Willie Clay
GSTD JtJ
We do not have anyone who can step in for Clay without loosing a step.
We lost a veteran presence (who no one seemed to have a problem with until he
got cut).
Willie Clay may not have been supurb safety, but he was better than average,
and he was certainly better than anyone we have to replace him with. This move
may be validated by talking about 'capology' and the 'business of football',
but at the end of the day, we are a worse team without him.
just my $0.02
jeff
DangerMouse
Sadly I tend to agree. While Clay wasn't anything special last year,
in fact he's one of the weak links in coverage and blitz situations, who
do we have that's better? I only hope they know what they're doing, and
that Chris Carter is capable of carrying the load.
Mark
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
KMTHALER
>
>
>I don't care what anyone says. We were a better team with Willie.
- Cool then you probably are not interested in discussing this issue only
declaring your opinion is best. I can live with that unless you make a dumb
statement that we have to call you on. Let's see how you did.
>
>We do not have anyone who can step in for Clay without loosing a step.
- I am not sure I am willing to grant this as Clay was the slowest of the four
starts in the Defensive Backfield. Further it was an excepted fact that he was
the least proficient tackler. So if Chris Carter or Tony George covers more
ground or comes up and does run support then we have not lost a step.
>We lost a veteran presence (who no one seemed to have a problem with until
>he
>got cut).
- I agree with you we lost a veteran presence. Further I would agree that
there is no one on the roster who can fill this role...never mind anyone at
FS. However you can't say no one had a problem with him. Obviously someone
did and my guess is that someone was the head coach. Otherwise he would still
have a job.
>
>Willie Clay may not have been supurb safety, but he was better than average,
>and he was certainly better than anyone we have to replace him with.
- Time will tell but as of this moment I tend to agree with you. However I am
hopeful that one of the younger guys steps in and replaces Clay...preferably
Carter as he is the smartest of the whole group.
This
>move
>may be validated by talking about 'capology' and the 'business of football',
>but at the end of the day, we are a worse team without him.
- I have no idea how you can make such an idiotic statement. Without cutting
Clay you do not get the draftees into camp. Were there other options sure.
Cut Jefferson then you bitch about weakness in the WR corp. Cut Moss and we
have a hole at RT as it is evident that Ellis is still not and begining to look
like he may never be ready. Cut Rucci or Lane and do not really save a whole
lot of money. So your options are to keep Clay and not get Woody or Kat or
Faulk into camp or cut him. Seems to me there are better without him.
Kent Thaler
Section 321
Beatwriter for Patriotnutz!
http://www.sportznutz.com/nfl/nwe/
Visit www.sportznutz.com
The Spiritual Mentor
http://www.wrestlingnutz.com
TIMOTHY NELSON
can't keep having first round picks be backups, or nickel backs.Weei
mentioned the possibility of having Tebucky start at FS, and keeping Steve
Israel stay at the other corner. Wasn't Tebucky a safety in college?I agree
it kind of stinks Clay had to go, but next year there will be others leaving
so we can keep Law. I'm starting to think that if Mcginest doesn't have an
outstanding year, let him and his high salary go so we can keep law and
Milloy.
GSTD JtJ
>I have no idea how you can make such an >idiotic statement. Without cutting
>Clay you do not get the draftees into >camp. Were there other options
sure..... >So your options are to keep Clay and not >get Woody or Kat or
>Faulk into camp or cut him. Seems to >me there are better without him.
According to the papers, Ty Law's cap figure is $3 million and a new contract
could free up as much as $1 million.
jeff
John E Larkspur
: Jeff wrote:
:>We do not have anyone who can step in for Clay without loosing a step.
: - I am not sure I am willing to grant this as Clay was the slowest of the four
: starts in the Defensive Backfield. Further it was an excepted fact that he was
: the least proficient tackler. So if Chris Carter or Tony George covers more
: ground or comes up and does run support then we have not lost a step.
But it's not so much that Clay was horrible as that the other guys
are just really fast/hard hitters. And since when did run support become
a problem for this defense? With Milloy back there, what we really want
out of our free safety is cover skills. Clay is very good in zone
coverage and below average man-to-man, but no matter how you slice it, he
was never a liability on the field. At least not compared to the
liabilities of other defenses in the league.
:>Willie Clay may not have been supurb safety, but he was better than average,
:>and he was certainly better than anyone we have to replace him with.
: - Time will tell but as of this moment I tend to agree with you. However I am
: hopeful that one of the younger guys steps in and replaces Clay...preferably
: Carter as he is the smartest of the whole group.
Am I the only person who remembers dumping on Chris Carter?
Remember when we were saying that it's okay he's skipping camp for med
school because that's where his future is? No, he didn't actually ever
apply to med school (stupid lying Globe), but that's beside the point.
Don't let yourselves be manipulated by the way Carter has been
reinvented. The Patriots' approach to FS mimics the way the Dolphins
are handling the RB slot: throw a whole bunch of unproven talent at it
and assume someone will stick.
I don't have anything personal against Chris Carter. He's a good
person with a good head on his shoulders. But if he ends up making this
defense better through his play as a starting free safety, then I'll have
to chalk him up as my biggest ever mis-evaluation of a Patriot's playing
ability.
: This move
:>may be validated by talking about 'capology' and the 'business of football',
:>but at the end of the day, we are a worse team without him.
: - I have no idea how you can make such an idiotic statement. Without cutting
: Clay you do not get the draftees into camp. Were there other options sure.
: Cut Jefferson then you bitch about weakness in the WR corp. Cut Moss and we
: have a hole at RT as it is evident that Ellis is still not and begining to look
: like he may never be ready. Cut Rucci or Lane and do not really save a whole
: lot of money. So your options are to keep Clay and not get Woody or Kat or
: Faulk into camp or cut him. Seems to me there are better without him.
Just to reaffirm my own position (because I think I'm so damn
important), cutting Clay was not a disastrous move, and yes it was
better than making no move, but it was not the best move the Patriots
could have made. Again, let's use Jefferson as an example. Clay and
Jefferson make exactly the same amount of money, and both of their
contracts were in their final years. Neither was going to be re-signed.
Let's look at the talent behind Jefferson: Simmons, Brown, Brisby, Ladd,
Morey, Mackey, and more added daily. Behind Clay? Carter, George, Whigham,
Washington, Hamilton, and Gilliard. Now, which of these talent gaps is
larger, do you think? Jefferson shouldn't even be the starter anyway.
Then ask yourself, which position is more difficult, FS or WR? Obviously
safety. And which position allows you to do more damage to your team, WR
or FS? Again, safety. The worst thing a WR can do is not get open.
Finally, which position has a larger pool of available talent that can
come in and start right away? Wide Receiver.
This is a no-brainer. The only reason to release the safety is
either a)the team has personal problems with Clay, or b) Pete Carroll
doesn't want to take risks at any position other than the one he knows best.
Lark
Andrew Fleischer
> Lark
Lark, I couldn't have said it better myself. Your comments about
Jefferson and Clay hit the bullseye. The Pats needed to free up X amount
of dollars and these two guys were sort of on the bubble. Whose position
is easier to fill?? As you stated Jefferson should not even be the
starter at WR and the WR position is easier to replace in this league, at
least with a quality player. Your reasons make sense for releasing him.
I'd just like to throw a question out to the NG.
If you had to drop either Jefferson or Clay who would it be and why????
I've taken enough flak over the last few months for my mild Jefferson
bashing, so I guess everyone knows who I would say!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Fleischer
Carleton University
Email address: afle...@chat.carleton.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike & Susan Romano
better than cutting Jefferson, if for no other reason than Clay has been
a vocal critic of Carroll on occasion. I really think Carroll realized
this is his put up or shut up year and he wants to surround himself with
guys who believe in what he is doing. I also believe that Carroll, who
is a pretty good defensive mind, decided that the biggest area to be
addressed on the defense was the lack of speed from Clay's safety
position. I tend to disagree, since I think more depth on the defensive
line (especially with McGinnest's chronic injury problem) is a more
pressing need. I really think the writing was on the wall for Clay when
the Pats drafted Tony George and Marcus Washington. If the move
backfires, Carroll is probably gone. If it pans out and the deffensive
line stays healthy, then the Pats defense will have the ability to shut
down the pass as well as they have the run.
MikeR
KMTHALER
John Larkspur) that Jefferson is a far more important person to keep on this
team than Willie Clay. The Pats WR seem to be a frail bunch (and the bringing
in of Henry Ellard last year would cement my arguement) and having atleast one
dependable guy is crucial. Further I have been on an anti-WIllie Clay kick for
about 1.5 years as he infuriates me with his inablity to tackle.
Havinf said all that with Ted Johnson going down a different dynamic now
occurs. Let's Say you start Carter at FS, Milloy as SS and then KatzenMoyer or
Merkerson at MLB. Much softer up the middle than you were with Clay, Johnson
and Milloy. My point is you could easily replace one but replacing two is
going to expose some of the Pats weaknesses.
SO Lark, the solution maybe we both get what we want. the Pats may have to cut
Jefferson to pick up another LB and FS.