Clements agent at Tues. practice

[Kelly the Dog]

nothing like a good talking to from simon. for my part, i've been harping for almost a year now that smith made a great, great play, and that clements was in perfect position. sometimes you've gotta give credit to the guy on the other team.

410838[/snapback]

Sometimes you do. Not on that play however, regardless of the fact that it was a great catch. The simple fact remains, that you seem unwilling to acknowledge, with overwhelming evidence right in front of you (by watching the tape): IF Nate Clements wanted to knock that ball down, he could have, easily, and Jimmy Smith could not have done a thing about it. And the Bills woud have won that game. IF Nate Clements would have tried to break up the pass and not tried to intercept the pass, there wasn't a thing Jimmy Smith could have done. The ball would have been nowhere near him. Nate was in perfect position to make the play. The only reason Jimmy Smith could make that great catch was because Nate jumped up with two hands to catch the ball. If Nate wanted to knock that ball away, Jimmy Smith would not have had a chance in the world to bring it down.

 

AND, even if Nate Clements made the greatest catch in the history of football, it STILL would have been a lousy play, because we would have lost 40 yards. There arent more than 4-5 plays in a season where you can say if one player makes the play we win or lose (like, say, a FG with no time remaining), but if Nate makes the play a seven year old would know to make, we win. He didn't and we lost. And it was only because he made the selfish play not the team play. That is why he lost the game single-handedly.

[Simon]

To even place the name of Clements among all-time greats such as Sanders and Blount (my personal favorite) is saying quite a bit.

Before this gets out of hand, let's re-examine the sentence that brought this on: "if he puts up another like it there is going to be talk about his potential to join the pantheon of greatest cornerbacks in the history of this sport."

 

If he puts up another like it (a Huge if since keeping that clean for 16 games is nearly impossible for a corner) there is going to be talk (not saying he will be thier equal, just there that will be talk about it) about his potential (the talk will be about his Potential, not his actual or virtual enshrinement) to join the pantheon of greatest cornerbacks in the history of this sport.

 

I'm not saying that Nate should even be mentioned among these guys, just that he put up an obscenely good season of the likes we used to regularly see from the greats. He'll have to show a lot more of it to be considered in their league.

 

P.S. Don't tell the yokels but my imaginary all-time NFL team has Blount manning one of the corners;-)

 

 

That is why he lost the game single-handedly.

In the entire history of the team sport of football, there has never ever been a contest where one player single-handedly lost a game. Ever.

Nor will their ever be.

[Kelly the Dog]

In the entire history of the team sport of football, there has never ever been a contest where one player single-handedly lost a game. Ever.

Nor will their ever be.

411809[/snapback]

You know what I meant there, Mr. Pennsyltucky. Especially after I said there aren't more than a few plays a season around the entire league where one can honestly say if a player MAKES the simple play his team wins. That was one of those plays, ONLY because it was 4th down and we could have knelt down for the rest of the clock. I would never had made a statement like that if there was a minute more on the clock because we wouldn't know for sure that the Bills would have won. In that game, with seconds to go, 4th and forever, 99% of all football players seven years old and up everywhere know to knock that ball down.

[dave mcbride]

You know what I meant there, Mr. Pennsyltucky.  Especially after I said there aren't more than a few plays a season around the entire league where one can honestly say if a player MAKES the simple play his team wins. That was one of those plays, ONLY because it was 4th down and we could have knelt down for the rest of the clock. I would never had made a statement like that if there was a minute more on the clock because we wouldn't know for sure that the Bills would have won. In that game, with seconds to go, 4th and forever, 99% of all football players seven years old and up everywhere know to knock that ball down.

411985[/snapback]

it seems to me that there was another fourth down conversion in that game that had a greater bearing on the score.

[dave mcbride]

Sometimes you do. Not on that play however, regardless of the fact that it was a great catch. The simple fact remains, that you seem unwilling to acknowledge, with overwhelming evidence right in front of you (by watching the tape): IF Nate Clements wanted to knock that ball down, he could have, easily, and Jimmy Smith could not have done a thing about it. And the Bills woud have won that game. IF Nate Clements would have tried to break up the pass and not tried to intercept the pass, there wasn't a thing Jimmy Smith could have done. The ball would have been nowhere near him. Nate was in perfect position to make the play. The only reason Jimmy Smith could make that great catch was because Nate jumped up with two hands to catch the ball. If Nate wanted to knock that ball away, Jimmy Smith would not have had a chance in the world to bring it down.

 

AND, even if Nate Clements made the greatest catch in the history of football, it STILL would have been a lousy play, because we would have lost 40 yards. There arent more than 4-5 plays in a season where you can say if one player makes the play we win or lose (like, say, a FG with no time remaining), but if Nate makes the play a seven year old would know to make, we win. He didn't and we lost. And it was only because he made the selfish play not the team play. That is why he lost the game single-handedly.

411780[/snapback]

 

oh please. at least he was in position to make a play, which is more than i can say for many other 4th down conversions i've seen in my lifetime. really, this is ridiculous. plus it's not as if he gave up the winning td. if you want to blame any one bill for losing that game (not that you should), the better bet would be chris villarreal, whose holding penalty basically gave the ball back to the jags. otherwise, the bills would have run out the clock. as for clements, he was pretty much responsible for the bills only td that game.

[Kelly the Dog]

it seems to me that there was another fourth down conversion in that game that had a greater bearing on the score.

412055[/snapback]

Again, you refuse to just face the reality of the play. There was not one person solely responsible on the endzone play. There wasn't one player completely in position to make the endzone play. There wasn't one player just waiting for the ball to come down on the endzone play. There wasn't one player who selfishly went for an interception when he knew to just knock the ball down on that play. The Jags QB just threw the ball up in the back of the endzone and the WR made the catch. It wasn't nearly the same thing and you know it.

[Kelly the Dog]

oh please. at least he was in position to make a play, which is more than i can say for many other 4th down conversions i've seen in my lifetime.  really, this is ridiculous.  plus it's not as if he gave up the winning td.  if you want to blame any one bill for losing that game (not that you should), the better bet would be chris villarreal, whose holding penalty basically gave the ball back to the jags. otherwise, the bills would have run out the clock. as for clements, he was pretty much responsible for the bills only td that game.

412060[/snapback]

Again, the point of the argument is that there are thousands and thousands of plays every year where players make mistakes on, and yet you cannot say with any certainty whatsoever that that play cost the game. 99% of all games there are NO plays like that. Simply because there are other plays that follow it that could change the course of the outcome, however unlikely. There are a handful of plays over the course of the season where one CAN make that statement. And the Clements play was one of them. Unless you want to foolishly make the Joe Pisarchik argument.

 

Can you honestly sit at your computer and deny that if Nate Clements wanted to knock that ball down he could have for sure and the Bills would have won that game? I double-dog dare ya.

[Simon]

You know what I meant there, Mr. Pennsyltucky.

If that's not what you meant, then why is that about the 7th time you've said it?

 

99% of all football players seven years old and up everywhere know to knock that ball down.

Knwoing it is one thing, doing it in the heat of battle is another.

I'm not defending the play; it was a terrible mistake borne of over-confidence and Clement's agressive nature. And he knows it was a mistake, too. What I find amazing is that it's really the only time in nearly 1,000 snaps I saw him blow a play. And what I find disconcerting is that after that incredible season where he made so many big plays for this team, that so many people choose to continually focus on the single mistake. he made.

 

Cya

[34-78-83]

And what I find disconcerting is that after that incredible season where he made so many big plays for this team, that so many people choose to continually focus on the single mistake. he made.

 

Cya

412157[/snapback]

 

There is the key statement that people need to look at....

 

Other examples:

-Kelly has thrown picks at the end of games they had a chance to win.

-Bruuuce has failed to wrap up a RB which led to a lost playoff game.

-We all know about Thurman's costly fumble.

 

Are these not GREAT players?

[Kelly the Dog]

If that's not what you meant, then why is that about the 7th time you've said it? 

Knwoing it is one thing, doing it in the heat of battle is another.

I'm not defending the play; it was a terrible mistake borne of over-confidence and Clement's agressive nature. And he knows it was a mistake, too. What I find amazing is that it's really the only time in nearly 1,000 snaps I saw him blow a play. And what I find disconcerting is that after that incredible season where he made so many big plays for this team, that so many people choose to continually focus on the single mistake. he made.

 

Cya

412157[/snapback]

Fair enough. As you know, i have been as tough on him as anyone, and yet I now feel he has improved every single year and is a stud. I even advocate that TD play him the 18 mil bonus and Champ Bailey money (where I never would have wanted that at this time last year). Last year he played great, you're right, and he's a stud. He's young and he's valuable and (now) at the top of his game. The last ten games or so last year he was excellent and was rarely beat. He didn't miss as many tackles and he was a true shutdown corner for the first time in his career, at least IMO.

 

But the reason people still harp on that game was because that was his glaring fault, that he was too much a hot dog and he blew too many plays. It was just arrogant and beyond stupid. And that single play cost us a heart-breaking game, and we were kept out of the playoffs by one game. It wasn't just a single mistake, it was a win vs. a loss. I am not saying he cost us the playoffs, and never have and never will, because we don't know what would have happened if they won the Jax game. You can't just add one win there and say the season would have played out the same as it did with the loss.

 

I am thrilled he is on the team and want us to keep him at literally all costs. But that doesn't mean he single-handedly didn't cost us a win last year.

[dave mcbride]

Fair enough. As you know, i have been as tough on him as anyone, and yet I now feel he has improved every single year and is a stud. I even advocate that TD play him the 18 mil bonus and Champ Bailey money (where I never would have wanted that at this time last year). Last year he played great, you're right, and he's a stud. He's young and he's valuable and (now) at the top of his game. The last ten games or so last year he was excellent and was rarely beat. He didn't miss as many tackles and he was a true shutdown corner for the first time in his career, at least IMO.

 

But the reason people still harp on that game was because that was his glaring fault, that he was too much a hot dog and he blew too many plays. It was just arrogant and beyond stupid. And that single play cost us a heart-breaking game, and we were kept out of the playoffs by one game. It wasn't just a single mistake, it was a win vs. a loss. I am not saying he cost us the playoffs, and never have and never will, because we don't know what would have happened if they won the Jax game. You can't just add one win there and say the season would have played out the same as it did with the loss.

 

I am thrilled he is on the team and want us to keep him at literally all costs. But that doesn't mean he single-handedly didn't cost us a win last year. 

412178[/snapback]

 

like i said earlier, if you're going to go in that direction, at least use chris villarreal, whose penalty more than anything else caused the bills to lose. if he didn't commit it, the bills would have won.

[Kelly the Dog]

like i said earlier, if you're going to go in that direction, at least use chris villarreal, whose penalty more than anything else caused the bills to lose. if he didn't commit it, the bills would have won.

412190[/snapback]

No, likely have won. There was 2:45 left in the game. It was 3rd and 2. The Bills would have had to run plays and the Jags would very likely have gotten the ball back, however desperate their situation may have been. On the Clements play, the game was vitually over. BIG difference. But not as big a difference as a holding penalty mistake vs. what Nate did. A lot of players have held or jumped offsides in similar situations as CV, or been called for a penalty. If Nate Clements would have been called for an illegal chuck, I would have been pissed, and it would have been dumb, but I never would have thought it was a global error like the not knocking the ball down. As far as I remember, it was a pretty picky call on CV. Villarial didn't do something monumentally stupid, or something every football player in the world knows not to do.

[dave mcbride]

No, likely have won. There was 2:45 left in the game. It was 3rd and 2. The Bills would have had to run plays and the Jags would very likely have gotten the ball back, however desperate their situation may have been. On the Clements play, the game was vitually over. BIG difference. But not as big a difference as a holding penalty mistake vs. what Nate did. A lot of players have held or jumped offsides in similar situations as CV, or been called for a penalty. If Nate Clements would have been called for an illegal chuck, I would have been pissed, and it would have been dumb, but I never would have thought it was a global error like the not knocking the ball down. As far as I remember, it was a pretty picky call on CV. Villarial didn't do something monumentally stupid, or something every football player in the world knows not to do.

412215[/snapback]

 

you can spin it however you want, but it's pretty obvious that you've invested a lot of emotion in that clements play. i know what my eyes saw and brain interpreted. there's no way that jacksonville wins that game if villarreal doesn't get called for holding. the bills would have had the ball with 2:30 to go and a first down inside the 20, and jax would have had one TO remaining. as for boneheaded plays, i always was under the impression that holding at the 24 yard line on third and 1 late in the game with a lead was about as dumb as it gets. it takes your team out of field goal range, stops the clock, and forces you into a passing situation.

[Kelly the Dog]

you can spin it however you want, but it's pretty obvious that you've invested a lot of emotion in that clements play. i know what my eyes saw and brain interpreted.  there's no way that jacksonville wins that game if villarreal doesn't get called for holding.  the bills would have had the ball with 2:30 to go and a first down inside the 20, and jax would have had one TO remaining. as for boneheaded plays, i always was under the impression that holding at the 24 yard line on third and 1 late in the game with a lead was about as dumb as it gets. it takes your team out of field goal range, stops the clock, and forces you into a passing situation.

412431[/snapback]

It's dumb, just not as dumb as it gets. And it's a judgment call by the Refs. Nate's was literally as dumb as it gets. If you're really, honestly, seriously, trying to argue that Villarial's holding was a dumber play than Nate's, you have zero football credibility.

[dave mcbride]

It's dumb, just not as dumb as it gets. And it's a judgment call by the Refs. Nate's was literally as dumb as it gets.  If you're really, honestly, seriously, trying to argue that Villarial's holding was a dumber play than Nate's, you have zero football credibility.

412492[/snapback]

well, i guess i don't have any football credibility with you at least. i can live with that!

[Assquatch]

Sorry for the confusion. Somebody (not me this time) merged two threads about Nate into this one big one. They must have caught you in mid key-stroke.

I HATE it when I get caught mid-stroke.