OnTheRocks Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 From PFW "The Way We Hear It" section" "After losing starting CB Antoine Winfield during the 2004 free-agency period, and with Pro Bowl CB Nate Clements scheduled to become a free agent following the ’05 season, we hear it would be a shock if the Bills let a second starting corner go next year. Much as they did with DE Aaron Schobel last year, word is the Bills would like to work out a long-term extension with Clements during training camp or by early in the season. Clements, 25, has the size (6-0, 209) and playmaking ability (six interceptions in ’04, two TDs — one via interception and one on a punt return) that make him one of the top young corners in the league, so it’s clearly in the team’s best interest to lock him up before he hits the open market. It may come down to what Clements wants — to choose the security of a long-term deal from a team for which he has enjoyed success, or to roll the dice, risking injury, and potentially land a megadeal in free agency." The problem, as is always the case with these football periodicals is they never give a source. So...my guess is this is more likely just the opinion of the writer than it is info from a team source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 From PFW "The Way We Hear It" section" "After losing starting CB Antoine Winfield during the 2004 free-agency period, and with Pro Bowl CB Nate Clements scheduled to become a free agent following the ’05 season, we hear it would be a shock if the Bills let a second starting corner go next year. Much as they did with DE Aaron Schobel last year, word is the Bills would like to work out a long-term extension with Clements during training camp or by early in the season. Clements, 25, has the size (6-0, 209) and playmaking ability (six interceptions in ’04, two TDs — one via interception and one on a punt return) that make him one of the top young corners in the league, so it’s clearly in the team’s best interest to lock him up before he hits the open market. It may come down to what Clements wants — to choose the security of a long-term deal from a team for which he has enjoyed success, or to roll the dice, risking injury, and potentially land a megadeal in free agency." The problem, as is always the case with these football periodicals is they never give a source. So...my guess is this is more likely just the opinion of the writer than it is info from a team source. 368886[/snapback] Well, it makes a ton of sense. NC might opt to take less money in order to obtain certain financial security vs. the alternative, which is waiting a year and getting more, but at the same time risking injury. Schobel opted for the security route. Maybe NC will as well. Either way, it is a good move by TD to try and lock him up now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Well, it makes a ton of sense. NC might opt to take less money in order to obtain certain financial security vs. the alternative, which is waiting a year and getting more, but at the same time risking injury. Schobel opted for the security route. Maybe NC will as well. Either way, it is a good move by TD to try and lock him up now. 368898[/snapback] He should have locked him up last year....The CB market keeps skyrocketing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 He should have locked him up last year....The CB market keeps skyrocketing. 368929[/snapback] You are correct, but that is assuming that NC would have agreed to it; not a given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Thats amazing research there by PFW. The Bills actually want to KEEP one of the top 10 CBs in the NFL? Whoa...stop the presses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I doubt Clements makes a decision before he sees whether the uber-kid can get him where he wants to go. If uber-kid is a bust, how long does Clements have to wait before he's on a team with a good quarterback? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I doubt Clements makes a decision before he sees whether the uber-kid can get him where he wants to go. If uber-kid is a bust, how long does Clements have to wait before he's on a team with a good quarterback? 368945[/snapback] I doubt that's very high on NC's list of criteria, to be honest. This is his ONE shot at a big payday and he's going to take it. The question is, does he do it before the season and possibly take a bit less, or does he play through, chancing injury, and hit the market for more? I have a feeling it'll be the latter but hopefully not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I wouldn't be surprised if he signed with a crappy team for loads of cash! Ala, Jennings. These things don't faze me with regard to Pro athletes greed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I wouldn't be surprised if he signed with a crappy team for loads of cash! Ala, Jennings. These things don't faze me with regard to Pro athletes greed. 368948[/snapback] Why is it greed? Are you telling me you wouldn't move companies if another one offered you a significant payraise and ton of guaranteed money, even if the company wasn't as good? Things like that don't change because a zero or two get added to your income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I doubt that's very high on NC's list of criteria, to be honest. This is his ONE shot at a big payday and he's going to take it. The question is, does he do it before the season and possibly take a bit less, or does he play through, chancing injury, and hit the market for more? I have a feeling it'll be the latter but hopefully not. 368947[/snapback] Some day I'll buy in to the fact that players play for money, not to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Anyone know who his agent is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted June 27, 2005 Author Share Posted June 27, 2005 Why is it greed? Are you telling me you wouldn't move companies if another one offered you a significant payraise and ton of guaranteed money, even if the company wasn't as good? Things like that don't change because a zero or two get added to your income. 368960[/snapback] i agree with that to an extent. if i were an NFL player, and knew the history of the teams, i would never sign with the Cardinals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I doubt that's very high on NC's list of criteria, to be honest. This is his ONE shot at a big payday and he's going to take it. The question is, does he do it before the season and possibly take a bit less, or does he play through, chancing injury, and hit the market for more? I have a feeling it'll be the latter but hopefully not. 368947[/snapback] There is no comparing his situation with Schobel's. Nate is a sure thing, barring injury, when it comes to cashing in big time in free agency. Schobel was and is a pretty mediocre talent. It was by no means sure that he would hit it big so the injury risk probably was a much bigger factor, relatively, in his case. The pay day wasn't going to be all that huge and he could easily have had a lousy year. I don't see that happening with Nate. If we want him we will have to pay him what the market says he is worth even if we think it is too much ala-Winfield. For me, I say we keep him. You don't get better by losing your best players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 There is no comparing his situation with Schobel's. Nate is a sure thing, barring injury, when it comes to cashing in big time in free agency. Schobel was and is a pretty mediocre talent. It was by no means sure that he would hit it big so the injury risk probably was a much bigger factor, relatively, in his case. The pay day wasn't going to be all that huge and he could easily have had a lousy year. I don't see that happening with Nate. If we want him we will have to pay him what the market says he is worth even if we think it is too much ala-Winfield. For me, I say we keep him. You don't get better by losing your best players. 368982[/snapback] I respectfully disagree that the AS and NC situations are totally different. True, NC is looking at a bigger payday, but Schobel plays DE and has big sack numbers. DE is one of the hardest positions to fill. I wouldn't be surprised if AS cost himself close to 10 mil by signing early. My point is that I view the 2 situations as very similar, but the numbers favor Nate because he is one of the best in the NFL at his position. Jmo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Some day I'll buy in to the fact that players play for money, not to win. 368961[/snapback] Why do folks insist that this an either or choice particularly at this point when the reality is simply negotiation as far as the one team Clements can talk to because of the agreed upom restraint of trade which the NFL and NFLPA have created. Clements clearly can pursue an outcome which allows him the best chance he can create to have both the maximum amount of cash and the maximum chance to win. It is simply a fact of reality that in the end, he will have to make a choice between these two outcomes if he enters the marketplace and the maximum cash offer comes from a team that does not provide him with the maximum chance to win. However, for now reality says he cannot even make that choice. The good news for Clements is that 1. The Bills have a very good chance of competing for it if a number of things break there way (Namely the O works because JP plays as well as we hope or Holcomb fits in well if he falters, the D continues to perform at recent levels and the ST also continues to perform). 2. The Bills are quite likely to be able to give NC a load of money because a new TV contract to be negotiated before FA time will cause a huge increase in the salary cap by rule. If NC avoids injury and maintains the same level of performance he will not have to chioose between making a boatload of $ and winning it all. If i were Clements I would wait until the last possible moment and try to get TD to offer me a contract based on the likely new cap numbers using the leverage tha the potential I may enter the free market puts on the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Clements clearly can pursue an outcome which allows him the best chance he can create to have both the maximum amount of cash and the maximum chance to win.369000[/snapback] Someone forgot to tell Jonas Jennings. Though I'm sure he'll find the best of all worlds lining up for the Niners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 He should have locked him up last year....The CB market keeps skyrocketing. 368929[/snapback] Again, it takes two to get a deal done. What makes you think N.C. was ready to get a deal done last year? If it were me I'd like to at least get close to free agency to maximize my payday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BF_in_Indiana Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I recall similar articles last year about Jennings and Pat Williams, and the year before about Winfield. He's either gonna sign before the season or he won't be a Buffalo Bill next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I recall similar articles last year about Jennings and Pat Williams, and the year before about Winfield. He's either gonna sign before the season or he won't be a Buffalo Bill next year. 369145[/snapback] I fully agree. Schobel opted for security and signed before he was a ufa. I am thinking that if NC doesn't sign soon, RW will not be willing nor probably able to match the deal that NC will get from another richer owner when he is a ufa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I respectfully disagree that the AS and NC situations are totally different. True, NC is looking at a bigger payday, but Schobel plays DE and has big sack numbers. DE is one of the hardest positions to fill. I wouldn't be surprised if AS cost himself close to 10 mil by signing early. 368990[/snapback] No team in their right mind pays Schobel 10mill more than we did. MAYBE Daniel Snyder when he's drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts