dave mcbride Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/The+W...tm?mode=afceast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 i wish we could get something for him if he leaves... :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I think the Bills could have the cap to sign him.......or am i mistaken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 18, 2006 Author Share Posted December 18, 2006 and this, from PFW whispers: Redskins sources indicate the team is likely to ask several veterans — perhaps CB Shawn Springs, QB Mark Brunell, DE Renaldo Wynn and ORT Jon Jansen — to redo their deals in order to clear up cap space to make a run at some free-agent defenders. The apple of their eye reportedly is Bills CB Nate Clements. http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/The+W...hispers2124.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Word is the Bills and Clements have had preliminary discussions regarding a new deal, but that they were so far apart they decided that any further discussion would be a waste of time. Oh, well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Thanks for the link. Not a surprise--he was gone the day we decided to agree not to franchise him. It's not about cap room, it's about money. We're talking about perhaps the premier free agent on the market with lots of rich teams around who have cap space. $15-$20 million dollar signing bonus is a possibility. Oakland A's fans don't worry about signing Barry Zito. We shouldn't worry about signing Nate Clements. Enjoy his final games as a Bill. How much is Asante Samuel going to cost? What college players fit the Tampa-2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roscoeparrishfanII Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I think the fans should do something next week to show how much we appreciate nc. Signs and chants, maybe send him some mail? I know it doesn't mean much, and it all comes down to money. But if the contracts are close it might make a difference. I remember when we played the bengals when TKO was going to be a free agent . He was blown away by the fans respose to him, then he signed with us. I actually think ralphs going to open the check book. After seeing his recent comments I know he thinks the team is close. I think he knows this is his last chance to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Thanks for the link. Not a surprise--he was gone the day we decided to agree not to franchise him. It's not about cap room, it's about money. We're talking about perhaps the premier free agent on the market with lots of rich teams around who have cap space. $15-$20 million dollar signing bonus is a possibility. Oakland A's fans don't worry about signing Barry Zito. We shouldn't worry about signing Nate Clements. Enjoy his final games as a Bill. How much is Asante Samuel going to cost? What college players fit the Tampa-2? 870834[/snapback] Not to mention that Nate's play is related to how many games he has left before renegotiating by the inverse-square law... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Does the transition tag give us anything if he leaves? Or just the ability to match a contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I actually think ralphs going to open the check book. After seeing his recent comments I know he thinks the team is close. I think he knows this is his last chance to win. 870839[/snapback] All he's done recently is complain about money and large market vs small market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I'd argue that letting Clements go would be akin to when we let Pat Williams leave. The result would set the entire defense back. I think teams run on us so much because they can't pass and a good reason for that is Clements. If we keep Clements and shore up the run defense, we'll have an above average defense next year. As good as Youbuty may be, he's still a huge unkown and no one else has shown they can consistently stop a reciever like Nate has. I think it essential that we keep Nate on this team. On the other hand, I understand Nate may want to leave. He may want more money than is reasonable. But, I do think we should offer him top 3 money. If he demands to be the top CB in pay and doesn't budge, then I tag him again (despite the promise) and get a 1st round pick when he leaves. He's good and critical to our defense; however, is he the top CB in the league? That I'm not so sure about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Does the transition tag give us anything if he leaves? Or just the ability to match a contract? 870852[/snapback] Nope. We apparently agreed not to tag him (in fact what he and the Bills agreed to do is all supposition and no one outside of the two sides that agreed no exactly what they agreed to, neither side can be absolutely trusted in what they tell outsiders as the game here (like the draft) is to lie to others particular the media like PFW to create leverage to reach your goals). If we agreed not to tag him (either franchise or transistion) we agreed not to tag him. Either tag would eliminate or severely limit the bidding war for him. The transition tag would actually be worse for both the Bills and NC as under the rules other teams could negotiate a deal with him which would be severely limited in value for NC as teams would have to give up draft choices to get him, but it would virtually guarantee he is gone for the Bills as some team would likely be willing to make a deal for him. The Bills could try to play that game and benefit over simply losing him for nothing as the rules stipulate under FA, but to do so would lower the value Nate gets and leave a sour taste in multiple mouths which could impact the Bills rep for dealing with players in solid manner. if in fact the Bills agreed not to put the tag on him and did, they would get and deserve a rep as a lying partner to work with an it would likely hinder our ability to get FAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 Wide Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 oh if only we could have used some of that cap space this season to work a long term deal with Nate. We could have given him some huge roster bonus this season with all the free cap space and had a reasonable deal for down the line. coulda...shoulda....woulda..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 This last month has established that we have a lot fewer needs than we appeared to have. I see us drafting a DT and some OL's and not a huge need for free agents. Marv likes to keep the stars on his team, and I think Ralph will pay the bucks to keep clements. I don't think Clements has some big need to go elsewhere and playing with a defense he is familiar with has at least some cachet. I thin we can and will make a legitimate run to get him. What impresses me is not only the rookie play, but the way our backups at linebacker and defensive back, at running back, tight end, and some on the offensive line have shown their stuff. I think that puts the signing of Nate in a different light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I'd argue that letting Clements go would be akin to when we let Pat Williams leave. The result would set the entire defense back. I think teams run on us so much because they can't pass and a good reason for that is Clements. If we keep Clements and shore up the run defense, we'll have an above average defense next year. As good as Youbuty may be, he's still a huge unkown and no one else has shown they can consistently stop a reciever like Nate has. I think it essential that we keep Nate on this team. On the other hand, I understand Nate may want to leave. He may want more money than is reasonable. But, I do think we should offer him top 3 money. If he demands to be the top CB in pay and doesn't budge, then I tag him again (despite the promise) and get a 1st round pick when he leaves. He's good and critical to our defense; however, is he the top CB in the league? That I'm not so sure about. 870869[/snapback] agree 100% with this post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koufax Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I hope we get him back, and am hopeful that with the team surge he will wan to stay. But if we get into an irrational spending contest with Dan Snyder we are going to lose (whether we win the contest or not). Just like when A-Rod left the Mariners for the Rangers for $252 million, it was unfortunate for the Mariners, but it would have been worse to pay him $253 and keep him. I really really want Nate back, and think we are in a position to offer him a LOT of money. But if the Redskins get crazy, I think we can find a way to move on, and think putting Ashton in for Nate is not a big enough downgrade to merit completely breaking the bank and having our hands tied for being able to make other moves. I don't view this as a Pat Williams moment at all. We will definitely court Nate, treat him right, and make him a big offer, and hope he accepts it. If he doesn't take it we will pencil in Ashton and Terrance as our corners, and then look for other places to improve our team to compensate for the downgrade at corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 1. The promise to not franchise is almost certainly a written agreement some place. If it's not, then Marv / Ralph / Dick are still waaay too honorable to renege on a promise. The franchise tag just will not happen. 2. Nate will become the highest paid corner in the league. It's not about whether he's better than Champ Bailey or not. It's just a matter of the market. There are lots of rich teams with lots of cap space who have a need at CB and will pay through the roof. I seriously doubt we can match the offers that will be thrown at him. And this isn't even taking into consideration the question of whether Nate is a Buffalo man who is happy living in this city. We have almost no chance of re-signing Nate. I would be shocked. Bring this post back up and call me an idiot if it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkyMannn Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 All he's done recently is complain about money and large market vs small market. 870858[/snapback] You got that right. There is no reason to expect RW to open the wallet and spend next year as we are like $10 million under the cap this season and he didn't spend it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloRebound Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Personally, I think Clements would be an idiot for leaving now if the difference in money is not ridiculous. This team is young and on its way to better days. If the difference is a $18m bonus with the 'Skins or a $13-14m bonus with the Bills, maybe the Bills have a chance at keeping him. He got paid $7m this year as the franchise player and perhaps Marv earned some goodwill by agreeing not to franchise him next year. I don't think the Bills should just let him walk without a serious offer. I'm not saying Marv and Ralph should or would offer him an $18m bonus, but perhaps a $12m bonus offer at least makes it harder for Clements to leave. That being said, Fletcher is the heart and soul of the defense, and I'd rather lose Clements than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt in KC Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I don't view this as a Pat Williams moment at all. We will definitely court Nate, treat him right, and make him a big offer, and hope he accepts it. If he doesn't take it we will pencil in Ashton and Terrance as our corners, and then look for other places to improve our team to compensate for the downgrade at corner. 870891[/snapback] Actually, this is more like a Winfield moment, isn't it? I think that to succeed as a team, you need to get good value (production for the money) from your starters and backups. Sure, Nate is playing great, but the FA money is going to be insane. I just couldn't tie up all that money in a player who may cool off when the money's not riding on the level of his play, and to whom a single fluke play (injury) could really hurt this team for years. That's too much risk tied up in a single player. With schoolyard rules (just picking one player at a time before the other team does) sure I pick Nate early. But paying him the money 3+ starters should make is crazy for a team supposedly rebuilding. I can't fault Nate for leaving unless the money is really close (to us "only" a million dollars might sound close). This is his big payday, where all the risk he's taken on pursuing this carreer pays off for his family, and future generation(s). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts