Horus Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I really dont understand ppl some times... we dont pay the damn salaries so why do fans care how much any player costs...I think the ppl who run the team can figure out what they wanna pay and not pay and how much they can and cannot pay a player...we know from past seasons that the TD era front office didnt pay..hopefully levy is smarter than that...as a fan I hope the front office and clements can come together and get this done...Im sick of loseing good players over money...Im sick of bills haveing to fill holes they shouldnt have to because of money thats there but they dont use...if they had paid PW we wouldnt have this runstop problem...all I know is the bills better start re-signing players that are good and stop creating holes that arent there especially when there are allready holes they need to fill..as for clements talent and if hes worth the money....id rather spend the money with what i know than take a chance on a cheaper guy that I dont know...show me a team that has the same talent we do and dosent pay..then show me a team with more talent on both sides that pays less..if there is one they will be paying soon or theyll lose the secondary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share Posted November 20, 2006 I really dont understand ppl some times... we dont pay the damn salaries so why do fans care how much any player costs...I think the ppl who run the team can figure out what they wanna pay and not pay and how much they can and cannot pay a player...we know from past seasons that the TD era front office didnt pay..hopefully levy is smarter than that...as a fan I hope the front office and clements can come together and get this done...Im sick of loseing good players over money...Im sick of bills haveing to fill holes they shouldnt have to because of money thats there but they dont use...if they had paid PW we wouldnt have this runstop problem...all I know is the bills better start re-signing players that are good and stop creating holes that arent there especially when there are allready holes they need to fill..as for clements talent and if hes worth the money....id rather spend the money with what i know than take a chance on a cheaper guy that I dont know...show me a team that has the same talent we do and dosent pay..then show me a team with more talent on both sides that pays less..if there is one they will be paying soon or theyll lose the secondary. 843021[/snapback] I actually made this point in another thread. The teams with the least ammount of cap room seemed to do the best. Teams including the Colts, Bears, Patriots ... etc all have less than 10 mill with the Colts/Pats having around zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I actually made this point in another thread. The teams with the least ammount of cap room seemed to do the best. Teams including the Colts, Bears, Patriots ... etc all have less than 10 mill with the Colts/Pats having around zero. 843029[/snapback] But it makes sense the other way around. What do good teams seem to have....more so than not-so-good teams? Lots of good players(stars). To keep all those stars they need to pay top dollar.....which maxes out their cap. If teams simply spent to their cap limit "because it was there" rather than "because they wanted to keep their stars" when they finally found some legit stars they would be unable to pay them. Chicken or egg? Not really....top teams pay their top players that make them top teams in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share Posted November 20, 2006 But it makes sense the other way around.What do good teams seem to have....more so than not-so-good teams? Lots of good players(stars). To keep all those stars they need to pay top dollar.....which maxes out their cap. If teams simply spent to their cap limit "because it was there" rather than "because they wanted to keep their stars" when they finally found some legit stars they would be unable to pay them. Chicken or egg? Not really....top teams pay their top players that make them top teams in the first place. 843034[/snapback] Cool. You just made my point. Pay Clements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaLee83 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Here is what I think people are getting caught up on. People just dont want to pay him HUGE money ... well dude ... whether or not you *think* he is worth it shouldnt matter. This team is bad as it is and we should let good players go. Build around the good players for goodness sakes. 842382[/snapback] Exactly, it's all about keeping a core of good players and building around them. The core of this team for the past 5 years has changed quite often, we've seen an influx of expensive veterans looking to pad retirement that played hard about 50% of the time (Sam Adams, Milloy, Vincent, etc) The core of this team needs to stay intact for at least next season until the newbies can step up and truly become a part of this "core". Off-season non O-line priorities should be: 1. Re-signing Clements and Fletcher (#1 priorites) 2. Extending Lee Evans by at least 5 more years (I would have said this last week even before his 8 million yard game today-I think that would give him 7 total after this season). 3. Address the running game, I'm on the fence on McGahee at this point. Draft a speed back or a power back to complement him or trade him. I'm unsure so don't flame me too hard. 4. Addressing Takeo Spikes' situation, I say let him finish out his contract but draft a replacement or sign a 2nd tier young FA who has *potential* 5. Aquire or draft a running FB, I see Shelton departing after this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 People forget that Clements and McGee were originally drafted to play man in the 46-D. Now, in their first season playing in the Tampa cover-2, they have had their share of struggles but also have looked great for stretches of plays this season. I expect them to only get better as the D unit around them gets better with experience (rookie safeties), health (TKO) and new players (DT's). Daquixers is 100% dead-on with his analysis of Clements. Re-sign him for whatever the free agent market says he is worth. We will have over $30 million in cap space, and there is no way we will be able to spend anywhere close to that much, especially if we aren't able to sign Eric Steinbach. Might as well not open up MORE holes on this roster; we already have enough. 842151[/snapback] You in fact are 100% correct. I simply cannot understand why anyone would want to see Nate leave town. If he stays, and even one of our early round safeties develops, the Bills secondary could be viewed as solid, and perhaps our management could focus in another area. The only thing I would add to your post is that I think that they should at least try to sign nate soon. I have a feeling that once he hits the free agent market, he will be snapped up in seconds. Sadly, I get the feeling that he wants to leave town, but perhaps waiving a huge signing bonus under his nose before the holidays will change his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olaf Fub Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Hey DaQuix, why didn't you tell us you were Leo Roth? Resign Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I actually made this point in another thread. The teams with the least ammount of cap room seemed to do the best. Teams including the Colts, Bears, Patriots ... etc all have less than 10 mill with the Colts/Pats having around zero. 843029[/snapback] I agree with your basic premise but the line about the Pats is incorrect. They are currently $13.8 millon under the cap. I'm sure Tom Brady is really happy that he took a lot less money to stay in New England so they could use that cap space to sign other players.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 NC didn't get this close to the "money grab" to all of a sudden re-sign with the Bills prior to the start of free agency next spring. He's going for the BIG money and someone other than the Bills is going to pay it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 You in fact are 100% correct. I simply cannot understand why anyone would want to see Nate leave town. If he stays, and even one of our early round safeties develops, the Bills secondary could be viewed as solid, and perhaps our management could focus in another area. The only thing I would add to your post is that I think that they should at least try to sign nate soon. I have a feeling that once he hits the free agent market, he will be snapped up in seconds. Sadly, I get the feeling that he wants to leave town, but perhaps waiving a huge signing bonus under his nose before the holidays will change his mind. 843060[/snapback] Nate has been an absolute monster the last month or so. Maybe it did have to do with adjusting to the new D scheme. Thats said, both Nate and Fletcher need to be re-signed. My question is what about the franchise tag. I know they "said" they would not franchise Nate, but I'd rather do it anyway than risk losing him for nothing. Would that violate the CBA in any way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv Levy Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Is he even on the team anymore?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB2004 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Can we still put the franchise tag on Nate or is he going want a long term deal? I think that is the best option for the Buffalo Bils at this point. We have to see what Youboty can do when he gets in there and plays man to man coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share Posted November 20, 2006 Hey DaQuix, why didn't you tell us you were Leo Roth? Resign Nate 843276[/snapback] Good article. I agree with your basic premise but the line about the Pats is incorrect. They are currently $13.8 millon under the cap. I'm sure Tom Brady is really happy that he took a lot less money to stay in New England so they could use that cap space to sign other players.... 843284[/snapback] Sorry. here are some of the teams projected to be at 10 mill or under: Broncos, Panthers, Colts, Chiefs, Bengals, Rams, Ravens, and Bears ... uhh ... if that doesnt explain it Can we still put the franchise tag on Nate or is he going want a long term deal? I think that is the best option for the Buffalo Bils at this point. We have to see what Youboty can do when he gets in there and plays man to man coverage. 843524[/snapback] We promised not too ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Good article.Sorry. here are some of the teams projected to be at 10 mill or under: Broncos, Panthers, Colts, Chiefs, Bengals, Rams, Ravens, and Bears ... uhh ... if that doesnt explain it We promised not too ... 843699[/snapback] May be the bengals will go after him...The Bears have quite a bit of their own players to re-sign. If the Colts re-sign Freeney, they probably won't be in the mix. I think the Panthers have good starting CB already. I am not sure how the Ravens and Rams will be in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 May be the bengals will go after him...The Bears have quite a bit of their own players to re-sign. If the Colts re-sign Freeney, they probably won't be in themix. I think the Panthers have good starting CB already. I am not sure how the Ravens and Rams will be in it. 843705[/snapback] Great Pic. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/photo?slug=b07..._htt104&prov=ap I have always thought Nasty Nate is the man. I did this before, but compare the careers of Champ Bailey and Nate Clements. I think you will be pleasantly shocked. Also, it's harder to get INTs when teams avoided throwing in your direction. Teams know the player Clements is and that's why they pick on McGee. Yes, Clements makes a bonehead play or have a bad game, but generally he is one of the best players on this defense for the last 5 years. And his missed tackles are from aggression, not because he is a soft player. I'll take that type of corner on my team anytime. All I know is that I really want Clements back. I also realize that we need some serious help on the lines. So it will be tough. But considering how inconsistent our D-line play has been throught Clements' tenure here, isn't it more impressive what he has accomplish. Let's give the man his due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Sorry. here are some of the teams projected to be at 10 mill or under: Broncos, Panthers, Colts, Chiefs, Bengals, Rams, Ravens, and Bears ... uhh ... if that doesnt explain it 843699[/snapback] Don't forget the Redskins, oh wait that would throw off your theory a little Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Thats said, both Nate and Fletcher need to be re-signed. My question is what about the franchise tag. I know they "said" they would not franchise Nate, but I'd rather do it anyway than risk losing him for nothing. Would that violate the CBA in any way? 843477[/snapback] Why would it? It was just a gentlemens agreement he made with Marv last offseason. It wasn't a NFL or CBA rule, just an agreement between GM and Coach If they did go back on it and franchise him again, it would just look bad on Marv ethically Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Have you give him his weekly BJ yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nostradamus Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 I would say franchise Clements again... on the condition he is content with being paid as one of the top 5 corners in the game. That would seem to be a fair deal, as that salary would be commensurate with his ability. I hope the Bills won't have to overpay for him, but, lets face facts. If we go in next year with K. Thomas or Youboty as a starter, we're in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantankerous Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 sign him long-term. The Bills cannot afford to lose him. Fu-k the cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts