Search the Community

Is TD going to sign him...if he does be prepared $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ NBC is happy about taking over Sunday night games. ESPN is giddy to get Monday Night Football. But when the NFL announced its new broadcast package, the happiest ones of all were the players and agents. Total broadcast revenue will increase by at least 50 percent when the new deals go into effect in 2006 - from $2.45 billion a year to at least $3.75 billion. The players get 65 percent of revenues, so you can expect a big bump in salaries in '06. It'll be a great time to be a free agent. Nate Clements, are you listening?

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/news.jsp?news_id=3093

I'd appreciate anybody who'd be willing to describe the what/where/how/when of it as I don't have the slightest idea of what Martz is babbling about. Many thanx.............

Pretty funny: http://sports.ign.com/articles/568/568040p1.html?fromint=1 CW

http://www.eastcoastsportsnews.com/2005PreDraft.html This is possible as Clements is unsignable and franchise tag for CB is absurd. Gregg Williams loves clements

What are the chances that he won't be re-signed and will leave via free agency next year? Do the Bills step up and work out a deal, like they did for Schobel?

Im sorry but I had to post this, I feel saddened at all the post I read that say Clement will be traded this season if we got Ty Law. Obvisously the arm chair GMS have gottena little to lazy in their Lazy chair, or mixed too much Kool-aid. First off Clements is in his last year of the contract, if we cant sign him to an extension or resign him next season he can be Franchised and we could get a min first round pick for him but the tag calls for 2 first round picks. Clements is defenately a top 10 CB in the leaugue and I seriously doubt we would let him go for nothing. Secondly, Ty Law's signing would be complimentary to Clements and another sigining to make our defense even better. Not an indicator that we would trade Clements. Think of Ty law tutoring Clements how much better he could possibly get. Finally, why must almost everyone have someone out the door on the heels of some prospect. We have a championship caliber team. Cutting Clements only weakens our secondary and special teams, personnally I wouldnt do it and i dont see it happening.

When we havent spent a single damn dime yet? If we get to the point that a guy wed love to land cant be had because of our cap situation, then complain. Till then, we are sitting on our money while others are spending theirs!!!

At 6:38 eastern, I am posting this. Nate Clements will be on Fox Sports South West, on the show "Totally Football". I am pretty sure they re-run at different times, on different Fox Sports regional stations. For those of us far from home, this kind of thing is rare...

That's Fox Sports Network... show started a few mnutes ago.

but he finished strong. I think he caused two fumbles along with his interception.

I don't remember him suffering a shoulder injury in the game...anyone hear anything on this? Special teams would really be taking a hit if Dorenbos and Clements were out....

Did uou see the franchise number for the CB position? Woodson signed an offer of 10 million dollars. Ironically, Law drove up that price and was cut. In any event, this all but takes away the option to tag Clements in 06. I like him a ton as a cb, AND he returns punts, but imo, cb is just the wrong position to allocate 10 mil. worth of cap space. Winfield got more than 30 million dollars. Clements is clearly superior, and he is a very good return man. What will HE want, 40 million? 50 million? It may work out, but I am thinking that the Bills need to draft a corner on day 1 of the draft. I would have loved to get Surtain as well. I think that TD should have tried last season to extend Nate. You know, maybe he did, but looking at the whole picture, I am thinking that 05 is it for Nate as a Buffalo Bill.

As I see it, it's a given that TD will sign a vet LG in free agency, and perhaps a TE and backup RB. That leaves just a little bit of cap room left, and it seems to me the team's choice is signing Pat Williams at around $3-$4 mil per year, or, alternatively, locking up Nate to a long-term extension. In my mind, the choice is simple - you sign Nate, the most consistent CB in the League last year. He's younger, he's more difficult to replace, he loves Buffalo, and he's an elite athlete. He's also key to Jerry Gray's defense - a shut-down man-to-man cornerback.

In the long run, it's what should be done. Nate Clements is one of the best players on our team. But face facts, this is his last year as a Buffalo Bill. TD may be a "genius", but he doesn't re-sign ANYONE. Especially when you try and think of the type of money Nate's going to get next year. He let Peerless walk, he let Antoine Winfield walk, he let Jonas Jennings walk, he let Pat Williams walk and if you think he's going to shell out the "Top 10 CB" money; you're dillusional. So now we have to look at it like this, trade Nate for a top ten pick or keep Nate for one year and then get nothing. I feel as if a top ten pick who will be with us for many years to come is much more important than one year of Nate Clements play. TD said it himself, our defense is incredible; but our offense isn't good enough. Yes we have Willis McGahee. Yes we have Eric Moulds and Lee Evans. But that's where it ends on offense. J.P. needs another weapon. On top of that, Eric Moulds doesn't have much time left. I'm not talking contract wise, i'm talking playing wise. This will be E-Moulds' 10th season and it's starting to show (not to mention we're one slow-starting rookie QB away from him "rethinking" things again). TD is sitting on a whole bunch of money, which is very unlike him (funny how he never resigns anyone, but throws all sorts of money around for FA's). He hasn't made many moves because he's waiting for the draft. But why would you do that with only a #55? I honestly think he has something up his sleeve. Maybe not a trade involving Nate, but he's cooking something. If I were TD, i'd pull the trigger on a trade involving Nate. But only for one person...... USC WR/TE Mike Williams. Here's a guy that we were very interested in last year before "The Maurice Rule" was appealed and defunct. His size has a lot of teams looking at him to play an Antonio Gates type role as TE, along with WR. This is the perfect type of addition to our offense! And with Moulds, Evan, and Williams; along with McGahee in the backfield, J.P. is loaded with help. Now the rumor is: Nate to Washington for #9. But here's a couple scenarios I see as possibilities: Nate and Travis to Arizona for #8 and L.J. Shelton - Arizona needs two things: a RB and a CB. We've been prolifically working on a deal involving Shelton and Henry. But we just can't seem to agree on compensation. Arizona is going to draft one or the other, why not take care of both with the #8 and ship out L.J.? It makes perfect sense for both teams. The only thing is, we'd need to move up to at least #6 (in front of Minnesota) to get MW. But from #8, it shouldn't take more than a 3rd rounder to get to 6 (the same type of deal would apply if we sent Nate to Washington for a #9). Especially since they'll (Tennesee) most likely take a CB as it is. It's essentially the same deal as below, but with a #3 and L.J. Shelton (which is a fair deal to me). Nate and Travis to Tennessee for #6 - Almost the same things apply here. Tennessee needs all the help they can get. CB and RB being two huge needs and one of the two will be addressed by Tennessee with this pick. Why not take care of both? As for L.J. Shelton, this move forces Arizona to pick a RB. We'll just throw a #3 their way for L.J., i'm sure they'll bite. I know people are going to be saying "Nate Clements and Travis Henry for Mike Williams; a rookie?!" Well it's not as bad as it sounds when you look at it from this perspective; Travis Henry will NOT play for us. Even if he does, he won't see the light of day on the field and next year he's gone. Nate Clements will be amazing as always for Buffalo in 2005. But that's all we get as far as Nate goes. Nate in 05 because in 06.... he's gone. Mike Williams would give us that boost on offense we need and none of the trades I propose are unrealistic. Other teams would jump at a package like that. So what about CB with Nate gone you ask? Well, we draft a CB in the second, third, or forth round and take some of our $6.5 in cap money and sign a veteran like Ty Law or Andre Dyson. There was too much talk by EVERYONE to discount Law not being here for a visit. I do believe he at least stopped by to check out the place. But I think it was kept on the downlow for a reason. Using a pick in the top four rounds should get you a good CB to groom (ala Terrence McGee). Then if you add another veteran like Law, we're in a good position. So what about other positions of need? DT - I feel that TD addressed it last year with the drafting of Tim Anderson. Do you honestly feel that TD's going to spend a 3rd rounder on a DT from Ohio State and not use him? Combined with Ron Edwards 4 sack season and you have a couple guys who could step up. I'd be surprised if we got another DT going into the season. I think TD feels set and if ever a position to sacrifice a little defense for the offense, DT would be it. OL - Dear god, I really don't understand why everyone wants to draft an OL. Maybe if we didn't have a shot at Shelton, but it's pretty much a given. Let's say we get Shelton then our OL looks like this: L.J. Shelton (LT) Bennie Anderson (LG) Trey Teague © Chris Villarial (RG) Mike Williams (RT) - Mike Gandy Justin Bannan Ross Tucker Lawrence Smith Ben Sobieski Dylan McFarland Jason Peters HOW MANY LINEMAN DO WE NEED?! TE - With Campbell and Euhus coming back, we're back to square one and that's not all bad. But MW is being scouted as a TE as well. I think he would flourish playing TE and slot reciever. K - Oh man, the Nugent factor. I can't believe how many Bills fans this guy has. As long as we still have a 2nd after whatever trade up we make, if he's still there than definitely go for it. But I feel we're stuck with Lindell. There is no one out there on the market and we need help in other places more important than kicker. I cna't envision TD spending our top pick on a kicker. The bottom line is we're in a good position and these things are entirely possible. Do I think it will happen? Probably not. But i'd love to give it a try if I were TD. Mike Williams is one of the only good players in this draft and there are tons of teams that want him. I think if trading Nate would get us a shot at him, it should be done.

He fits the profile of the kind of free agent-to-be that we should make a push to sign. He's coming off his first Pro Bowl and entering the prime of his career. His current cap number is in the $3.5 M range. It's not as if the price for him is going to go down, especially in light of the Surtain deal. If we were to sign him to, say, a 6 year $49 M deal with a $15 M signing bonus (which is probably in the range of what he would command -- if not more -- on the open market) and heavily back-loaded the contract, then we would actually SAVE cap space this year.

I have a tendency to get on Nate for being a hotdog and giving up as many big plays as he makes but he was terrific yesterday and aside from his public brainfarts has been playing very good ball. So this is a public admission I may soon be on the Clements bandwagon. I always thought he could be a great player, but just wasn't, and his ego prevented it by trying to make the highlight play. Here's to hoping he's turned that corner and can be the dominant player he should be. He was awesome yesterday against a great receiver.

They went on to say Mc Dermott said they will compete. You have to earn the spot. Hmnn. I had heard nothing of this.They said he is running the show after the Whaley firing.

This is a tough call for me. I am going to say Clements. He seemed to give an overall better effort. What do you think? Is this post stupid? Are you wondering why you even clicked on it?

I doubt it, I think you would still have people complaining that the O didn't score enough, that DB didn't throw downfield enough.

How do you guys feel about Nate playing on special teams? I think it's good and bad. Very high risk for our BEST CB. I like the idea he can take it to the house when he touches the ball.

Dude, It's 4th and forever. KNOCK THE GD BALL DOWN! Stop going for the pick. It's 4th F'ng down! Knock it down!!! Gaaahhhhhh!!!!!

What a butthead!!!!!!! I can't believe someone would put that over their locker. If Vincent was 2-3 years younger Clements could move to free safety and maybe this "phrase" would make sense. As of now, he still has a ways to go. UnBILLievable!!!!!!

Jets have the ball in the redzone.....Pennington back to pass...he underthrows Moss and it hits Clements right in between the numbers....INT...Nope dropped Well atleast he "KNOCKED IT DOWN" this time....LoL

I think that on 4th and long teams know to test Nate Clements He got beat in the Jacksonville game because he would not knock the ball down He got beat again today on a 4th and long for a TD pass to B. Johnson. Although I must say he played a very solid game outside of that.