There are 137 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Nate Clements stay or go??

take a pay cut or walk
Go please.
  • Nuns
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 784
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
Go please.

You post frequently. I do not. I don't understand why you wish to let our best corner go? He's better than Spencer and the money doesn't belong to you. I'm perplexed. Keep him
Cut him, let him sign with the Raiders, and I'll take Asomugha on one side, Spencer on the other, Von Miller rushing the passing, and Willis holding things down in the middle.
Originally posted by global_nomad:
Cut him, let him sign with the Raiders, and I'll take Asomugha on one side, Spencer on the other, Von Miller rushing the passing, and Willis holding things down in the middle.

we've got the money, if we can't replace him with something of equal or greater value, and he is willing to play for less then we should keep him.
Originally posted by kezar49er:
Originally posted by matt49er:
Originally posted by Chief:
Clements is overpaid and underrated.

He isn't as good as his pay scale and he isn't as bad as the Webzone makes him out to be.

Restructure and keep him, he is a solid CB and the best on our roster.

this

agreed
Yes

LOL! Clements will 90% be a 49er next year with a restructured deal and the 49ers want him back. Besides who's worse? Clements, Spencer and Goldson or Lawson, Haralson and Brooks. You guys rag on the secondary INT total, but our three starting OLBs have just as few sacks.

[ Edited by NinerGM on Jan 29, 2011 at 07:08:34 ]
...

[ Edited by NinerGM on Jan 29, 2011 at 07:08:13 ]
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by kezar49er:
Originally posted by matt49er:
Originally posted by Chief:
Clements is overpaid and underrated.

He isn't as good as his pay scale and he isn't as bad as the Webzone makes him out to be.

Restructure and keep him, he is a solid CB and the best on our roster.

this

agreed
Yes

LOL! Clements will 90% be a 49er next year with a restructured deal and the 49ers want him back. Besides who's worse? Clements, Spencer and Goldson or Lawson, Haralson and Brooks. You guys rag on the secondary INT total, but our three starting OLBs have just as few sacks.

Very good point. We don't have that one guy that can cause consistent pressure but in 2009 we were tied for 3rd in the NFL in sacks and this year we were tied for 14th but yet our cover corner rarely get INT's.

Nate had 3 INT's this year with one being irrelevant since he gave it right back and only had 1 INT last year.

So even when we are getting pressure, he still doesn't get the takeaways that you'd like.

With that said, I wouldn't be opposed to him moving to #2 on running downs and playing the slot on passing downs .

I think Spencer is a better cover corner but Nate is a better "all around" corner in which I would put him on the field with Nmandi or Prince in likely running situations and take the chance if the team is willing to pass, that he can cover the offenses #2 WR.
Originally posted by NinerGM:

Yes

LOL! Clements will 90% be a 49er next year with a restructured deal and the 49ers want him back. Besides who's worse? Clements, Spencer and Goldson or Lawson, Haralson and Brooks. You guys rag on the secondary INT total, but our three starting OLBs have just as few sacks.

That's a horrible comparison. They are both equally underachieving, terribly.
With proper coaching, I can imagine Brooks doing something constructive.

Clements stays only at a "reasonable" price.
  • dald1
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 547
Originally posted by global_nomad:
Cut him, let him sign with the Raiders, and I'll take Asomugha on one side, Spencer on the other, Von Miller rushing the passing, and Willis holding things down in the middle.

a man can dream cant he? lol
Originally posted by Sims84:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by kezar49er:
Originally posted by matt49er:
Originally posted by Chief:
Clements is overpaid and underrated.

He isn't as good as his pay scale and he isn't as bad as the Webzone makes him out to be.

Restructure and keep him, he is a solid CB and the best on our roster.

this

agreed
Yes

LOL! Clements will 90% be a 49er next year with a restructured deal and the 49ers want him back. Besides who's worse? Clements, Spencer and Goldson or Lawson, Haralson and Brooks. You guys rag on the secondary INT total, but our three starting OLBs have just as few sacks.

Very good point. We don't have that one guy that can cause consistent pressure but in 2009 we were tied for 3rd in the NFL in sacks and this year we were tied for 14th but yet our cover corner rarely get INT's.

Nate had 3 INT's this year with one being irrelevant since he gave it right back and only had 1 INT last year.

So even when we are getting pressure, he still doesn't get the takeaways that you'd like.

With that said, I wouldn't be opposed to him moving to #2 on running downs and playing the slot on passing downs .

I think Spencer is a better cover corner but Nate is a better "all around" corner in which I would put him on the field with Nmandi or Prince in likely running situations and take the chance if the team is willing to pass, that he can cover the offenses #2 WR.

its a terrible point, we dont start 3 olb's as he indicates so i tuned out his comment
  • sfout
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 6,193
Originally posted by crabman82:
Originally posted by Sims84:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by kezar49er:
Originally posted by matt49er:
Originally posted by Chief:
Clements is overpaid and underrated.

He isn't as good as his pay scale and he isn't as bad as the Webzone makes him out to be.

Restructure and keep him, he is a solid CB and the best on our roster.

this

agreed
Yes

LOL! Clements will 90% be a 49er next year with a restructured deal and the 49ers want him back. Besides who's worse? Clements, Spencer and Goldson or Lawson, Haralson and Brooks. You guys rag on the secondary INT total, but our three starting OLBs have just as few sacks.

Very good point. We don't have that one guy that can cause consistent pressure but in 2009 we were tied for 3rd in the NFL in sacks and this year we were tied for 14th but yet our cover corner rarely get INT's.

Nate had 3 INT's this year with one being irrelevant since he gave it right back and only had 1 INT last year.

So even when we are getting pressure, he still doesn't get the takeaways that you'd like.

With that said, I wouldn't be opposed to him moving to #2 on running downs and playing the slot on passing downs .

I think Spencer is a better cover corner but Nate is a better "all around" corner in which I would put him on the field with Nmandi or Prince in likely running situations and take the chance if the team is willing to pass, that he can cover the offenses #2 WR.

its a terrible point, we dont start 3 olb's as he indicates so i tuned out his comment

Clements is a damn good corner, however he is over the hill by all means. Check out this thread

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/thread.php?num=152125&page=1

look at his stats
(Tackles(Solo+Assists)/Sacks/Forced Fumbles/Interceptions/Pass Defend)
N. Clements.....72(82)--1--3--3--10
Now take a look at the rest of our starting CB/FS/SS
D. Goldson.......59(80)--1--0--1--5
S. Spencer.......38(42)--.5--1--3--9
R. Smith..........38(42)--0--0--1--4
T. Mays...........31(38)--0--1--0--2

UM ACCORDING TO THIS OUR CORNERS PLAYED THE BEST
If anyone needs to go it is Goldson and we need to sign Dawan Landry to SS and move Smith to FS.
Originally posted by Nuns:
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
Go please.

You post frequently. I do not. I don't understand why you wish to let our best corner go? He's better than Spencer and the money doesn't belong to you. I'm perplexed. Keep him

Him being our best corner is not saying much. He's a liability on the outside, his ball skills are subpar, he's overly aggressive and has a strong history of biting on double moves. The only strong attribute that he has is that he's a good open field tackler.

I would rather be training a rookie out there than retaining Clements at his current salary. Good teams don't keep highly overpaid players on the field. While it's not out personal money that is paying Clements, it's the principle in negotiating deals and the fact that the money could likely be used to address other needs.

-9fA

[ Edited by 9erfanAUS on Jan 30, 2011 at 21:02:05 ]