Which is the MOST true?

[Kelly the Dog]

Add your observations and comments on the specifics of the poll questions here, as well how many of the four, if any, you agree with.

[BuffOrange]

To me it really doesn't depend on how much better Clements is than McGee. I think if we can find another CB as good as McGee (or if Eric King develops into a good player) for cheap, then goodbye Nate. If the alternative is starting a Chris Watson type player opposite McGee, then I guess you have to break the bank for Clements.

[Gavin in Va Beach]

Clements is always on the #1 receiver. If McGee were always on the #1 receiver, he may not look as effective as he does now. I'd still want to lock up Nate, because most games he owns the #1 receiver.

 

Still, I'm greedy. I vote for locking both up...

[stuckincincy]

Get another CB and have McGee play safety.

[MRW]

I really don't want to see Clements go, because I think he is a really good young corner. However, I will understand it given that his demands will be huge.

 

McGee, on the other hand, I will be extremely pissed if the Bills let him slip away. He's a player who seems to be coming in to his own, and I think the window of opportunity to extend him cheaply is closing.

[Kelly the Dog]

To me it really doesn't depend on how much better Clements is than McGee.  I think if we can find another CB as good as McGee (or if Eric King develops into a good player) for cheap, then goodbye Nate.  If the alternative is starting a Chris Watson type player opposite McGee, then I guess you have to break the bank for Clements.

478449[/snapback]

I don't think that is the problem we will face. Look at the Winfield situation. TD decided, most people agreed, and it turned out to be true, that AW was a very good player but was going to ask for and receive more than he was worth. So we let him go. We simply went out and signed a Troy Vincent for (approximately) 20 mil instead of 35 mil, and we'd likely do it again if we don't resign Nate. We're not going to sign a Chris Watson or just rely on Eric King and Jabari Greer. We'd very, very likely go out and sign a Vincent kind of corner, in both talent and cash.

[JasoninMT]

E) None of the Above.

 

We shoud keep both. This doesn't mean we should keep Nate at *all* costs...

 

Nate Clements and Terrence McGee are better than Terrence McGee and *rookie*... McGee isn't playing the #1 WR... I'm not saying he couldn't... but we aren't comparing apples to apples.

 

On the other note, I do NOT like that we have both our starting corners being return men - even with McGee being an awesome kick returner... It's just too easy to lose someone to injury on ST.

[BuffOrange]

I don't think that is the problem we will face. Look at the Winfield situation. TD decided, most people agreed, and it turned out to be true, that AW was a very good player but was going to ask for and receive more than he was worth. So we let him go. We simply went out and signed a Troy Vincent for (approximately) 20 mil instead of 35 mil, and we'd likely do it again if we don't resign Nate. We're not going to sign a Chris Watson or just rely on Eric King and Jabari Greer. We'd very, very likely go out and sign a Vincent kind of corner, in both talent and cash.

478466[/snapback]

 

In that case goodbye Nate and hello line upgrade (either side).

I'd like somebody younger than Vincent though. Most of the black guys on our D seem to be pretty old.

[JAMIEBUF12]

i still say sign nate!

[Kelly the Dog]

Clements is always on the #1 receiver. If McGee were always on the #1 receiver, he may not look as effective as he does now. I'd still want to lock up Nate, because most games he owns the #1 receiver.

 

Still, I'm greedy. I vote for locking both up...

478457[/snapback]

While that is absolutely true right now, and we couldn't necessarily count on McGee to shut down #1 wide receivers the way Nate can right now, there are things in McGee's game that tell me it's possible. I didn't think anyone could compete with Nate physically because of his combintion of size and speed and quicks and strength. But watching him, McGee is everything Nate is except two inches shorter and doesn't make the monster hits. He has tremendous closing speed, as good as Clements already, and he uses it. He has great hands. He is a playmaker without self-proclaiming himself to be. He is always around the ball. He stops quick and breaks on the ball quick. He has very good fundamentals tackling and isn't afraid to stick his snoot into the fray. He doesn't take a lot of risks and doesn't get routinely burned like he used to. Nate is surely a better cornerback to me as of now but McGee is closing the gap very fast, doesn't make the mistakes and is an absolutely spellbinding return man. I think a year from now, we could be saying that Terrence McGee is a shut down corner, and will be at the point in his career that Nate is now (in years).

[Last Guy on the Bench]

Not to quibble, but isn't this only McGee's third season (meaning he's played 2+ not 3+)? Right now, he's my favorite player on the team (not saying he's the best - though he's getting closer).

[Rico]

None of the above,

just sign them both, TD!

[Kelly the Dog]

E)  None of the Above.

 

We shoud keep both.  This doesn't mean we should keep Nate at *all* costs...

 

Nate Clements and Terrence McGee are better than Terrence McGee and *rookie*...  McGee isn't playing the #1 WR...  I'm not saying he couldn't...  but we aren't comparing apples to apples.

 

On the other note, I do NOT like that we have both our starting corners being return men - even with McGee being an awesome kick returner...  It's just too easy to lose someone to injury on ST.

478471[/snapback]

Understood. I am finding it increasingly difficult to imagine that we will be able to re-sign both. They are too friggin' good. I never expected McGee to be this good. On the other point, I think Fast Freddie has become the #1 PR man and will remain so, until perhaps Parrish takes it over, and that Nate will just get one once in awhile. Smith is pretty good already, a huge threat every time he touches it and IMO as good as Clements is as a PR.

[Kelly the Dog]

Not to quibble, but isn't this only McGee's third season (meaning he's played 2+ not 3+)? Right now, he's my favorite player on the team (not saying he's the best - though he's getting closer).

478481[/snapback]

Yes, it is. My mistake. I definitely think he is as good an overall player (because he's sooooo very good on returns) than Nate was a year and a half ago. Cannot flat out cover as well though. And Nate was a year younger coming out of school, so Nate is only a year older than Terrence.

[JimBob2232]

Last I checked we start 2 CBs each game.

[The Jokeman]

Add your observations and comments on the specifics of the poll questions here, as well how many of the four, if any, you agree with.

478430[/snapback]

The Bills have a good chance to re-sign both Nate and Terrence so long they franchise Nate. As we would then have right of refusal with both (being Terrence is due to be a RFA). As good as Terrence looks I think is Nate far and away better in terms of coverage as evident by the way teams seeming throw more to the WRs on McGees side. That said McGee more than proves his worth as a return man. I think Clements' contract could be signed if we choose to release Eric Moulds which given he has definately lost a step and the hopes Evans does develop into a #1 WR. I would think we should be able to re-sign McGee for at most backloaded deal starting at $1 million the first few years and then hitting multi millions in the 3rd and 4th years.

[/dev/null]

As we would then have right of refusal with both (being Terrence is due to be a RFA).

478657[/snapback]

 

IMO McGee if they don't lock McGee up before he becomes an RFA, they should offer him a 1st round tender to keep other teams away

[bill in Livonia]

I am sorry I busted your stones at the Miami Game. Your poll is really quite original and creative.

You expressed a thought that has been niggling at the back of my beer soaked brain for the last three games. McGee is a genuine playmaker and an all out sort of player. Clements is a more selfish player and does not apear to be willing to sacrafice his body on every play. Peace

[realtruelove]

Clements is a Pro Bowl player, McGee is an All Pro.

[Bill from NYC]

The Bills have a good chance to re-sign both Nate and Terrence so long they franchise Nate. As we would then have right of refusal with both (being Terrence is due to be a RFA). As good as Terrence looks I think is Nate far and away better in terms of coverage as evident by the way teams seeming throw more to the WRs on McGees side. That said McGee more than proves his worth as a return man. I think Clements' contract could be signed if we choose to release Eric Moulds which given he has definately lost a step and the hopes Evans does develop into a #1 WR.  I would think we should be able to re-sign McGee for at most backloaded deal starting at $1 million the first few years and then hitting multi millions in the 3rd and 4th years.

478657[/snapback]

 

Jokeman, are you working on the draft yet?

 

Sorry, but I gotta disagree with you about what it would cost to renegotiate the contract of McGee.

The price of CBs has skyrocketed in the last few years. McGee is improving at CB, and he is one of the fastest men in the NFL from what I have seen. On kickoff returns, he is simply off the charts.

 

I am not up on the cost of signing RFAs in terms of compensatory draft picks (and would appreciate if some who does know would post it), but I see a strong possibility of another team offering big bucks to a healthy McGee. Again, I think that this is how Parcells got Curtis Martin from NE.

I care about the draft more than most because I believe it is the true way to build a football team, but what would you rather have, McGee or a late 1st round pick? He really might get some offer sheets as a RFA.

 

I could easily be quite wrong here, but I think that it would take "Schobel money" to get this kid to lock in for 5 years, because if he waits a year, GMS will be tripping over each other trying to sign him.

 

McGee is a player that the Bills cannot afford to lose.

[dave mcbride]

I don't think that is the problem we will face. Look at the Winfield situation. TD decided, most people agreed, and it turned out to be true, that AW was a very good player but was going to ask for and receive more than he was worth. So we let him go. We simply went out and signed a Troy Vincent for (approximately) 20 mil instead of 35 mil, and we'd likely do it again if we don't resign Nate. We're not going to sign a Chris Watson or just rely on Eric King and Jabari Greer. We'd very, very likely go out and sign a Vincent kind of corner, in both talent and cash.

478466[/snapback]

no. my sense is that the reason they let winfield go is because he didn't create enough turnovers. clements does, and if you look at what donohoe prizes, it's that. rod woodson is the obvious example, and donohoe is on record as stating that letting woodson go was one of the biggest mistakes of his career. i'll say it again -- i would bet the farm that they'll franchise clements. he's a much better cornerback than mcgee, although mcgee is ok (even if he has a tendency to occasionally get beat very badly -- see the miami game).

[dave mcbride]

Understood. I am finding it increasingly difficult to imagine that we will be able to re-sign both. They are too friggin' good. I never expected McGee to be this good. On the other point, I think Fast Freddie has become the #1 PR man and will remain so, until perhaps Parrish takes it over, and that Nate will just get one once in awhile. Smith is pretty good already, a huge threat every time he touches it and IMO as good as Clements is as a PR.

478486[/snapback]

one thing to remember is that the bills don't really have many players with huge contracts except for spikes and mike williams. if the choice comes down to franchising clements and cutting mike williams or spikes or letting clements go, i'd definitely take the former. like most people here, i'm guessing that spikes will never be the same player again, and it might be best to cut his salary. otherwise we end up with a greg lloyd type situation -- a guy who has been rendered human by injury and is not performing to his contract level. mike williams is ok, but he's never performed to his contract level. milloy also makes a good chunk of change, but he's not breaking the bank. there's also the moulds situation. the point is that the bills can afford a franchise tag on clements and pay mcgee given that they're already paying large chunks of change to guys who are just ok or seriously injured. they aren't spending top money on topshelf talent at the marquee positions at all -- qb, running back, WR, LT, DE, and DT.

[Kelly the Dog]

no. my sense is that the reason they let winfield go is because he didn't create enough turnovers. clements does, and if you look at what donohoe prizes, it's that. rod woodson is the obvious example, and donohoe is on record as stating that letting woodson go was one of the biggest mistakes of his career.  i'll say it again -- i would bet the farm that they'll franchise clements. he's a much better cornerback than mcgee, although mcgee is ok (even if he has a tendency to occasionally get beat very badly -- see the miami game).

479347[/snapback]

Well part or most of the reason that they let Winfield go, or didnt think he was worth the money, was indeed because of what you said, he didn't create enough turnovers. I am not doubting that they franchise Nate for this year, and see what they can do. Maybe they think next year is their Super Bowl run and it will be worth the large dollar figure. A lot can happen.

 

Frankly, McGee causes as many turnovers as Nate does. And as far as the Miami game goes, I was at that game and watching closely, and Nate got beat far more than Mcgee did. IMO, it wasn't even close.

[dave mcbride]

Well part or most of the reason that they let Winfield go, or didnt think he was worth the money, was indeed because of what you said, he didn't create enough turnovers. I am not doubting that they franchise Nate for this year, and see what they can do. Maybe they think next year is their Super Bowl run and it will be worth the large dollar figure. A lot can happen.

 

Frankly, McGee causes as many turnovers as Nate does. And as far as the Miami game goes, I was at that game and watching closely, and Nate got beat far more than Mcgee did. IMO, it wasn't even close.

479376[/snapback]

i listened to that game on the radio. mcgee did get beat by chambers pretty badly for the second phish td, and clements did have both a pick and the game deciding forced fumble.

[Kelly the Dog]

i listened to that game on the radio. mcgee did get beat by chambers pretty badly for the second phish td, and clements did have both a pick and the game deciding forced fumble.

479387[/snapback]

You listened to the radio and you're telling me who had a better day covering? And that Mcgee got beat by Chambers pretty badly for the second phish TD? That's great, Dave.

 

First of all, Chambers didn't score, although he did spend much of the day beating Nate, who had an interception on a pass that was five yards short and Chambers behind him. The second TD by the Fins was scored by Randy McMichael, and if you think the Bills put 5'9 Terrence McGee on him one on one, you're nuts. They were in a zone and Mcgee leaped for the ball that was well over his head. A safety should have been covering deep and/or McMichael on that play. But I guess you could tell that by noticing it was Chambers while you were watching the radio.

 

McGee's interception, however, was a great play, showing terrific closing speed in the end zone, and was the play of the game alongside Nate's fumble causing hit on a play he wasn't covering. I do give Nate a ton of credit on that play, it won the game. It had nothing to do with covering, however, which McGee was simply the better player that day. Watch a few more games on the radio and we can talk about who had a better game.

 

I do not think McGee is as good a cover corner or overall corner that Nate is. Yet. And he may never be. But he certainly forces as many turnovers and makes as many game changing plays right now.

[The Dean]

I don't think that is the problem we will face. Look at the Winfield situation. TD decided, most people agreed, and it turned out to be true, that AW was a very good player but was going to ask for and receive more than he was worth. So we let him go. We simply went out and signed a Troy Vincent for (approximately) 20 mil instead of 35 mil, and we'd likely do it again if we don't resign Nate. We're not going to sign a Chris Watson or just rely on Eric King and Jabari Greer. We'd very, very likely go out and sign a Vincent kind of corner, in both talent and cash.

478466[/snapback]

 

 

First of all, I agree with most of what you say here...with one exception. IMO AW didn't ask for more than he was worth. He asked for more than he was worth to the Bills. Because we had Nate and some good young players AND we knew we could sign a player of TV's ability, we could make do w/o Winfield. For the Vikes, I tink AW's worth every penny.

 

Whith that said, a similar thing might happen with Nate. Nate will command big $$$. TD might just figure that with McGee and some good young players (and TV if he's needed) he can sign someone during the offseason for far less than keeping NC. If that happens, it won't be necause Nate was asking for more than he was worth...it'll be because Nate got more than he was worth to the Bills.

[Kelly the Dog]

First of all, I agree with most of what you say here...with one exception.  IMO AW didn't ask for more than he was worth.  He asked for more than he was worth to the Bills.  Because we had Nate and some good young players AND we knew we could sign a player of TV's ability, we could make do w/o Winfield.  For the Vikes, I tink AW's worth every penny.

 

Whith that said, a similar thing might happen with Nate.  Nate will command big $$$.  TD might just figure that with McGee and some good young players (and TV if he's needed) he can sign someone during the offseason for far less than keeping NC.  If that happens, it won't be necause Nate was asking for more than he was worth...it'll be because Nate got more than he was worth to the Bills.

479425[/snapback]

Good point, and what I actually meant originally. That's what TD does, put a dollar figure on players as to how much he thinks he is worth to the Bills, based on everything. AW was probably worth it to the Vikes, especially because of their cap situation, and even though he signed for like 36 mil he probably costs them only 2-3 mil a year on the cap, so he's well worth it now. Frankly, I am convinced they will franchise Nate. see what other teams offer him on a contract and the Bills on a trade. Otherwise keep him a year.

[dundy249]

Yes, it is. My mistake. I definitely think he is as good an overall player (because he's sooooo very good on returns) than Nate was a year and a half ago. Cannot flat out cover as well though. And Nate was a year younger coming out of school, so Nate is only a year older than Terrence.

478491[/snapback]

 

 

I cant agree with the statement that he can not flat out cover as well. I think there is minimal difference between the 2.

 

One Difference was pointed out in the Jets game, Clements will take the stupid PI penalty where McGee will play within himself and technically sound.

[dave mcbride]

You listened to the radio and you're telling me who had a better day covering? And that Mcgee got beat by Chambers pretty badly for the second phish TD? That's great, Dave.

 

First of all, Chambers didn't score, although he did spend much of the day beating Nate, who had an interception on a pass that was five yards short and Chambers behind him. The second TD by the Fins was scored by Randy McMichael, and if you think the Bills put 5'9 Terrence McGee on him one on one, you're nuts. They were in a zone and Mcgee leaped for the ball that was well over his head. A safety should have been covering deep and/or McMichael on that play. But I guess you could tell that by noticing it was Chambers while you were watching the radio.

 

McGee's interception, however, was a great play, showing terrific closing speed in the end zone, and was the play of the game alongside Nate's fumble causing hit on a play he wasn't covering. I do give Nate a ton of credit on that play, it won the game. It had nothing to do with covering, however, which McGee was simply the better player that day. Watch a few more games on the radio and we can talk about who had a better game.

 

I do not think McGee is as good a cover corner or overall corner that Nate is. Yet. And he may never be. But he certainly forces as many turnovers and makes as many game changing plays right now.

479420[/snapback]

no need to be snide - i admitted that i listened to it on the radio for god's sake. and forgive me for screwing up the receiver's name. as if that matters. jeez. my point was that the announcers said that mcgee was beaten badly on the play, and said it more than once. i like avp, and generally think he knows what he's talking about. maybe he was wrong. it's hard for me to tell. given what i had heard, though, i made a reasonable inference that he was beaten.

[nfreeman]

Good point, and what I actually meant originally. That's what TD does, put a dollar figure on players as to how much he thinks he is worth to the Bills, based on everything. AW was probably worth it to the Vikes, especially because of their cap situation, and even though he signed for like 36 mil he probably costs them only 2-3 mil a year on the cap, so he's well worth it now. Frankly, I am convinced they will franchise Nate. see what other teams offer him on a contract and the Bills on a trade. Otherwise keep him a year.

479429[/snapback]

 

 

I agree completely -- TD has a number in mind that he won't go above. I also agree that this is the right way to run things. Bottom line is that the market today for top CBs is too expensive relative to value to the team. I don't think Winfield has transformed the Vikes' defense -- a DB just doesn't have as much impact as, say, a Bruce Smith or Ted Washington would have. In that regard, wouldn't anyone here trade NC or McGee for Bruce or Ted in their primes?

 

TD might franchise Clements and/or McGee when the time comes, but his goal in doing so won't be to keep him at $10 million for the year -- it will be to get maximum trade value. Nate is going to want a $17-$20 million bonus plus a good salary, and someone is going to give it to him -- but it won't be the bills.

 

Unfortunately, I think the same goes for McGee. He knows he's going to get a huge payday and is not going to extend for less -- ie he will play out his current contract. Regardless of whether he's as good as NC, he's at least a pretty good CB and a top 3 if not #1 kick returner in the NFL, which has significant value. I'd say he's better than Winfield right now. He's not going to accept Schobel money when Clements/Bailey money is out there.

 

I would love to keep both -- or either -- but I think this is going be a case of the TD revolving door of great defensive players, just like we saw when he was in Pittsburgh. Hopefully we can get good draft picks in trade and use them on good replacement DBs.

[Kelly the Dog]

no need to be snide - i admitted that i listened to it on the radio for god's sake. and forgive me for screwing up the receiver's name.  as if that matters. jeez. my point was that the announcers said that mcgee was beaten badly on the play, and said it more than once. i like avp, and generally think he knows what he's talking about. maybe he was wrong. it's hard for me to tell. given what i had heard, though, i made a reasonable inference that he was beaten.

479472[/snapback]

Maybe it's me, but I think a comparison between the two CBs coverage abilities, using a game like Miami as your lone reference, combined with "mcgee is ok (even if he has a tendency to occasionally get beat very badly -- see the miami game)." when you didn't in fact "see" the miami game, warrants snide.

[Ramius]

Lock up T-Mac!!!!!!

 

I cant see us keeping both, so i'd rather have T-Mac at 30 mil than Clements at 50 mil.

 

I'd love to keep both CB's, but i really dont see that happening, cap-wise, so i think it'd be in better interest to secire a good corner, and pick up another good one through FA or the draft(to go along with king/greer)

[The Jokeman]

Jokeman, are you working on the draft yet? 

 

Sorry, but I gotta disagree with you about what it would cost to renegotiate the contract of McGee.

The price of CBs has skyrocketed in the last few years. McGee is improving at CB, and he is one of the fastest men in the NFL from what I have seen. On kickoff returns, he is simply off the charts.

 

I am not up on the cost of signing RFAs in terms of compensatory draft picks (and would appreciate if some who does know would post it), but I see a strong possibility of another team offering big bucks to a healthy McGee. Again, I think that this is how Parcells got Curtis Martin from NE.

I'm always working on the draft, I started the day after last year's draft. Currently, I'm looking at an OTs. Jonathan Scott of Texas seems like a likely choice but a little aprehensive of OTs from Texas. Granted unlike Mike Williams he has played Left OT in college.

 

In terms of McGee as a RFA, depending on the qualifying offer we extend to him would determine how much compensation we could get. If we give him the minimum then the best we can get is a pick back in the Round which he was drafted (a 4th) Yet, I fully expect us to give him a qualifying offer that would net us at least a 1st if another team signs him and we don't match. The reason I think he can be had for a $1 million the first few seasons is it's close to 3x what he's making right now. Not to mention KR/CB Allen Rossum re-signed with the Falcons last year after making the Pro Bowl for about 670k last year and he was an UFA. Granted he is a nickel back and a bit older so that's why I pegged more $ for McGee.

[1959BillsFan]

McGee is more of aplayer you would want to build around. He doesn't have an over inflated head and he is more T-E-A-M oriented. You don't see McGee doing that shaking his head deal, he just calmly walks over and hands the ball to the official after an interception or an incredible return.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Whn doing this CB figuring don't forget:

 

1. The salary cap is going to change big time next year by agreement as the new TV contracts will kick it and under the CBA this will be part of the defined gross revenue from which a huge % (above 65%) will be dedicated to player salaries. NFL teams MUST pay a higher wage to their players and one is going to see an explosion in the wages of the best players who are on the market like Clements. Champ Bailey took in a $20 million bonus and he probably won't even be in the top 5 CB cap hits when all is said and done.

 

2. The folks who were ranting at TD to "Just git it done" and lock Clements up were fooling themselves in terms of the real numbers. While there was a remote (real remote given his arrogance that makes his a good player) chance that Clements might have caved and taken a sucker deal from TD to guarantee that he had the maximum the Bills could pay in hand, it was actually Clements who needed to be pressured to sign as he almost certainly would have been foolish to do this. Unless he suffered a near fatal injury even if he was hurt, he will make more than the Bills could have paid him under the cap this year by entering the free market.

 

3. Clearly the Bills were in no position to resign AW regardless of whether they wanted him or not. AW was a done deal as a Bill when Lawyer Milloy entered the marketplace and the Bills used $ they set aside to try to entice AW into a long-term deal on Milloy.

 

AW not only found a better deal in the free market than the Bills were willing (and ultimately even able) to offer but he found two. Remember that the Jets thought they had him signed and sealed, but the Vikes actually made a blockbuster offer to AW that stole him from the Jets before he was delivered. The Bills simply could not have matched what the Vikes offered as NFLPA.com has his 2005 cap hit at over $12 million and we are complaing about MW getting his mere $9 million.

 

I think the Bills can potentially resign Clements as we are in pretty good shape in terms of available FAs next year and the new cap will offer an opportunity to pay a huge amount to Clements. You need 2 starting CBs and actually a pretty good nickel CB so paying through the nose for Clements may be the thing we have to do.

 

Nevertheless, there will be all sorts of psychotic deals out there because the NFL by agreement will have to distribute a bunch of money to the players and TD may be best off by franchising Clements and using the $ to sign McGee long-term. As many teams have already locked up their highest paid CB, it may take a little while for the top 5 franchise # at CB to creep up there and franchising Clements next year may be a very cheap thing to do (and if so he will likely sign a longtem deal with us and get big bucks and security instead of simply bog bucks).

 

Even still, i do not feel bad about a CB corps for the Bills which consists of McGee, Vincent doing the best he can, Eric King who seems to be developing into a player and a rehabbed Kevin Thomas as our options for finding 3 players at CB. Indeed, if Clements is gone we will then have not only the huge cap room of the new salary cap, but whatever we planned to spend on Clements and we will supplement the McGee/Vincent/King/Thomas base by signing the best FA CB available.

 

Cornerback is one the areas where I think we are in better shape coming into the new FA period.

[Bill from NYC]

I'm always working on the draft, I started the day after last year's draft. Currently, I'm looking at an OTs. Jonathan Scott of Texas seems like a likely choice but a little aprehensive of OTs from Texas. Granted unlike Mike Williams he has played Left OT in college.

 

In terms of McGee as a RFA, depending on the qualifying offer we extend to him would determine how much compensation we could get. If we give him the minimum then the best we can get is a pick back in the Round which he was drafted (a 4th) Yet, I fully expect us to give him a qualifying offer that would net us at least a 1st if another team signs him and we don't match. The reason I think he can be had for a $1 million the first few seasons is it's close to 3x what he's making right now. Not to mention KR/CB Allen Rossum re-signed with the Falcons last year after making the Pro Bowl for about 670k last year and he was an UFA. Granted he is a nickel back and a bit older so that's why I pegged more $ for McGee.

479907[/snapback]

 

Thanks. I noticed that you said "at least a first." Is there a scenario in which we could tend him an offer which would require compensation of MORE than a first?

[Simon]

i do not feel bad about a CB corps for the Bills which consists of McGee, Vincent doing the best he can, Eric King who seems to be developing into a player and a rehabbed Kevin Thomas as our options for finding 3 players at CB

Vincent is almost certainly done as a starting CB in this league, I thought King struggled in the preseason and then was somewhat abused by the phish in his first significant action and Thomas regressed after a solid start and now can't even put on pads. If we walk into a season expecting to find our top3 corners from that list, I can promise you that pro offenses will rip us to shreds on a weekly basis. And if we plan to supplement that with a FA signing, it better be one hell of a corner.

Cya

[Bill from NYC]

Vincent is almost certainly done as a starting CB in this league, I thought King struggled in the preseason and then was somewhat abused by the phish in his first significant action and Thomas regressed after a solid start and now can't even put on pads. If we walk into a season expecting to find our top3 corners from that list, I can promise you that pro offenses will rip us to shreds on a weekly basis. And if we plan to supplement that with a FA signing, it better be one hell of a corner.

Cya

480676[/snapback]

 

You are correct no doubt, but I for one hope that the Bills do not draft yet another first round corner.

We did well with McGee in the 4th, and to this day I think that Kerner (3rd) would have been superb if he was not injured. We have been drafting cbs, in round 1, losing them, and not making the playoffs.

[LaDairis]

"Eric King who seems to be developing into a player"

 

 

Yeah, I like what I've seen from the rook. I'd feel better with both starters and King as the nickel, but King just has it.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Vincent is almost certainly done as a starting CB in this league, I thought King struggled in the preseason and then was somewhat abused by the phish in his first significant action and Thomas regressed after a solid start and now can't even put on pads. If we walk into a season expecting to find our top3 corners from that list, I can promise you that pro offenses will rip us to shreds on a weekly basis. And if we plan to supplement that with a FA signing, it better be one hell of a corner.

Cya

480676[/snapback]

There is no doubt that we would be better off with out current #1 and #2 CBs as our number 1 and 2 CBs for the forseeable future.

 

However, all I am saying that I don't feel like we are doomed with an FA situation where:

 

1. McGee continues to progress at the current rate where though he was lit up filling in for Vincent last year, he learned from the trial by fire and has already pulled into a position where is CB play is stable enough that his ST role which won him a Pro Bowl start is not diminished at all by his play (unlike his partner NC who is a better cover corner generally, but his consistent boneheaded play per game makes you like him because the good outweighs the bad). I think he shows the athleticism and talent to cotinue developing so he can become a shutdown corner. Height is his major drawback here but if he watches old AW films and can replicate his cover like a glove work.

 

2. The question is one of whether King can show enough to challenge for the #2 role next year. Probably not, but though he did struggle in pre-season I do like what I am seeing so far and if he continues wth the sane speed of development he showed from pre-season to now, i certainly feel comfortable with him as my nickel and give him an outside shot at being a #2 who does get lit up from time to time but this the NFL.

 

3. Is Vincent done as a CB. He seems to feel that is so and its why he moved to safety. Still I feel good about this as he obviously is a thinking man and I do not feel bad about him being essentially my nickel from his safety position. His presence is one of the things which makes me feel more comdortable that Hills may develop quickly.

 

4. Where does Jabari Greer fit in? Again, he is a player who has shown good signs with how he broke on the ball for a couple of INTs and also with some good ST tackling to be a player up to nickel duty. However, as this nickel back gets the call when the O goes into a 3 WR set which often happens on third down, the Bills horrendous record at stopping the opponent on 3rd down means Greer's play deserves some special scrutiny.

 

I must admit I have not look closely at 3rd downs yet so I do not know how much of our poor record on this down in Greer's fault. Either way he will need to pick it up a lot next year if we lose Clements. If he is not at fault for the 3rd down failure or his play improves the rest of the year he will likely compete for the #2 job though I doubt he can do it. If he is at fault he will need to step up his game merely to be a credible nickel.

 

5. Which brings us to Kevin Thomas. It does not look good from an injury standpoint. My understanding he had a second surgery which has cost the season. Not a good sign and he is probably done as a player and certainly is not one you should count on. However, we have seen with WM what modern mecdical science and hard work can do. I think Thomas is a UNLV product so unless one counts staying up until the wee small hours at the Blackjack table as hard work this is probably not his middle name. Yet just as he should not be counted upon he should not be written off either. he was thought of as good enough to be *you guessed it) our nickel back.

 

At any rate, the reason I do not feel bad if this is what we have in place for next year to find three positions, we start with 5 possibilities (just merely possibilities but all are possibilities ranging from a good possibility to one day be our number one like McGee to a possibility at best to even play the game again like Thomas.

 

The reason I feel pretty good about this though is that with the new salary cap and with the money set aside to sign Clements, and little else in terms of FAs of note to as must resigns (even when/if we go big for WM signing him will be allocated so the intial cap hit should not be huge) if Clements does not return we will certainly be one of the lead candidates to sign whatever the best available FA CB talent there is.

 

it would be a shame to lose Clements but not a death blow at all to this team.