PromoTheRobot Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 How smart does Baltimore look now giving up two #3's for Willis McDoofus? How about San Fran breaking the bank for Clements? I can recall how certain posters here declared the Earth would spin off its axis if the Bills didn't keep these two "irreplaceable" players. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 How about San Fran breaking the bank for Clements? Nate Clements is one of the game's best corners and played great last season. And the defense took a big step back without him. His contract was huge... but then again, so was Derrick Dockery's. I'd rather have Clements, who ranks among the best at this position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 How smart does Baltimore look now giving up two #3's for Willis McDoofus? How about San Fran breaking the bank for Clements? I can recall how certain posters here declared the Earth would spin off its axis if the Bills didn't keep these two "irreplaceable" players. PTR Hey, I don't want to compare the Bills front office to other bad front office moves just to rationalize that the Bills front office is OK. Glad to be on the giving end for both Clements and Willis, but when you don't make the playoffs for 10 years and have losing records for most of those years, the front office looks bad. Not many franchises in the NFL are as bad as Buffalo over the same period so I'm not throwing stones anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDD Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 How smart does Baltimore look now giving up two #3's for Willis McDoofus? How about San Fran breaking the bank for Clements? I can recall how certain posters here declared the Earth would spin off its axis if the Bills didn't keep these two "irreplaceable" players. PTR I don't like McGahee either but the bottum line is the guy can play. He made the probowl last year man. We had to replace him using our 1st rounder on Marshawn Lynch. Seems to me we could have used that 1st rounder at another spot instead of treading water. That's just the way things run at One Bills Drive- lose a guy and replace him don't advance. Kind of like having Clements then having to use this years's 1st rounder to replace him with McKelvin. Sure Clements made alot of money, but he is a top CB and is a playmaker. Just ask the Dolphins if they were glab he left Buffalo for San Fran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Nate Clements is one of the game's best corners and played great last season. And the defense took a big step back without him. His contract was huge... but then again, so was Derrick Dockery's. I'd rather have Clements, who ranks among the best at this position. He played ok last season, not great. Nate had only 4 int (none for touchdowns) and didn't make the pro bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 We traded McGahee and a 5th for Trent Edwards, Marcus Stroud, and a 7th. We are far better off without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 He played ok last season, not great. Nate had only 4 int (none for touchdowns) and didn't make the pro bowl. According to Pro Football Outsiders, Nate shut down the offense's primary receiving option 63% of the time -- a higher percentage than ANY other CB in the NFL. So yes, he played pretty damn well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 According to Pro Football Outsiders, Nate shut down the offense's primary receiving option 63% of the time -- a higher percentage than ANY other CB in the NFL. So yes, he played pretty damn well. I can't find DB stats, only DL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 According to Pro Football Outsiders, Nate shut down the offense's primary receiving option 63% of the time -- a higher percentage than ANY other CB in the NFL. So yes, he played pretty damn well. still not good enough for the PB last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 According to Pro Football Outsiders, Nate shut down the offense's primary receiving option 63% of the time -- a higher percentage than ANY other CB in the NFL. So yes, he played pretty damn well. I agree with you. Clements is a very good CB playing on a very bad team. However, I still to this day think the niners overpaid for his services. As good as Nate is, I would never put him in the same class as a Champ Bailey. Also, if you go back and look at all the numbers, you will see that the average yards given up per catch by McGee is one of the lowest for a CB in the NFL, if not the lowest. McGee and Greer are good to above average corners who are not breaking the bank here. One of the things that Nate supporters harped on before his release that made me laugh was that Buffalo had one of the best passing defenses in the nfl during his last season as a Bill. What this logic doesn't take into account is that Buffalo's run defense was so porous, most teams didn't need to pass against the bills because they could run the ball with relative ease. This definitely skewed the stats. Anyway, I think Buffalo's corners now are good enough and I'll even go as far as saying I would take Windfield over Clements any day of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Doug Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Nate Clements is one of the game's best corners and played great last season. And the defense took a big step back without him. His contract was huge... but then again, so was Derrick Dockery's. I'd rather have Clements, who ranks among the best at this position. For what its worth, San Fran's defense didn't really improve much with him. 2006 (without Clements): Passing yards allowed/game=223.2, INT=14, PTS/game=25.8, overall rank=26th 2007 (with Clements): Passing yards allowed/game=227.7, INT=12, PTS/game=22.8, overall defense rank=25th It's a team sport. We don't need to blow our load on just one (apparently small) piece of the puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 How smart does Baltimore look now giving up two #3's for Willis McDoofus? How about San Fran breaking the bank for Clements? I can recall how certain posters here declared the Earth would spin off its axis if the Bills didn't keep these two "irreplaceable" players. PTR OK, I agree. The Bills front office is not the suckiest in the NFL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Nate Clements is one of the game's best corners and played great last season. And the defense took a big step back without him. His contract was huge... but then again, so was Derrick Dockery's. I'd rather have Clements, who ranks among the best at this position. youd rather have $100million tied up in ONE cornerback and have rookies/backups starting at at least 2 positions on the OLine than a solid OLine and a rookie CB? clements leaving was not the only obstacle the Defense faced last year either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 still not good enough for the PB last year He played on a pretty bad team. Bad teams generally don't send Pro Bowlers in droves. Trufant, Harris and Newman all played for division winners, played in big games and were on a bigger stage throughout the season. Clements himself played at a Pro Bowl level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Clements himself played at a Pro Bowl level. Did you notice this post? Nate's Pro Bowl level of play apparently amounted to a tiny ripple in a very large pond. Once and for all, can any Clements fan admit he wasn't and isn't worth what SF paid, and it would have been silly for the Bills to tie up that kind of money in him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 youd rather have $100million tied up in ONE cornerback and have rookies/backups starting at at least 2 positions on the OLine than a solid OLine and a rookie CB? clements leaving was not the only obstacle the Defense faced last year either. No, I'd rather pay top dollar to a top-5 CB than overpay with top-5 money to a guard who isn't one of the top guards in the NFL. But hey, at least they spent their first round pick on CB this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 How smart does Baltimore look now giving up two #3's for Willis McDoofus? How about San Fran breaking the bank for Clements? I can recall how certain posters here declared the Earth would spin off its axis if the Bills didn't keep these two "irreplaceable" players. PTR FO 1 Clements and sWillis 0. Nate Clements is one of the game's best corners and played great last season. And the defense took a big step back without him. His contract was huge... but then again, so was Derrick Dockery's. I'd rather have Clements, who ranks among the best at this position. If he had asked for half of what he signed for with SF and the Bills let him walk I'd be very critical. Letting him walk for that contract was a smart move. Hey, I don't want to compare the Bills front office to other bad front office moves just to rationalize that the Bills front office is OK. Glad to be on the giving end for both Clements and Willis, but when you don't make the playoffs for 10 years and have losing records for most of those years, the front office looks bad. Not many franchises in the NFL are as bad as Buffalo over the same period so I'm not throwing stones anywhere. The point is that both moves were made by the current FO. I think it bodes well for us. I don't like McGahee either but the bottum line is the guy can play. He made the probowl last year man. We had to replace him using our 1st rounder on Marshawn Lynch. Seems to me we could have used that 1st rounder at another spot instead of treading water. That's just the way things run at One Bills Drive- lose a guy and replace him don't advance. Kind of like having Clements then having to use this years's 1st rounder to replace him with McKelvin. Sure Clements made alot of money, but he is a top CB and is a playmaker. Just ask the Dolphins if they were glab he left Buffalo for San Fran. McGahee is addition by subtraction and Marshawn is a lot better player. He played ok last season, not great. Nate had only 4 int (none for touchdowns) and didn't make the pro bowl. $80 million dollar man?! We traded McGahee and a 5th for Trent Edwards, Marcus Stroud, and a 7th. We are far better off without him. youd rather have $100million tied up in ONE cornerback and have rookies/backups starting at at least 2 positions on the OLine than a solid OLine and a rookie CB? clements leaving was not the only obstacle the Defense faced last year either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Did you notice this post? Nate's Pro Bowl level of play apparently amounted to a tiny ripple in a very large pond. Once and for all, can any Clements fan admit he wasn't and isn't worth what SF paid, and it would have been silly for the Bills to tie up that kind of money in him? He did his job, shutting down the #1 receiver of the opposition the majority of the time. In turn, teams effectively stopped throwing to his side and attacked the rest of the secondary. As I said, I'd rather pay top-dollar to a top-dollar worthy player. Clements ranks among the best in his position, so he will command top-dollars. Dockery is NOT among the best in his position, but is paid like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Just ask the Dolphins if they were glab he left Buffalo for San Fran. Unfortunately for the Fins, Clements' absence made no difference for them. They still got swept, and will again this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seq004 Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Nate Clements is one of the game's best corners and played great last season. And the defense took a big step back without him. His contract was huge... but then again, so was Derrick Dockery's. I'd rather have Clements, who ranks among the best at this position. Nate Clements is NOT one of the game's best corners. In fact last year here was very average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts