Bates says he isn't playing on tag

[cincygrad]

For a small market like Cincinnati, tying up $100 million dollars of income into an account for a few players you can't touch or make money off of, hurts. If you are a massive market that has billions at your disposal, then that means nothing, because the salary cap is so much lower than your actual income, because cap is based off tv revenue only.

I totally agree with this point. The league is going to have to change the way that guarantees are treated at the franchise level. The idea that a team has to place that money in escrow is ridiculous - It essentially treats the league assets like they are a risky investment.... The NFL is a no-risk investment - Profits will increase for ever. The way guarantees are going will severely hamper small markets and family-owned teams.... I'm shocked that the Rooney family hasn't bitched about this practice.

 

[BigKen]

You all say he's in the top 5. He's being tagged at #10.

Don't know what he's looking for, but if he's as good as you guys say, then pay the guy $15M -$17M a year and be done with it.
If he holds out, he has all of the leverage. Bengals won't get shit in a trade for him. Everyone knows that they'll be bailing.
When teams franchise top players, they always appear to be trying to short the player. Most players get pissed and end up getting the cash elsewhere. The team never gets value for a pissed off player.

 

[BigKen]

The highest-paid safeties in the NFL​

10) Jessie Bates III, Cincinnati Bengals | AAV: $12.911 million​

The only safety set to play the 2022 season on the franchise tag, Jessie Bates III is holding out of minicamp in hopes of landing a long-term extension from the Bengals. However, after Cincinnati selected safety Daxton Hill in the first round of the 2022 NFL Draft, they may be content to let Bates play out the year and then depart via free agency.

Unless Bates works out a deal with the Bengals before the July 15 franchise tag extension deadline, he will collect a fully guaranteed $12.911 million during the upcoming campaign. Bates is the only defensive back on this list currently projected to reach the open market next offseason.

9) Quandre Diggs, Seattle Seahawks | AAV: $13 million​

Quandre Diggs re-signed with Seattle in the offseason, inking a three-year, $39 million accord that contains $13.49 million in full guarantees. In reality, this is more like a one-year, $14 million deal that Seattle could potentially escape before next year.

Diggs collected a $12.3 million signing bonus that will be prorated over the life of the deal. His $1.19 base salary in 2022 will keep his cap number at just $5.8 million, but his cap charges will explode over the following two years. Diggs is scheduled to count for $18.1 million in 2023 and $15.1 million in 2024.

8) Marcus Williams, Baltimore Ravens | AAV: $14 million​

Still only 25 years old, Marcus Williams played for the Saints on the franchise tag in 2021 before landing a five-year, $70 million pact with the Ravens in March. He received $32 million fully guaranteed, including his $14.965 million signing bonus and base salaries in 2022 and 2023.

The rest of Williams’ guarantees are included in a $14.92 option bonus. That bonus is already fully guaranteed, but it doesn’t officially have to be exercised until the beginning of the 2023 league year. At that point, the option bonus will be prorated over the rest of Williams’ contract (in the same fashion as a signing bonus).

7) Kevin Byard, Tennessee Titans | AAV: $14.1 million​

Kevin Byard is arguably the best safety in the NFL, so the Titans are getting a relative steal given that he’s just the seventh-highest-paid at the position. Tennessee has already restructured Byard’s deal for 2022, the second time they’ve done so during the life of the contract. Thus, his cap hit for the upcoming season is only $7.058 million.


Because the Titans moved some of Byard’s money into the future, his cap charges will be $19.623 million and $17.823 million in 2023 and 2024, respectively. He also has two void years tacked onto the end of his deal in 2025 and 2026. Tennessee will take on $4.386 million in dead money if Byard doesn’t re-sign after the 2024 season.

6) Eddie Jackson, Chicago Bears | AAV: $14.6 million​

The Bears signed Eddie Jackson to a four-year, $58.4 million extension in Jan. 2020, tying him to the team through 2024. Jackson received $22 million guaranteed, including a $12 million signing bonus and effectively guaranteed base salaries in 2020 and 2021. In March 2022, his $11 million base salary — previously only guaranteed for injury — became fully guaranteed for injury, cap, and skill purposes.

Chicago reworked Jackson’s pact in March 2021, creating $6.36 million in cap space in the process. The club moved $7.59 million of Jackson’s salary into a signing bonus and tacked on a void year in 2025, giving themselves one more season to spread out Jackson’s prorated money.

5) Budda Baker, Arizona Cardinals | AAV: $14.75 million​

Budda Baker is under contract with the Cardinals through the 2024 campaign under the terms of the four-year, $59 million extension he inked in Aug. 2020. Arizona used a $7.1 million option bonus that was exercised in March 2021.

As things currently stand, Baker will have relatively stable cap charges of $14.775 million, $16.875 million, and $17.975 million over the next three seasons. Of his 2022 base salary, $2 million of it became guaranteed in March 2021. The remaining $9 million was guaranteed as of March 2022.

4) Justin Simmons, Denver Broncos | AAV: $15.25 million​

Originally assigned the franchise tag in 2021, Justin Simmons agreed to a long-term contract with the Broncos last summer. The now-29-year-old received a four-year, $61 million extension with $32.1 million fully guaranteed. His guarantees were comprised of a $15 million signing bonus and base salaries of $2 million in 2021 and $15.1 million in 2022.


Simmons has one of the more straightforward contracts among the highest-paid NFL safeties. Denver didn’t use a complicated structure, and they haven’t reworked his deal as of yet. The Broncos could conceivably move on from Simmons after the 2023 campaign, but he’s still playing at an All-Pro level.

3) Harrison Smith, Minnesota Vikings | AAV: $16 million​

The oldest safety on the list at 32, Harrison Smith signed a four-year, $64 million extension in Aug. 2021. Given his age, it was a relatively surprising deal. However, the pact is really a two-year, $26 million contract that Minnesota could exit after 2022.

Smith’s $2.95 million base salary is guaranteed in 2022, and he’ll have a cap charge of $7.407 million. In 2023, Smith has just $1.25 million guaranteed. The Vikings could cut him with a dead money charge of just $11.768 million. If Minnesota used a post-June 1 designation, they’d only take on $3.916 million in 2023 dead money.

2) Jamal Adams, Seattle Seahawks | AAV: $17.5 million​

Jamal Adams had all the leverage in the world after being acquired by the Seahawks in 2020. Seattle sent two first-round picks to the Jets in exchange for Adams, so how could they deny eventually making him one of the NFL’s highest-paid safeties?


Adams received a four-year, $70 million extension that included $21 million in full guarantees. The deal contained a $12.44 million option bonus that became fully guaranteed in Feb. 2022. Additionally, $2.56 million of Adams’ 2023 base salary will become guaranteed five days after Super Bowl 57. His contract also contains incentives tied to interceptions, sacks, and Pro Bowl and conference championship berths.

Who is the highest-paid safety in the NFL?​

1) Minkah Fitzpatrick, Pittsburgh Steelers | AAV: $18.247 million​

Minkah Fitzpatrick is the NFL’s new highest-paid safety after agreeing to a four-year, $72.98 million extension with the Steelers. Fitzpatrick received a $17.5 million signing bonus and $36 million in full guarantees.

Pittsburgh has typically refused to guarantee more than one full year on any contract. However, they’ve now broken that protocol with both Fitzpatrick and T.J. Watt. Fitzpatrick will collect guaranteed base salaries of $4 million in 2022 and $14.5 million in 2023. He’ll get $55.388 million over the first three years of the deal.


Fitzpatrick and Adams are in their own tier among safety contracts. Fitzpatrick’s deal will only increase the demands of Derwin James and Jessie Bates III, both of whom are angling for new pacts. With Fitzpatrick crossing the $18 million/year threshold, the stage is set for the next crop of safeties to top $20 million annually.

 

[cincygrad]

You all say he's in the top 5. He's being tagged at #10.

Don't know what he's looking for, but if he's as good as you guys say, then pay the guy $15M -$17M a year and be done with it.
If he holds out, he has all of the leverage. Bengals won't get shit in a trade for him. Everyone knows that they'll be bailing.
When teams franchise top players, they always appear to be trying to short the player. Most players get pissed and end up getting the cash elsewhere. The team never gets value for a pissed off player.

I think there is a mixed opinion on how good he is. He is not the best safety in the league. He's definitely a top 10 guy. You could make a good argument for him being top 5, but you could also make a good argument for him not being top 5. So, in reality he's probably somewhere between 4-8.

FWIW, I agree with what the Bengals have done here. I think they approached Bates early (last season) and they couldn't get it done. They aren't overpaying for him. Someone else will have to do it. As far as all the chatter about future deals for Burrow, Chase, Higgins, etc..... We'll see what happens with those when they come around. Historically the Bengals have had no problems cutting huge deals for offensive skill positions. Historically, they've never cut large deals for guards or safeties.

 

[BigKen]

I think there is a mixed opinion on how good he is. He is not the best safety in the league. He's definitely a top 10 guy. You could make a good argument for him being top 5, but you could also make a good argument for him not being top 5. So, in reality he's probably somewhere between 4-8.

FWIW, I agree with what the Bengals have done here. I think they approached Bates early (last season) and they couldn't get it done. They aren't overpaying for him. Someone else will have to do it. As far as all the chatter about future deals for Burrow, Chase, Higgins, etc..... We'll see what happens with those when they come around. Historically the Bengals have had no problems cutting huge deals for offensive skill positions. Historically, they've never cut large deals for guards or safeties.

Professional sports are all reaching a point of self destruction.

$60M a year for 80 basketball games?
$50M a year for 162 baseball games?
$50M a year for 17 football games?

I see things a lot different than a lot of folks. I understand that some guys are much better at their job than others, but those other guys are equally important to the success of the TEAM. That's why I tend to lean on the Bill Belichick salary system. Pay everyone well but don't overpay anyone. He showed it could work for twenty years, even with the best QB on the planet.

Eventually, the salary cap will have to go. Putting a $200M restriction on any team will eventually do severe damage to every team. If a team has a top 5 QB, RB, WR, TE, DE, DT, CB and S, can that team pay every top guy the top dollar in hi position? Seriously, i a team has eight of the top players in eight positions, you're talking roughly $170M per year or that team has to trade players or watch them walk. Even if the capwas increased to $250M a year, that $170M would represent 61%.

The fairest way to set a fair salary cap might be for every team to report it's total gross earnings every year. That team's cap would be 10% of the gross. Dallas Cowboys bring in $5,000,000,000, then their cap is $500,000,000and every team must spend no less than 75% ($375M). Owners would do everything to max income in order to stay competitive. Players would be paid fairly and they'd know what their teams were and were not doing to increase available money.

Owners would never go for it.

 

[cincygrad]

The fairest way to set a fair salary cap might be for every team to report it's total gross earnings every year. That team's cap would be 10% of the gross. Dallas Cowboys bring in $5,000,000,000, then their cap is $500,000,000and every team must spend no less than 75% ($375M). Owners would do everything to max income in order to stay competitive. Players would be paid fairly and they'd know what their teams were and were not doing to increase available money.

I mean, this is ridiculous..... The amount of money one could make in the Los Angeles market even if they weren't trying at all will be 200 fold more money than one could make in Green Bay, Wisconsin. The success of the NFL is predicated on revenue sharing - Otherwise market factors will dictate which teams will succeed each and every year. Even baseball, without their cap recognized that market size was creating unfair advantages, so they created a system that ends up taking money away from the big-market teams so that they can subsidize the smaller market teams.

In many ways the players are to blame for their insistence on low-end wages for rookie deals. Good teams have figured out that they can't spend all of their cap on veteran players - Eventually, they have to let guys go and replace them with cheap labor (rookies). Sure, the quarterbacks get paid and sometimes the receivers.... But a lot of better than average, but mid-tier type free agents won't see second contracts with their home team because of cap issues. Yes, the cap will continue to increase - But the owners keep providing bigger deals to make up for any increase.

 

[cdumler7]

Professional sports are all reaching a point of self destruction.

$60M a year for 80 basketball games?
$50M a year for 162 baseball games?
$50M a year for 17 football games?

I see things a lot different than a lot of folks. I understand that some guys are much better at their job than others, but those other guys are equally important to the success of the TEAM. That's why I tend to lean on the Bill Belichick salary system. Pay everyone well but don't overpay anyone. He showed it could work for twenty years, even with the best QB on the planet.

Eventually, the salary cap will have to go. Putting a $200M restriction on any team will eventually do severe damage to every team. If a team has a top 5 QB, RB, WR, TE, DE, DT, CB and S, can that team pay every top guy the top dollar in hi position? Seriously, i a team has eight of the top players in eight positions, you're talking roughly $170M per year or that team has to trade players or watch them walk. Even if the capwas increased to $250M a year, that $170M would represent 61%.

The fairest way to set a fair salary cap might be for every team to report it's total gross earnings every year. That team's cap would be 10% of the gross. Dallas Cowboys bring in $5,000,000,000, then their cap is $500,000,000and every team must spend no less than 75% ($375M). Owners would do everything to max income in order to stay competitive. Players would be paid fairly and they'd know what their teams were and were not doing to increase available money.

Owners would never go for it.

Isn't the salary cap a big part of what makes the NFL so intriguing? Teams have to figure out how to keep top players while also fielding a full roster. It keeps teams like Dallas or LA from being able to buy championships. One of the things I hate about the NBA and MLB is how much teams can spend eliminating any kind of parity. If we go to your idea then a team like Cincinnati never stands a chance again of making the Super Bowl unless something crazy happens.

You have with this idea eliminated every small market team in the NFL. You've turned the NFL into college football. Pretty much can narrow it down every year to the same 5 teams competing for championships.

 

[BigKen]

Isn't the salary cap a big part of what makes the NFL so intriguing? Teams have to figure out how to keep top players while also fielding a full roster. It keeps teams like Dallas or LA from being able to buy championships. One of the things I hate about the NBA and MLB is how much teams can spend eliminating any kind of parity. If we go to your idea then a team like Cincinnati never stands a chance again of making the Super Bowl unless something crazy happens.

You have with this idea eliminated every small market team in the NFL. You've turned the NFL into college football. Pretty much can narrow it down every year to the same 5 teams competing for championships.

My point is that teams are already screwing the with cap.

Perfect example is Mahomes $500M deal he signed two years ago and has rewritten twice since.

Make a rule that contracts cannot be rewritten for three years from the date of original signing and all contracts must be guaranteed.

Hockey, baseball and basketball are all guaranteed. Do that and the salary cap takes it up whazoo in the NFL.

If the small markets can't compete, then maybe it's time to move the franchises to the larger ones, or to large international venues like Mexico City, Toronto or San Antonio. 8^)

 

[cincygrad]

My point is that teams are already screwing the with cap.

Perfect example is Mahomes $500M deal he signed two years ago and has rewritten twice since.

Make a rule that contracts cannot be rewritten for three years from the date of original signing and all contracts must be guaranteed.

Hockey, baseball and basketball are all guaranteed. Do that and the salary cap takes it up whazoo in the NFL.

If the small markets can't compete, then maybe it's time to move the franchises to the larger ones, or to large international venues like Mexico City, Toronto or San Antonio. 8^)

Again, this is ridiculous. One of the greatest franchises all-time is the Green Bay Packers. Though a bigger market than Green Bay, the same would basically be true for Pittsburgh which is one of the best franchises in all of sports. Are you really interested in the Mexico City Packers or Toronto Bills? Why? Things are working just fine with the way things are set up now - Teams are just overpaying for certain positions.

 

[BigKen]

Again, this is ridiculous. One of the greatest franchises all-time is the Green Bay Packers. Though a bigger market than Green Bay, the same would basically be true for Pittsburgh which is one of the best franchises in all of sports. Are you really interested in the Mexico City Packers or Toronto Bills? Why? Things are working just fine with the way things are set up now - Teams are just overpaying for certain positions.

I don't expect everyone to agree with me.

My brother lived in GB and his wife worked for the Packers. She was responsible for setting up travel, rooms, food for the team and for setting up packages for Season Ticket holders that travel to every away game. It's the only team without a billionaire owner and depends on public trust and financing for infrastructure. The day is coming when some gigantic financial decision will have to be made and the existing structure will have to change. Having a Jeff Bezos take over or a Steve Wynn could keep the Packers in Green Bay with an 80,000 seat domed stadium in a big Casino/Hotel complex would be a huge economic boost and solidify the team going forward.

As far as the Bills are concerned, they finally have an owner with deep pockets, but he hates spending any of his own. he's already cutting deals with Canada to move a couple of games across the border. Toronto and the Canadian government are trying to entice him to cross over with a free domed stadium and a ten year no tax with future tax incentives. The NFL is listening closely because Toronto just might be able to get the next open franchise along with Mexico City.

Can't operate in professional sports with your heart or living in the past. If you believe you can, you're a fool. The number one rule is simple:

FOLLOW THE MONEY !!!

 

[alf8478]

My point is that teams are already screwing the with cap.

Perfect example is Mahomes $500M deal he signed two years ago and has rewritten twice since.

Make a rule that contracts cannot be rewritten for three years from the date of original signing and all contracts must be guaranteed.

Hockey, baseball and basketball are all guaranteed. Do that and the salary cap takes it up whazoo in the NFL.

If the small markets can't compete, then maybe it's time to move the franchises to the larger ones, or to large international venues like Mexico City, Toronto or San Antonio. 8^)

I actually like that idea. They shouldn’t be able to redo every contract every year to gain financial flexibility

 

[Cincyfan78]

Bates is good. Top 10? Yes. I *think* the Bengals have offered him, over the past 2 off-seasons, deals that would have put him near top 5 in the league - which is about right, IMO.

He seems to want top 1-2 money. He's not that. Sad thing is, as Crash mentioned, he's likely to have seen more AAV return had he just signed last year's extension, or even agreed to something this year. Bengals do 1 thing right - they've always taken care of their players, and the vast majority see the full value of the contract. Unlike other teams who know a mega deal with a player isn't likely to see that final 30-40% of the deal...

If he's really wanting top 1-2 money, and higher guarantees....nothing to be done other than wish him well, and remind him that the grass isn't always greener.

 

[Cincyfan78]

2 years barely above average in WAR, 1 year below, 1 year well above. So, he's banking a top 2-3 salary on 1 really good year ...

 

[cincygrad]

I'm sure it all just came down to guarantees.... This is where things get a little ridiculous. Aside from Watson's deal with Cleveland, almost all "guaranteed" deals are only guaranteed through the first two years. And it's very rare that a player wouldn't see the second year. Take Trae Waynes deal with the Bengals as an example. His deal had 15 million guaranteed (it was all in his signing bonus). His salary for the first year was 5 million. He didn't play a single snap. His second year salary was 10.8 million. He disappointed and was cut. But, basically he signed a 3 year deal with 30.8 million coming to him no matter what he did. I'm certain the Bengals offered Bates over 30 million within the first two years of a new deal. But the guarantees are a way for agents to flex their muscles and this is the consequence.

 

[cdumler7]

My point is that teams are already screwing the with cap.

Perfect example is Mahomes $500M deal he signed two years ago and has rewritten twice since.

Make a rule that contracts cannot be rewritten for three years from the date of original signing and all contracts must be guaranteed.

Hockey, baseball and basketball are all guaranteed. Do that and the salary cap takes it up whazoo in the NFL.

If the small markets can't compete, then maybe it's time to move the franchises to the larger ones, or to large international venues like Mexico City, Toronto or San Antonio. 8^)

I don't mind the idea of limiting how often a team can re-do deals. The reality though for the player this is actually a good thing. They get more guarantees added back into the deal so I can't see the players union going for that idea.

As for the small market teams I do not want to see them lose their franchises. Many of those communities depend big time on that franchise being around. Throw in a lot of the smaller market teams have some of the longest history in the NFL. Great example is that the Packers/Bears game in week 2 could be for who has the most wins in NFL history. Are we really going to scrap all those years of history just because Green Bay is a small market? I would add part of what makes the NFL so great is because the large market teams do not get to buy championships. I know you cheer for a team in one of the largest markets available so that would be huge for the Patriots, but the NFL in the long run would lose money seeing fans lose interest as the same 5 teams keep winning.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

I thought I had read that the Bengals were offering Bates $17.9 million a year for 5 years, but only willing to give him the first year of the contract guaranteed with a $17 million dollar signing bonus. He was likely to see the whole contract with the Bengals in that scenario, and the fact that Mike Brown is very loyal to his players, especially the ones he offers large contracts to as he would like to see them get it all. So he offers lower signing bonuses historically and provides a track record of paying those guys full term over 90% of the time. This way a small market can still sign these stars and they don't have to front so much money, because as long as they are on the team for the full length of the contract, they will see 100% of the money.

That contract for Bates would have made him the highest paid safety in the NFL for full contract value, even though it would have been second highest in the NFL for annual value. The sticking point was the signing bonus. Bates and his agent must have real concerns about his ability to maintain any kind of viable resemblance of his current self, so they needed the huge wad now. The guaranteed money was a no go, so that was that.

People keep saying Mike Brown is cheap, he is not cheap, he is financially reasonable. Brown honors his big contracts if his players are putting in the time and effort. If the player just shits the bed, why should he get paid for his past production only when you can get him on the field anymore and you have to replace him? Why should the team keep paying a guy that much money and destroy their limited cap for a guy not playing? Brown was taking a huge risk on Bates with that kind of overall contract, Bates needed to make a concession on the signing bonus to allow the Bengals some monetary leeway with other upcoming contracts.

 

[cincygrad]

I thought I had read that the Bengals were offering Bates $17.9 million a year for 5 years, but only willing to give him the first year of the contract guaranteed with a $17 million dollar signing bonus. He was likely to see the whole contract with the Bengals in that scenario, and the fact that Mike Brown is very loyal to his players, especially the ones he offers large contracts to as he would like to see them get it all. So he offers lower signing bonuses historically and provides a track record of paying those guys full term over 90% of the time. This way a small market can still sign these stars and they don't have to front so much money, because as long as they are on the team for the full length of the contract, they will see 100% of the money.

That contract for Bates would have made him the highest paid safety in the NFL for full contract value, even though it would have been second highest in the NFL for annual value. The sticking point was the signing bonus. Bates and his agent must have real concerns about his ability to maintain any kind of viable resemblance of his current self, so they needed the huge wad now. The guaranteed money was a no go, so that was that.

People keep saying Mike Brown is cheap, he is not cheap, he is financially reasonable. Brown honors his big contracts if his players are putting in the time and effort. If the player just shits the bed, why should he get paid for his past production only when you can get him on the field anymore and you have to replace him? Why should the team keep paying a guy that much money and destroy their limited cap for a guy not playing? Brown was taking a huge risk on Bates with that kind of overall contract, Bates needed to make a concession on the signing bonus to allow the Bengals some monetary leeway with other upcoming contracts.

To be fair, the dialogue about the Bengals honoring all contracts is a bit outdated. The Waynes contract is a good example of that as we cut him before letting him get to 9 million in year 3. It was also true of Bobbie Hart - We gave him a terrible (for us) three year deal in 2019, but cut him to save 5 million in 2021. But, I do think Bates would have made north of 30K through 2 years no matter what happened.... So the guarantee business is sorta silly in this respect.

 

[Cincyfan78]

To be fair, the dialogue about the Bengals honoring all contracts is a bit outdated. The Waynes contract is a good example of that as we cut him before letting him get to 9 million in year 3. It was also true of Bobbie Hart - We gave him a terrible (for us) three year deal in 2019, but cut him to save 5 million in 2021. But, I do think Bates would have made north of 30K through 2 years no matter what happened.... So the guarantee business is sorta silly in this respect.

Maybe - but Waynes is certainly an outlier. I mean, you can't miss 2 full seasons and expect to not get cut. If you've heard him talk, he's actually likely to retire anyway after his injuries.

Hart was a TERRIBLE contract to begin with - and cutting bad/dead weight that should never have been signed is also not really comparable to the Bates situation.

It's one thing to sign a guy you think is going to be good, and have to deal with some bad play, or whatever...it's another in those two examples to get complete zeroes from positions and after years, still expect to be contracted...

 

[CrashDavisSports]

To be fair, the dialogue about the Bengals honoring all contracts is a bit outdated. The Waynes contract is a good example of that as we cut him before letting him get to 9 million in year 3. It was also true of Bobbie Hart - We gave him a terrible (for us) three year deal in 2019, but cut him to save 5 million in 2021. But, I do think Bates would have made north of 30K through 2 years no matter what happened.... So the guarantee business is sorta silly in this respect.

And that is why I said 90% of the cases. You have to be injured all t he time, like Waynes was. Or you had to completely shit the bed like Hart did to not get your FINAL year. In both those outliers, those two players made 67% of their contract even though Waynes never real saw the field, and Hart spent two seasons trying to murder our QB.

 

[DanBengalfan]

probably has more money in the bank right now than a normal person does when they retire with a 401k

he'll just go to the gym and try to stay in shape for when he plays for the Browns.