ganesh Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 You are correct, but that is assuming that NC would have agreed to it; not a given. 368934[/snapback] If someone is offered market value, they are going to take it for the immediate security rather than wait to hit FA. You are one injury away from ending your NFL career..... If NC was given a 12-14M signing bonus and a 30M contract in the same ballpark as Winfield, NC takes it as he is set for his life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey 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. 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. 368990[/snapback] I see what you are saying but you need to look inside the numbers on those sacks. He only had 8 last year and 5 of them came against the fins, browns and bengals (he was 25th in the league in sacks). I think just about any DE worthy of playing in this league could net 5 sacks by accident. I also think he is pretty weak against the run. I do think he is more athletic than most DE's and forces his share of fumbles because of that athleticism. Despite his mediocre play, it is certainly possible some team would have been dumb enough to over pay him though I think that 10 mil figure is just a wee bit high. He is better than average but not by much. Clements on the other hand ranked 3rd in the league in picks and has a habit of turning one or two of those into touchdowns. He is also a pretty fair punt returner. He is not quite the second coming of Deon Sanders but he is on a whole different level than Aaron Schobel. Look at it this way, what would be the fan reaction around here if it were announced that we just signed Champ Bailey or Chris Gamble? We'd be going freaking nuts adding a shut down corner of that caliber. Well Nate is just about as good as those guys if not better. We are just going to have to pay him, a lot. Anyway, so how's that brilliant daughter of yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I see what you are saying but you need to look inside the numbers on those sacks. He only had 8 last year and 5 of them came against the fins, browns and bengals (he was 25th in the league in sacks). I think just about any DE worthy of playing in this league could net 5 sacks by accident. I also think he is pretty weak against the run. I do think he is more athletic than most DE's and forces his share of fumbles because of that athleticism. Despite his mediocre play, it is certainly possible some team would have been dumb enough to over pay him though I think that 10 mil figure is just a wee bit high. He is better than average but not by much. Clements on the other hand ranked 3rd in the league in picks and has a habit of turning one or two of those into touchdowns. He is also a pretty fair punt returner. He is not quite the second coming of Deon Sanders but he is on a whole different level than Aaron Schobel. Look at it this way, what would be the fan reaction around here if it were announced that we just signed Champ Bailey or Chris Gamble? We'd be going freaking nuts adding a shut down corner of that caliber. Well Nate is just about as good as those guys if not better. We are just going to have to pay him, a lot. Anyway, so how's that brilliant daughter of yours? 369253[/snapback] Good points for the most part but one must consider that ALL "sack artists" rack up the bulk of their numbers against lesser competition. This goes back to countless examples such as Bruce Smith and Reggie White and on throughout the history of the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Good points for the most part but one must consider that ALL "sack artists" rack up the bulk of their numbers against lesser competition. This goes back to countless examples such as Bruce Smith and Reggie White and on throughout the history of the NFL. 369298[/snapback] Bruce and Reggie also showed up vs. good teams though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 It's hard to say what TD will do with Clements. IMO, he's really never been faced with this decision before, where he needed to resign a star player who was actually going to be worth the money he will be offered, or close to it. Moulds was the closest thing and guess what, TD signed him early. Wiley was a possibility but he wasn't a sure thing, and TD decided on Moulds over Wiley, which proved correct. All other FA's, like Phat Pat and JJ and Antoine were going to be offered outrageous sums that virtually no one here that follows the team thought they were worth. Clements, however, most fans think is deserving of the payday he has coming. I am sure that TD and the staff regard him highly, but we cannot say either way that TD does or doesn't "get 'er done" in these situations. In my mind, he's only been faced with it once and he paid Moulds the going rate. I think he does the same with Nate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Who knows what TD will offer/be willing to pay, and what Nate will accept? But what I DO know is that, if Nate isn't signed to a long-term deal before the start of UFA next season, he WILL be franchised and then traded. Count on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 TD really needs to tie up Nate for the long-term now. If they can't find a way to do it before the season starts, Nate will be gone next year. Unless of course, they franchise him. But that will probably be a $10 million one year deal. TD needs to find a cap-friendly way of doing it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Git er done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Bruce and Reggie also showed up vs. good teams though. 369333[/snapback] It was really more of an expose on the value of statistics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 It's hard to say what TD will do with Clements. IMO, he's really never been faced with this decision before, where he needed to resign a star player who was actually going to be worth the money he will be offered, or close to it. Moulds was the closest thing and guess what, TD signed him early. Wiley was a possibility but he wasn't a sure thing, and TD decided on Moulds over Wiley, which proved correct. All other FA's, like Phat Pat and JJ and Antoine were going to be offered outrageous sums that virtually no one here that follows the team thought they were worth. Clements, however, most fans think is deserving of the payday he has coming. I am sure that TD and the staff regard him highly, but we cannot say either way that TD does or doesn't "get 'er done" in these situations. In my mind, he's only been faced with it once and he paid Moulds the going rate. I think he does the same with Nate. 369336[/snapback] As far as I recall, Antoine Winnfield was very highly regarded around the NFL (and still is), and was perceived as one of the top players at his position for a couple of seasons before becoming a FA. Do I think Winnfield was overpayed by the Vikings? Yes, but his salary is one of the salaries that set the new level of pay for starting corners. To keep Clements, we will likely pay at least what Winnfield makes, if not more. Is Clements better than Winnfield? I am not sure of that... This may be an unpopular thing to say, keep in mind, Clements is one of my very favorite Bills players. However, his reputation as one of the best in the leauge is relatively new, and you really didn't hear this perception stated much, until this offseason. He would likely be the best player at corner next offseasonm if he becomes a free agent, but I am still not sure that translates into him being one of the top 2 or 3 corners in the leauge. Clements offers a the Bills more big play ability than Winnfield, but unless he plays with more discipline, down for down, Winnfield offered consistancy. I really hope the Bills do resign Clements before the season ends, but I have the feeling that won't happen, and I don't see TD getting in a bidding war to keep him, nor would I want him to. He could be franchised. I would only use that move, if he has an even better season than this past, and if we truly want to keep him in Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 IMO, Nate is better than Winfield. Winfield is one of the best ever in run support, but a huge number of his tackles were pushing the receiver out of bounds after a 10 yard out. It always seemed like he was giving way too much cushion. Nate is a better coverage corner and has much better hands and big play ability. Throw in his return skills and he is much more valuable to the Bils than AW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 NC is a class player. He deserves to get paid. But correct me if I am wrong, but we don't have very much wiggle room in the salary cap to shell out the blockbuster numbers that top CBs are getting at the moment. It's going to take some renegotiating by some of the bulkier contracts to allow us to keep NC and it also means we could be fairly stagnant in FA the next year also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 NC is a class player. He deserves to get paid. But correct me if I am wrong, but we don't have very much wiggle room in the salary cap to shell out the blockbuster numbers that top CBs are getting at the moment. It's going to take some renegotiating by some of the bulkier contracts to allow us to keep NC and it also means we could be fairly stagnant in FA the next year also. 369507[/snapback] nate's current cap number = 3.5M two biggest CB contracts of the off-season: ken lucas' current cap number = around 3M partick surtain's current cap number = around 2.75M if nate is extended his cap number will not go up much, if at all........in fact, it may go down......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted June 28, 2005 Author Share Posted June 28, 2005 if nate is extended his cap number will not go up much, if at all........in fact, it may go down.........369533[/snapback] i am going to go out on a limb and disagree with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 i am going to go out on a limb and disagree with that. 369545[/snapback] current base salary is 2.5M.........under a new deal it would likely be reduced to under a million current unamortized bonus is 860K, which all counts against this year's cap.......under a new deal it would be amortized over the life of the contract, likely reducing it to the 150-200K range....... the new signing bonus would obviously be amortized over the life of the new deal........so if nate got paid a 8M signing bonus as the first part of a two tiered bonus, the amortization of that would likely only be around 2M per year....... being very conservative, here is how his new cap number could stack up: salary -- 750K old bonus -- 200K new bonus -- 2M new cap number = 2.95M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 current base salary is 2.5M.........under a new deal it would likely be reduced to under a million current unamortized bonus is 860K, which all counts against this year's cap.......under a new deal it would be amortized over the life of the contract, likely reducing it to the 150-200K range....... the new signing bonus would obviously be amortized over the life of the new deal........so if nate got paid a 8M signing bonus as the first part of a two tiered bonus, the amortization of that would likely only be around 2M per year....... being very conservative, here is how his new cap number could stack up: salary -- 750K old bonus -- 200K new bonus -- 2M new cap number = 2.95M 369595[/snapback] That's not very conservative - that is ULTRA conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 NC is a class player. He deserves to get paid. But correct me if I am wrong, but we don't have very much wiggle room in the salary cap to shell out the blockbuster numbers that top CBs are getting at the moment. It's going to take some renegotiating by some of the bulkier contracts to allow us to keep NC and it also means we could be fairly stagnant in FA the next year also. 369507[/snapback] Yes....like Moulds 8M salaray cap hit next year.....and probably some big cap hits from Milloy and Takeo too....They might have to restructure.... Also, I see a McGahee hold out for a big contract come next spring, especially if he has a pro-bowl type year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 My gut tells me nothing will be signed until a new CBA is in place. Both Ralph and NCs agent are gonna need to know the details of the new CBAl before either one of them can figure out what is a fair deal. Got a feeling it will get done, and even though not likely, with the increase in TV money next year, one year franchise deal may not be a killer for the Bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 My understanding of the big deal regarding the 2006 salary cap is that the NFL is due to rework all the TV deals this year and next year's cap will reflect a massive increase in what teams must spend as about 70% of the designated gross (which includes TV money). The smarter players with professional agent representation will have already built in escalators to their contracts to suck up this money. Teams will make deals with players they want long term to give them bonuses in exchange for longer term deals. If I'm NC I would have never signed a long term deal last year and depending on how risk averse I am I would wait as long as possible (possibly even until I hit free agency) before I resign with the Bills. Its funny to me that folks seem to feel TD refuses to resign his players (excuse me but wasn't it TD who gave away large chunks of change to resign Bledsoe not to mention getting long term extension deals done with Schobel, Moorman and others) it seems to me that the person who may least want to resign at this point is Nate Clements. It really depends upon his own judgments about the utility of a bird in the hand being worth two in the bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 My gut tells me nothing will be signed until a new CBA is in place. Both Ralph and NCs agent are gonna need to know the details of the new CBAl before either one of them can figure out what is a fair deal. the lack of a CBA hasn't stopped todd heap, jamal williams, santana moss, marcus stroud, and many others from signing long-term with their current clubs this off-season.......what makes their situations different then nate's? how come they got deals done but it's unrealistic for us to expect the bills to work out something with nate now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts