I Have No Problem with Clements attitude

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I think it is quite silly of fans to bemoan Clements geeting a nameplate which says playmaker on some McMansion he owns and putting it up before the debacle with Smith.

 

1, One of the key problems cited on this board and that the Bills have had is a bend but don't break approach to playing D. This approach (which they have used well since the days of Cottrell) has been generally well-played by the Bills, but in terms of an approach though it is good (and sometimes very good as seen in their #2 statiscal ranking last year) this approach does not seem to put the team over the top. It is the lack of turnovers and the lack of players deemed playmakers which is a reflection of this shortcoming on greatness.

 

2. Clements is seen and has taken on the role of contributing to the team not simply through good play at CB (which he has provided but like all CBs he will get torched from time to time) but he is also taking on the extra responsibility for a starter of returning punts specifically because the braintrust sees him as a playmeker and someone who can break one for a TD or a long gain. We saw this weekend, how an extra 7 points in a game would be huge.

 

3. Clements has earned the right (compared to the other Bills) of presenting himself as a playmaker. For example, when we lost to Miami in the critical 3rd game last year after an impressive 2-0 start, it was a complete power-outage by the O that was the beginning of this precipitous slide. It was Clements who made an INT returned for a TD that even remotely gave us a chance in this game. He also ripped Manning off for a TD return earlier in his career.

 

The Bills have been totally insufficient at getting turnovers and making plays even amidst a good overall D performance. At least in addition to or actually rather than giving Clements grief for failing to cover Smith's Hail Mary play (a turning point in Sunday's game but smaller than other mistakes which made a difference in my mind) it seems like a more rational approach for a Bills fan to focus on some of the real problems which keep us from victory. I'm a big believer in the "act like you have been there before" school of players holding down the off field demonstrations, pretend cellphone calls, Sharpie incidents and other silliness. However, if a player perceives he gets hyped by putting up a playmake nameplate and most of all he produces on the field which Clements has from time to time, I have no problem with this.

 

Its a far bigger real deal that Reese's INT was the forst by a Bills safety in 40+ games that this tempest in a teapot about Clements.

[Rico]

Great post, I agree 100%

[Justice]

well said.

[San-O]

I think it is quite silly of fans to bemoan Clements geeting a nameplate which says playmaker on some McMansion he owns and putting it up before the debacle with Smith.

 

1, One of the key problems cited on this board and that the Bills have had is a bend but don't break approach to playing D.  This approach (which they have used well since the days of Cottrell) has been generally well-played by the Bills, but in terms of an approach though it is good (and sometimes very good as seen in their #2 statiscal ranking last year) this approach does not seem to put the team over the top.  It is the lack of turnovers and the lack of players deemed playmakers which is a reflection of this shortcoming on greatness.

 

2. Clements is seen and has taken on the role of contributing to the team not simply through good play at CB (which he has provided but like all CBs he will get torched from time to time) but he is also taking on the extra responsibility for a starter of returning punts specifically because the braintrust sees him as a playmeker and someone who can break one for a TD or a long gain.  We saw this weekend, how an extra 7 points in a game would be huge.

 

3. Clements has earned the right (compared to the other Bills) of presenting himself as a playmaker.  For example, when we lost to Miami in the critical 3rd game last year after an impressive 2-0 start, it was a complete power-outage by the O that was the beginning of this precipitous slide.  It was Clements who made an INT returned for a TD that even remotely gave us a chance in this game.  He also ripped Manning off for a TD return earlier in his career.

 

The Bills have been totally insufficient at getting turnovers and making plays even amidst a good overall D performance.  At least in addition to or actually rather than giving Clements grief for failing to cover Smith's Hail Mary play (a turning point in Sunday's game but smaller than other mistakes which made a difference in my mind) it seems like a more rational approach for a Bills fan to focus on some of the real problems which keep us from victory.  I'm a big believer in the "act like you have been there before" school of players holding down the off field demonstrations, pretend cellphone calls, Sharpie incidents and other silliness.  However, if a player perceives he gets hyped by putting up a playmake nameplate and most of all he produces on the field which Clements has from time to time, I have no problem with this.

 

Its a far bigger real deal that Reese's INT was the forst by a Bills safety in 40+ games that this tempest in a teapot about Clements.

33508[/snapback]

 

 

I hope he can contribute some time when it counts. If I were on the team,

I would probably wait until the team has a winning season before putting stupid

crap on my license plate.

 

[sfladave]

I have to agree 100%

 

I would rather have a bunch of guys with major "I am the man" attitudes than a bunch of politically correct fluff balls!

 

All this banter about celebrations and license plates is just plain stupid! All I care about is the team having a winning attitude.

[Guest Guest]

Not surprised author 'approves' - he seems to think players ought to look at player's needs first, team's needs second and fans last. It is ok for players to be greedy seems to be his attitude.

 

Clements went for the interception because he was hotdogging it; if he had batted the ball down Bills would be in a better position but that is not what is best for him so he went for the interception / contract bonuses and cost Bills the game. I have no problem with him going for an interception when Bills need it or are far ahead but not in that situtation; Clements thought with his wallet and Bills paid the bills.

[sidbuff]

I agree with the post from the get go

 

 

Every1 else is ready to talk smack but CLEMENTS but he he catches 3 ints againts Miami or any other team for that matter and takes it to the house EVERY1 jives how he is the man.

 

Remember he is a football player but he is also still human and we do tend to make mistakes........ITHINK

[Stussy109]

Clements IS a playmaker, no question about it. He played that ball great thrown to Jimmy Smith. He wrestled it away the first time, and damn near had it the 2nd. i give him props

[San-O]

Clements IS a playmaker, no question about it.  He played that ball great thrown to Jimmy Smith.  He wrestled it away the first time, and damn near had it the 2nd.  i give him props

33612[/snapback]

 

That was a bad play, no two ways about it. Quit making excuses for the guy.

 

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Not surprised author 'approves' - he seems to think players ought to look at player's needs first, team's needs second and fans last.  It is ok for players to be greedy seems to be his attitude.

 

Clements went for the interception because he was hotdogging it; if he had batted the ball down Bills would be in a better position but that is not what is best for him so he went for the interception / contract bonuses and cost Bills the game.  I have no problem with him going for an interception when Bills need it or are far ahead but not in that situtation; Clements thought with his wallet and Bills paid the bills.

33585[/snapback]

 

 

It's not that I think players ought to look at their own needs first, the team second and fans' last, it is that I think that in reality they do look at their needs first, the team's second and fans last. The problem I have is with folks who suggest the reverse perspective as though that were reality, it just ain't. If you want to post seriously about football then at least make some cursory acknowledgment of reality. The posts that advocate a during season cut of players who man critical positions and advocate these cuts with no realistic accomplishable alternative are simply silly.

 

I am a big booster of a traditional perspective toward the game and wished that players really did put the team and the fans ahead of their own individual needs. However, this is not reality not just with the NFL but in society. In the "ownership society" that is modern America, people have a focus on me and mine over the common good which drives society.

 

In the old days going back to the great Depression there was an interest in the team (America) taking care of all of us which underlay the founding of many New Deal ideas such as Social Security, the Minimum Wage, Child Labor Laws etc. Hpowever, in the modern ownership society are ways are skewed much more toward the individual taking care of themselves and their family and less toward the joint ownership of our society of resoueces like the National Parks. The conventional wisdom (at least among our politicians like George Bush and Bill Clinton is one which desribes free trade as king and pursuit of the individualism inherent in the free market as the overriding theme of life.

 

Much of this debate belongs on the Politics and Pundits Board, but football is interesting as a reflection of society because at the same time we see the reflections of individual ownership which drives America (as owners run their businesses to make money and players sign contracts to make money) it also revels in individual sacrifice for the good of the team. The NFL has some downright communistic controls on the game as the salary cap totally removes the benefit from getting more money because you have more to spend on building a winner. By rule, everyone has the same amount of money to spend on building their team (within the varitions the cap allows) and this seems to produce better competition even though it is not the free market at all.

 

Overall in sports it is ironic that we can do what we do and enjoy a lot of wha we have because of a laissez faire free-market belief in our society, but for this particular area, the free market is being run away from as the NHL pursues a salary cap, as the MLB is seen as a horrendous operation because its free market allows the George Steinbrenners to run amuck (as seen in his recent forfeit demand because the opposing Devil Ray players were given time to devote to their families and property in the face of the coming hurricane) and as the NFL with its tight non-free market controls on the sport is seem as the Cadillac of US sport management.

 

Theoretically I do disagree with the priorities of players but it is hard for me to ignore the fact that reality has little to do with my theories and that the reality of market control seems to produce a better product here than the free market.

[Realist]

Agree with your post. Clements is a 'playmaker' and gives us a great shot getting turnovers. The only problem I have with NC now, is he needs to know when NOT to go for the pick. And I believe the Defensive Backs coach really bitched at him after the game. So I'm sure that has sunk in now and hopefully this is going to be a non issue in the future.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Agree with your post.  Clements is a 'playmaker' and gives us a great shot getting turnovers.  The only problem I have with NC now, is he needs to know when NOT to go for the pick.  And I believe the Defensive Backs coach really bitched at him after the game.  So I'm sure that has sunk in now and hopefully this is going to be a non issue in the future.

33657[/snapback]

 

 

I think it is good football and folks are being good Bills fans as long as their posts reflect the full reality that Nate Clements screwed up badly against Smith and also is one of the most talented playmakers the Bills have.

 

The proposal to trade him in 2004, bench him or cut him this yeat are simply stupid. It ain't gonna happen and if it did happen would likely hurt the Bills bigtime in 2004. He must nit screw-up like he did going for the INT on Smith instead of knocking it down, however, he has been productive for us such as his INTs for TDs last year and before in his career and his INT this year.

 

We are taking the risk of using him on punt returns because he is a potential playmaker.

 

I and others wish that he and other players were more reserved and that he saw no need to get playmaker on his license plate, housegate, or whatever, but this is so trivial that it does not merit hurting the the team's production by getting rid of him that it isn't even funny.

 

Posters simply need to get real and not declare NC a god because he has done a few things right, nor declare him a goner because he has done a few things wrong.

[TigerJ]

Problems? No, not really. I think cornerbacks, like quarterbacks have to be a little bit cocky. He probably caused himself a little embarrassment but he'll soon forget about it. That's another essential quality for cornerbacks, a short memory.

[Kelly the Dog]

Clements makes too many anti-plays compared to his playmaking, and he is just this side of Terrel Buckley. Last year, he made a total of three interceptions, one of which he may have returned for a TD. Jeff Posey, who gets no credit at all from anyone, caused four fumbles that the Bills recovered. One was for a touchdown and one was for a safety. Why is he not a playmaker? Clements gave up way, way, way more than three big plays by simply being a punk, not by just getting beat a few times like all CBs do. Two of them in one game was directly responsible for the loss to Houston (he gave up 10 points personally).

 

The play against Jax on Sunday was not just getting beat, it was not just a bad play, it was A WIN. There is no argument that if he bats the ball down the Bills win. They could kneel down. All other plays in the game, and 99.9% of all games are "what if" kind of plays, where you don't know for sure if making or not making the play would have changed the outcome. THIS was the game. And if he wasn't going for the interception, he is NOT beat to the ball by Jimmy Smith. He missed that ball because he timed his jump to catch it. If he was just going to bat the ball away he wouldnt have needed to jump like that with both hands up and be in a position to get outwrestled. That play, that selfishness, is a LOSS for the team. There isn't even an argument the other way.

 

I don't think we should bench him or trade him or anything. He certainly has all the tools to become a great player in this league. He has shown the capacity to be a "playmaker." But he has shown a greater capacity to be a detriment on big plays. And a huge leap of maturity is needed before he is even in the upper echelon of Cbs in the league.

[BuffalOhio]

I hope he can contribute some time when it counts.  If I were on the team,

I would probably wait until the team has a winning season before putting stupid

crap on my license plate.

 

33552[/snapback]

 

OK, it's not on a Mansion or his License Plate. It's the nameplate above his locker that says Playmaker.

[BuffalOhio]

Clements makes too many anti-plays compared to his playmaking, and he is just this side of Terrel Buckley. Last year, he made a total of three interceptions, one of which he may have returned for a TD. Jeff Posey, who gets no credit at all from anyone, caused four fumbles that the Bills recovered. One was for a touchdown and one was for a safety. Why is he not a playmaker? Clements gave up way, way, way more than three big plays by simply being a punk, not by just getting beat a few times like all CBs do. Two of them in one game was directly responsible for the loss to Houston (he gave up 10 points personally).

 

The play against Jax on Sunday was not just getting beat, it was not just a bad play, it was A WIN. There is no argument that if he bats the ball down the Bills win. They could kneel down. All other plays in the game, and 99.9% of all games are "what if" kind of plays, where you don't know for sure if making or not making the play would have changed the outcome. THIS was the game. And if he wasn't going for the interception, he is NOT beat to the ball by Jimmy Smith. He missed that ball because he timed his jump to catch it. If he was just going to bat the ball away he wouldnt have needed to jump like that with both hands up and be in a position to get outwrestled. That play, that selfishness, is a LOSS for the team. There isn't even an argument the other way.

 

I don't think we should bench him or trade him or anything. He certainly has all the tools to become a great player in this league. He has shown the capacity to be a "playmaker." But he has shown a greater capacity to be a detriment on big plays. And a huge leap of maturity is needed before he is even in the upper echelon of Cbs in the league.

34077[/snapback]

 

Kelly, that is a fantastic post. I see now why you are fair and balanced.....

[IndyJay1234]

Clements makes too many anti-plays compared to his playmaking, and he is just this side of Terrel Buckley. Last year, he made a total of three interceptions, one of which he may have returned for a TD. Jeff Posey, who gets no credit at all from anyone, caused four fumbles that the Bills recovered. One was for a touchdown and one was for a safety. Why is he not a playmaker? Clements gave up way, way, way more than three big plays by simply being a punk, not by just getting beat a few times like all CBs do. Two of them in one game was directly responsible for the loss to Houston (he gave up 10 points personally).

 

The play against Jax on Sunday was not just getting beat, it was not just a bad play, it was A WIN. There is no argument that if he bats the ball down the Bills win. They could kneel down. All other plays in the game, and 99.9% of all games are "what if" kind of plays, where you don't know for sure if making or not making the play would have changed the outcome. THIS was the game. And if he wasn't going for the interception, he is NOT beat to the ball by Jimmy Smith. He missed that ball because he timed his jump to catch it. If he was just going to bat the ball away he wouldnt have needed to jump like that with both hands up and be in a position to get outwrestled. That play, that selfishness, is a LOSS for the team. There isn't even an argument the other way.

 

I don't think we should bench him or trade him or anything. He certainly has all the tools to become a great player in this league. He has shown the capacity to be a "playmaker." But he has shown a greater capacity to be a detriment on big plays. And a huge leap of maturity is needed before he is even in the upper echelon of Cbs in the league.

34077[/snapback]

 

I agree that it was the difference between a win and a loss. I just have a tough time believing that the guy in a game, mid air decides to get selfish. I think it is more reactionary than selfish. I would argue that it was bonehead if he truly did not know it was 4th down. I just do not think you decide to get selfish during a play. It happens too quickily.

[San-O]

I agree that it was the difference between a win and a loss.  I just have a tough time believing that the guy in a game, mid air decides to get selfish.  I think it is more reactionary than selfish.  I would argue that it was bonehead if he truly did not know it was 4th down.  I just do not think you decide to get selfish during a play.  It happens too quickily.

34238[/snapback]

 

 

What if it was his attitude that caused him to go for the INT instead of being smart

and just knocking the ball down? If this is the case, his attitude cost the game.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I think we agree that Clements can be beaten by a WR who takes advantage of his aggressiveness, however, I think we disagree as to whether this happens with a frequency that makes him a liability or about the value of the plays he does make.

 

Frequency- From what I have seen NC has been and appears to be the #2 skilled back on the Bills. Last year AW was a great cover guy (he did not get enough INTs, but he tended to blanket guys so thet he had a rep for good coverage and he is a definite hitter so opposing WRs were watching for his tackles as much as they were looking th ball in which helped alot) amd this year Vincent has a great rep for coverage and for hitting. The result of this is that I think Clements actually tends to see schemes which isolate him or send plays his way as opponents avoided AW and now Vincent.

 

I think the result is that in relation to the amount he is challenged with a route aimed his way or by very good receivers if the opposing DC beats Gray and gets the match-up he wants I do not feel horrendous about Clements play at all.

 

Like all CBs playing against the great WR talent in this league he gets burned from time to time, but not at a rate that I would say is more than most #2s in this league.

 

Playmaking- I think it is the second point which makes Clements an extremely valuable Bill. He has been the only member of our secondary who is the least bit of an INT threat where Reese got the first INT by a safety in 44 games last week and where the main problem with AW was lack of INTs. The 3 he got is less than we want, but by far the most production we have seen by a Bill DB playing within our system. He was the main reason we were in the game last year against Miami where ur season went south as he not only was the only one to put a TD on the board, but communicated wonderfully to recognize that Miami had left him with no one to cover on his side, made the hand-off to Milloy to cover anybody who crossed to his side and then ranged across the field to make an INT off a Fiedler not even watching him on a pass where AW had the inside coverage and looked beaten to Fiedler. It was great communication by Clements and real playmaking to get the INT.

 

That was last year, what about this year. The Clements story against Jax is not only Smith beating him on the Hail Mary he should have knocked down, but him also getting the INT which turned into our first and only TD. The final play made Clements a goat rather than him getting a gameball for his performance for the first 58 minutes of the game. He deserved to be named and pointed out as the goat for failing to make the play which along with the final pass for the TD, the Lindell miss, and the Nillarial hold cost us the game. However, knowing this does not simply wipe out the first INT or his "almost" gameball performance like it never happened. He is a goat for the game, but he is a goat who played extremely well for almost all the game.

 

Add to that the faith that he has evoked in the coaches with his punt return potential. I mark him down for one bad play on PR duty this pre-season but he showed when he was briefly called upon last year that he can be a force as a punt returned.

 

In the end, I think we agree on the only important things which is where you say

 

"I don't think we should bench him or trade him or anything. He certainly has all the tools to become a great player in this league. He has shown the capacity to be a "playmaker."

 

 

The fact that he is punk is simply french pastry from my perspective. It is fluff which can have a real game impact as we saw Sunday when he should have simply blocked the ball, but I can't think of a better unfortunate lesson for him and us than what happened. Like you I do not see him as tradeable or whatever. He is my #2 CB and will remain so for quite a while as best as I can tell or judge.

 

 

Clements makes too many anti-plays compared to his playmaking, and he is just this side of Terrel Buckley. Last year, he made a total of three interceptions, one of which he may have returned for a TD. Jeff Posey, who gets no credit at all from anyone, caused four fumbles that the Bills recovered. One was for a touchdown and one was for a safety. Why is he not a playmaker? Clements gave up way, way, way more than three big plays by simply being a punk, not by just getting beat a few times like all CBs do. Two of them in one game was directly responsible for the loss to Houston (he gave up 10 points personally).

 

The play against Jax on Sunday was not just getting beat, it was not just a bad play, it was A WIN. There is no argument that if he bats the ball down the Bills win. They could kneel down. All other plays in the game, and 99.9% of all games are "what if" kind of plays, where you don't know for sure if making or not making the play would have changed the outcome. THIS was the game. And if he wasn't going for the interception, he is NOT beat to the ball by Jimmy Smith. He missed that ball because he timed his jump to catch it. If he was just going to bat the ball away he wouldnt have needed to jump like that with both hands up and be in a position to get outwrestled. That play, that selfishness, is a LOSS for the team. There isn't even an argument the other way.

 

I don't think we should bench him or trade him or anything. He certainly has all the tools to become a great player in this league. He has shown the capacity to be a "playmaker." But he has shown a greater capacity to be a detriment on big plays. And a huge leap of maturity is needed before he is even in the upper echelon of Cbs in the league.

34077[/snapback]

[Kelly the Dog]

I agree that it was the difference between a win and a loss.  I just have a tough time believing that the guy in a game, mid air decides to get selfish.  I think it is more reactionary than selfish.  I would argue that it was bonehead if he truly did not know it was 4th down.  I just do not think you decide to get selfish during a play.  It happens too quickily.

34238[/snapback]

Who says it was during the play? He was likely thinking interception all along. He's looking for a bomb. It's fourth and long. He's covering Jimmy Smith. I don't think he changed his mind mid-jump, I think he was always going for it.