Search the Community

Ha! I was just going to post something of this variety. In last year's ESPN the Magazine's Pre-Draft issue, AY was projected as a late 1st rounder. The current NFL player that they compared him to was ... drum roll please ... Nate Clements. Of course, all of that means nothing until he steps on the field and faces an opponent's top WR.

That was pretty funny. There is another cartoon on that site called "IN THE MONEY" you should watch. It has Derrick Dockery, Nate, and Marv amoung others from around the league! Very Funny! Will try to provide link but can be easily found on the bang cartoon site. Enjoy! http://www.bangcartoon.com/2007/money.htm

Levy, Bills still have work to doposted: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry filed under: Buffalo Bills Although the Bills finished the 2006 season with a 7-9 record, there were high expectations for 2007 heading into the offseason. However, in looking at what the Bills have accomplished so far there should be concerns about second-year general manager Marv Levy as the organization's main decision maker. Levy has a strong relationship with head coach Dick Jauron, who has a strong say when determining the Bills' 53-man roster. Levy will take certain input from his personnel people but will usually follow the recommendations that come from Jauron and his coaching staff. Since determining quarterback J.P. Losman is the future of this organization and a solid fit in offensive coordinator Steve Fairchild's system, the Bills were very aggressive in their spending that revolved around the offensive line that protects Losman. The Bills have struggled over the last few seasons in both the run and pass game as the line has failed to consistently protect the quarterback or create effective inside running lanes. With the development of LT Jason Peters, who is the team's best offensive lineman, the Bills targeted both inside guard positions and right tackle as positions that needed to be upgraded. They were very active in the early stages with the additions of RT Langston Walker, guard Derrick Dockery and versatile backup Jason Whittle. Although the Bills overpaid dearly for Dockery, he still made sense based on the going market and need for the position. The Bills will field a solid tandem on the left side of their offensive line to hopefully run behind effectively. However, Walker played on one of the worst offensive lines in the history of the NFL last season in Oakland. He is a massive offensive tackle with above-average athletic skills who has struggled in his development and with consistent performance throughout his career. Offensive line coach Jim McNally will have his work cut out for him with a high-dollar player that may be best suited in a backup role. On top of that, the Bills traded away RB Willis McGahee to the Baltimore Ravens for multiple draft picks due to a lack of consistency since 2004 season and his future salary demands. The Bills did re-sign Anthony Thomas this week, but he is a substantial drop-off in talent from McGahee. One of the main areas the Bills will need to address in the draft is the running back position. Defensively, the Bills still have a lot of work to do in replacing RC Nate Clements and MLB London Fletcher-Baker. Baker was a highly productive inside player, while Clements was the Bills' No. 1 shut-down corner. Also, the Bills are quietly shopping starting LB Takeo Spikes, who struggled to play at a Pro Bowl level last season after overcoming a torn Achilles tendon suffered in 2005. However, the Bills will need to continue to beef up the interior to try and improve a run defense that finished 28th in the league in 2006, allowing 140.9 yards a game. The Bills have been very aggressive in their spending when acquiring and re-signing players. But has Levy made the right moves when investing money in future players who can get this franchise back on track and contending for the AFC East title? Only time will tell if the Bills made the right decisions, and next month's NFL draft will be critical to the Bills success in 2007.

8 years/ $80 million - just to piss Nate off!

That was funny there something wrong with it tho, i could understand Nate.

I will tell you this, put Nate on the Saints roster and they almost certainly would have been playing in the Super Bowl. Look, argue that Nate wasn't worth the contract he got and I can respect that. But don't try to convince me that's he's not a great player. He played lights out last year.

I totally agree with you. Fletcher made a lot of tackles, but not many of them were at the line of scrimmage or behind it. If the Bills had wanted to keep Fletcher they would have extended him with one year left on his contract after the 2005 season. They obviously did not want to do that and for good reason. I think whomever we put in the middle will be an upgrade. As far as Nate is concerned, he is definitely a good cornerback, but also most definitely not in the top five. There were many games over his tenure with the Bills that he was toasted. Who can forget opening day 2004 against Jacksonville! The bottom line is that we should give Marv and Dick the benefit of the doubt with there player personnel decisions. I am sure there is a lot of thought into who we resign and who we let go. Clements and Fletcher are gone. Lets forget about it and move forward. I am sure they have a plan as to who there replacements will be. Lets not forget that we are not breaking up the Steelers of the 1970's. This is a team that has gone 38-58 the past six years. Lets be OPTIMISTIC about the upcoming season.

He got champ bailey money, not nate clements money. pfft.

No that means that all of those guys you listed have not been on this team very long in comparison to NC and LF-B, the veteran leadership?, the "playmakers", the guys that make the others around them "better". Wait. We aren't better, in fact we have not improved or gotten worse with those guys on the team. Time to move on! Nate Clements is not a playmaker when he can't crack the top 30 in the INT list=chuck em. Aaron Schobel is a playmaker when he is 3rd in the league in sacks= keep em. What's hard to understand about this? No one is saying to get rid of the whole team, although that is precisely what the Bills have been doing(Adams, Vincent, Milloy, Posey, Shelton, Bledsoe, the list goes on and on) for the past 2 years. These guys had their shot to be great, but most of the time were good at best. Again, time to move on.

I did not want Nate to go either, as most here feel. He did not want to be here though, and look at the$$ he signed for just crazy. Here is a name for you, Brian Kelly of the Bucs. He is not Nate but close, and it lookes like he can be had.

A good post. But the scope of the article was to identify teams which lost more than they gained in free agency. And the article has a point. The Bills have lost the following players: - Nate Clements, Willis McGahee, London Fletcher, Mike Gandy. The Bills have added the following players: - Dockery, Langston Walker, 3rd round pick Mike Gandy > Langston Walker Dockery + 3rd round pick < Clements + McGahee + Fletcher In the short run, the Bills' offseason moves represent a step backwards. But the only loss that will create long-term pain is Clements. And on the plus side of the ledger, we've added Dockery and those picks for McGahee. In the long run, these offseason moves should make us a (somewhat) better team. And even going into 2007, the Bills could easily be a better team due to our upcoming draft picks, and to younger guys from last year's team playing better this year.

Um, yes it friggin does! The primary reason SF got off the schnide and won the SB is Deion. His contributions moved them from win a playoff game and then lose team to a SB winning team. Yeah they were good before, just like the Colts were good before this year -> the point is they weren't good ENOUGH until he got there. The same thing is true with the Cowboys. Reverse your logic -> are u telling me that adding Nate to the Patriots/Bears/Saints would have gotten them a SB? - of course not. If that's what you think then you have missed my rationale. I am not saying we shouldn't actively pursue players with upside/proven performance. I am saying that a veteran guy like Clements, who isn't even in the top 5 in his position, is not worth pursuing. Schobel is. Moorman is. We shouldn't look to spend big money on a guy with 4 INTs, who hasn't made a pro-bowl in 3 years(at least), and ain't getting any better. We should give the guys we drafted a chance, rather than "locking up" mediocrity. Btw, Schobel was 3rd in the league in the main stat for his position - sacks. Clements wasn't even in the top 30 for his - INTs. How the hell is Nate a better CB than Schobel is a DE, again?

Yes, he is a different type of player, asked to do different things AND had huge offensive lineman hanging on him do to our relative lack of talent and BEEF at DT. Fletcher is not Zach Thomas. London is still one of the top MLBs in the NFL. The guy we get to replace him probably won't be Zach Thomas either. We might be fine at LB...I EXPECT us to be fine. I'm just saying, Fletcher played hard and good. Was a team leader, called the D, played hurt and did everything you expect a veteran leader to do. He didn't hold the Bills hostage. He is not a player who's talent has severely declined. He's not a ME guy. What's not to like about the guy? Basically, I'm defending the integrity of LF-B here. I think he's been underrated and under-appreciated by many Bills fans. I also don't think he left in a negative way. To lump him in with Nate (who I would defend differently) or Willis is a mistake and unfair, IMO. Also, in response to the topic at the time, I offered up the possibility that younger players may learn a lesson here...and not the one we probably want them to learn.

The example wasn't ill advised in the least. The fact that Deon cherry picked teams that were on the verge has something to do with his winning. Deon himself didn't bring the winning to those teams, he was a big part, no doubt, but without the other pieces in place Deon on the team doens't mean squat. No player, not even a QB, can will his team to win simply because he is a "difference maker". It just doesn't happen that way in the game of football. As for your other players, Schobel was not better than Clements last year. If you want to go simply by Pro Bowl voting have at it. Nate is a better CB than Schobel is a DE (and I like Schobel a lot). Anyway, by your rational we should just dump Schobel anyway, that bum. What has he ever done for the Bills?

Just my opinion. What makes an NFL corner Pro Bowl material, or a shutdown corner? Is it tackles, sacks, interceptions, times not thrown at? Well when most people vote for the Pro Bowl they vote a name. In the AFC Nate was not the biggest name, nor had the most tackles, nor the most interceptions, you get the point. What I think made Nate look good was he was a good corner, not hreat, and Terrence McGee wasn't. If I knew faking you with a left jab 20 times got me 15 hits with the right, I'd fake you 100 times. But he is enough of a loss that I think it is a huge concern now.

And that accounts for your ill-advised Deion example how exactly? Better players than Nate: Aaron Schobel Brian Moorman Um, Pro-Bowlers.

Well a bunch of changes have been made as we have all seen. Do you all realize that last years Bills could have been 12-4? They had lost 5 games by a total of 10 points. Of course it is the offense's job to put points on the board. I believe except for Tight End and RB, all is on the offense is well. Defense is such a concern now and I think CB is the hot position. Nate was a pro-bowler in my eyes. If you look at the competition at that position in the AFC is why he did not get the nods. But to keep him at 80 Mil would have been ridiculous. Terrence McGee is ok, but not the future answer. Look for Youboty to pass him up quick. Run stuffer is the next big concern. I believe fast guys our good, but no good if 325 lb guys are pushing 295 lb guys out of the way. The final weakness is LB. If TKO goes, two will then be needed. In-experience will do no good there. I believe the Bills have a legitimate shot this year. I believe it all starts up front though, meaning the front four. So while I think CB is the hot position, it may well be DT. If this new offensive line can help keep the defense off the field, look for good things from the Bills this year.

It's interesting that you would use Deion to make that point - since each team he went to instantly got better(Redskins), or won the Superbowl(49ers, Cowboys). The only time that didn't happen was when he went to his last team(ravens back from retirement) - but he was 37 years old. How in the hell was Nate Clements our "best player" last year? Don't bother - he wasn't.

Last year they cut Milloy, Adams, Vincent, those were bigger holes to fill which they did. ( unfortunatly McCargo was injured). They wanted to upgrade and replace both Fletcher and McGahee, they could have kept them both if they so desired. The only player they had no chance at keeping was Nate. It will be interesting to see how he playes this year now that he has the $$$.

I don't think we are disagreeing much. i will say this, though... Unlike many others, I think Fletcher is still a top MLB and his stats support that (#3 in the NFL in tackles last year AND he was playing injured for awhile). It isn't like keeping Vincent, a player with severely diminished skills. I'm a little concerned this move says, "Be a top player, a great teammate and leader and we'll still let you go." Bad lesson, IMO. As for Nate we didn't "call his bluff". He was sitting with 4 aces and he took a big pot home. He was just too expensive for us, i understand that. But, we lost 2 top players (not OK players). I know what lesson you think they are being TAUGHT by these moves, i think it's just as likely the lesson they may be LEARNING is, be a great player and cash in as a free agent, because the Bills won't pay you. As for Willis, I think the lesson is clear enough.

Nate Clements...veyr good corner, never a Pro-Bowler.... London Fletcher: Tackling machine, very good LB. Willis McGahee: Self proclaimed great RB, had a great 1/2 season plus great games against the Jets, otherwise not much else. Can you all tell me just how much the Bills accomplished WITH these players???? So if you are down about Marv not bringing back NC or LF, what if they did, but yet neglected the OL YET again?? The Bills defense was poor last year with those guys, how can it get much worse without them??? Plus the offseason is NOT over yet, and we still have the NFL Draft to assess. Both sides of the ball need fixing, glad to see at least Marv and Co. took big strides into fixing the OL.

I don't disagree with much of what you say, but I have a question: What does London Fletcher have to do with ANY of this? Fletch played hard ALL the time and was the epitome of a "team player". He was an FA and took a good contract from the Skins. I don't even know what the Bills offered, but I don't remember there being any contentiousness (is that a word?). Nate wanted (and deserved) big $. Hell the only lesson that teaches is you can get better deals by playing out your contract and going FA.

It is more about scapegoats, and while Milloy wasn't the Pro Bowl caliber player that he was for NE*, he wasn't completely torn apart here, either. My interpretation is basically players that flat out sucked (Bennie Anderson, Tim Anderson) failed to live to their own hype (Nate Clements), set the franchise back (Tom Donahoe, Ralphy), talked major sh-- about Buffalo (Willis MacGahee), or had sex with minors (Travis Henry)

How about Eddie "I got juked by Chad Pennington" Robinson Buffalo Billdo Larry Tripplett Nate Clements Melvin Fowler any Bills TE (minus Everett) and Tom Clements

A (franchise) tag and trade is not out of the question. In this case, both parties would be happy. Nate would go to the skins (or whoever) and make huge bucks and we would get a draft pick. No one would be offended or left bitter. This would NOT leave the bills org with a black eye or turn off future free agents.