Schefter: Nate Clements a 'Potential' Cut This Week

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

I swear I've seen Nate play 15 yards off the los. Thats safety territory. There's comfortable, then there's playing not to get beat. Im not sure what scheme that is. It's quick out/hitch heaven for any opposing OC.

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

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

I swear I've seen Nate play 15 yards off the los. Thats safety territory. There's comfortable, then there's playing not to get beat. Im not sure what scheme that is. It's quick out/hitch heaven for any opposing OC.

Yeah, I remember that occurring. I think it was in the preseason against the Raiders last season or the season before. I believe when Nate was asked about it by the media, he said "not to worry" or something along that lines since he was trying out a technique.

-9fA

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

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

I swear I've seen Nate play 15 yards off the los. Thats safety territory. There's comfortable, then there's playing not to get beat. Im not sure what scheme that is. It's quick out/hitch heaven for any opposing OC.

Yeah, I remember that occurring. I think it was in the preseason against the Raiders last season or the season before. I believe when Nate was asked about it by the media, he said "not to worry" or something along that lines since he was trying out a technique.

-9fA

Probably a lack of speed/confidence issue. I think the best thing for his career as well as the 49ers is for him to give SS a shot. I could see him being a pro bowler at the safety position.

I can't believe he lead the team in stuffs. He is the opposite of what we wanted.

f**k it, we don't need him.... in fact...we dont need....a QB, CB, C, OLB, Saftey, quality depth or anything. We got Carr, Spencer & Brown, maybe Heitman or maybe Wragge, Haralson/Brooks/some guy named Giddeon, Mays/Reggie/Curtis Taylor...........

Let's say it together "Championship!!!"

If our defense was fully built and Clements was one of the factors we rank so low on defense, then I could see a reason for cutting him. People forget the finger pointing at Manusky, Lawson, Haralson, Goldson, Clements is the least of our troubles on defense. I'd rather see what Clements can do with a new DC and what is supposed to be a more aggressive approach.

I can't understand why the 49ers haven't done anything about Nate Clements' contract yet? Either restructure it, or cut him loose.

Not a big deal. A cornerback can be targeted in the first or second round.

Originally posted by RishikeshA:
Not a big deal. A cornerback can be targeted in the first or second round.

yup and that SAME rookie cornerback will be targeted by opposing QBs our whole season.

I'm not saying we shouldn't draft a CB, but imo Terrell Brown is HORRIBLE and has been Horrible for awhile now...even though Sing and company tried to force feed him to us, by moving Nate to special teams a couple of years ago... Most of the time he is always beat.

if we go into the season with Spencer and Brown as our starting cbs..then we will have trouble from the beginning of the season. So unless they have some other proven vet who can step in, I would rather stick with Nate.

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.

Why they have until the begining of the season? I would keep him at least until after the draft. That we can keep teams guessing.

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.

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.

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.