Per veteran NFL reporter Len Pasquarelli of the Sports Xchange, Seahawks defensive end Chris Clemons rejected a 3-year contract extension offer that would have kept him in Seattle through 2014. Via FoxSports, Pasquarelli reported that:

"The Sports Xchange has learned that the Seahawks offered Clemons a new three-year contract through 2014 that would essentially have boosted his 2012 compensation to $8 million (from a scheduled base of $4 million), and added two years, at salaries of $4.5 million (for 2013) and $5.5 million (2014). That's a total of $18 million for three years. Clemons could have earned a $500,000 bonus for registering 10 or more sacks. The two add-on years, though, at a total of $10 million, exclusive of bonuses, would have "bought out" Clemons from a chance at free agency. And that clearly wasn't enough for the player to sacrifice the chance to market himself as early as next spring, and so the deal was rejected."

The big boost in 2012 makes sense for Clemons, but it's not super surprising he balked at the 2013 and 2014 numbers. John Clayton has been banging the drum that the double-digit sack accumulating defensive end for the past two years would probably be looking for $6-$7 million per year. The Pasquarelli article seems to assume that the information he's hearing means Clemons has already decided to opt for free agency in 2013, but I suppose the Seahawks could always up the offer a little bit to lock him down. I tend to think that it's still pretty early in the negotiating period - still over a month until training camp even starts, not to mention he's locked in for the entire 2012 season. So, a lot could happen before Clemons hits free agency.

--

UPDATED: A club source close to the situation has told Tacoma News-Tribune's Eric Williams "that contrary to the report, the Seahawks have not received a formal rejection on any deal, and the two sides continue to negotiate."

Williams' information makes a little more sense to me, and though the Seahawks and Clemons' camp have thus far failed to land on a number that is agreeable to both sides, it does seem early to be formally and conclusively breaking off talks, as the first report seemed to imply had happened. My guess is that negotiations will continue, but we'll have to see.