectacular in those 3 games? Was he good?

"CaribPhin wrote:

I don't necessarily disagree with this in the NFL. The contracts aren't fully guaranteed. Owners agree to pay players a certain amount for a certain level of production and will very quickly cut them if they can't meet that level of production. NFL players, when they exceed that production, want to renegotiate that deal to earn more money. That's a fair trade. When an NBA player signs a contract for $100 million, he's getting that. When an NFL player signs it, he gets his guaranteed money, two to three years of checks, and a renegotiation offer under threat of termination near the end.

In other industries, this is called playing hardball and seeking out your value. If I worked at a investment bank and I was the firm's top performer, I would get offers from other firms to bring my talents and client base to their firm. In the NFL, other firms get penalized for courting me, I can't seek out offers, I will likely never see the entirety of my contract's value, and then I'll get called ungrateful if I want to get more money.

If a player negotiates a deal for their previous level of production, isn't it fair to want to get more if you exceed it? Besides, if contracts were fully guaranteed and un-modifiable, players couldn't even do this. The owners just don't want to pay full price since contract value is amortized and cutting guys to replace them with younger cheaper talent is very easy.

Players are compensated for the non-guaranteed nature of their contracts in the form of signing bonuses. And its a two-way street in that the players can terminate their contracts too. They can quit, retire, play in the CFL or the Arena League or wherever else they want to play. Of course, nobody does that, unless they are suspended from the NFL like Ricky Williams when he signed with Toronto. So when you sign an NFL contract they player should fully expect to play it out as long as he wants to play in the NFL. He can threaten to hold out and live with the consequences, but doing so hurts his team, teammates and fans. Maybe when we start to see players who underperform their contracts returning the money to the team, or agreeing to purely incentive-based deals, I will feel more sympathetic to the player who threatens to hold out because he believes he is underpaid under his current contract. I'm not holding my breath for that.

"jdang307 wrote:

In 3 crunch time games last year after a good performance against Denver, the offense scored 16, 13 and 13. Defense held in that first one, a win. Didn't hold in the last two. Was Tanny spectacular in those 3 games? Was he good?

He was bad against NE. Against Baltimore, I don't remember. ..although, going purely off stats, Tannehill played well, with like a 98 rating. I don't recall how other parts of the team played, though.

Although, even in the Pat's game, he threw for almost 400 yards...just couldn't seem to get tds. Don't really remember if he had any egregious drops that game or not.

"resnor wrote:

He was bad against NE. Against Baltimore, I don't remember. ..although, going purely off stats, Tannehill played well, with like a 98 rating. I don't recall how other parts of the team played, though.

Although, even in the Pat's game, he threw for almost 400 yards...just couldn't seem to get tds. Don't really remember if he had any egregious drops that game or not.

I believe there were 2 badly dropped deep ball TD's one to Damien Williams I can't remember who the other was intended for.

"resnor wrote:

He was bad against NE. Against Baltimore, I don't remember. ..although, going purely off stats, Tannehill played well, with like a 98 rating. I don't recall how other parts of the team played, though.

Although, even in the Pat's game, he threw for almost 400 yards...just couldn't seem to get tds. Don't really remember if he had any egregious drops that game or not.

That was against Minny. Against NE it was 346, but 1/2 TD/INT. Against Balt, he had a good rating but the offense only scored 3 points in the final 3 quarters. Sacks were an issue. I haven't rewatched but one analyst said Balt started sitting on the short routes and that baffled the offense.

"jdang307 wrote:

That was against Minny. Against NE it was 346, but 1/2 TD/INT. Against Balt, he had a good rating but the offense only scored 3 points in the final 3 quarters. Sacks were an issue. I haven't rewatched but one analyst said Balt started sitting on the short routes and that baffled the offense.

In the Balt game Tanne missed a wide open Wallace in the EZ from the 11 yard line, if he had connected on that extremely easy pass, we would have actually taken the lead in the 4th quarter of that game, instead we came away still trailing by 1, after driving downfield, and getting the opportunity for an easy TD and not getting it, the team just kind of fell apart after that, a look at the sidelines after that play tells you everything you need to know, jubilation on the Ravens side, heads hanging on the Fins side.

You cannot let opportunities like that slip through your fingers.

Bennet. Yeah, whatever.

"jdang307 wrote:

That was against Minny. Against NE it was 346, but 1/2 TD/INT. Against Balt, he had a good rating but the offense only scored 3 points in the final 3 quarters. Sacks were an issue. I haven't rewatched but one analyst said Balt started sitting on the short routes and that baffled the offense.

I was taking about NE...346 is pretty close to 400. Bad ratio, but, like I said, I don't remember what happened...I thought he may have had some bad breaks, and btfu remembers that as well. Looking at purely stats, you might say he didn't do enough. But, if he had two dropped tds, that's not on him.

"Stringer Bell wrote:

The league is actively making the game easier for QBs. There really isn't any debate. Coddling is just a euphemism.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

That's not his argument, that's your argument.

"Fin D wrote:

That's not his argument, that's your argument.

It's not an argument. It's a widely acknowledged fact. Like the sky being blue.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

"Stringer Bell wrote:

It's not an argument. It's a widely acknowledged fact. Like the sky being blue.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

I don't care what you say is or is not fact.

This thread is about a given player's opinion. His opinion is not the opinion you are putting forward. You are changing the topic and you are doing it in a way that is every bit as annoying as the things you don't like and complain about.

"Fin D wrote:

I don't care what you say is or is not fact.

This thread is about a given player's opinion. His opinion is not the opinion you are putting forward. You are changing the topic and you are doing it in a way that is every bit as annoying as the things you don't like and complain about.

Of course you don't care. You will continue to trash this forum like you regularly do.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

"Stringer Bell wrote:

It's not an argument. It's a widely acknowledged fact. Like the sky being blue.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

But Bennett said this:

At every other position, you can't be mediocre. If I was (Miami's) Ryan Tannehill and the most games I ever won was seven, how could you get a $100 million for that? I guess that's the value of the position.

So, he's complaining that mediocre QBs, which he claims Tannehill is, are getting paid more than him.

To address what Bennett said:

"Then quarterbacks get protected more than any other player," Bennett said.

It is very clear he is criticizing the current rule changes.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

The upside of being a franchise QB is obvious--you earn more money than anyone else.

The downside is that if you come into the league and look mediocre for even a few seasons, you may never get another shot to be a full-fledged starter again and you production is more heavily dependent on all the other players than anyone else on the field. So with high risk comes high reward.

At really any other position a player can float around the league and slowly develop. QBs really don't have that luxury. Very rarely does a QB get the necessary snaps in practice to actually receive a legitimate 2nd or 3rd chance to emerge as a franchise QB.

If you don't happen to land in a good spot and slay the dragon on your first go-round as a QB, you're probably done....not necessarily out of the league...just not getting rich.

"Stringer Bell wrote:

Of course you don't care. You will continue to trash this forum like you regularly do.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

lol. Like taking this off topic to promote your own topic is somehow good for the forum?

Keep telling yourself whatever you need to.

"resnor wrote:

But Bennett said this:

So, he's complaining that mediocre QBs, which he claims Tannehill is, are getting paid more than him.

Right, and that's because the league has changed the rules, which he decries here:

"Then quarterbacks get protected more than any other player," Bennett said.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

"Stringer Bell wrote:

Right, and that's because the league has changed the rules, which he decries here:

"Then quarterbacks get protected more than any other player," Bennett said.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Yeah, that one line means more than the entire rest of his argument. Sigh.

"Stringer Bell wrote:

To address what Bennett said:

"Then quarterbacks get protected more than any other player," Bennett said.

It is very clear he is criticizing the current rule changes.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

That had nothing to do with the pay.

"Fin D wrote:

lol. Like taking this off topic to promote your own topic is somehow good for the forum?

Keep telling yourself whatever you need to.

I took your personal attack off topic. Guilty as charged. Everyone here knows what's going on.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

"resnor wrote:

That had nothing to do with the pay.

It absolutely does. Why else are QBs worth more now than they were previously, and DEs less?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

"Stringer Bell wrote:

It absolutely does. Why else are QBs worth more now than they were previously, and DEs less?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Actually, that was a different part of the rant. He complained that mediocre QBS are getting paid more then him. Then he said "Then..." and continued to rant about how unfair it is that QBS get special treatment in regards to the hits they take, as compared to hits he takes. The whole thing is a pity party for poor Michael Bennett.

"resnor wrote:

Actually, that was a different part of the rant. He complained that mediocre QBS are getting paid more then him. Then he said "Then..." and continued to ranticipate about how unfair it is that QBS get special treatment in regards to the hits they take, as compared to his he takes. The whole thing is a pity party for poor Michael Bennett.

The rules being changed to accommodate QBs inherently cannot be mutually exclusive from the value of QBs.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

It was inherently exclusive in his rant. He didn't say that they were overpaid due to rules changes. He said they were overpaid. He then complained that in addition to begin overpaid, they get treated differently.

Agree to disagree, I guess.

"Here’s a larger point: If Bennett thinks quarterbacks get overpaid for being mediocre, why shouldn’t he become one? Play the position. See how hard it is to be average as an NFL quarterback. Understand what it’s like to have the weight of a franchise on your shoulder."

Hyde