Jump to content

S. Gilmore or Nate Clements in their prime?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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?

It's hard for me to say because I think the next 2 to 4 years will actually be Gilmore's prime and I'm expecting the Pats to get the very best from him and I strongly believe in the fact that he will be a pro bowl player for them. If I had to choose a player that I appreciated more and a player who wasn't a quitter for the Bills then I would go with Clements. I hated to see Clements go and I would have hated to see Gilmore stay. But at the end of the day I would bet Gilmore will have the better career before it's said and done with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gilmore will be a much better player on his next contract than Clements was when he left. Some of that's coaching, but a lot of it is talent.

 

The psychology of this thread is humorous to say the least.

Humorous is thinking you can predict the future

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clements over Gilmore.

 

Robert James over EVERYONE else. One of the best players, regardless of position, that ever laced them up.

The majority of people on this board were not born when he played. He was a complete corner and a gem. Knee injuries during his era prior to today's medical standards were so devastating.

 

One of my favorite players of all time was Tom Sestak. His style of play in the older era was actually very modern and would have translated to this era's style of lineman play.

 

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/4/3/2922575/buffalo-bills-afl-tom-sestak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw them both as a long time season ticket holder. Clemens when he was playing hard was far better than Gilmore. Clemens, however, occasionally took a few games off and disappeared. Still, given the choice, I would take Nate in his prime over Gilmore......Nate was a better ball hawk......by far, Nate was a better tackler......cover capability was equivalent. Interesting thread...theoretical, but interesting. And, I actually had an opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of people on this board were not born when he played. He was a complete corner and a gem. Knee injuries during his era prior to today's medical standards were so devastating.

 

One of my favorite players of all time was Tom Sestak. His style of play in the older era was actually very modern and would have translated to this era's style of lineman play.

 

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/4/3/2922575/buffalo-bills-afl-tom-sestak

Yeah, Sestak was a great player. Up there with the Bob Lillys and Merlin Olsens of his day for sure.

 

As for James, he was a "shut down corner" before anyone knew what that was. Routinely shut out every WR he went up against. From Warfield to Beletnikoff to Alworth to Maynard and any other HOF receiver in between, he simply took them out of the game. Just a great athlete all around. He would have been a first ballot HOFer if not for that knee injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a big fan of each guy, but for me, it's Gilmore

 

Clements definitely had better ball skills, but Gilmore was a stickier coverage guy.

 

I also didn't like that Clements would dance after allowing a 15-yard completion for a 1st down.

 

Ready for me to really ruffle some feathers?

 

I'd take Jabari Greer over any of them.

greer at his absolute peak was as good as anyone in the league (saints super bowl run). his ability to mirror guys routes step for step with no wasted footwork was very impressive for a stretch there.

 

in the greer vs clements -- i think theres some absence makes the heart grow fonder with clements. gilmore did us "wrong" more recently.

Edited by NoSaint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...