So here is a good question.

[Devin]

Just curious what you all think:

Do you sign Nate and keep McGee for 1 more season and deal with McGahees upcomming contract situation (undoubtedly if hes not extended he will holdout). We have first dibs on McGee after this season but if we sign Clements id expect Milloy gone and potentially McGee after next year.

Or.....

Personally I think we should franchise Nate and trade him, I would then extend Millow, McGahee and McGee and use my draft picks on CB/DT positions.

Restructuring with other playersshould allow for FA help at OL.

Dont get me wrong I love Nate and would love nothing more then to see him in a Bills uniform, but he will command a 50-60 Mil contract and while we could do it how will that affect us in 2-3 seasons when its time to deal with McGahee/Spikes/Losman? And whoever else is a FA.

[Devin]

Re: So here is a good question.

I think Losman is up the year after McGahee as is probably Lee Evans.

Clump would know for sure.

[Drive 4 Five]

Re: So here is a good question.

Personally I think that McGee has outplayed Clements so far this season. I like Nate as much as anyone else, but I am sick of reading how he thinks he is the best at his position, and always seems to be running and his mouth, then he goes out and gets punked by Dante Stallworth and Chris Chambers in back to back weeks, and then there was the blatant pass interference call today that set up a Jets touchdown. I just don't believe that ANY ONE player is worth the kind of cheese he is going to be asking for. I think you do what is best for the future of the franchise and I agree with you that he should be franchised and traded.

[Devin]

Re: So here is a good question.



He has his moments no doubt, but 50-60 mil? I dont think so.

[Tasker]

Re: So here is a good question.

Fanchised and traded, well said.

Its bad enough to just produce when the contract is coming around, but when you dont you get the other side of that coin.

If they have a big season before signing they get paid big....if they are more talk than walk...they get traded or settle for what they earned which is a lesser (YET HUGE STILL) salary.

In reality, we need his trading power, and personally trading power of spikes as well, to get some inside run stoppers for the DL.

Carolina and Jacksonville could probally spare a few in that position, and when you are soft in the middle everything else suffers.

[Devin]

Re: So here is a good question.

If Clements took 30-35 Mil id consider it.

To me honestly its more important to lock up McGahee as a career Bill, id like Clements here but hes going to be to pricey imo.

[YardRat]

Re: So here is a good question.

Clements is gone...save the money from him and give it to McGee, McGahee, and Evans.

I agree with D4F...I think McGee's played better so far anyway.

[Devin]

Re: So here is a good question.

Yeah the only problem with McGee is he is very small and he has primarily matched up againt number 2/3 guys. Todays was a glaring example of why we need a big number 1 CB. A pass went right over his head into a WR's hands. He's only 5'9 and while he is a great number 2 CB I fear thats his position.....a number 2 guy/KR.

McGee matched up against a Chad Johnson, Terrel Owens, basically any big physical reciever would be a nightmare.

[Crisis]

Re: So here is a good question.

I think Spikes health will be an important factor in all of this...

[Devin]

Re: So here is a good question.

IM guessing your saying you think he wont be back or wont be 100% next season?

[Lexwhat]

Re: So here is a good question.

Personally I think that McGee has outplayed Clements so far this season. I like Nate as much as anyone else, but I am sick of reading how he thinks he is the best at his position, and always seems to be running and his mouth, then he goes out and gets punked by Dante Stallworth and Chris Chambers in back to back weeks, and then there was the blatant pass interference call today that set up a Jets touchdown. I just don't believe that ANY ONE player is worth the kind of cheese he is going to be asking for. I think you do what is best for the future of the franchise and I agree with you that he should be franchised and traded.

It's probally true that McGee has played better than Clements overall this year. But Clements is almost always matched up against the opposing team's best receivers. Not McGee. Offensive coaches have to gameplan extensively against Nate. It's not fair to be critical of Nate just because he gives up a few plays (I'm not saying you are being critical Drive 4 Five). With the way the NFL rules are these days protecting WRs and QBs so much, tell me a team's #1 corner who's played much better than Nate Clements? There might be 2 or 3 in the league...Basically, even the best cornerbacks give up TDs and receptions to good recievers. The Dante Stallworth case was just a poor game for Clements, thats all. Everyone has their off days. Moreover, Nate is very important to us in run defense.

This situation is analogous to saying Lee Evans outplayed Moulds last season and has become the #1 receiver. If a team pays less attention to a player, such as they did for Lee, it gives that player a chance to do much better and benefit from the situation.

With salary cap getting larger, show Nate the money. With the way things are going, it's not like Lee Evans is going to demand a big pay day. If anything, Lee has been solid, nothing spectacular.

The only way I say we let Nate go is we have a chance to sign Brian Westbrook from Philly after this season. (Or a big play WR, but don't know if one will be available). I would love to have Westbrook here. Of course, that is considering our coaching staff can combine the abilities of Willis and his rushing with Westbrook and his receiving.

Oh well, we'll see.