Clowney considering options including a "prove it" short term deal

[John from Riverside 7,399]

13 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Watkins just won a super bowl and was the leading receiver in the playoffs and key contributor to why the Chiefs won the Super Bowl..... agreed, who needs talent like that? ?

Just to point out

 

There are no name players that have done this same thing......Sammy getting paid a lot of coin.

 

I mean....good for him....but I would not want to pay it and ask him to be "the guy" when he wasnt

[Mat68 1,060]

12 hours ago, JR in Pittsburgh said:

No doubt he did well in the super bowl, but that’s the point. He’s talented— like no. 1 receiver talented.  Yet he can’t even match the Consistent level of production of cole Beasley. 

And the market reflects that— he had to take a paycut and is on a 1-year deal (and he would have probably been cut outright but the chiefs wanted to avoid a $7M cap hit).

 

i don’t want to hijack the thread talking about watkins, but my point is you can be the most talented guy in the world, but teams should and usually do pay for players based on some degree of consistent production. 

They paid Watkins to have that little extra late in the year, or in the playoffs.  They got out of him what they wanted. 

 

I would bring in Clowney to add that little extra something to the defense.  They have the money.  Clowney is an upgrade.  He would vault the defense into championship quality.  Against the Cheifs, against the Ravens having someone who routinley gets penetration off the edge is huge.

[cle23 172]

1 hour ago, njbuff said:

I wonder if the Browns swoop in knowing they don't have Garrett to start the season and they still have 43 million in cap space?

 

Why wouldn't they have Garrett?

[njbuff 5,721]

1 hour ago, cle23 said:

 

Why wouldn't they have Garrett?

 

Suspension 

[Buffalo Barbarian 3,953]

Id wait as long as possible then give him a two year deal.

 

 

[Gambit 545]

25 minutes ago, njbuff said:

 

Suspension 

He isn't suspended anymore tho

[njbuff 5,721]

1 hour ago, Gambit said:

He isn't suspended anymore tho

 

I thought he was for a whole year.

[CSBill 2,069]

All things considered, if this is truly the year the Bills are going for the Super Bowl, then, yes, sign him to a one year prove it deal. But, I'm guessing he really wants more than that.

[Doc Brown 8,040]

1 hour ago, njbuff said:

 

I thought he was for a whole year.

No.  He's eligible week 1.  Fowler from ESPN reported that Cleveland is interested in him though as they have the most cap space in the league at this point.  If they sign Clowney they'll cut Vernon.  Releasing Vernon saves them a little more than 15 million dollars without any dead cap money.  I think he either goes to the Browns, Seahawks, or Jets in that order.

[Gambit 545]

1 hour ago, njbuff said:

 

I thought he was for a whole year.

Sadly nope. He was reinstated back in February. I honestly think the pos should be banned at least a year. It's going to be interesting the next time he plays against Pittsburgh.

[njbuff 5,721]

26 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

No.  He's eligible week 1.  Fowler from ESPN reported that Cleveland is interested in him though as they have the most cap space in the league at this point.  If they sign Clowney they'll cut Vernon.  Releasing Vernon saves them a little more than 15 million dollars without any dead cap money.  I think he either goes to the Browns, Seahawks, or Jets in that order.

 

Where the hell have I been?

 

[Hardhatharry 323]

Clowney isn't that good anyway.

[NewEra 5,472]

1 hour ago, Hardhatharry said:

Clowney isn't that good anyway.

What exactly does “That good” mean? 
 

he’s good enough to help us win a super bowl.  Fosho

[Flutie Flakes 48]

12 hours ago, Hardhatharry said:

Clowney isn't that good anyway.

 

Can you quantify that please...12 sacks but 122 QB pressures.  Not good?  He is an athletic freak.  I don't see us spending the $$ he is asking, but with what we are building, maybe he softens his ask?

[njbuff 5,721]

I'd be a little surprised if a team made a move on Clowney now right before the draft unless he re-signs in Seattle.

 

If a team that needs a pass rusher badly doesn't get the draftee they want, they will swoop in and make their bid for Clowney.

 

 

[NewEra 5,472]

1 hour ago, njbuff said:

I'd be a little surprised if a team made a move on Clowney now right before the draft unless he re-signs in Seattle.

 

If a team that needs a pass rusher badly doesn't get the draftee they want, they will swoop in and make their bid for Clowney.

 

 

I don’t understand why.  This draft is pretty weak in the edge rush department.  I get why people didn’t want to pay him 20 mills a year, but 17 isn’t THAT bad considering it can be a one year deal that won’t affect the future.  

[Augie 17,079]

5 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I don’t understand why.  This draft is pretty weak in the edge rush department.  I get why people didn’t want to pay him 20 mills a year, but 17 isn’t THAT bad considering it can be a one year deal that won’t affect the future.  

 

I’ll let the market set itself there. In my mind he’s just a rich man’s Shaq. Time will tell. Certainly not what Clowney expected. He got so hyped in college he lost sight of reality. I’m in for a fair deal. 

[Mat68 1,060]

Good is all about context.  Hughes has a few good years left.  I would give Clowney a 2 or 3 year deal around 18 mil per year in a sec.  He frees up Oliver and Hughes who were already productive.  He may not be Watt or Miller but I know he could be legion of boom Micheal Bennet.  I would like to see Buffalo make a move that puts the defense into unquestioned tops in the league.

[Buffalo_Stampede 2,918]

We don't need him but if you put an edge athlete like him on our defense it's going to make a huge difference for everyone. 

 

 

[FeelingOnYouboty 1,047]

Don’t like this guys attitude and even on a 1 year deal I’m hesitant