Jump to content

Will the Bills ever sign Charles Clay?

YoloinOhio

By YoloinOhio
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Will the Bills ever sign Charles Clay?  

294 members have voted

  1. 1. Will the Bills ever sign Charles Clay?

    • Yes
      122
    • No
      100
    • They will actually sign Clay Charles and he's a baller
      45
    • Perhaps. I need to ask Pat Moran.
      27

  2. 2. When will they sign him?

    • 5 days from today
      42
    • 5 days from tomorrow
      61
    • When he is a FA again in 2019
      40
    • NEVER. Big Sammy will start at TE and we will like it.
      76
    • 5 days from "soon"
      75

Recommended Posts

YoloinOhio Hall of Famer

YoloinOhio

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

Contrary to the opinions of many on this board, Clay is not a very good blocker. I live in South Florida, and his blocking ability has always been the knock on his game. See below...

 

LOL that same website ranked Clay the 11th best TE in the league last year. Chandler was 50th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

D. L. Hot-Flamethrower All Pro

D. L. Hot-Flamethrower

Posted
Posted (edited)

LOL that same website ranked Clay the 11th best TE in the league last year. Chandler was 50th.

Clay is an ascending player, Chandler descending. Clay was a starter at 22 Chandler at 26. Projecting forward, it is not even close.

Also, receiving stats to rate TEs is not good. I don't love PFF, but the tape says clay is on verge of top 10, Chandler on verge of being outside the top 50.

Edited by moreproblemsthanOrton
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Justice Veteran

Justice

Posted
Posted

I hate waiting lol

 

I tell you what, if the Bills actually offer him a contract, it better be one the Fins cant match since they have had all this time.

 

CBF

While the wait is agonizing, I believe the longer the wait the better for us. He hasn't signed with the Bills yet, but on the bright side he hasn't signed with Miami either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillsFan-4-Ever All Pro

BillsFan-4-Ever

Posted
Posted

Clay is not being signed for his blocking abilities. He is a very good receiver and the Bills envision a lineup of Sammy, Woods, Harvin, McCoy, and Clay....lots of speed and quickness on the field.

Well done. little more practice and you're there

if true....let me pose this - Chandler was also not used for his blocking abilities... why get rid of Chandler?

 

I'm all for using a TE to pass catch and not block

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nucci Hall of Famer

nucci

Posted
Posted

if true....let me pose this - Chandler was also not used for his blocking abilities... why get rid of Chandler?

 

I'm all for using a TE to pass catch and not block

I don't know....Guessing the new coaching staff wanted a quicker and faster player than Chandler. Clay is a much better player than Chandler. Check the youtube video of his highlights. I like Chandler but Clay is better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillsFan-4-Ever All Pro

BillsFan-4-Ever

Posted
Posted (edited)

Clay is an ascending player, Chandler descending. Clay was a starter at 22 Chandler at 26. Projecting forward, it is not even close.

Also, receiving stats to rate TEs is not good. I don't love PFF, but the tape says clay is on verge of top 10, Chandler on verge of being outside the top 50.

Lets say that Clay is younger by 3 years. Age in and of itself does not guarantee ascending talent.

 

Players switching teams sometimes perform better - ex Jerry Hughes, sometimes much worse like Albert Haynesworth, lesser Stevie Johnson, Mike Williams,

were running a ground and pound.. A non blocking TE type won't fit

I was referring to this post -

nucci posted - Clay is not being signed for his blocking abilities

 

so I compared the 2 as non blocking TE's.

I don't know....Guessing the new coaching staff wanted a quicker and faster player than Chandler. Clay is a much better player than Chandler. Check the youtube video of his highlights. I like Chandler but Clay is better.

I can deal with younger .... but at ~ 4 times the salary estimated $9 Mil to $1,9Mil ... it makes you question the deal

Edited by BillsFan-4-Ever
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lurker All Pro

Lurker

Posted
Posted

Ground and pound is a marketing phrase.....Watkins, Woods, Harvin, McCoy, possibly Clay...this is a fast lineup

 

Yeah, it's a somewhat misleading phrase that conjures up a "three yards and a cloud of ground up tire pellets" image.

 

Moving the ball on the ground and through a short-area passing game (pseudo runs) is really what we're talking about here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
negativo RFA

negativo

Posted
Posted

Lets say that Clay is younger by 3 years. Age in and of itself does not guarantee ascending talent.

 

Players switching teams sometimes perform better - ex Jerry Hughes, sometimes much worse like Albert Haynesworth, lesser Stevie Johnson, Mike Williams,

I was referring to this post -

so I compared the 2 as non blocking TE's.

I can deal with younger .... but at ~ 4 times the salary estimated $9 Mil to $1,9Mil ... it makes you question the deal

 

If we cut Chandler to sign Clay for $9 million/year someone needs to be fired, or have their head examined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ddaryl Veteran

ddaryl

Posted
Posted (edited)

I was referring to this post -

so I compared the 2 as non blocking TE's.

 

 

 

Yes he is attempted atbeing signed because he can block. Doesn't mean he can't receive either. Next time quote in context where the quote derived from

Edited by ddaryl
Link to comment
Share on other sites
klos63 Veteran

klos63

Posted
Posted

Lets say that Clay is younger by 3 years. Age in and of itself does not guarantee ascending talent.

 

Players switching teams sometimes perform better - ex Jerry Hughes, sometimes much worse like Albert Haynesworth, lesser Stevie Johnson, Mike Williams,

I was referring to this post -

so I compared the 2 as non blocking TE's.

I can deal with younger .... but at ~ 4 times the salary estimated $9 Mil to $1,9Mil ... it makes you question the deal

it makes you question the deal, not me. I am one of those that doesn't get all worked up about the salary cap. I just want great players on the team. I will let the Pegula's worry about paying the bills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillsFan-4-Ever All Pro

BillsFan-4-Ever

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Yes he is attempted atbeing signed because he can block. Doesn't mean he can't receive either. Next time quote in context where the quote derived from

I'm sorry, but - I don't believe I said that either.

 

 

Clay is not being signed for his blocking abilities. He is a very good receiver and the Bills envision a lineup of Sammy, Woods, Harvin, McCoy, and Clay....lots of speed and quickness on the field.

 

I thought my response was is in context.

Are you arguing Chandler was a horrible pass catcher?

Edited by BillsFan-4-Ever
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ddaryl Veteran

ddaryl

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

If we cut Chandler to sign Clay for $9 million/year someone needs to be fired, or have their head examined.

 

 

if the bills want Clay that bad then they are going to go all in

 

9 mil this year is front loaded. it won't be 9 mil per season

Edited by ddaryl
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kirby Jackson Hall of Famer

Kirby Jackson

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

If we cut Chandler to sign Clay for $9 million/year someone needs to be fired, or have their head examined.

Disagree completely. They released a below average player that does not fit the scheme at all for the player that may fit the scheme as well as anyone in the NFL. There is plenty of cap room to do it and with a large hit this year it will be a cap friendly contract down the road (at least I would imagine). Chandler MAY have been a decent #2 option but he is not a #1 option on a good team. After breaking down the tapes they didn't feel that way and he is gone.

 

Personally, I applaud the Bills for so desperately trying to upgrade a position that has never been any good. I believe that the last Bills TE to go to the Pro Bowl was Ernie Warlick (that isn't sarcasm either). If you figure that 4-6 guys a year get selected it is almost impossible to go 50 years without having a top 5 guy; the Bills have managed to do it.

 

Part of the reason that people here think that Chandler is good is because they compare him to Tim Euhus, Derek Fine, Shawn Nelson, etc... Just because he was better than those stiffs doesn't mean that he is good by today's standards. He was given a lot of opportunities so his stats ended up far superior to his talent. Last year when he was given the opportunity to test the market he returned to Buffalo without even getting a visit elsewhere. So Clay is a guy that teams are fighting over and clearing cap space for and Chandler is a guy that couldn't get dinner at the Kansas City equivalent of Tempo. They are not equal or even close to the same player.

Edited by Kirby Jackson
Link to comment
Share on other sites
negativo RFA

negativo

Posted
Posted

They are not equal or even close to the same player.

 

Clay is a better H-back than Chandler. TE? I disagree. If H-Back is the preferred position of scheme for Roman than he's getting one of the better ones. If TE is what he wants, he would be getting one too short, too weak of a blocker and little production as an intermediate/deep threat receiver. Remember, he's significantly slower than Vernon Davis, and will not stretch the field as a receiver like that for us.

 

I wouldn't overpay for Clay. If it were me, I'd rather grab a TE with our 1st pick who can play a complete game. Save our money to upgrade the OL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower All Pro

D. L. Hot-Flamethrower

Posted
Posted

Disagree completely. They released a below average player that does not fit the scheme at all for the player that may fit the scheme as well as anyone in the NFL. There is plenty of cap room to do it and with a large hit this year it will be a cap friendly contract down the road (at least I would imagine). Chandler MAY have been a decent #2 option but he is not a #1 option on a good team. After breaking down the tapes they didn't feel that way and he is gone.

Personally, I applaud the Bills for so desperately trying to upgrade a position that has never been any good. I believe that the last Bills TE to go to the Pro Bowl was Ernie Warlick (that isn't sarcasm either). If you figure that 4-6 guys a year get selected it is almost impossible to go 50 years without having a top 5 guy; the Bills have managed to do it.

 

Part of the reason that people here think that Chandler is good is because they compare him to Tim Euhus, Derek Fine, Shawn Nelson, etc... Just because he was better than those stiffs doesn't mean that he is good by today's standards. He was given a lot of opportunities so his stats ended up far superior to his talent. Last year when he was given the opportunity to test the market he returned to Buffalo without even getting a visit elsewhere. So Clay is a guy that teams are fighting over and clearing cap space for and Chandler is a guy that couldn't get dinner at the Kansas City equivalent of Tempo. They are not equal or even close to the same player.

I'm with you on all that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stl Bills Veteran

Stl Bills

Posted
Posted

 

Clay is a better H-back than Chandler. TE? I disagree. If H-Back is the preferred position of scheme for Roman than he's getting one of the better ones. If TE is what he wants, he would be getting one too short, too weak of a blocker and little production as an intermediate/deep threat receiver. Remember, he's significantly slower than Vernon Davis, and will not stretch the field as a receiver like that for us.

 

I wouldn't overpay for Clay. If it were me, I'd rather grab a TE with our 1st pick who can play a complete game. Save our money to upgrade the OL.

Just for the record, every TE to ever play football is slower than Vernon Davis. Davis ran a 4.38 at the combine which is one of the most ridiculous numbers in combine history. Although he is not as fast as Davis, Clay is an extremely athletic TE who can stretch the field (Clay ran a 4.69 in the 40, Chandler a 4.85). I know 40 times are the end all be all but still it illustrates my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
klos63 Veteran

klos63

Posted
Posted

 

Clay is a better H-back than Chandler. TE? I disagree. If H-Back is the preferred position of scheme for Roman than he's getting one of the better ones. If TE is what he wants, he would be getting one too short, too weak of a blocker and little production as an intermediate/deep threat receiver. Remember, he's significantly slower than Vernon Davis, and will not stretch the field as a receiver like that for us.

 

I wouldn't overpay for Clay. If it were me, I'd rather grab a TE with our 1st pick who can play a complete game. Save our money to upgrade the OL.

But you have no idea what the Bills are looking for in personnel and they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kirby Jackson Hall of Famer

Kirby Jackson

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Clay is a better H-back than Chandler. TE? I disagree. If H-Back is the preferred position of scheme for Roman than he's getting one of the better ones. If TE is what he wants, he would be getting one too short, too weak of a blocker and little production as an intermediate/deep threat receiver. Remember, he's significantly slower than Vernon Davis, and will not stretch the field as a receiver like that for us.

 

I wouldn't overpay for Clay. If it were me, I'd rather grab a TE with our 1st pick who can play a complete game. Save our money to upgrade the OL.

We can do both. The Bills have the room to add Clay and a starting caliber guard. They have that Urbik/Williams tandem in their back pocket that can completely offset the cap hit of Evan Mathis (for example). If the money were an issue I may agree with you that there is a point that you walk away from Clay. The money is not an issue.

 

Clay is significantly faster than Chandler. Vernon Davis is an unfair comparison as I believe that he is the fastest TE ever clocked at the combine. Chandler is a mediocore possession receiver. When the Bills got the ball to Hogan and Chandler at least 7 times last year they were 1-5. The 1 win was Minnesota which may be the worst game that they played. Part of the reason that Chandler got the ball is because that is where the opposing defenses wanted you to throw it. He did not scare them. They would allow him to catch the ball underneath and make tackles. As an offense you need to get the ball into the hands of guys that can cause problems.

Edited by Kirby Jackson
Link to comment
Share on other sites
billsfan1959 Veteran

billsfan1959

Posted
Posted

 

Clay is a better H-back than Chandler. TE? I disagree. If H-Back is the preferred position of scheme for Roman than he's getting one of the better ones. If TE is what he wants, he would be getting one too short, too weak of a blocker and little production as an intermediate/deep threat receiver. Remember, he's significantly slower than Vernon Davis, and will not stretch the field as a receiver like that for us.

 

I wouldn't overpay for Clay. If it were me, I'd rather grab a TE with our 1st pick who can play a complete game. Save our money to upgrade the OL.

FWIW, PFF had Clay graded 11th among tight ends in run blocking. Chandler was rated 40th

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SWATeam All Pro

SWATeam

Posted
Posted

There's a reason Chandler always "killed" the Pats... They blatantly allowed him to knowing he isn't a playmaker and would have minimal YAC... I always liked him but give me Clay 8 days a week

I wonder why they signed him then...

 

That said Clay>>>Chandler regardless of what the stats say

Link to comment
Share on other sites
negativo RFA

negativo

Posted
Posted

Just for the record, every TE to ever play football is slower than Vernon Davis. Davis ran a 4.38 at the combine which is one of the most ridiculous numbers in combine history. Although he is not as fast as Davis, Clay is an extremely athletic TE who can stretch the field (Clay ran a 4.69 in the 40, Chandler a 4.85). I know 40 times are the end all be all but still it illustrates my point.

 

Chandler actually ran a 4.78, but speed aside he has been a better deep threat than Clay. He has a higher YPC without significant YAC. Reason being he has height and boxes out well on the intermediate/long routs. Clay doesn't have the speed to go deep or the height to be the tallest target on longer throws.

 

Like I said, Clay is a system guy. A short/mid range limit on receptions, tough YAC runner and an excellent screen pass option. He is a different position in that sense from Chandler. Also, Chandler is rated an adequate blocker while Clay is generally regarded as weak.

 

H-back might be better fit for how Roman is scheming, and if the money was similar or slightly higher than the departing Chandler I'd be all in, but it's so grossly disparate that I'm more skeptical of the investment than most of you seem to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigBuff423 Veteran

BigBuff423

Posted
Posted

 

Clay is a better H-back than Chandler. TE? I disagree. If H-Back is the preferred position of scheme for Roman than he's getting one of the better ones. If TE is what he wants, he would be getting one too short, too weak of a blocker and little production as an intermediate/deep threat receiver. Remember, he's significantly slower than Vernon Davis, and will not stretch the field as a receiver like that for us.

 

I wouldn't overpay for Clay. If it were me, I'd rather grab a TE with our 1st pick who can play a complete game. Save our money to upgrade the OL.

For me the issue is that TEs very RARELY make an impact, regardless of where they're Drafted, in their first two years....go back and look at some of the best TEs including Graham, J. Thomas, Witten, and to speak of Davis - he was on the brink of being considered a "bust" until Harbaugh, and um, a guy known as Greg Roman, came calling and turned him into a truly good (not great) TE...so, if TE really is that critical to Roman's Offense, you need production this year and TEs don't typically produce in their first year or two. Even Tony Gonzalez who was also the only other 1st round TE to have done much in recent years, didn't come out of the gate blazing, but did have good returns in his first couple years. The other names mentioned along with Antonio Gates and others, took a couple years to develop and were 3rd / 4th round selections. Only Gronk, who has Brady and Belichick, of recent has really come out on fire and done some amazing things at the TE position. So, I would rather over pay right now and get a guy who can produce and contribute from Day 1 and is still young, than wonder about what the Offense will look like in three or four years. Before FA started, and before the trades for McCoy and Cassel, the BILLS were projected to have about $60 million in Cap space next year, so no need to worry about the sky falling with all the new contracts......IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lurker All Pro

Lurker

Posted
Posted

The Suh contract has to be a big impediment for the Fins in also locking up Clay (paying $14 million plus for two TEs). Today's MMQB gives a perspective on what kind of problems they're going to have beyond this year:

 

 

 

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/03/16/sam-bradford-chip-kelly-jimmy-johnson-eagles-nfl/6/

 

The MMQB: You wrote Thursday that the Ndamukong Suh contract in Miami is particularly onerous. What concerns you in the future about that deal for the Dolphins, and how will they handle it?

 

Fitzgerald (OvertheCap): In order to fit Suh within their cap easily this season, the Dolphins opted for a structure that will see Suh count for only $6 million against the cap, despite the annual contract value of $19.1 million. That leaves Suh with an average cap charge for the 2016-2018 seasons of $21.9 million. Quite honestly I am not sure how you compete in the NFL for a championship with those figures, especially for a defensive tackle.

 

When you look throughout NFL history, the highest percentage of cap spent on one individual player by a Super Bowl winner is just 13.1 percent, which occurred in 1994, the first year of the salary cap. The average is under 10 percent.

 

The only defensive tackle to have the highest percentage of cap allocation on a team was Warren Sapp, who was just under 10 percent. If we assume the cap continues to rise at a rate of $10 million a season, the only seasons where Suh is at an acceptable cap number are 2015, 2017, and 2020. That is really limiting what you can do during the effective term of his contract.

 

The 2016 season in particular is worrisome. His $28.6 million cap charge is crippling, and the team will need to decide to restructure for cap relief, making his future cap charges even more difficult to handle, or bite the bullet and realize what a mistake they made. This is the same contract structure the Dolphins recently used with receiver Mike Wallace, who had a cap hit of $3.25 million in his first contract year and a $17.25 million hit in his second year.

 

At the end of the day, I have a feeling this contract may be looked at similar to Mike Ditka’s decision to trade an entire draft for Ricky Williams. It’s a situation where a team or a person gets it in their mind that they need a player to make an impact on an organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...