candyman93 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 Aiyuk just doesn’t want to go to Cleveland or the deal would be done already. We’ve been rumored to offer San Fran the best deal and Aiyuk the most money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 3 hours ago, Nabbs4u said: Pretty sure at no point going into the season did that FO think Trent Williams was going to be Trent Williams again. Him pulling this crap wasn't expected. However Trent being Trent knows if he doesn't get a pay increase right now as SB favorites, he's not getting it after the Purdy extension. Mind you Trent set the market as the highest paid OT in the league a few years ago. Just because you didn't realize the cap was going to explode, shouldn't negate the other 3 years of the contract the 49ers have structured accordingly to sign other players. Trent is why Aiyuk isn't signed already. I mean, the 49ers also sort of left themselves vulnerable to "Trent Williams does Trent Williams things off the field" by not continually reinforcing the overall OL group. Since they added Williams in 2020, the 49ers have spent picks in rounds 1-4 on OL on three guys: Aaron Banks, Spencer Burford, and Dominic Puni. If the 49ers were in a good place with the rest of the starting 5 on OL, it would have been a lot less tempting for Trent to do his thing. Like I get that they had a dearth of premium picks because of the whole Trey Lance thing, but nobody is telling you to take Trey Sermon or Cameron Latu with premium picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 4 minutes ago, candyman93 said: Aiyuk just doesn’t want to go to Cleveland or the deal would be done already. We’ve been rumored to offer San Fran the best deal and Aiyuk the most money. The rumor (unsubstantiated) in 49ers circles is that he does not get a long with someone on Cleveland, possibly watson. But obviously no evidence of that outright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 I think he wants to go to Washington but Adam Peters has no real interest in meeting the Niners demands which I appreciate. I get he wants to play with his boy but how long until he becomes a distraction for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
typecast Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 3 minutes ago, lavar703 said: I think he wants to go to Washington but Adam Peters has no real interest in meeting the Niners demands which I appreciate. I get he wants to play with his boy but how long until he becomes a distraction for us? It's not a distraction. They've moved on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 Just now, PossibleCabbage said: I mean, the 49ers also sort of left themselves vulnerable to "Trent Williams does Trent Williams things off the field" by not continually reinforcing the overall OL group. Since they added Williams in 2020, the 49ers have spent picks in rounds 1-4 on OL on three guys: Aaron Banks, Spencer Burford, and Dominic Puni. If the 49ers were in a good place with the rest of the starting 5 on OL, it would have been a lot less tempting for Trent to do his thing. Like I get that they had a dearth of premium picks because of the whole Trey Lance thing, but nobody is telling you to take Trey Sermon or Cameron Latu with premium picks. The Shanny response to the O-line thing is hilarious. Someone else can probably summarize it better, but he went on the Kawakami podcast (he does it every year) and was asked about their refusal to really get aggressive on the line and he basically strawman-ed it by saying that if they spent every pick on the offensive line they'd be weak at other positions. Then he mentioned something about how they like to draft people who will contribute and something about offensive line evals without acknowledging that they have frequently redshirted their rookies for multiple years now lol. Probably doesn't help when their offensive line coach says stuff like, "use premium picks elsewhere, we can make this work with the later picks" even though it clearly isn't working all that well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BILLievers Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 What a mess. How does this get resolved without him missing week 1? lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 (edited) 43 minutes ago, mse326 said: I am on SF side on Williams but Aiyuk's side with his deal. I remain of the belief that the only players I'll support holding out are those on Rookie/RFA/Tag contracts. If you decided to sign a deal in FA then you should play it out. You wanted long term, then you know you'll be underpaid at the end. That is what you signed up for. But when there is restrictions on you negotiating ability you don't have that choice, so fighting to get what your worth makes sense. Do you feel this way about players who have signed a FA deal but then retired with years pending on their contract? There's nothing in Trent Williams' deal that forces him to play. It's a contract that dictates when, where, and how he should show up to play in exchange for the money, but it doesn't force him to play so he's not violating it by refusing to play. If Trent Williams demanded his 2024 Week 1 game check on Sunday after he didn't play, or refused to pay fines that were spelled out in his contract, I'd agree with you. But there's no difference between the retirement example and what Williams has done to this point, except that the 9ers are planning on having him at LT in the future. And that planning is on the 9ers. Edited August 29 by ramssuperbowl99 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 2 minutes ago, Forge said: Probably doesn't help when their offensive line coach says stuff like, "use premium picks elsewhere, we can make this work with the later picks" even though it clearly isn't working all that well. It's known that front offices for various franchises have position groups they are better at drafting and those they are worse at drafting (e.g. New England and WRs.) It's possible the brain trust in SF just isn't as good at drafting (i.e. evaluating) OL compared to some other teams, and this is in fact the reason it's a good idea to sign Trent Williams. But it also shouldn't surprise you when Trent Williams turns around and asks for more money, which is basically the reason he was a free agent you could sign in the first place. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 13 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: I mean, the 49ers also sort of left themselves vulnerable to "Trent Williams does Trent Williams things off the field" by not continually reinforcing the overall OL group. Since they added Williams in 2020, the 49ers have spent picks in rounds 1-4 on OL on three guys: Aaron Banks, Spencer Burford, and Dominic Puni. If the 49ers were in a good place with the rest of the starting 5 on OL, it would have been a lot less tempting for Trent to do his thing. Like I get that they had a dearth of premium picks because of the whole Trey Lance thing, but nobody is telling you to take Trey Sermon or Cameron Latu with premium picks. But he's also doing to SF exactly what he did to us. He had a good contract and was highly paid and then somebody else got paid so he wanted paid again. Love the dude. One of my all-time favorite Redskins but this is exactly what he did in DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 8 minutes ago, typecast said: It's not a distraction. They've moved on. I'm talking about Washington if he gets traded here. Which I don't want to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 6 minutes ago, The BILLievers said: What a mess. How does this get resolved without him missing week 1? lol. If he signs with the niners this week, he'll play week one. He may have his snaps limited as he gets into football shape and works on conditioning, but he'll know the playbook, calls, etc. If he gets traded, he's going to be a ton more limited because he just won't know anything about the offense either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted August 30 Share Posted August 30 6 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Do you feel this way about players who have signed a FA deal but then retired with years pending on their contract? There's nothing in Trent Williams' deal that forces him to play. It's a contract that dictates when, where, and how he should show up to play in exchange for the money, but it doesn't force him to play so he's not violating it by refusing to play. If Trent Williams demanded his 2024 Week 1 game check on Sunday after he didn't play, or refused to pay fines that were spelled out in his contract, I'd agree with you. But there's no difference between the retirement example and what Williams has done to this point, except that the 9ers are planning on having him at LT in the future. And that planning is on the 9ers. Their ability to fine him says differently. The fine is for violating the contract. Retirement isn't a violation of the contract, that is an option a player has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted August 30 Share Posted August 30 1 minute ago, mse326 said: Their ability to fine him says differently. The fine is for violating the contract. Retirement isn't a violation of the contract, that is an option a player has. I don't think teams can fine players on rookie contracts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
typecast Posted August 30 Share Posted August 30 9 minutes ago, squire12 said: I don't think teams can fine players on rookie contracts In preseason, it's optional (doesn't read as "mandatory fine"). The last day of preseason is September 1. Quote (vi) Unexcused late reporting for or absence from preseason training camp by a player under contract except those signed as (1) an Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 9; or (2) a Drafted or Undrafted Rookie pursuant to Article 7—mandatory fine of $50,000 per day. For the avoidance of doubt, any such fines shall be mandatory, and shall not be reduced in amount or waived by the Club, in whole or in part, but must be paid by the player or deducted by the Club as provided in Section 5(b) of this Article. (vii) Unexcused late reporting for or absence from preseason training camp by a player under contract signed as an Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 9—mandatory fine of $50,000 per day, plus one week’s Paragraph 5 Salary for each preseason game missed. For the avoidance of doubt, any such fines shall be mandatory, and shall not be reduced in amount or waived by the Club, in whole or in part, but must be paid by the player or deducted by the Club as provided in Section 5(b) of this Article. (viii) Unexcused late reporting for or absence from preseason training camp by a player under contract signed as a Drafted or Undrafted Rookie, pursuant to Article 7, except for a player in the fifth League Year of his Rookie Contract (the option year) after his Club has exercised the Fifth-Year Option pursuant to Article 7, Section 7— fine of $40,000 per day. https://overthecap.com/collective-bargaining-agreement/article/42 The values in the language are for 2020-21, but the chart that replaces those values don't change the values until 2026. https://overthecap.com/collective-bargaining-agreement/article/42/section/1/(c)/ For the language specific to players on the fifth-year option, the rookie compensation article covers that. Quote (i) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Article 42 or Article 4, after the Club has exercised its Fifth-Year Option for any player selected in the first round of the 2016 or any subsequent Draft, any unexcused late reporting to or absence from preseason training camp by a player in the fifth League Year of his contract (the option year) shall subject the player to a fine of $40,000 per day for the 2020-2025 League Years and $45,000 per day for the 2026-2030 League Years, plus one week’s regular season salary for each preseason game missed. For purposes of this Subsection, Preseason Training Camp shall be defined as the period beginning with the mandatory reporting date for that player through the Sunday immediately preceding the first game of the NFL regular season. For the sake of clarity and the avoidance of doubt, the Progressive Discipline requirement set forth in Article 42, Section 1(a) shall not apply to any fine under this Subsection. https://overthecap.com/collective-bargaining-agreement/article/7/section/7/(h)(i)/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts