daquixers_is_back Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 We certainly have a ton of other problems, but Im sorry guys, these last two games should show us that we really cant afford to lose Clements. Flame away.
BuffOrange Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 How can this sorry team not afford to lose anybody? What are we going to do, go 5-11 without him?
daquixers_is_back Posted October 22, 2006 Author Posted October 22, 2006 How can this sorry team not afford to lose anybody? What are we going to do, go 5-11 without him? 812534[/snapback] As a TEAM we are doing horrible. If we cut everyone who deserved to be cut we would have a very small team. Clements has blanketed his receiver all day today. Brady has thrown his way twice I believe ... 0 completions.
JStranger76 Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 We may not win 5 with him. This team sucks.
rolly Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 My God man, get off his pole. Our obvious problems are the lines. Our secondary sucks but it all begins with the lines.
Swift Sylvan Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 We certainly have a ton of other problems, but Im sorry guys, these last two games should show us that we really cant afford to lose Clements. Flame away. 812525[/snapback] Fair point, correct statement, wrong timing. First the game isn't over yet, second, after a game like this, I think hearing a "I told you so" isn't the best thing.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Well it's not like the Pats have great WR's.
BuffOrange Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 First the game isn't over yet 812569[/snapback]
Swift Sylvan Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 812577[/snapback] I know I know, just some undeserved optimism or more likely denial.
daquixers_is_back Posted October 22, 2006 Author Posted October 22, 2006 Well it's not like the Pats have great WR's. 812576[/snapback] Their doing a number against the other DB's ... People are going to start thinking I love Clements .... but I dont. I just think its dumb to get rid of him.
Typical TBD Guy Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Their doing a number against the other DB's ... People are going to start thinking I love Clements .... but I dont. I just think its dumb to get rid of him. 812607[/snapback] daquixers, you are completely right and I have your back in this argument. Reasons why Clements needs to be re-signed at all costs: 1. We are going to have LOTS of cap space...maybe among the highest amount in the league 2. Not many quality free agents hit the market anymore, anyway...especially linemen...so might as well use our money for our own guys 3. Clements hasn't been the problem with the CB's - McGee has been. If he wasn't a great kick returner, people would be calling for his head like we do with Wire 4. Here's the big one: the problem has more to do with this crappy tampa 2 D than it does with Clements. We don't have the D-line to compete, so the LB's and DB's get exposed way more than they should.
daquixers_is_back Posted October 22, 2006 Author Posted October 22, 2006 daquixers, you are completely right and I have your back in this argument. Reasons why Clements needs to be re-signed at all costs: 1. We are going to have LOTS of cap space...maybe among the highest amount in the league 2. Not many quality free agents hit the market anymore, anyway...especially linemen...so might as well use our money for our own guys 3. Clements hasn't been the problem with the CB's - McGee has been. If he wasn't a great kick returner, people would be calling for his head like we do with Wire 4. Here's the big one: the problem has more to do with this crappy tampa 2 D than it does with Clements. We don't have the D-line to compete, so the LB's and DB's get exposed way more than they should. 812685[/snapback] You listed nearly every point I do ... good post.
UConn James Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 As a TEAM we are doing horrible. If we cut everyone who deserved to be cut we would have a very small team. Clements has blanketed his receiver all day today. Brady has thrown his way twice I believe ... 0 completions. 812537[/snapback] Nope. The Caldwell 1st down was Clements' way. It was a short 3rd, Nate lined up way back, and even I knew where the ball was going. That's just one I do remember. Doesn't really matter, b/c Brady was busy picking McGee apart. But I just don't get how this proves much about Nate given what you say is a derth of data. You might as well try to prove that California won't have an earthquake over 8.0. I'm not saying the failure of the Defense is on Nate. Our D-line gets little more than the odd coverage sacks. The DEs are mostly matadored right out of the plays. Give any QB time and he'll complete passes. What I said in the game thread about 'heart' when he pulled up and started hopscotching when Dillion was at the 5 on the first TD.... You can call it what you want. The willpower to tackle anyone trying to score on your endzone, wanting to bust up whoever comes your way, whatever. Nate hasn't shown it in this, his contract year. He is going through the motions and trying not to get injured for wherever he ends up next year. (Which won't be in Buffalo, b/c if a long-term contract was going to happen, it would have.)
apuszczalowski Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 lements is a decent CB, but not worth what hes getting paid, that is the problem with him. He wants top CB money, if you want it, show us you deserve it, and so far he is not. It will be hard to replace him if he goes, but not impossible. Its plain and simple, he is not worth the money he is asking for, and just because we have the cap space for next year doesn't mean we will in the future when he still counts against the cap after next year (when signed to a long term deal)
Fezmid Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Nope. The Caldwell 1st down was Clements' way. It was a short 3rd, Nate lined up way back, and even I knew where the ball was going. I don't think that's a Clements issue as much as a coaching one. Don't the coaches tell the players where to line up on each play? The opposing QBs are attackign McGee every week; to me, that means that they think Clements is doing a good job.
daquixers_is_back Posted October 22, 2006 Author Posted October 22, 2006 I don't think that's a Clements issue as much as a coaching one. Don't the coaches tell the players where to line up on each play? The opposing QBs are attackign McGee every week; to me, that means that they think Clements is doing a good job. 812787[/snapback] CB's usually play sides and yes I agree. When a QB chooses to NOT throw towards a particular CB more than 2-3 times a game, that usually means that CB is doing a darn good job.
UConn James Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 I don't think that's a Clements issue as much as a coaching one. Don't the coaches tell the players where to line up on each play? The opposing QBs are attackign McGee every week; to me, that means that they think Clements is doing a good job. 812787[/snapback] To me, it's an indication that the opposing team can only throw the ball to one player per play, and with McGee giving up the ghost more than anyone.... It is a coaching issue in that this CB placement scheme sucks. Anyone tell Fewell that we can bump WRs w/in 5 yards? But it's more than that. We've had the same 'CBs 10 yards off the LOS' problem for the past three coaches. They each say they're going to do different things, but it's the same sh--. At this point, I don't think Nate wants to be back, and I can't say I blame him. You shouldn't use a thoroughbred as a carthorse. But that also doesn't excuse his play this year. He wants to be paid like a Playmaker --- where are the plays?
daquixers_is_back Posted October 22, 2006 Author Posted October 22, 2006 To me, it's an indication that the opposing team can only throw the ball to one player per play, and with McGee giving up the ghost more than anyone.... It is a coaching issue in that this CB placement scheme sucks. Anyone tell Fewell that we can bump WRs w/in 5 yards? But it's more than that. We've had the same 'CBs 10 yards off the LOS' problem for the past three coaches. They each say they're going to do different things, but it's the same sh--. At this point, I don't think Nate wants to be back, and I can't say I blame him. You shouldn't use a thoroughbred as a carthorse. But that also doesn't excuse his play this year. He wants to be paid like a Playmaker --- where are the plays? 812859[/snapback] Most CB's who make plays have a decent defense around them. Find me a playmaker CB who has a bad defense around him.
jahnyc Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 I agree that Clements should have been re-signed for all of the reasons listed above. One additional reason: the Bills have so many holes and it would suck if they have to draft a cb in the early rounds to replace Clements. That would mean one less draft pick for the oline or the dline.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Uh, yes. This team has WAAAAAY bigger issues than losing Nate Clements.
Recommended Posts