Shemar Stewart WTF?

The Den
21

So 1 DE retires, Trey holds out, Shemar has left,

And this is from a defense that was letting up 50 per game ?

Yikes

3 Likes
22

I don’t think it’s injury guarantees (but I could be wrong, my source is Florio), My understanding it’s about voiding future guarantees when a breach has been committed. Think Jamo when he had the gambling violation that voided his future guarantees . . . at the end of the day, Jamo was/is so talented, that it didn’t/doesn’t matter that his 3rd/4th year base salary was no longer guaranteed.

Some teams like the Lions have those voids up future guarantees, but they also pay signing bonuses and/or future roster bonuses at an earlier date.

Cincy wants their cake and eat it too, but will cave before training camp. Of course if they put Hendrickson in a Lions uniform, they’d have more money to pay Stewart sooner.

23

Bengals added that language to the contract this year and I guess Stewart’s camp ain’t having it. Only the bengals could be in a contract dispute with their best DE only to draft a DE 17th overall and somehow have a contract dispute with him as well. My issue is he should just sign the waiver and practice and honestly,the bengals should just sign the kid at this point. The amount overall really isn’t a big cap hit if something happens with stewart

2 Likes
24

Okay. I just saw on Twitter a Bengals blogger claiming that they were trying to mess with injury guarantees. Perhaps the void clauses that are more widely reported are not injury related.

2 Likes
25

trade us Stewart! Problem solved!

1 Like
26

I’m not positive, but I think the injury guarantee had to do with the standard practice of guaranteeing an unsigned player’s contract IF a player got hurt during mini-camp (as the Bengals just completed mini-camp where Stewart didn’t participate).

One is the dispute that the Bengals and Stewart are having over the language of the unsigned contract (the voiding of future guarantee language/timing of cash payment), the other is Stewart not participating in mini-camp with the typical injury guarantee . . . at least, that’s my understanding.

1 Like
27

I do think the Bengals are trying to change the language to what most NFL teams are using……but just seems like the bengals can’t do anything right with signing their players. If they hadn’t gotten lucky with being able to draft Burrow I’m not sure how bad they would be.

28

Didn’t realize Cincy was also trying to dick around with the training camp injury guarantee but this does not surprise me. And yes, from what I’ve read, the language they want in Stewart’s contract would cause all future guarantees to void if his contract is voided at any point during the duration of the deal, including for injury.

1 Like
29

For all the grief the Lions have given us over the (decades) we can thank our lucky stars they aren’t owned by a family like the Browns whose entire wealth is tied up in the team, or the Nuttings in Pittsburgh who use the Pirates as a piggy bank

5 Likes
30

Are there any other 1st rounders not signed? Or just Cinci being Cinci?

31

Season 2 No GIF by Martin

So glad we didn’t draft this guy.

2 Likes
32

Why?
Because he has signed his contract with the cheap as Bengals?
Tate Ratledge has not officially signed with the Lions, do you wish we hadn’t drafted him?
Ratledge has participated, unlike Stewart, but the Bengals are playing games with the waivers.

33

Because I think he was the most overrated player in the draft. Works out like Tarzan plays like Jane. He was the one player I did not want. Now he walked away from his team. Sounds like your giving him a pass because of your dislike for the “cheap as Bengals”

He is not a Dan Campbell kinda player, he is the opposite . Some just want any ole DE.

2 Likes
34

We just disagree on the player.
Stewart worked out like Tarzan and played like Tarzan.
I think he is a DC player that loves football and plays hard all the time.
There are a bunch of drafted players not currently signed.
I think Alex Anzalone is a DC kinda player and he wasn’t at OTA’s and he is under contract.

2 Likes
35

“It’s just like… the on field stuff I’m not doing…” :roll_eyes: :roll_eyes: :roll_eyes:

36

AGREED!

2 Likes
37

I had heard the language the bengals were using is used by other teams. Now I hear it isn’t and the bengals are out on a limb by themselves. What a mess. Can’t really blame Stewart if he gets injured and cut would he lose the guaranteed money? If so, there’s no way he should sign this contract. The NFL got rid of the crazy rookie contracts and these guys are making less but part of this was the guaranteed money I thought.

3 Likes
38

No, this is wrong, it has to do with the moral clause that the Bengals want to include. He would still be compensated for his entire rookie contract if he had an injury.

No, this is wrong, it has to do with the moral clause that the Bengals want to include. He would still be compensated for his entire rookie contract if he had an injury.

There are two issues:
The first is the is the rookie contract negotiations. The Bengals want to put in a “Moral clause” that voids future years guarantees, It’s the same clause that Detroit used to void Sutton’s and Jamo’s guarantees. The Bengals haven’t used that clause before in their rookie contracts, including the #18 overall draft pick. They also haven’t used that in any veteran player extensions before (including Burrow, Chase and Higgins). Most other teams (including the Lions) have a moral clause in their contract.

The other is the injury waiver which basically allows the player to participate in mini camp AND if he is injured, he’ll be paid his entire rookie contract (the amounts of the rookie contract are already known, its just the language that isn’t). The Bengals offered this waiver to Stewart and he wouldn’t sign it, that part is on Stewart, not the Bengals.

Now typically, unsigned players will sign the waiver.

The Bengals are trying to insert the same clause that Detroit uses in their contracts, it’s the one that voided Sutton’s and Jamo’s guarantees, doesn’t have anything at all to do with injury.

Yes, Cincy is trying to insert a moral clause into Stewarts contract that many other NFL teams use. Cincy has a valid point.

Stewart would be the first contract that Cincy has had this moral clause in, they have never done this before this year. Chase/Higgins/Burrow, Mims (last years 1st round pick) and Murphy (2023 1st round pick) do not have that language in their contract. Stewart has a valid point.

Someone will cave soon, my guess is shortly after training camp begins.

2 Likes
39

Schefter was saying that the language the bengals are trying to use is different than What other teams have done in the past. He made it sound like the Bengals are going in a different direction than the rest of the NFL? There’s a lot of conflicting information is the only thing I can be certain of lol.

40

Schefter said it was different than the language the Bengals used in the past, but the same language that other teams have used. Schefter explains it at about the 1:10 mark

Florio does a better job explaining exactly what the Bengals are trying to put in their contract.

The Bengals are right to try to get the language in their contracts (but they couldn’t use Burrow/Chase/Higgins as guinea pigs).

Stewart is right, he shouldn’t be the 1st player on the Bengals to have this clause.

At the end of the day, it probably won’t matter if the clause is in there or not, as it’s unlikely that he commits a voidable offense and even if he creates a voidable event (like Jamo did with the gambling), the Bengals very well might want to keep and pay the player just like Detroit did with Jamo.

1 Like