rstencel Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I don't know where you got that information, but living here in the DC area, Fletcher can STILL play, is a warrior who is never injured, and is constantly getting sideline-to-sideline, clogging up running lanes and making tackles. Indeed, he is perhaps one of maybe 3-5 consistent, solid performers on the Redskins roster. Losing Fletcher isnt a big deal. Losing Pat Williams was the big loss. If Williams was still around, the London would have fit in, but he needs protection. Since he tends to runs around the blockers, and give allot of ground before making tackles if not protected. He has that protection with arguably the best Tackle in the game in front of him now. With the small linemen the Bills employ, he would need to take on blockers, which isnt something that he is good at. It seemed like half of his tackles where 8 yards or more off of line of scrimmage, when he was here. While it was nice to have someone who was making the saving tackle in the secondary, would have prefered if it was the saftey. I tend to prefer the type of linebackers where playing near the line, making the tackles that would stop drives, or force 3rd and longs, rather than 2nds and 2's. Not that the Bills have anyone better that's not injured or recovering from them, but I don't miss him with this team at all. His pass defense was poor when needed to cover allot of ground, which is a requirement in the Cover 2 scheme. Once they decided to go cover-2, upgrading the pass coverage of the LB's seemed to be the priority. Most of the LB's on the roster now are pretty solid in coverage. Wish could say the same thing of thier Tackling abilities. Basically, I agree Fletcher was a sure tackler, he isn't a great fit with a smaller line and below average pass defense skills for the type of defense they chose to play, and I think the loss of Pat Williams was the big hit that set the team back on defense. The pickup of Stroud helped a ton, but imaging if they had Stroud lined up next to Williams. Now that would be a tough combo to block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Clements was, and still is, a huge gambler on Defense. That's probably the main reason I was okay with letting him go. For every "Wow, that was an amazing one handed INT by Nate" there was a dozen of "I can't believe Clements got beat on that out route". I do not think TO has been an attitude problem for us at all this year. Nor is this surprising at all as the TO MO in the past is that in his first year at all because he is busy being a good teammate and winning the hearts and minds of fans. He actually has played a positive role on the field as he still attracts dts which make it much easier for Evans to work as he gets one of ones. The problem we have had has not been TOs attitude but the FO and braintrust being so screwed up they had to can the OC in the week before the first game. If Singletary was gonna make a difference it would not be by jumping to the same conclusion as Sully and various legends in their own mind reporters at ESPN that Owens needed to be throttled, it would have been in getting a real OC to manage the O for him. Almost anything TO would say about this offense I'd agree with if he came out and said it publicly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrudginglyPessimistic Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I was more upset when they let Winfield go to the Vikes. Pound for pound that little dude was the best open-field tackler I ever saw. Who are you pissed at? It shouldn't be the Bills as though TD certainly made a bunch of errors he deserved to be canned for, not signing Winfield was not one of them. He clearly had every intention of extending Winfield a season before he hit FA as the Bills were sitting on a bunch of cap room about the size of a nice extension for Winfield but a pretty sweet deal for the Bills compared to what the market later deservedly gave to him. Milloy suddenly hitting the market was a surprise to everyone (Bellicheat most of all apparently) and given that both our plan A and plan B retire (Chad Cota and Ainsley Battle both signed and then retired) getting Milloy was expensive but a much better option than going with Coy Wire at SS with no back-up. Once Winfield hit the FA market, the rules worked like they were supposed to and NYJ seemed to be on the verge of outbidding us. While one might be semi-reasonably pissed IF the Bills had let Winfield go to a team we would face twice a year, there was simply no way mathematically possible for us to match the Vikes offer. I think it was due to an arbiters ruling and a couple of other factors the Vikes actually had to spend a bunch of money and allocate it to the cap or they would be in violation of the CBA. The Vikes were clever in the deal they offered Winfield in that by a freak of timing of the arbiters ruling no team was in a position to specifically match their offer to Winfield as it did not take the traditional route of allocating the contract over several years salary caps but allocated to the cap upfront in the first year. In theory all of this should be academic as either with the single year or multi-year cap hit the upfront allocation is roughly the same. However, the Vikes arranged the contract so no one could match it without taking a roughly $12 million cap hit for one salary. I think its hard to blame the Bills because the market simply beat them regardless their choice and that they made a good faith effort to extend Winfield a year early but failed to do this deal for pretty good reasons. It just doesn't strike me as upsetting the way we lost Winfield. TD seemed to be setting him up to and Winfield and his agent were pretty clearly negotiating an extension for him the year before he hit FA. Both sides seemed to be doing it the way it is done in that TD was likely to get him for a lot less than what the FA market would give him, but Winfield would almost certainly take the bird in the hand of huge dollars rather than ridiculously huge dollars in exchange for signing before he faced another grueling NFL season. A season where if he got hurt badly he might lose it all. The two sides were grinding it out until the last minute as good negotiators do, when suddenly and surprisingly Lawyer Milloy hit the free market cause Billicheat tried to roll him. TD used the cap room he had set aside for Winfield to get Milloy. Given that the alternative after Cota and Battle both retired that we would have had to go with Coy Wire as the starting full safety going after Milloy was the right move to make. The full season saw not only Winfield survive but he played quite well and was gonna get a big offer from the market. I thought it was bad but I was not pissed at the Bills when NYJ outbid us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 LMAO. This is gonna be a really big ego hit to a lot of people here that think Nate is that lockdown corner we dearly miss so much. Wish we had a coach like Singletary. Half of our guys wouldn't even be in the NFL anymore. TO would be on the bench, where he should be, if Singletary was the coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Ryan Clady - hindsight I wanted Branden Albert in that draft and thought from day 1 that McKelvin was a dumb pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 They should offer the 49ers a 3rd round draft pick for Clements. MAYBE this would prevent Jauron from drafting another 1st round defensive back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishouldbegm Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 its more of a strategic move then a demotion, you guys are funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 its more of a strategic move then a demotion, you guys are funny If Clements was as good as some people think, there would be no need for a "strategic move." Name one other big money cornerback who would be replaced in the lineup for strategic purposes? Name one other big money player at any position who would be replaced in the lineup for strategic purposes? Would the Philadelphia Eagles replace DeSean Jackson in the lineup because they wanted to use a bigger receiver to exploit a smaller defensive backfield? You are swallowing Singletary's spin, hook, line, and sinker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishouldbegm Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 If Clements was as good as some people think, there would be no need for a "strategic move." Name one other big money cornerback who would be replaced in the lineup for strategic purposes? Name one other big money player at any position who would be replaced in the lineup for strategic purposes? Would the Philadelphia Eagles replace DeSean Jackson in the lineup because they wanted to use a bigger receiver to exploit a smaller defensive backfield? You are swallowing Singletary's spin, hook, line, and sinker. are u serious, nate is going to be on the slot wr, indy runs alot of 3 wr sets... you guys are acting like he will never see the field, plus the game hasnt even happened yet, so really it doesnt mean anything could be a motivation tactic, he benched shaun hill, vernon davis, its how he gets them to play better i guess. still would take nate over the majority of corners today, shouldve kept him.... and winfield was no where near as good as nate when he was here... winfield got better at minn with a much better team than 49ers or bills he might be time to see nate move to safety where he would be great imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I agree with this. There were days when Nate Clements looked like an elite cornerback and other days (not that rare) that he looked like a clunky, oversized cornerback who had a hard time in coverage. Remember the epic game in which Chris Chambers lit up Clements for like 15 catches and over 200 yards? I always thought that with Clements size, athleticism, and ball skills, that he'd be one of the best safeties in the league. I understand the 49ers decision here because I've always felt that Clements' difficulties in short area agility hurt him as a cover man. If Clements was as good as some people think, there would be no need for a "strategic move." Name one other big money cornerback who would be replaced in the lineup for strategic purposes? Name one other big money player at any position who would be replaced in the lineup for strategic purposes? Would the Philadelphia Eagles replace DeSean Jackson in the lineup because they wanted to use a bigger receiver to exploit a smaller defensive backfield? You are swallowing Singletary's spin, hook, line, and sinker. are u serious, nate is going to be on the slot wr, indy runs alot of 3 wr sets... you guys are acting like he will never see the field, plus the game hasnt even happened yet, so really it doesnt mean anything could be a motivation tactic, he benched shaun hill, vernon davis, its how he gets them to play better i guess. still would take nate over the majority of corners today, shouldve kept him.... and winfield was no where near as good as nate when he was here... winfield got better at minn with a much better team than 49ers or bills he might be time to see nate move to safety where he would be great imo Well, we apparently agree that Nate would possibly be a better safety than a cornerback. But I stand by my comments that no big money, supposed pro bowl quality player would be removed from the starting lineup only for strategic reasons. I agree that Singletary is a master motivator and has a good chance of lighting a fire underneath Nate. I have the advantage of living in the bay area so I can tell you that there are concerns about his play as a cornerback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I do not think TO has been an attitude problem for us at all this year. Nor is this surprising at all as the TO MO in the past is that in his first year at all because he is busy being a good teammate and winning the hearts and minds of fans. He actually has played a positive role on the field as he still attracts dts which make it much easier for Evans to work as he gets one of ones. The problem we have had has not been TOs attitude but the FO and braintrust being so screwed up they had to can the OC in the week before the first game. If Singletary was gonna make a difference it would not be by jumping to the same conclusion as Sully and various legends in their own mind reporters at ESPN that Owens needed to be throttled, it would have been in getting a real OC to manage the O for him. TO is not making the stupid comments to the media like he has in the past, but he is not giving 100% on the field. He telegraphs with his body langauage when he is going to be getting the ball, and just does not care about trying to improve the team more then his stats. Go watch him in person on the field. He almost never gets back to the huddle and just goes to the line and gets ready for the next play, he doesn't give 100% when he knows the ball isn't coming his way, and he is willing to take days off of practice instead of spending more time wanting to work with his QB to get better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills44 Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Mr. Knock The Ball Down broke his shoulder blade in today's game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts