MAY 15: It is indeed safe to assume guarantees beyond the 2025 season are a key issue in this situation, ESPN’s Dan Graziano writes. The Bengals were willing to break with organizational tradition with Burrow, Chase and Higgins when they were 26 at signing, but whether or not that will be the case for Hendrickson at his age will be worth watching when (or if) talks resume.
MAY 14: The Bengals have developed an earned reputation as slow starters during Zac Taylor‘s time at the helm. This pattern has been a significant impediment to the team, one that began 0-3 last year and stood 0-2 to start the 2022 and ’23 seasons. With the team now having paid both its wide receiver standouts, more pressure will be on Taylor to have his crew ready to go when the season starts.
Trey Hendrickson‘s status suddenly factors into this equation. The Bengals’ top defensive player has gone public with his frustrations, with a Monday text from Taylor prompting a Tuesday grievance rundown. Hendrickson has officially threatened a holdout. Training camp holdouts have become more difficult to wage under the current CBA, leading to the hold-in tactic, but some players have bucked that trend and stayed away anyway.
[RELATED: How Will Hendrickson’s Situation Play Out?]
CeeDee Lamb held out well into Cowboys camp last year, with Zack Martin doing the same in 2023. Trent Williams did the same, and teammate Nick Bosa held out in 2023 as well. All four of these Dallas- and San Francisco-based absences led to new contracts. Haason Reddick staged an unsuccessful holdout last year, eventually reporting to the Jets in late October and playing out the string.
The Chiefs went into the 2023 season with Chris Jones engaged in a holdout. After a Week 1 loss to the Lions, the Chiefs agreed to a temporary solution that brought the future Hall of Famer back into the fold. Kansas City then caved on a player-friendly deal for Jones two days before the 2024 free agency period began. Jones was 29 when he signed that monster Chiefs extension. By the time Hendrickson would be free agency-eligible, he will be 31. The All-Pro defensive end’s age represents a key component in his Bengals stalemate.
Few players have proven willing to pass on game checks to extend holdouts into the regular season. Le’Veon Bell famously did on the franchise tag in 2018, while Duane Brown (2017) and Vincent Jackson (2010) sat out lengthy stretches as well. It is still too early to predict Hendrickson will follow suit, but ESPN.com’s Jeremy Fowler notes some close to the disgruntled pass rusher believe his contract stance would lead to him skipping regular-season games — should Cincinnati not reward its ace sack artist before Week 1.
As part of a one-year, $21MM extension he signed in 2023, Hendrickson is due a $15.8MM base salary this season. This works out to just more than $920K in game checks. Teams regularly win bets on players being unwilling to pass on game checks, but Hendrickson’s only play against the Bengals would be to withhold services. He managed Defensive Player of the Year runner-up status on one of the league’s worst defenses last season. Removing Hendrickson from the mix would certainly threaten a Bengals team committed to complementing Joe Burrow better than it did in 2024. That will be an interesting storyline to follow.
Although the Bengals let Hendrickson seek a trade just before free agency, the Cincinnati Enquirer’s Kelsey Conway notes the team wants its All-Pro sack artist back in 2025. What is unclear is how much Cincy wants Hendrickson beyond this season. Contract structure represents the central hang-up here, Hendrickson said, as negotiations have paused. A structural issue would seemingly point to guarantees. The Bengals almost never authorize post-Year 1 salary guarantees, though they made exceptions for Burrow, Ja’Marr Chase and Tee Higgins.
While the franchise has a history extending D-lineman in Hendrickson’s age range (via the 2018 Carlos Dunlap and Geno Atkins paydays), a March report pointed to hesitancy regarding the new edge rusher going rate. Hendrickson is not a candidate to eclipse Myles Garrett‘s $40MM-per-year number, but Maxx Crosby‘s $35.5MM-AAV accord — which settled in north of Bosa’s ($34MM per) — represents a lofty number as well.
As the Hendrickson saga keeps producing notable plotlines, the Bengals also saw first-round pick Shemar Stewart — their potential long-term Hendrickson replacement — sit out rookie minicamp due to his contract. Bonus structure kept Stewart off the field last weekend, per Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio. Players regularly participate in offseason work unsigned, as many first-rounders have yet to put pen to paper. Waivers protecting them are commonplace, but while the Bengals attempted to complete a Stewart deal early, nothing transpired.
First-round contracts (and now at least two second-round draft slots) bring fully guaranteed deals, but the percentage of Stewart’s money to be paid as a training camp roster bonus, per Florio, became an issue. That percentage checked in lower than last year’s No. 17 overall pick received, leading to the absence. First-round contract drama does not rival what took place before the rookie-scale system debuted in 2011, but the Bengals have brought at least a hiccup during Stewart’s first weeks in town. And it has come amid the higher-stakes Hendrickson dispute.
i’d hold out to as opposed to living in ohio
What is it you don’t like about Ohio ?
Everything
The buckeyes duh
The Bears need to swoop in on this mess to bring him to Chicago!
No doubt he’s been awesome, but I just don’t think there’s any way Poles gives up a first or second round pick + and then signs a 31 year old DE to a massive extension. I’m thinkin’ the Bengals have to somehow sign him to a short term deal with a lot of guaranteed money.
Trade him to Washington already
The Washington Wokies blow. Trade him to the Falcons that’s the smart move
Wokies?
Woke and changed their name from the legendary Redskins. As a Falcons fan I feel sorry for the Redskins fans. If they did that to my Braves, I’d break every woke idiot in half that was responsible.
Threatening a hold out is on page 2 of the players posturing manual. Figure at least 20 more updates before the situation nears a resolution 🙂
I say this every holdout for hacks that don’t play their deal.
Play. Your. Deal.
In this millennium a deal is only a deal until someone decides it isn’t.
Do you hold owners to the same standard?
Bill you must be new to me saying this.
Players sign deals that are mutually agreed on by players and teams. If the team cuts, trades, or let’s a contract run out all of those variables are outlined in the deal.
So in the event of a player who is cut, he gets paid by the team what he agreed to get paid in the event that happens. That is the guaranteed money. If players want more guarantee they can instruct their agent to negotiate as such.
If the teams push back the players pay money to their union yet they are the only major NA sport without fully guaranteed contracts.
Now youre probably thinking there are players who play at a higher level compared to their pay. Which doesn’t make sense on two fronts. One, for every player who outplays their deal there are plenty who under perform. The second front is that if you feel you are going to over play that deal or the market will change you should have negotiated escalators in your deal.
If you sign a deal play the deal. If an owner cuts a player they legally have to pay him what was agreed in the guarantee. If the player holds out who is there to hold the player to a standard similar?
If their entire contract was guaranteed, I’d agree and say play out their deal. But with how team friendly most contracts are in the second half (unless you are like the Browns and give out just horrendous contracts) … with the game being so physical, I don’t see anything wrong with holding out. Especially since he’s on the last year of his deal. It’s just how the NFL does business between teams and agents/players.
Plus, I doubt he’s looking for max money to be the #1 at his position? (I haven’t read anything that said otherwise) but it would probably behoove the team to extend him to a new contract that helps smooth out his cap hit over the next few years before he gets to age 34/35.
The world needs ditch diggers too
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Your point is it’s legal? And they get a small portion guaranteed therefore they shouldn’t force renegotiations? So essentially if they underperform it’s fine for owners and teams to cut them because some small percentage of the contract was guaranteed but if they out perform the contract they should suck it up? That’s top tier billionaire bootlicking if I’ve ever heard it.
No. That’s how contracts are in the NFL. If the player doesn’t like it, why did he sign the contract in the first place?
Macbeth, if we want to get long winded and technical, then Hendrickson is 100% in his right to holdout.
Owners and players mutually agree to the CBA, and the CBA clearly lays out the cost for Hendrickson to hold out, and what week he needs to report by to gain an accrued season.
He’s outplayed his deal, and he plays for the cheapest team in sports. Assuming he holds out, this is the only leverage he has, and he’s doing everything within the ‘mutually agreed on’ CBA to get a new deal.
This is maybe his last chance to secure a $100M contract. The rules allow him to hold out and pay a fine if he wants to.
But yes, continue to defend billionaires who refuse to pay their best players, because the guy actually earning all the money for the franchise signed a contract three or four years ago and the Bengals refuse to guarantee anything. Rules are rules, Hendrickson’s following them just fine.
They don’t “refuse to pay” their best players. The Bengals are in this position because they DID just pay a few of their best players, and now they need to fit another in for the future.
But, I do see both sides of it-Hendrickson has “outperformed” (meaning done better than comparable players) his deal. He now wants a new one. Normally, you’d say “play what you agreed to”, but the other side of it is that teams (not owners, as people like to say; unless you’re Jerry Jones, or in theory-ironically-Mike Brown) can cut a player for some allowable reason, or approach with a paycut or restructure request. So, it’s pretty hard to hold players to deals that teams may not be beholden to. It’s a double edged sword where both parties abuse the definition of the word “contract”.
The solution, to me, is to make all contracts guaranteed. Yes, that means that some players will cost teams money by not living up to a contract or getting hurt; however, that’s the team’s responsibility to evaluate when doing these deals. You gave out the contract, you shouldn’t be able to wiggle out of it. Same for players-if, as an example, you want more money on a deal you signed just because someone is now making more than you, that’s a pretty weak and egotistical argument. Having the deals guaranteed gives the player security against a team dishonoring a deal, and gives the team security against the player demanding increases. Teams should get punished for giving bad deals, anyway. Players should have to honor their end, too.
Sure, in the short term, top players will protest about deals being lesser in value. Teams will protest when they have to pay an injured guy or a one year wonder. Eventually though, things will stabilize, and surely the amounts will increase as teams get more comfortable giving them out. It sounds more risky and changing than it actually is-players and teams still play a hazardous guessing game and engage in offseason-long back and forth because neither side trusts each other and both want guarantees.
The current system only benefits the agents, who get to announce gaudy numbers that are inflated with incentives, option years, or conditional payments. Neither the team nor the player benefits from vague terms or fake numbers or fake commitments.
Only the agents, who use it for advertising, actually benefit from this. It surely sounds much better announcing that a Player X signed a five year, $180 million deal than it does to say that he actually signed a three year contract worth $65 million, with incentives and option years tacked on. Then, in year four, when the player could be cut at any moment and has half of his money tied up in a performance incentive, he starts getting antsy and clamoring for an upgrade. Then the team has to figure out how to rearrange their future books and roster to make it happen, or find a trade partner. Guaranteed deals fix all of that, and also make teams and players both more responsible for their choices. The people it hurts are agents, who could really all just disappear and make life easier for everyone holistically.
No, they’re in this position because they waited too long to pay their best players because they were being stubborn and enjoying the leverage they thought they had.
Different day…same silly comment……contracts spell out every detail and legality that binds both the player and team….that’s what agents get 10% for and the reason they all or at least most have law degrees…..suggesting that teams are less faithful to those contracts is dumb….maybe if players in many cases actually had college degrees and could read their contracts, they wouldn’t or couldn’t complain….
Especially when they aren’t on rookie deals anymore. Dang he only makes over 900,000 Per game. Poor guy. Even if their agent and taxes take half that’s insane pay to holdout over.
Absolutely true but this is simply about current events in the NFL….players all want long term contracts but at the instant that a player who either plays their position or is the same age, or skill level in their minds signs a deal worth more than theirs…..they cry holdout wanting to re-negotiate, or give me a new deal…..in the NFL a contract isn’t a contract to players but they are to teams….kind of an imbalance……
Getting rid of multi-year contracts would fix everything, except the NFLPA would never let that fly. How about no pay until the season is over and you get paid based on your performance? There is no happy medium. These players want to be paid top dollar while the top dollar is constantly changing. Guys are the “highest paid at their position” for 3 days, then someone else tops it, so that statement means nothing. They want long-term security as well as an annual raise to the top. It’s ridiculous.
Right on….excellent comment……exactly what I said earlier, only you said it better.
And they want there contracts paid when they under perform or miss games due to injury. Can’t have it both ways.
Risk of injury is one of the things they’re being paid for. They’re damaging their bodies for owner profit and risking life altering harm.
Per ‘Over the Cap’ he Bengals have a bit of change they could sweeten Treys ‘25 salary even if they did something simple like tie it to performance. The defense isn’t top level and without TH it’s not really mediocre.
This story also focused on a failure to appease their 1st round pick, so the 2025 budgetary machine in Cincinnati has been tasked with a load of contract issues. Playing hardball usually doesn’t make a good relationship with veteran players but big money can soothe a rookie
Counting on offense to get through the season and making ‘the dance’ seems like a delusional possibility.
Imo CIN paid much more for the 2 wr than they initially planned. Maybe by only $10-12 mil more per, but enough to make them re-think “taking care of him”.
Cin used to have a no re-negotiating on the final years…. until they didnt recently.
I just don’t understand. These players sign a contract and then they can act like they can just disregard it if they think they are owed more money. No one forced them to sign that contract. If they wanted that flexibility, then just sign one year deals. What am I missing?
Totally agree.
If the tables were turned and Tre Hendrickson was a free agent bust would he give money back ?
If he were a bust he’d have been cut and not made most of the money in his contract.
Most teams give good faith raises and extensions to players who perform at star levels when they reach the last year of their contracts or trade them.
I’m tired how these football players can’t play out their current contract that they originally signed on the dotted line too but no they have to act like total cry babies demanding more money their last year of the contract until they get the money they want. Darn players GROW UP and GET OUT ON THE FIELD! Trey Hendrickson and his family can live comfortably on 16 million per year!
It seems like the Bengals likely told him last year that they would take care of him this year, then he put up a huge season and got low balled. At some point you have to put some stock in the fact that Cincinnati has these issues way more than most teams.
I think this is more of a Hendrickson trying to secure his 2026/27 knowing that he is still one of the top DE in the NFL. Injury in 2025 of any sort would destroy his earning capacity during FA. Bengals view it as the flip side, Hendrickson is at his ability ceiling and players over 30 that get injured seldom come back to form.
A lot of you people just don’t get it. The Bengals said they would renegotiate his contract if he got 17 1/2 sacks again or somewhere close to that. He did so he satisfied his end of the deal. The Bengals chose to pay two wide receivers and screw him over, so he says F them and he has every right to.
And where would they be without signing Chase? Higgins maybe, but they’re more valuable than the DE position. Sucks, but it’s the truth. This league is about points, not sacks. They HAD to pay up for WR, and at the end of the day, there’s only so much money to go around. The days of guys playing to win or for championships are nearly gone. It seems more about money and themselves. It’s a situation that’s going to always be a situation unfortunately.
They missed the playoffs because of their terrible defense so I’d say defense is pretty important.
Over paying one dude isn’t going to fix a team defense issue.
Way to completely miss the point. It’s not just about Trey. It’s about taking their defense for granted when it was good and not doing a good job at all of keeping it good.
Yeah fantasy football is good for offensive stats, but I’ve been an NFL fan far too long to know that defense wins championships. Just go back and look at my Falcons that blew the Super Bowl against the Patriots. Worst loss ever. I’ll never forget.
Once he leaves the bangles or decides not to play and sits on the side, just you wait and see how crappy they will be this year
Almost poetic that Shemar is holding out as well. It’s very obvious he’s their Hendrickson replacement plan.
Bengals are back to being the Bengals. Better hope Burrow doesn’t get hurt.
What’s really interesting is that a lot of fans who dog on the Bengals as a bad franchise are fans of teams that haven’t even sniffed the playoffs in years.
Not a Bengals fan, but have lived in the Greater Cincinnati area for my entire life.
Let Him Hold Out !!
Eagles: Trade Huff and a 3rd round pick for him ONLY if: He agrees to a two year, $25MM per year guaranteed contract….. a 3rd year could become guaranteed at same rate if he achieves 25 sacks over the next two years, plays some agreed upon number of snaps, etc…. Make it happen Howie. Eagles have to take advantage of the next two years of elite offensive line and playmaker ability. They have plenty of picks next year to continue to stay young, pay Jalen Carter, etc….
We already have guys who have starting potential, like Jalyx Hunt and now bringing Campbell and others into the mix.
I’m all for trading for Trey at the deadline if the Eagles really need him at edge though.
No one is as ready as Hendrickson though… that guy would be a wrecker with Carter as well. And if we need him at the deadline, the cost will be more. But I hear what you are saying. Our schedule this year is brutal and he would make us that much better.
Actually I think it will be less at the deadline because a team will only be renting him for part of the season.
Well if we need him at the deadline, then we must be injury ridden. I want him for multiple years at elite level….
Sure, sit out the season. Teams will be lined up at your front door. Good call
The only reason it didn’t work out for Reddick is because Reddick had what people saw as a down year prior to holding out.
Hendrickson is in the complete opposite situation.
Pay the man if you want to play the man.
It’s mid-May. There’s absolutely no need to do something right now. He’s posturing because he really doesn’t have any leverage. I’m not faulting him, he’s got to do what he’s got to do. And I do think he’s deserving of a raise and extension., but nothings transpiring out of the ordinary when it comes to the Bengals. I’d anticipate a contract just before training camp which is the history of the team. Nothing to see here, but it’s post-draft and we all need something to talk about.
This just seems like a perfect situation to be resolved with a midseason trade to a contender. The thing complicating that is Cincy’s own desire to contend-and they may very well do that, if last year was just a hiccup. They’re too good to be awful, but last year exposed a lot of issues on the team that could keep them out of the top of a tough division (and tough conference).
So, if Cincy is right on the edge of contention at the deadline, a deal to send Hendrickson to a buyer sounds like the best resolution. Hendrickson playing makes that much attractive (unless he’s injured); so it’s in the Bengals’ best interest to lure him to the table at least for this year. I know that Cincy wants Hendrickson long term, but he’s 31, still very productive, and wants more money. Trading him to a willing partner to finish out the year seems like a no brainer decision for them, especially if it becomes obvious that the team is anything less than a top contender during the season. Potential trade partners also tend to get more desperate as roster deficiencies are exposed and injuries occur…