You Clements supporters have it made.

[OpIv37]

If the Bills keep him and run a cover 2, he will look like he "improved" only because the system doesn't rely as heavily on CB play as the 46 D that Jerry Gray ran last year.

Clements benefitted from a strong D in 03 and 04, and this upcoming season he stands to benefit again from the system, so those of you who want to keep him here will be able to claim that you're "right" when he doesn't get toasted all season like he does in 05.

IMO, last year he proved his worth and it's nowhere near $5.8 million. A good cover 2 CB can be had for less than half that, and we have way too many other holes to fill on this team.

[ICE74129]

If the Bills keep him and run a cover 2, he will look like he "improved" only because the system doesn't rely as heavily on CB play as the 46 D that Jerry Gray ran last year.

Clements benefitted from a strong D in 03 and 04, and this upcoming season he stands to benefit again from the system, so those of you who want to keep him here will be able to claim that you're "right" when he doesn't get toasted all season like he does in 05.

IMO, last year he proved his worth and it's nowhere near $5.8 million. A good cover 2 CB can be had for less than half that, and we have way too many other holes to fill on this team.

They can't be too happy yet. I know what Marv said, but clements interview says he wont' settle for less and from what I take, doesn't really want to be here.

We are not going to pay clements an 18 mill SB and 63 mill like Bailey got, so I bet he fails to reach an agreement.

[Tatonka]

"you clements supporters have it made..."

no.. "us bills fans"

what a awful post.. so :limp:

[gr8slayer]

He looked like crap because Gray had him playing ten yards off every damn WR.

[Tatonka]

he even made a point in his interview to say "i played exactly how they told me to".

[ChristopherWalken]

That Bend not Break crap just doesn't work without the right components. The Bills run stop D was destroyed in the absence of Phat Pat. They had to start throwing more men in the box to help put out the running game fires started early in the season. As soon as the Bills threw the 1-2 extra guys in the box, you mismatches all over the field. Throw in a play action or two and suddenly the Bills find themselves just getting demolished on the passing game as well.

IMO, Clements had no choice to line 10 yards off the receivers (in some cases) becasue he was flying solo most of the time with the Safeties cheating at the line to stop the run.

I like the idea of the Cover 2 for the simple fact that the corners can get aggressive in the 5 yard cushion off the line. This allows the Safeties plenty of time to adjust to the long route.

So, in a way I guess you're right Opiv37. We do have it made. Or in other words, it really can't get much worse.

But I think I understand your gripe. Is Clements worth the money if all he is doing is playing a little bump and chase? I can't say for certain until the LD fills in, but if and when it does, Clements might just be hauling in and extra 4 ints this season because of it.

[OpIv37]

"you clements supporters have it made..."

no.. "us bills fans"

what a awful post.. so :limp:

so, I guess because we all root for the same team, we're not allowed to call people out if we think they're wrong?

Way to support open dialogue.

[OpIv37]

he even made a point in his interview to say "i played exactly how they told me to".

What did you expect him to say? "They had a great plan, but I just couldn't execute within the system. I'm not worth a huge contract".

Please.

[ublinkwescore]

Ooooooh BUUUUURRRRRRRNNNNNNN!!!

[madness]

That Bend not Break crap just doesn't work without the right components. The Bills run stop D was destroyed in the absence of Phat Pat. They had to start throwing more men in the box to help put out the running game fires started early in the season. As soon as the Bills threw the 1-2 extra guys in the box, you mismatches all over the field. Throw in a play action or two and suddenly the Bills find themselves just getting demolished on the passing game as well.

IMO, Clements had no choice to line 10 yards off the receivers (in some cases) becasue he was flying solo most of the time with the Safeties cheating at the line to stop the run.

I like the idea of the Cover 2 for the simple fact that the corners can get aggressive in the 5 yard cushion off the line. This allows the Safeties plenty of time to adjust to the long route.

So, in a way I guess you're right Opiv37. We do have it made. Or in other words, it really can't get much worse.

But I think I understand your gripe. Is Clements worth the money if all he is doing is playing a little bump and chase? I can't say for certain until the LD fills in, but if and when it does, Clements might just be hauling in and extra 4 ints this season because of it.
excellent post. :bf1: no comeback?

[TacklingDummy]

03 and 04, and this upcoming season he stands to benefit again from the system, so those of you who want to keep him here will be able to claim that you're "right" when he doesn't get toasted all season like he does in 05.

Clements wasn't toasted all season. If you watched the games you would see that most of (not all) the big passing plays against us Nate wasn't even the guy covering the WR.

Like in the Miami game, Nate was barely on Chambers and the big plays that Chambers did make were against someone else.

Nate is a good CB. There's no way we should let him go and then draft someone that you hope will be good.

[lordofgun]

So it's a bad thing that the system will make him look good? Exactly how is that bad?

[STAMPY]

So it's a bad thing that the system will make him look good? Exactly how is that bad?

:bf1:

[gr8slayer]

So it's a bad thing that the system will make him look good? Exactly how is that bad?
Its only bad if your a Bills basher.

[STAMPY]

I don't understand why we must hope certain guys do bad or good just so we can say I TOLD YOU SO!

[OpIv37]

Clements wasn't toasted all season. If you watched the games you would see that most of (not all) the big passing plays against us Nate wasn't even the guy covering the WR.

Like in the Miami game, Nate was barely on Chambers and the big plays that Chambers did make were against someone else.

Nate is a good CB. There's no way we should let him go and then draft someone that you hope will be good.

he's a GOOD CB- why should we give him GREAT CB money? I said this before and I'll say it again. A Toyota Corolla is a great car for $15,000, but woud you pay $40,000 for one? If we pay Nate $5.8 million (which is what it costs to tag a CB so I doubt he'll willingly accept less than that), it's like paying $40,000 for a Corolla.

[OpIv37]

I don't understand why we must hope certain guys do bad or good just so we can say I TOLD YOU SO!

I'm not hoping for anything except the Bills doing well.. I know overpaying Nate is a mistake and I'm trying to launch a pre-emptive strike at the "I told you so" Nate supporters.

[OpIv37]

So it's a bad thing that the system will make him look good? Exactly how is that bad?

because the system can make someone else look just as good, and save cap $ for an O lineman, D lineman, backup LB, backup RB, younger safety, or any of the other plethora of holes this team has.

[lordofgun]

5.8 mil is not overpaying for Nate.

[OpIv37]

5.8 mil is not overpaying for Nate.

by my count, he had 4 good games last year and at least 6 bad ones. And he plays to pad his own stats rather than help the team win. How is that worth $5.8 million?

And you said it yourself- the system can make him look good. If it's the system and not the players, why should we pay so much for him when this team has so many other needs?

[STAMPY]

i do agree with OP on one thing... it is overpaying because there is no such thing as a shut down corner in football anymore. receivers have advantage by far with thre newer rules on contact.

[Drive 4 Five]

Seems to me like $5.8 is a bargain for a "supposed" elite corner. Think of it as an audition. I don't see a better bargain out there and I'm quoting someone else here, "why draft a corner whom you hope will be be good. Nate is damn good. Maybe he can be great in the right system. I like the personally.

[lordofgun]

Well he's definitely going to be a Bill next year, so let's all just enjoy the fact that the cover 2 is going to be great for him. :D

[Drive 4 Five]

Hard to argue with these numbers. Anyone think that Law was not worth the kind of money NE gave him in his prime as their franchise DB?

Ty Law 1995-1999

Tackles 315
Sacks 3
Forced Fumbles 2
Recoveries 0
Interceptions 20
Yards 315
Touchdowns 3

Nate Clements 2001-2005
Tackles 372
Forced Fumbles 11
Recoveries 0
Interceptions 20
Yards 261

PLUS Clements is a pretty decent return man too.
Touchdowns 4

[TacklingDummy]

If it's the system and not the players, why should we pay so much for him when this team has so many other needs?

You pay Nate because if you don't then CB becomes one of biggest needs. Why create a need position when one is already filled if ya pay the guy?

The Bills will never be consistent winners if they allow their best players to walk.

[OpIv37]

You pay Nate because if you don't then CB becomes one of biggest needs. Why create a need position when one is already filled if ya pay the guy?

The Bills will never be consistent winners if they allow their best players to walk.

And they'll never be consistent winners if they tie up $17 million in cap space for an underperforming CB/WR combo while both the O-line and the D-line are amongst the worst in the league.

Name one winning team that ties up 20% of their cap space in two players who weren't even in the top half of the league in their respective positions last year.

[TacklingDummy]

And they'll never be consistent winners if they tie up $17 million in cap space for an underperforming CB/WR combo while both the O-line and the D-line are amongst the worst in the league.

Name one winning team that ties up 20% of their cap space in two players who weren't even in the top half of the league in their respective positions last year.


Now your adding Moulds to the mix. Moulds will likely restructure his contract.

The Bills won't tie up 17 million between the 2 players. I figure maybe aound 7-8 million for the 2 of them, 5 for Clements, 2 to 3 for Moulds.

Name 1 winning team that doesn't pay their best players to stay?

[OpIv37]

Now your adding Moulds to the mix. Moulds will likely restructure his contract.

The Bills won't tie up 17 million between the 2 players. I figure maybe aound 7-8 million for the 2 of them, 5 for Clements, 2 to 3 for Moulds.

Name 1 winning team that doesn't pay their best players to stay?

I disagree that Nate's one of our best players. And Moulds was one of our best players a few years ago, but he's been on the decline ever since 2-3 years ago when he got injured (I don't recall exactly when it was).

There's no way Nate stays for less than $5.8 million cuz that's what it costs to franchise him.

[YardRat]

Nate is worth the tag $$ for one year IMO...hopefully the defense will have a great year, Nate can take his accolades and big money demands elsewhere in '07, and the guy that replaces him (King??) will have a full year of the new system under his belt and be able to hit the ground running next year with no discernable drop-off in production.

Win-win in my book.

[OpIv37]

Nate is worth the tag $$ for one year IMO...hopefully the defense will have a great year, Nate can take his accolades and big money demands elsewhere in '07, and the guy that replaces him (King??) will have a full year of the new system under his belt and be able to hit the ground running next year with no discernable drop-off in production.

Win-win in my book.

except for the fact that Nate's cap hit will keep us from getting the OL or DL that we sorely need.

[lordofgun]

No it won't. We should be in fine cap shape. Especially since the cap should increase quite a bit this year.

[The_Philster]

He looked like crap because Gray had him playing ten yards off every damn WR.


he even made a point in his interview to say "i played exactly how they told me to".don't confuse those afflicted with blind hatred with the facts...we had these same arguments about Antoine Winfield...it was constantly being he wasn't worth what he wanted (which was true) and that he kept getting burned because he sucked (which wasn't...he was playing off the WR almost every snap his last season in Buffalo...he's played well in Minnesota where he has had a coach who actually knew what the **** he was doing)

[BAM]

Hard to argue with these numbers. Anyone think that Law was not worth the kind of money NE gave him in his prime as their franchise DB?

Ty Law 1995-1999

Tackles 315
Sacks 3
Forced Fumbles 2
Recoveries 0
Interceptions 20
Yards 315
Touchdowns 3

Nate Clements 2001-2005
Tackles 372
Forced Fumbles 11
Recoveries 0
Interceptions 20
Yards 261

PLUS Clements is a pretty decent return man too.
Touchdowns 4

That's pretty good! We need to re-sign this guy!

:rockon:

[OpIv37]

No it won't. We should be in fine cap shape. Especially since the cap should increase quite a bit this year.

according to Clump, we're $6.4 million under an estimated cap of $93 million. Sign Clements for $5.8 and that leaves us a whopping $600,000 to sign draft picks and FA's. Fine cap shape indeed! :rolleyes:

http://www.billszone.com/mtlog/archives/2005/02/17/billszones_2006_buffalo_bills_salary_cap_page.php

[THATHURMANATOR]

"you clements supporters have it made..."

no.. "us bills fans"

what a awful post.. so :limp:
:bf1:

[lordofgun]

according to Clump, we're $6.4 million under an estimated cap of $93 million. Sign Clements for $5.8 and that leaves us a whopping $600,000 to sign draft picks and FA's. Fine cap shape indeed! :rolleyes:

http://www.billszone.com/mtlog/archives/2005/02/17/billszones_2006_buffalo_bills_salary_cap_page.php
Before making any other moves. :rolleyes:

[justasportsfan]

there isn't a single player who played as expected other than Moorman. The entire team failed because of coaching. But Nate is still one of the best players we have on the team. People want Moulds, Sam, Nate, Willis etc. gone. Why even bother fielding a team if we keep wanting to get rid of our better players?

I remember the time we had Robinson , Rob and co when TD first cam in. He continued his ways especially with our OL last year. No thanks, I'm tired of taking in other teams' rejects.

[justasportsfan]

that 5.8 won't mean anything once the bills make playoffs. We need continuity . An average player is gonna struggle trying to get familiar with the players around him. I would be more comfortable with Clements opposite McGee . If our D needs to switch a defnsive schemes on certain plays, familiarity will play a huge role.

[Tatonka]

i am not against paying nate to stay.. he is a GOOD cb.. maybe not elite.. but maybe so.. if nate would have had the same year in 2005 that he had in 2004, no one would be saying a damn thing about us tragging him.

the only thing that is a bit of a head scratcher is that the cover 2 system is supposed to allow for great cb play out of average to good cbs.. so would it be cheaper to get someone else that doesnt cost 5.8 mill and isnt quite as good.. but can still play well.. like a rookie.. or maybe even greer or king could do well in the cover 2..

that being said.. i am not going to complain because we have to keep a top cb.. and aside from a down year, he is a top cb.. the numbers clearly say so.

[OpIv37]

there isn't a single player who played as expected other than Moorman. The entire team failed because of coaching. But Nate is still one of the best players we have on the team. People want Moulds, Sam, Nate, Willis etc. gone. Why even bother fielding a team if we keep wanting to get rid of our better players?

I remember the time we had Robinson , Rob and co when TD first cam in. He continued his ways especially with our OL last year. No thanks, I'm tired of taking in other teams' rejects.

Was I the only one who watched the second half of the season? What part of "Nate is NOT one of our best players" is so hard to understand?

[The_Philster]

If you really watched the 2nd half of the season, then how come you didn't notice he was constantly put in a position to fail? You don't play a CB who excels at the bump-and-run 8-10 yards off the LOS

[lordofgun]

What part of "Nate is NOT one of our best players" is so hard to understand?

This part: "Nate is NOT one of our best players"

[Tatonka]

nate has been our best player there in the past.. and he still has a bright future ahead of him.

can you imagine if the new DC can help him improve like he helped vasher improve?

you hate nate.. we get that.. he is a bill now for at least one more year.. get over it.

[OpIv37]

i am not against paying nate to stay.. he is a GOOD cb.. maybe not elite.. but maybe so.. if nate would have had the same year in 2005 that he had in 2004, no one would be saying a damn thing about us tragging him.

the only thing that is a bit of a head scratcher is that the cover 2 system is supposed to allow for great cb play out of average to good cbs.. so would it be cheaper to get someone else that doesnt cost 5.8 mill and isnt quite as good.. but can still play well.. like a rookie.. or maybe even greer or king could do well in the cover 2..

that being said.. i am not going to complain because we have to keep a top cb.. and aside from a down year, he is a top cb.. the numbers clearly say so.

you aren't at all concerned that he had an off-season in a contract year? I have to say that I'm concerned about the fact that he played so poorly with millions at stake- how will he play when he already has those millions.

[lordofgun]

you aren't at all concerned that he had an off-season in a contract year? I have to say that I'm concerned about the fact that he played so poorly with millions at stake- how will he play when he already has those millions.
Dude, he's had millions for his whole career! He was a first round pick, remember?

[Tatonka]

i am actually kind of happy he had an off year in a contract year.. it was not just him.. the whole damn team had an off year.. it was not like he was the guy who caused the dline to suck or the LBs to get hurt and play below the level we thought they would.. and he didnt cause the safeties to play better.

he poor contract year will help us get him for a more reasonable rate in the long term.

[OpIv37]

i am actually kind of happy he had an off year in a contract year.. it was not just him.. the whole damn team had an off year.. it was not like he was the guy who caused the dline to suck or the LBs to get hurt and play below the level we thought they would.. and he didnt cause the safeties to play better.

he poor contract year will help us get him for a more reasonable rate in the long term.

I hope you're right.

[Tatonka]

i am always right. ask my wife.

:up:

[OpIv37]

If you really watched the 2nd half of the season, then how come you didn't notice he was constantly put in a position to fail? You don't play a CB who excels at the bump-and-run 8-10 yards off the LOS

I did watch it. He was either squatting on routes to try to get INT's and giving up the long stuff, or playing 10 yards off his man to try to avoid the bomb and getting beat underneath. EVERY TIME. He was playing for personal stats and not to help the team.

And if it was Gray's fault for playing him off the LOS, how come he STILL got beat long so many times? It takes an elite CB to lose a 10 yard head start.

[Tatonka]

i am glad you know what defense was called and how he was supposed to play..

your just throwing out assumptions... and you know what they say about assumptions.

[OpIv37]

i am glad you know what defense was called and how he was supposed to play..

your just throwing out assumptions... and you know what they say about assumptions.

I watched him get burned many, many times this season. I don't know why so many people here just decide to give random players the benefit of the doubt, especially when it costs $6 million to do it.

[OpIv37]

Dude, he's had millions for his whole career! He was a first round pick, remember?

So he's already made millions and the new contract isn't motivation for his performance? Well if that's the case he should just play for the league minimum so he can help his team win- the money isn't motivation.

And if that ever happens, expect to see four horsemen tearing through a burning sky very shortly afterwards.

[The_Philster]

And if it was Gray's fault for playing him off the LOS, how come he STILL got beat long so many times? It takes an elite CB to lose a 10 yard head start.
You don't get it...playing off like that is why he got beat. How the **** was he supposed to play bump-and-run when he couldn't get his hands on the WR? It happened with Winfield and it happened with Clements.

[justasportsfan]

Was I the only one who watched the second half of the season? What part of "Nate is NOT one of our best players" is so hard to understand?that's your opinion.

[THATHURMANATOR]

The entire Defense was horrible last year. Do you forget the previous 3 seasons where Clements was very good to great? He is also at a prime age. How is this a bad thing?

[OpIv37]

You don't get it...playing off like that is why he got beat. How the **** was he supposed to play bump-and-run when he couldn't get his hands on the WR? It happened with Winfield and it happened with Clements.
isn't playing 10 yards off the LOS supposed to PREVENT the big play? Otherwise there's no point in doing it. Other teams play off the LOS as well, they just do it more selectively than the 2005 Bills.

You're letting your anger at Gray for blowing '05 cloud your judgement here.

If Clements is on this team for $5.8 million, it's a huge mistake and we're going to regret it. Maybe not from his play, but in another position that couldn't be upgraded because of Clements' cap hit.

[lordofgun]

nonsense!

[justasportsfan]

If Clements is on this team for $5.8 million, it's a huge mistake and we're going to regret it. Maybe not from his play, but in another position that couldn't be upgraded because of Clements' cap hit.so what's your solution?

[OpIv37]

The entire Defense was horrible last year. Do you forget the previous 3 seasons where Clements was very good to great? He is also at a prime age. How is this a bad thing?

like I just said to Phil- the entire D was GOOD in the 3 previous years- how do we know Clements wasn't just living off of the play of everyone else? It's entirely possible that anyone could have done what Clements did in his position on those really good defenses.

[OpIv37]

so what's your solution?

Find a cheaper corner from:
A) guys already on the team
B) FA, or
C) the draft

and use the cap savings towards a big-name OT or DT. Even if we have to sign a FA corner for $3 million, that's nearly $3 million that can go towards another position and should be enough to attract a big name tackle for either side of the ball.

Remember, when used properly the Cover 2 doesn't require standout corners (of course, that's dependent on the Bills actually staying with the cover 2: this team doesn't have a good history of sticking with schemes).

[mysticsoto]

Find a cheaper corner from:
A) guys already on the team
B) FA, or
C) the draft

and use the cap savings towards a big-name OT or DT. Even if we have to sign a FA corner for $3 million, that's nearly $3 million that can go towards another position and should be enough to attract a big name tackle for either side of the ball.

Remember, when used properly the Cover 2 doesn't require standout corners (of course, that's dependent on the Bills actually staying with the cover 2: this team doesn't have a good history of sticking with schemes).

I think cutting and/or restructuring Moulds, MW and a few other smaller contracts will allow us to grab FAs without having to cut Clements. Additionally, the idea of tagging him may be to trade him for a 1st rounder. That shouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities to happen if we could swing a trade with the Giants...

[justasportsfan]

Find a cheaper corner from:
A) guys already on the team
B) FA, or
C) the draft

.
Guys on the team: Who? None of them were good enough to take the job away from McGee meaning none of them are even close to Clements

FA: who?

Draft: who do you draft in rd. 1 ,2 ,3,4 .

If you've already decided that keeping Clements is a mistake, you should have a solution to back up your conclusion. I'm not saying that what you stated is wrong but there's more to it than just letting our best cb go.


We can tag Clements and draft a player to prepare him for 2007 or use Eric King . But right now we need a proven cb opposite McGee who isn't a probowl cb material.

It's easy to say that anyone can play the cover 2. I thought smashmouth football was easily done too.

[OpIv37]

Guys on the team: Who? None of them were good enough to take the job away from McGee meaning none of them are even close to Clements

FA: who?

Draft: who do you draft in rd. 1 ,2 ,3,4 .

If you've already decided that keeping Clements is a mistake, you should have a solution to back up your conclusion. I'm not saying that what you stated is wrong but there's more to it than just letting our best cb go.


We can tag Clements and draft a player to prepare him for 2007 or use Eric King . But right now we need a proven cb opposite McGee who isn't a probowl cb material.

It's easy to say that anyone can play the cover 2. I thought smashmouth football was easily done too.


when was the last time the Bills tried smashmouth football? I don't mean paid lip service to it- I mean really tried it.

I don't follow the draft or FA enough to know who's out there, but I'd be shocked if there wasn't a better value out there somewhere.

[John Doe]

You can't judge Clements on his coverage skills alone. He got burned some last year, but the guy supported the run and he stayed healthy. It allowed us to go through last season with only 4 true corners on the active roster. Now, you take away Nate (our best and most physical corner) and we are left with McGee, Greer, and King. These guys are smurfs, vulnerable to big, physical recievers, and only one is an above average tackler.

You better find two more good corners if Clements were to leave.

[OpIv37]

well when the D line and O line still suck going into next season, don't say I didn't warn you people.

Nate's coverage skills won't matter much when we continue to get thrashed on the ground.

[The_Philster]

isn't playing 10 yards off the LOS supposed to PREVENT the big play? Otherwise there's no point in doing it. Other teams play off the LOS as well, they just do it more selectively than the 2005 Bills.

You're letting your anger at Gray for blowing '05 cloud your judgement here.

If Clements is on this team for $5.8 million, it's a huge mistake and we're going to regret it. Maybe not from his play, but in another position that couldn't be upgraded because of Clements' cap hit.
The best way of preventing the big play is to not let the WRs get a clean release...it not only works as far as stopping the big play, but it keeps the CB in position to stop a completion on a shorter route as well. My anger at Gray is because he doesn't learn from his mistakes...he did that to Winfield and Antoine kept getting burned.

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.