There are 76 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Schefter: Nate Clements a 'Potential' Cut This Week

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Nate deserved better than Manusky's 10 yard off-coverage, and definitely deserves better than the 49ers fanbase. At least he was well compensated for us wrecking what was (at the time of the signing) a good career.

I actually read somewhere that the DBs are often given a choice of whether to line up in press or off coverage.

-9fA

And I think there in lies the problem - DBs are given a choice? Shouldn't the DC be making that decision given the scheme? Sounds like a coaching/scheme issue to me.

But then again, you don't want to force your players to play in a manner in which they're not comfortable. It's a balance.

-9fA

ITA. However, I'm hoping Fangio/Donatell can get more out of him in terms of coverage than Manusky/Joseph. In any event, he's better than most FA outside of Asomougha. I'm all in favor of upgrading but only if there's a plan in place for an upgrade. IMHO, a rookie in the secondary without an impact player generating pass-rush is not an upgrade to me.

The balance I see that needs to be achieved is between the defensive LOS or backfield; if you're going to pick at OLB at lower rounds, then I recommend not cutting Nate (or bringing in an equivalent or better FA). Keeping Nate, IMHO keeps draft options open. Creating a DIRE need at CB I think isn't the best thing to do in a shortened off-season.

I agree with what you said and what Oakland-Niner said. Cutting Clements at this point in time makes little sense since his contract bonus does not come into full effect till the regular season starts (I think). Furthermore, cutting Clements at this very moment raises a bright flashing neon sign over Santa Clara HQ saying that we'll be drafting PP or AK in the first round. So yes, it makes sense not to cut him at this time.

However, in reference to your first paragraph, I don't believe that Clements' issues arise from scheme and/or coaching. The guy is a 10 year veteran of the league, his poor performance is due to his physical and mental limitations. While the mental limitations may be corrected, it's clear that Clements is half through the down-slope of his career.

In reference to unrestricted FAs, I like Ike Taylor and Brent Grimes. I would be especially happy with Grimes as a consolation prize in the event that we don't win the Asomugha sweepstakes (we likely won't).

I want to keep Clements but I do not want to retain him at $11M. As an owner or a coach, you don't reward mediocrity. In addition, it also sets you shorthanded in future contract negotiations as player value is based on precedent and current wages.

-9fA
Yea, let's cut the best corner on our team so we can draft a rookie ("with speed!" right?) only to watch him torched on passing downs because WE STILL DONT HAVE A FREAKING PASS RUSH. I'm still fuzzy on how it became Nate's fault that opposing QB's have 7-8 seconds to throw the ball. Now do I think we should restructure his contract? Definitely.

But cut him? That'd just be foolish.

You don't get of good CB's unless you have someone better already lined up.
[ Edited by baltien on Mar 4, 2011 at 10:40 AM ]
Originally posted by PTulini:
I can't understand why the 49ers haven't done anything about Nate Clements' contract yet? Either restructure it, or cut him loose.

they may be waiting to see what the likely hood is of obtaining a better corner and possibly sliding him to safety. I could be wrong, just a thought
Originally posted by mryan1004:
Originally posted by PTulini:
I can't understand why the 49ers haven't done anything about Nate Clements' contract yet? Either restructure it, or cut him loose.

they may be waiting to see what the likely hood is of obtaining a better corner and possibly sliding him to safety. I could be wrong, just a thought

Nate has already said repeatedly that he's a corner and will not be a safety. Here or anywhere else.
[ Edited by baltien on Mar 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM ]
Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Nate deserved better than Manusky's 10 yard off-coverage, and definitely deserves better than the 49ers fanbase. At least he was well compensated for us wrecking what was (at the time of the signing) a good career.

I actually read somewhere that the DBs are often given a choice of whether to line up in press or off coverage.

-9fA

And I think there in lies the problem - DBs are given a choice? Shouldn't the DC be making that decision given the scheme? Sounds like a coaching/scheme issue to me.

But then again, you don't want to force your players to play in a manner in which they're not comfortable. It's a balance.

-9fA

ITA. However, I'm hoping Fangio/Donatell can get more out of him in terms of coverage than Manusky/Joseph. In any event, he's better than most FA outside of Asomougha. I'm all in favor of upgrading but only if there's a plan in place for an upgrade. IMHO, a rookie in the secondary without an impact player generating pass-rush is not an upgrade to me.

The balance I see that needs to be achieved is between the defensive LOS or backfield; if you're going to pick at OLB at lower rounds, then I recommend not cutting Nate (or bringing in an equivalent or better FA). Keeping Nate, IMHO keeps draft options open. Creating a DIRE need at CB I think isn't the best thing to do in a shortened off-season.

I agree with what you said and what Oakland-Niner said. Cutting Clements at this point in time makes little sense since his contract bonus does not come into full effect till the regular season starts (I think). Furthermore, cutting Clements at this very moment raises a bright flashing neon sign over Santa Clara HQ saying that we'll be drafting PP or AK in the first round. So yes, it makes sense not to cut him at this time.

However, in reference to your first paragraph, I don't believe that Clements' issues arise from scheme and/or coaching. The guy is a 10 year veteran of the league, his poor performance is due to his physical and mental limitations. While the mental limitations may be corrected, it's clear that Clements is half through the down-slope of his career.

In reference to unrestricted FAs, I like Ike Taylor and Brent Grimes. I would be especially happy with Grimes as a consolation prize in the event that we don't win the Asomugha sweepstakes (we likely won't).

I want to keep Clements but I do not want to retain him at $11M. As an owner or a coach, you don't reward mediocrity. In addition, it also sets you shorthanded in future contract negotiations as player value is based on precedent and current wages.

-9fA

Im not 100% sure but by AK i think you meant Prince Amukamara and unless there is a run on corners, with the 7th pick there is a better than good chance he will be there with or without clements on our roster. If our team is sold on drafting a cornerback our biggest fear should be the cowboys. If partick peterson falls I can see them trading up in front of us to grab him. The falcons gave brent grimes a first round tender so i think he is out of the picture.
Well he can't be cut now till after the new league starts. Looks like Schefter was wrong.
Originally posted by golfing9er:
Well he can't be cut now till after the new league starts. Looks like Schefter was wrong.

  • PaulW
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 259
Originally posted by golfing9er:
Well he can't be cut now till after the new league starts. Looks like Schefter was wrong.

Schefter didn't say he would be cut, he said he was a potential cut.
The only way I see clements getting cut is if we draft peterson or amukamara and even then I think it's doubtful. I say a pay cut is the most likely scenario
Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:
Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Not sure why everyone is so excited? We've let all of our fa's test the market and now we are going to cut Nate. Hooray for the yorks! They've saved a ton of money. Of course now we can only field a half of team. How many daft picks do you guys think we have? We have no center, no qb, one ok corner, no NT, no starting caliber OlB. But hey, if we ever do decide to compete at least we'll have money. GTFO.

There's only a few irreplaceable players on this team. Why would we keep all the guys that were part of a 6-10 team? Clements is slow, plays dumb and jumps routes. He's completely replaceable as he was average at best. Let him walk along with [b]Franklin, Alex Smith, and Manny Lawson.
[/

Whats up with everyone hating on Manny?

Alex and Franklin can leave, but we need Lawson, hes tall but fast at the same time, also a great combination with Willis...

and just one note, before saying that someone should leave, what should be considered is how big of an impact the coaching staff had on our offensive and defensive play, what I'm getting at is that maybe certain players weren't able to really show their full potential, which would make many people want to get rid of players that we should actually keep, such as Lawson.

(**** is excluded)
dont let the door hit you
Nate is a hoss.

Dude can get the pick off

He handled Hasseldick twice, handled Matt Ryan got that forced fumble in Oakland,Carolina,and zona

Dude is a great CB.

His coverage game lacks only against the best.
That idiot Goldson is the one who sucks.
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home