daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 And many teams also don't resign players because they don't have the money and/or cap space, or if they don't feel the player is worth it. Explain to me why Hutchinson, Bentley, and Verba all hit free agency last year if teams always resign their good offensive linemen? Obviously they would have resigned them if they were that great, according to your logic. lol, where did I say that? And where have I said anything about Clements in this entire thread besides his comments? A general rule with sports players is to take everything in contract negotiations that are being said with a large grain of salt. I'm not saying he's lying, but just blindly believing what he's saying isn't exactly a good thing either. Lucas is a better CB I'd say, better then Mr. Clements. I don't disagree on Henry and Winfield though. I think that a 5 mil contract for Clements is fair, if he'd like to sign here. 813694[/snapback] Ok well were close ... I think it would be a good deal if we offered him a 5 year deal for 30 million (about 6 million a year) and a 10 mill signing bonus. That is what top 10 CB's are going for these days and I think thats fair. Think about this. The average pay of a top 10 NFL CB in 2002 (4 years ago, and market has risen) was 5.3 MILLION per year. So if we offer him less than 5.3 million we would be saying we consider him a top 20 CB ... come on people. Take off your rose-colored glasses. Nate Clements is a TOP 10 CB ... whether he be #10, or #1, he is still a top 10 CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Ok well were close ... I think it would be a good deal if we offered him a 5 year deal for 30 million (about 6 million a year) and a 10 mill signing bonus. That is what top 10 CB's are going for these days and I think thats fair. Think about this. The average pay of a top 10 NFL CB in 2002 (4 years ago, and market has risen) was 5.3 MILLION per year. So if we offer him less than 5.3 million we would be saying we consider him a top 20 CB ... come on people. Take off your rose-colored glasses. Nate Clements is a TOP 10 CB ... whether he be #10, or #1, he is still a top 10 CB. 813712[/snapback] If the average was $5.3mill, then by definition, some make less and some make more than that. Therefore, the #10 probably makes a fair amount less than 5.3mill. Hence, if NC is offered less than that, its not saying he's top 20; its saying he's in the bottom of the top 10. I, personally, think the 6 mill with 30 guaranteed as you suggest would be horribly overpaying for an average corner. In a contract year, such as this, he's arguably playing as well as he ever will. And his play for the last 1.5 years has been a touch above average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 If the average was $5.3mill, then by definition, some make less and some make more than that. Therefore, the #10 probably makes a fair amount less than 5.3mill. Hence, if NC is offered less than that, its not saying he's top 20; its saying he's in the bottom of the top 10. I, personally, think the 6 mill with 30 guaranteed as you suggest would be horribly overpaying for an average corner. In a contract year, such as this, he's arguably playing as well as he ever will. And his play for the last 1.5 years has been a touch above average. 813714[/snapback] When you have the money ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 When you have the money ... 813715[/snapback] ... you get a good offensive line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 ... you get a good offensive line. 813716[/snapback] From where? Do you plan that they build them in the basements of the stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 From where? Do you plan that they build them in the basements of the stadium? 813719[/snapback] Why is the rest of the league can somehow magically find offensive linemen, but it's impossible for us to find them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Why is the rest of the league can somehow magically find offensive linemen, but it's impossible for us to find them? 813720[/snapback] Much of the league either: 1. Drafts them 2. Picks up the players Buffalo doesnt want to pay such as Pat Williams or Antoine Winfield and next to be Nate Clements Most of the time their are a few good players in the free agency pool and teams bid HIGH to get them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Hence, I say spend the money on a lineman ... not on a CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Hence, I say spend the money on a lineman ... not on a CB. 813724[/snapback] Do me a favor. Go find the list of FA lineman (i already did) and see how many have a chance of NOT being re-signed by their team. You will come out to a number of about 1 good OL and 1 good DL. We could pick up BOTH of those players, daft all the players, pay them, pay nate what he wants and still have 10 mill left over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Do me a favor. Go find the list of FA lineman (i already did) and see how many have a chance of NOT being re-signed by their team. You will come out to a number of about 1 good OL and 1 good DL. We could pick up BOTH of those players, daft all the players, pay them, pay nate what he wants and still have 10 mill left over. 813726[/snapback] I reject the notion that all good players will be re-signed and none available. However, if all good players are indeed signed and we cannot secure top draft picks; then by all means, I agree, lets give it all to Nate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 I reject the notion that all good players will be re-signed and none available. However, if all good players are indeed signed and we cannot secure top draft picks; then by all means, I agree, lets give it all to Nate. 813727[/snapback] Well go and take a look for yourself man. MOST good lineman are re-signed. Some do escape because of teams salary cap ... etc. But when that happens their are 30 other teams trying to get that 1 player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Well go and take a look for yourself man. MOST good lineman are re-signed. Some do escape because of teams salary cap ... etc. But when that happens their are 30 other teams trying to get that 1 player. 813728[/snapback] No way I could have the patience to look all that up. All I'm saying is that if there's one, only one, top tier linemen available; we need to make sure we get him. Because not getting a good offensive line in this team has reached the point of absurdity. By the way, I really do agree with you that we should keep Nate if possible. I just really don't think we should over pay for him. We have alot of holes on this team. And I know that Nate leaving potentially creates another one, but there are far greater ones, even if Nate is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 No way I could have the patience to look all that up. All I'm saying is that if there's one, only one, top tier linemen available; we need to make sure we get him. Because not getting a good offensive line in this team has reached the point of absurdity. By the way, I really do agree with you that we should keep Nate if possible. I just really don't think we should over pay for him. We have alot of holes on this team. And I know that Nate leaving potentially creates another one, but there are far greater ones, even if Nate is gone. 813729[/snapback] I totally agree with that. Heck, if their were 3 good offensive lineman on the market in free agency I would say CYA NATE! and give those lineman whatever they wanted to get them here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 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. 812877[/snapback] I'm sure Bill from NYC would absolutely love it if the Bills used their first round pick to take a CB. On a more serious note, I think that's the last thing this team should do. Whether the Bills re-sign Nate, or sign some other free agent, we shouldn't use a first or second round pick on a CB. Doing so would merely continue a long Bills' tradition of drafting a guy in the first round, having him stay here four years or so, letting him leave in free agency, and using a first round pick once again on his replacement. Antoine Winfield, Thomas Smith, the list goes on. The problem the Bills face in signing any free agent--whether it be Clements or a FA from another team--is that players with options don't want to come here. The team is lousy, a lot of people don't like the weather, the city has a reputation for being less exciting than, say, Miami. Add to that the fact that many players scheduled to become free agents will get extensions from their current teams, and it's tough. So the Bills should add quality free agents wherever possible, realizing that we shouldn't expect too much. But if a position requires continuity, such as at QB or the offensive line, the Bills should restrict themselves to young free agents. The last thing this team needs is another Chris Villarrial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I knew we agreed with each other. Tomorrow, we find new coaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 The problem the Bills face in signing any free agent--whether it be Clements or a FA from another team--is that players with options don't want to come here. The team is lousy, a lot of people don't like the weather, the city has a reputation for being less exciting than, say, Miami. Add to that the fact that many players scheduled to become free agents will get extensions from their current teams, and it's tough. 813742[/snapback] BINGO! Thus why not pay Clements? We have the cap space. Get it done and build around him. He will be happy to have the money and hopefully play even better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts