Cornerville Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Here is how I reason the Bills signing NC or not... Forget the cap limit...the key is if the Bills are very willing to get close to their cap number...then I say sign Nate and then make other upgrades. If the Bills are in a budget and do not expect to get near the cap number for arguments sake let's say Ralph want sto only get to $20 million under the cap...then let NC walk, draft another CB and use that NC money to upgrade the OL, DL, another WR and/or a LB.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 if wilson stays $20mil under cap than its official that he's trying to pull the team out of buffalo by putting out a horrible product and driving ticket sales down... again.
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 i think the numbers you stated are about the starting point for negotiations. and if we're not going to offer that, then we'll never bother talking to Nate and his agent at all. and that makes me seriously wonder about this franchise. Lets not go overboard here. Remember that we are a cover 2 team, and we are talking about a cornerback here, the least important position in our scheme. I'm not going to "seriously wonder about this franchise" because they don't want to employ the league's highest paid cornerback in a system that doesn't require him to the extent that others do. I too agree with the principle of re-signing our own draft picks, but not to the point where I'd invest this much money in Nate Clements. Let him walk, re-sign The Beast, and let he, McGee and Youboty handle our top 3 cornerback spots. Then use a second-day draft pick on a corner to bring some depth and potential to the table. In my mind, that would suffice at corner, and we could spend that big money on a Lance Briggs, Daniel Graham or an Eric Steinbach.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 and then we can have a horrible pass-d to match our run-d. sounds like a perfect scheme.
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 and then we can have a horrible pass-d to match our run-d. sounds like a perfect scheme. The best thing about this post is the solid evidence you back it up with. You make a great case, I've been turned.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 The best thing about this post is the solid evidence you back it up with. You make a great case, I've been turned. since when does anyone use solid evidence around here? but if you really think that McGee and Yobouty arent going to get picked apart next year, then congrats on having more faith in an underperformer and a nonperformer than i. i hope you are right.
apuszczalowski Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Does anyone think that maybe Clements (under a salary that would make him close to the highest paid player at his position) is just not in the Bills coaching staffs plans? Maybe since the Cover 2 doesn't require top rated CB's to be successful, the Bills figure they could spend the money in a better spot. I trust the bills coaching staff over a bunch of fans as to what this team really needs. And just because the Bills have cap room, doesn't mean they plan to spend it. Spending money doesn't equate to success, just more of a chance of running into cap problems later.
daquixers_is_back Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Does anyone think that maybe Clements (under a salary that would make him close to the highest paid player at his position) is just not in the Bills coaching staffs plans? Maybe since the Cover 2 doesn't require top rated CB's to be successful, the Bills figure they could spend the money in a better spot. I trust the bills coaching staff over a bunch of fans as to what this team really needs. And just because the Bills have cap room, doesn't mean they plan to spend it. Spending money doesn't equate to success, just more of a chance of running into cap problems later. Is our defensive plans/scheme going to change next season? I remember a few games where Clements was probably THE deciding factor in winning us the game ... remember Greenbay? And then I believe he had another key batted down pass in Houston. He also had a HUGE INT in the Jets game and a big INT in the Miami game. One COULD argue that if Clements was not on our team last year, we would have lost to Greenbay and Houston, and the Miami and Jets games would have been a heck of a lot closer.
MRW Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Maybe since the Cover 2 doesn't require top rated CB's to be successful, I read this a lot, and I just don't buy it. Sure, any defense can get by with lesser performers in one area if it has stars in others - get a good enough pass rush and your corners won't matter as much. But I don't think scheme makes up for inadequate players. I also don't think that the Bills have anywhere near the dominance elsewhere on D to inspire confidence if they decide to not seriously pursue Nate. To me, this smacks of Gregg Williams-style arrogance, to assume that your coaching skills can guide you to victory.
BillsVet Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Clements is a big part of the pass defense, no question. Here's why I'd want him, even if it is around Bailey money 1. He's a big cover CB who can handle the run on the outside. Very few in the NFL today. 2. You have no one on the roster who can replace him. Youboty is untested and another FA will be new to the team. 3. Using a top draft pick is simply spinning our wheels. We've got needs in so many other areas, namely DL and OL. 4. He will maintain some consistency to next season, having been in the system one year with this coaching staff. 5. Champ Bailey money might become closer to just above average in 2-3 yrs as the cap increases. 6. Last but not least, his signing gives fans an idea that ownership is willing to keep its own in pursuit of a title. NC might not be Champ Bailey, but we're fortunate to have a player of his caliber against the opposing team's best WR. He wasn't perfect next season, but we know how he can play when it matters and shut down those receivers. Teams didn't throw the ball last season because we were so porous up the middle. How much sense does it make to get better on the DL and then let the pass defense fall off the table?
Dibs Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 the bottom line is the job of management is to put together a winning team. i would tag him and say,...."sorry Nate...it's not personal. it's business." who said what and when makes no difference. when the Bills win the Super Bowl next year all will be forgiven. Considering that members of the Bills organization(Marv.) have publicly stated that there was a verbal agreement, if we reneged on the deal then NC could certainly sue for breach of contract(verbal) & loss of potential income due to the breach........I'm assuming here but it sounds correct to me.
daquixers_is_back Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Considering that members of the Bills organization(Marv.) have publicly stated that there was a verbal agreement, if we reneged on the deal then NC could certainly sue for breach of contract(verbal) & loss of potential income due to the breach........I'm assuming here but it sounds correct to me. That is actually correct ... unless there is a clause written into the NFL somewhere.
Pyrite Gal Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 I read this a lot, and I just don't buy it. Sure, any defense can get by with lesser performers in one area if it has stars in others - get a good enough pass rush and your corners won't matter as much. But I don't think scheme makes up for inadequate players. I also don't think that the Bills have anywhere near the dominance elsewhere on D to inspire confidence if they decide to not seriously pursue Nate. To me, this smacks of Gregg Williams-style arrogance, to assume that your coaching skills can guide you to victory. Good coaching can make good players better (if the scheme puts the players into the best position to make plays they can make) but I think it is rare that a scheme can make bad or inadequate players good. It seems to only take a week or two of tape analysis for am opponent to figure out how to exploit the weaknesses of bad players so I agree with the limitations of a scheme to be some miracle solution. However, the GW arrogance seemed to me to be rooted in him assessing his former players like Jenkins at SS or whathisname at LB (who got deked out of his jock by none other than Chad Pennington) actually had enough left in the gas tank that were anything other than bad players. GW's arrogance was in that assuming it was just his scheme which made his teams good when actually it was that his scheme was in fact good but mostly because it put great players like Blaine Bishop and Jevon Kearse in a good position to do what they could do. I think scheme matters alot, but while it is necessary it is not sufficient in and of itself. One needs the players who do well in a scheme. It actually is for that reason that I am concerned but not worried about the CB position if NC walks. From the scouting reports I have seen the Cover 2 scheme the Bills play is a good one that emphasizes and makes good use of Youbouty's skills (a big boy about NC size, rep as a very competitive player and good hand fighter, a bit of a ball hawk at OSU leading the team in INTs at some points and blocking a kick once) and minimizes his weaknesses (apparently not as good with his back to the QB and despite track star speed in running with WRs on deep routes). The feeling from many of the draft pundits seemed to be that he could use another year in school and this dropped this 1st round to the third, but ironically there was some word he could contribute immediately. Actually while I think missing training camp cost him in being able to contribute much this year, that he should at least be our nickel next year and is a possible candidate to actually fill in as #2.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Old news - he's been saying this all season. more like the past 2 years.
ThreeBillsDrive Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Clements is a big part of the pass defense, no question. Here's why I'd want him, even if it is around Bailey money 1. He's a big cover CB who can handle the run on the outside. Very few in the NFL today. 2. You have no one on the roster who can replace him. Youboty is untested and another FA will be new to the team. 3. Using a top draft pick is simply spinning our wheels. We've got needs in so many other areas, namely DL and OL. 4. He will maintain some consistency to next season, having been in the system one year with this coaching staff. 5. Champ Bailey money might become closer to just above average in 2-3 yrs as the cap increases. 6. Last but not least, his signing gives fans an idea that ownership is willing to keep its own in pursuit of a title. NC might not be Champ Bailey, but we're fortunate to have a player of his caliber against the opposing team's best WR. He wasn't perfect next season, but we know how he can play when it matters and shut down those receivers. Teams didn't throw the ball last season because we were so porous up the middle. How much sense does it make to get better on the DL and then let the pass defense fall off the table? NT is also a strong open field tackler. And in DJ's schemes, back-to-basics proper tackling are key.
NavyBillsFan Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 "France said he's had no in-depth discussions with Buffalo" thats the news part to me. we really havent been trying to work on anything? or they wont bother to even to listen to any offers from the team? Its not that, its Ralphs dream of owning a farm team for the rest of the league
Recommended Posts