Is Clements playing like our #1 CB? (earning his $47 Mill Guarenteed)

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

You are still arguing??

-A TD is a TD, I don't care if the QB handed it to him to return it back or the kicker pitched it to him to return it back!

-I don't care if you are bored, asleep, in mars, or at school...Math is Math. If you are going to use a mathematical equation to validate a point, do it right!

-What??? Man, forget you! I'm done here cause no matter what I come back with you are going to keep b***hing back with irrelivent BS! If you dont like him then tell the 49ers to give you a refund for the money you spent to get the guy here! Or go play yourself! Or wait, let our alternative guy play... Brown??

Hmm, again you are saying my math is wrong. And AGAIN I am agreeing. I prepared everyone for it. And it is basically correct plus/minus a couple tackles. Give me a break if you're gonna b***h that much about it. Get over the math. And maybe if you read other posts before blabbering dumb points, you'd realize I agree that he is our best CB, that he has been solid, and has had no help from the pass rush. However, he had none in Buffalo and was more of a game-changer. Also, I am trying to look at him from a CB standpoint and I haven't seen game-changing INTS or any pick-6s (which is why you sign people for so much money at this position). And, yea, sure buddy, I'll get right on that refund. Calm down Literal Larry, I've made good points, agreed with what I was wrong on, and invalidated you're lame arguments.

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Quote:
Howard Balzer of The Sports Xchange took a look at Nate Clements' contract and concluded that it is not eight years, $80 million as was reported. The deal is actually seven years for $64.02 million.

Balzer reported, "Clements did not receive a signing bonus, but there is a $10 million roster bonus this year, which counts immediately against the salary cap. He will also receive a guaranteed $10 million option bonus in 2008, which for cap purposes will prorate against the cap from 2008 through 2013 at $1.67 million a year."

When the 49ers exercise the option, the final year of the contract, which carries a salary of nearly $16 million, is wiped out.

http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/default.asp?item=518810

... and as stated, no pass rush and Mike Nolan will make a fool of any DB. Nate Clements is not perfect. His one flaw that irritates me is that his natural aggressiveness tends to make him bite on the double move too much. Otherwise, he is a really good CB in his own right. If we can improve on the pass rush and have him press more often (he turned and ran with WRs too much, or gave large cushions by design), we will see that investment really paying off. Can you imagine our depth chart without him?

No, my god we would be in the tank. But hey, maybe we would have gone after other CBs that were FAs in the 2008 offseason? Not that there was much to really go after. Maybe two lesser solid corners? I don't know. I love NC, I just don't know if he has preformed up to what everyone felt he was going to be.

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Quote:
Howard Balzer of The Sports Xchange took a look at Nate Clements' contract and concluded that it is not eight years, $80 million as was reported. The deal is actually seven years for $64.02 million.

Balzer reported, "Clements did not receive a signing bonus, but there is a $10 million roster bonus this year, which counts immediately against the salary cap. He will also receive a guaranteed $10 million option bonus in 2008, which for cap purposes will prorate against the cap from 2008 through 2013 at $1.67 million a year."

When the 49ers exercise the option, the final year of the contract, which carries a salary of nearly $16 million, is wiped out.

http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/default.asp?item=518810

... and as stated, no pass rush and Mike Nolan will make a fool of any DB. Nate Clements is not perfect. His one flaw that irritates me is that his natural aggressiveness tends to make him bite on the double move too much. Otherwise, he is a really good CB in his own right. If we can improve on the pass rush and have him press more often (he turned and ran with WRs too much, or gave large cushions by design), we will see that investment really paying off. Can you imagine our depth chart without him?

No, my god we would be in the tank. But hey, maybe we would have gone after other CBs that were FAs in the 2008 offseason? Not that there was much to really go after. Maybe two lesser solid corners? I don't know. I love NC, I just don't know if he has preformed up to what everyone felt he was going to be.

Well, he hasn't, but it's hard to blame him. Again, all we need to do is look over at Denver's awful pass rush and see how Champ Bailey (or Bly for that matter) was performing lately. A secondary can only be as good as the pass rush allows. Add Nolan and his bend-don't-break cowardice, and Nate has been underwhelming. Still... there are not many top-notch CBs at a young age that will be readily available in FA, and we pounced on a good one when we needed to add true talent to our D. Hopefully, we can get the rest of the D playing better to take advantage of his services. I really think we are ONE player away from being a dominant D. ( NT )

Originally posted by Memphis9er:
He didn't really get 80 million guys,it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 60,not sure what they exact number is.He would look better on a team with better pass rush for sure,any DB would,hopefully our guys will step it up this year and make the opposing QB throw a few more up for grabs.

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Howard Balzer of The Sports Xchange took a look at Nate Clements' contract and concluded that it is not eight years, $80 million as was reported. The deal is actually seven years for $64.02 million.

Balzer reported, "Clements did not receive a signing bonus, but there is a $10 million roster bonus this year, which counts immediately against the salary cap. He will also receive a guaranteed $10 million option bonus in 2008, which for cap purposes will prorate against the cap from 2008 through 2013 at $1.67 million a year."

When the 49ers exercise the option, the final year of the contract, which carries a salary of nearly $16 million, is wiped out.

both correct. 7 at $64mm isn't too terrible given what else is going on out there right. Also, looks how bad Denver's secondary was last year even with Champ. You need a passrush and good surrounding cast to have a real shutdown corner.

Statistically it's very hard to judge a CB. Even watching the games doesn't always make it clear. What can look like the CB getting beat for a TD could have actually been a failure on the Safety's part. Our team has definitely had it problem with it's safeties. Lewis plays more like a LB than a safety and is actually somewhat of a liability in coverage. And as we all know, Roman just plain sucks. Most long passes are completed because the safety didn't provide proper coverage over the top. Interceptions don't work either, because the better CBs aren't challenged as much, meaning fewer opportunities. The fact is that be it $60 mil or $80 mil, I've always thought that was too much money for a CB, but I'm still gad that Nate is on our team. He makes us better and means we don't have to worry about that side of the field. He may not be Nnamdi Asomugha, but he's the best BD we've had in years and wins far more battles than he loses.

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

You are still arguing??

-A TD is a TD, I don't care if the QB handed it to him to return it back or the kicker pitched it to him to return it back!

-I don't care if you are bored, asleep, in mars, or at school...Math is Math. If you are going to use a mathematical equation to validate a point, do it right!

-What??? Man, forget you! I'm done here cause no matter what I come back with you are going to keep b***hing back with irrelivent BS! If you dont like him then tell the 49ers to give you a refund for the money you spent to get the guy here! Or go play yourself! Or wait, let our alternative guy play... Brown??

Hmm, again you are saying my math is wrong. And AGAIN I am agreeing. I prepared everyone for it. And it is basically correct plus/minus a couple tackles. Give me a break if you're gonna b***h that much about it. Get over the math. And maybe if you read other posts before blabbering dumb points, you'd realize I agree that he is our best CB, that he has been solid, and has had no help from the pass rush. However, he had none in Buffalo and was more of a game-changer. Also, I am trying to look at him from a CB standpoint and I haven't seen game-changing INTS or any pick-6s (which is why you sign people for so much money at this position). And, yea, sure buddy, I'll get right on that refund. Calm down Literal Larry, I've made good points, agreed with what I was wrong on, and invalidated you're lame arguments.

Don't get your panties in a ruffle cause I disagreed with you and invalidated your arguments (with stats). If you don't want others opinion who's different than yours, then DON'T BEGIN POSTS! Or, put a disclaimer in them saying (only for those who agree with me). Oh, and I can officially say NOOB now since my status recently changed!

It's amazing how many people get caught up wit INTs, and by the way Nate does have a TD, just not a INT TD, but INT's don't mean as much as people think, Nate is not a great ball hawk, he is a shut down corner. Vs. let's say Antonio Cromartie who is a great ball hawk, but not a very good shut down corner. Nate's been worth every penny, and for him to play as well as he did ie shutting down the likes of Mega-Tron, one of the 2 dudes on the Maddden 10 cover (basically every time we play Arizona Nate locks down Fitzgerald) without a consistent pass rush is pretty darn comendable, oh I'm sorry the dude did have one really bad game that yes I want erased from my memory in Dallas, but there isn't a guy in this league especially a corner who hasn't had one of those days. Nate is a top 5 corner, I love the guy, and he's gonna help us get to the playoffs this year, and probably have his best year, with a better safety help in hand, and a more aggressive defense around him. So in review, great job Mr. McCloughan, in signing this guy.

It was a bad signing. Clements is a decent corner but he is NOT a super star. He is not even in the top 5 in the nfl. The niners WAY overpaid for him, which is to be expected because not to many free agents want to come here anymore. Some of you might get butt hurt by that statement but its the truth.

Originally posted by susweel:
It was a bad signing. Clements is a decent corner but he is NOT a super star. He is not even in the top 5 in the nfl. The niners WAY overpaid for him, which is to be expected because not to many free agents want to come here anymore. Some of you might get butt hurt by that statement but its the truth.

Haha, no one is butt-hurt by your statements. We recognize it for an attention-getter and nothing more. ( need a hug? ) If nothing else, it just shows that opinions vary, and that's fine too.

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

You are still arguing??

-A TD is a TD, I don't care if the QB handed it to him to return it back or the kicker pitched it to him to return it back!

-I don't care if you are bored, asleep, in mars, or at school...Math is Math. If you are going to use a mathematical equation to validate a point, do it right!

-What??? Man, forget you! I'm done here cause no matter what I come back with you are going to keep b***hing back with irrelivent BS! If you dont like him then tell the 49ers to give you a refund for the money you spent to get the guy here! Or go play yourself! Or wait, let our alternative guy play... Brown??

Hmm, again you are saying my math is wrong. And AGAIN I am agreeing. I prepared everyone for it. And it is basically correct plus/minus a couple tackles. Give me a break if you're gonna b***h that much about it. Get over the math. And maybe if you read other posts before blabbering dumb points, you'd realize I agree that he is our best CB, that he has been solid, and has had no help from the pass rush. However, he had none in Buffalo and was more of a game-changer. Also, I am trying to look at him from a CB standpoint and I haven't seen game-changing INTS or any pick-6s (which is why you sign people for so much money at this position). And, yea, sure buddy, I'll get right on that refund. Calm down Literal Larry, I've made good points, agreed with what I was wrong on, and invalidated you're lame arguments.

Don't get your panties in a ruffle cause I disagreed with you and invalidated your arguments (with stats). If you don't want others opinion who's different than yours, then DON'T BEGIN POSTS! Or, put a disclaimer in them saying (only for those who agree with me). Oh, and I can officially say NOOB now since my status recently changed!

...are you kidding me? What did you invalidate? That my math was wrong? GOOD JOB! I agreed with you all 4 times you've tried to bash me with that that my math was wrong. And what I don't like about your post is that you're ignorantly blaming me for saying things that are wrong? What have I said that's wrong? That Nnamdi has "worse" stats than Clements over 6 years? Maybe you didn't read the post where I quoted that he had been targeted less than 30 times last season and that's why Nate has "better" stats.
You have no evidence to back up anything you are saying OTHER than the math. Read my responses to your opinions -- which actually you really don't have much of -- you are just saying that my math is wrong you really haven't said much about Nate Clements. And just because I don't have 200 posts doesn't mean I haven't been around here for a while.
And you still have "member" showing for me. I'm not really sure what has changed other than you have more posts, wow good job. I am just punking you because you decided to attack me personally after I responded with my own opinions.

Nolan's "Big Nipple" Defense -- the offense gets to suckle like a little baby -- is to blame. The philosophy was Bend and then Bend Over

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Originally posted by MiamiNiner:

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Originally posted by MiamiNiner:

He is exactly what the niners needed at the time we signed him and has played great. We have not had to worry about capabilities of the CB on that side. More pass rush and even better statistics, including more interceptions, TDs, etc

For $80 million, he was needed as a game-changer. As someone who could help the rest of the secondary get better. As someone who was feared and game-planned against by other teams. I see none of that. Walt Harris has been more productive and influential in the team. It's just not what I had in mind when signing him.

Walt Harris is injured and aint playing.

...I know this. I am looking at the past 2 seasons... Walt Harris has taken over games and sealed a couple. Raiders/Seahawks for instance. Has Nate? No.

he was guarding them so good that he bulger/hasselback had to throw to walt's side

Originally posted by niner4life21:
Two words:

Pass Rush.

it was a great signing
Nate is top 5 Corner in the league
u will see this year he will kickass

Go 49ERS

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

You are still arguing??

-A TD is a TD, I don't care if the QB handed it to him to return it back or the kicker pitched it to him to return it back!

-I don't care if you are bored, asleep, in mars, or at school...Math is Math. If you are going to use a mathematical equation to validate a point, do it right!

-What??? Man, forget you! I'm done here cause no matter what I come back with you are going to keep b***hing back with irrelivent BS! If you dont like him then tell the 49ers to give you a refund for the money you spent to get the guy here! Or go play yourself! Or wait, let our alternative guy play... Brown??

Hmm, again you are saying my math is wrong. And AGAIN I am agreeing. I prepared everyone for it. And it is basically correct plus/minus a couple tackles. Give me a break if you're gonna b***h that much about it. Get over the math. And maybe if you read other posts before blabbering dumb points, you'd realize I agree that he is our best CB, that he has been solid, and has had no help from the pass rush. However, he had none in Buffalo and was more of a game-changer. Also, I am trying to look at him from a CB standpoint and I haven't seen game-changing INTS or any pick-6s (which is why you sign people for so much money at this position). And, yea, sure buddy, I'll get right on that refund. Calm down Literal Larry, I've made good points, agreed with what I was wrong on, and invalidated you're lame arguments.

Don't get your panties in a ruffle cause I disagreed with you and invalidated your arguments (with stats). If you don't want others opinion who's different than yours, then DON'T BEGIN POSTS! Or, put a disclaimer in them saying (only for those who agree with me). Oh, and I can officially say NOOB now since my status recently changed!

Um, no it didn't. Nice try though, noob.