Do Fans Owe Clayton An Apology?

[neepo13]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='06 November 2009 - 05:12 PM' timestamp='1257545568' post='274481']
I could bring up several receivers who have the same or lower percentages than top receivers in the league. Here are a few:

Lee Evans has 23 catches on 50 targets.
Braylon Edwards has 23 catches on 50 targets
DeSean Jackson has 24 catches on 50 targets
Terrell Owens has 23 catches on 50 targets
Eddie Royal has 20 catches on 49 targets

Most people would agree all of those guys are better than Clayton but they have percentages similar to him.




But how do you know it will be improvement? What good NFL team tweaks their lineup when it's clicking? And I'll ask you again, what has Clayton done to be demoted? Nothing. He's caught every on target pass thrown his way except for two. He's fine where he is.

P.S. He dropped one on target pass against NE. The other pass would've been a sensational grab had he come down with it and I doubt most receivers in the league could've made that grab.
[/quote]

Clayton should be demoted because he didnt magically turn into Randy Moss in the offseason.

[FerrariFan87]

I reeeeeeeealy hope he has a big game on Sunday, then perhaps his doubters will be quieted, if only for a little while

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='FerrariFan87' date='06 November 2009 - 06:13 PM' timestamp='1257549205' post='274520']
I reeeeeeeealy hope he has a big game on Sunday, then perhaps his doubters will be quieted, if only for a little while
[/quote]

The doubterd will never be quieted. If he has a big game, it will only further prove how inconsistent he is. However, consistency is the exception not the norm with the receiver position. Even if the best receivers in the league have several games during the season where they only catch two or three passes. Whether it's the team's gameplan changing or the other team simply playing good defenses, a receiver won't catch 5+ passes and go over 100 yards every game no matter who he is. People just can't accept that when it comes to Clayton.

[hammer]

[quote name='flynismo' date='06 November 2009 - 04:56 PM' timestamp='1257541002' post='274426']
And, how am I wrong again?? You said most receivers hover around 50%.

Your chart backs up what I said though, which is that most guys are in the high 50s and low 60s.
[/quote]

Even though I think you are wrong about Clayton, you are absolutely right about the data. This chart does not correlate to the best recievers hovering at 50-60%. Of course, the term "best receivers" is not qualified, but if you are going by performance and not name recognition, then the best recievers are from 65% to 75% efficient.

[flynismo]

[quote name='neepo13' date='06 November 2009 - 07:05 PM' timestamp='1257548712' post='274516']
What the hell do you want from him? He's had 1 bad game this season and that was vs. SD. The other 5 games, although not blow you away performances, were decent games by him.

What do you want him to put up a 10 catch 200 yard performance every week? Thats what it seems like. The way you talk about the guy, you'd think defenses take him completely out of the game every week.
[/quote]


You guys kill me. There is no reasoning with the Clayton lovers.

If you think those other six games were decent, then there's no point even about this.

Yawn......

[flynismo]

[quote name='neepo13' date='06 November 2009 - 07:07 PM' timestamp='1257548845' post='274517']
Clayton should be demoted because he didnt magically turn into Randy Moss in the offseason.
[/quote]


Great, another Clayton lover that twists my words to fit their story.

How about he should be demoted for being a scrub?

[flynismo]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='06 November 2009 - 07:18 PM' timestamp='1257549510' post='274526']
The doubterd will never be quieted. If he has a big game, it will only further prove how inconsistent he is. However, consistency is the exception not the norm with the receiver position. Even if the best receivers in the league have several games during the season where they only catch two or three passes. Whether it's the team's gameplan changing or the other team simply playing good defenses, a receiver won't catch 5+ passes and go over 100 yards every game no matter who he is. People just can't accept that when it comes to Clayton.
[/quote]


Consistency is a relative term. Not a single player in the league that plays like a pro bowler every week.

No matter how you slice it up, there's no way that anyone can justify Clayton having 13 of 16 games with less than 40 yards last year.

Come to think of it, Clayton IS very consistent. Not in the way we want him to be though.

[RavingRaven]

[quote name='flynismo' date='06 November 2009 - 08:21 PM' timestamp='1257556903' post='274576']
Great, another Clayton lover that twists my words to fit their story.

How about he should be demoted for being a scrub?
[/quote]

The Clayton lovers kill me. They are like the sports dads who refuse to believe their kid sucks. Take a step back and look at Clayton objectively, did he really turn out to be worth a first round pick?

[PuRock]

I'm disappointed in Clayton because he has failed to live up to his billing. Clayton is doing a fine job as a #3 and even as a #2 guy. He just isn't the guy I expected. If I listed our #1 draft picks. Most of them have lived up to, or are starting to, their draft status. We had a complete busts in Taylor and Boller. Then you have guys like Clayton and Grubbs. Wouldn't you like to see Clayton be a part of the first group?

So if you feel satisfied with what Clayton has done, more power to you. He has the ability to do so much more and mean so much more to our team.

Jonathan Ogden
Ray Lewis
Peter Boulware
Duane Starks
Chris McAlister
Jamal Lewis
Todd Heap
Ed Reed
Terrell Suggs
Haloti Ngata
Joe Flacco
Micheal Oher

Ben Grubbs
Mark Clayton

Kyle Boller
Travis Taylor

[hoppin_wire93]

We need to respect him more. He stunned everyone last week. If he plays that same way against the Bengals, we definitely owe him an apology

[Bltravens]

[quote name='PuRock' date='06 November 2009 - 08:05 PM' timestamp='1257559558' post='274592']
I'm disappointed in Clayton because he has failed to live up to his billing. Clayton is doing a fine job as a #3 and even as a #2 guy. He just isn't the guy I expected. If I listed our #1 draft picks. Most of them have lived up to, or are starting to, their draft status. We had a complete busts in Taylor and Boller. [b]Then you have guys like Clayton and Grubbs[/b]. Wouldn't you like to see Clayton be a part of the first group?

So if you feel satisfied with what Clayton has done, more power to you. He has the ability to do so much more and mean so much more to our team.

Jonathan Ogden
Ray Lewis
Peter Boulware
Duane Starks
Chris McAlister
Jamal Lewis
Todd Heap
Ed Reed
Terrell Suggs
Haloti Ngata
Joe Flacco
Micheal Oher

Ben Grubbs
Mark Clayton

Kyle Boller
Travis Taylor
[/quote]
How do you list Grubbs in there with Clayton. Grubbs has been a very good G for us and has only played 2 full seasons.

[Ed_Reed_Pick_Six]

You should apologise to Mark for saying he has a furry back.

[neepo13]

[quote name='flynismo' date='06 November 2009 - 08:16 PM' timestamp='1257556567' post='274572']
You guys kill me. There is no reasoning with the Clayton lovers.

If you think those other six games were decent, then there's no point even about this.

Yawn......
[/quote]
Great, here we go with nick names again. I honestly dont see what was so bad about his play in those 5 games. He had a solid day, nothing more nothing less. You want a guy with eye popping stats, every week and thats not Clayton which is why you dont like him.

[quote name='flynismo' date='06 November 2009 - 08:21 PM' timestamp='1257556903' post='274576']
Great, another Clayton lover that twists my words to fit their story.

How about he should be demoted for being a scrub?
[/quote]

A scrub? lol. Give it up. If you think Clayton is a scrub, I dont think you know what a scrub is.
[quote name='RavingRaven' date='06 November 2009 - 08:47 PM' timestamp='1257558432' post='274585']
The Clayton lovers kill me. They are like the sports dads who refuse to believe their kid sucks. Take a step back and look at Clayton objectively, did he really turn out to be worth a first round pick?
[/quote]

Uh, I think you need to go back and read. The arguement is not about whether in hindsight he was worth a 1st round pick. I think we can all admitt in hindsight, he wasnt. And I dont recall seeing anyone say otherwise. The point is even though he turned out not to be worth that 1st round pick, he's still got value to us right now. Clayton haters, Flynismo specifically, talks about the guy like he's so bad that he shouldnt even be in the NFL. If Clayton got cut today, he'd have a job on another NFL team as soon as he cleared waivers. Depending on his contract, he probably would be claimed off waivers by another team.

There is no point running around here bashing the guy because he didnt turn into the big stud wr, we were all hoping for when we drafted him in the 1st round. He isnt great but he's solid and he'll be with this team for a very long time. So get over it and get used to it.

[quote name='PuRock' date='06 November 2009 - 09:05 PM' timestamp='1257559558' post='274592']
I'm disappointed in Clayton because he has failed to live up to his billing. Clayton is doing a fine job as a #3 and even as a #2 guy. He just isn't the guy I expected. If I listed our #1 draft picks. Most of them have lived up to, or are starting to, their draft status. We had a complete busts in Taylor and Boller. Then you have guys like Clayton and Grubbs. Wouldn't you like to see Clayton be a part of the first group?

So if you feel satisfied with what Clayton has done, more power to you. He has the ability to do so much more and mean so much more to our team.

Jonathan Ogden
Ray Lewis
Peter Boulware
Duane Starks
Chris McAlister
Jamal Lewis
Todd Heap
Ed Reed
Terrell Suggs
Haloti Ngata
Joe Flacco
Micheal Oher

Ben Grubbs
Mark Clayton

Kyle Boller
Travis Taylor
[/quote]
I understand completely. You were expecting a solid number 1 and got a solid number 2 guy. But is that enough reason to get rid of the guy? Because thats what Clayton haters are argueing. They wanted him to be a number 1 guy. He's not a number 1 guy, so he has no value at wideout at all and we should get rid of him. Its not acceptable to have just a solid wr. He has to be one of the top wr's in league or he's a waste.

I'd rather have a solid wr like Clayton falling below expectations, rather than be stuck with a bunch guys Clarence Moore and Randy Hymes. Because thats the kind of depth you get when you get rid of guys like Clayton.

[darklight1216]

[quote name='flynismo' date='06 November 2009 - 08:42 PM' timestamp='1257558145' post='274584']
Consistency is a relative term. Not a single player in the league that plays like a pro bowler every week.

No matter how you slice it up, there's no way that anyone can justify Clayton having 13 of 16 games with less than 40 yards last year.

Come to think of it, Clayton IS very consistent. Not in the way we want him to be though.
[/quote]
You know, Fly. I think that deep down you really like Mark Clayton. He's that guy that you love to hate, and when he's gone, you're going to miss throwing him under the bus.
[quote name='RavingRaven' date='06 November 2009 - 08:47 PM' timestamp='1257558432' post='274585']
The Clayton lovers kill me. They are like the sports dads who refuse to believe their kid sucks. Take a step back and look at Clayton objectively, [b]did he really turn out to be worth a first round pick?[/b]
[/quote]
If he were the fourth round pick and Mason were the first rounder, this would not even be an issue.

[PuRock]

[quote name='Bltravens' date='06 November 2009 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1257562166' post='274599']
How do you list Grubbs in there with Clayton. Grubbs has been a very good G for us and has only played 2 full seasons.
[/quote]

Yea I was debating whether to lump Grubbs up top or in the middle. Maybe give him a couple more years and it won't be debatable at all.

[PuRock]

[quote name='neepo13' date='06 November 2009 - 10:03 PM' timestamp='1257563011' post='274603']
I understand completely. You were expecting a solid number 1 and got a solid number 2 guy. But is that enough reason to get rid of the guy? Because thats what Clayton haters are argueing. They wanted him to be a number 1 guy. He's not a number 1 guy, so he has no value at wideout at all and we should get rid of him. Its not acceptable to have just a solid wr. He has to be one of the top wr's in league or he's a waste.

I'd rather have a solid wr like Clayton falling below expectations, rather than be stuck with a bunch guys Clarence Moore and Randy Hymes. Because thats the kind of depth you get when you get rid of guys like Clayton.
[/quote]

I'm not one that wants to get rid of Clayton, per se. We really don't have any other option. I can't see any scenario where we aren't going to bring him back next year. I'm happy he's productive in X number of games a year. And I do agree I do not want to go through the trial and errors without a productive guy (i.e. Hymes, Moore).

What we need is a young WR that can hopefully be our #1 guy, then Clayton would be a perfect fit on our team. And I'll get over the fact that Clayton didn't live up to his billing. But until then I still want to see more out of him. 3rd down catches, coming back to the ball after a broken play, YAC.

I was a big supporter of Clayton prior to this year. I thought it was the system. But now even with Flacco, I feel like Clayton still disappears way to often.

[FerrariFan87]

[quote name='PuRock' date='06 November 2009 - 11:20 PM' timestamp='1257564012' post='274617']
I'm not one that wants to get rid of Clayton, per se. We really don't have any other option. I can't see any scenario where we aren't going to bring him back next year. I'm happy he's productive in X number of games a year. And I do agree I do not want to go through the trial and errors without a productive guy (i.e. Hymes, Moore).

What we need is a young WR that can hopefully be our #1 guy, then Clayton would be a perfect fit on our team. And I'll get over the fact that Clayton didn't live up to his billing. But until then I still want to see more out of him. 3rd down catches, coming back to the ball after a broken play, YAC.

I was a big supporter of Clayton prior to this year. I thought it was the system. But now even with Flacco, I feel like Clayton still disappears way to often.
[/quote]

I just think Cam needs to figure out a way to get Clayton the ball in space more often so he can utilize his speed and quickness

[PuRock]

[quote name='FerrariFan87' date='07 November 2009 - 12:05 AM' timestamp='1257570328' post='274693']
I just think Cam needs to figure out a way to get Clayton the ball in space more often so he can utilize his speed and quickness
[/quote]

Which is why he would be an awesome slot receiver. But D-Will isn't going to be that other outside guy. And IMO Washington can't play on the outside.

[FerrariFan87]

[quote name='PuRock' date='07 November 2009 - 01:07 AM' timestamp='1257570459' post='274696']
Which is why he would be an awesome slot receiver. But D-Will isn't going to be that other outside guy. And IMO Washington can't play on the outside.
[/quote]

Can't know unless we try, right?

[darklight1216]

[quote name='FerrariFan87' date='07 November 2009 - 12:08 AM' timestamp='1257570506' post='274697']
Can't know unless we try, right?
[/quote]
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Two can play the trite expressions game. XD

[MagicianCamille]

What is with the weekly apology threads? These are professional athletes, they get paid to produce on the field.

I think people on this forum are overly negative towards Clayton, but nobody owes him an apology because he did/does his job.

[FerrariFan87]

[quote name='darklight1216' date='07 November 2009 - 01:11 AM' timestamp='1257570680' post='274701']
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Two can play the trite expressions game. XD
[/quote]

I am not implying it's broken, just that every week there should be some new wrinkle introduced into the gameplan just to make the next team think about it. Going 3 wide with Mason and Washington on the outside with Clayton at slot could be lethal.

[flynismo]

[quote name='darklight1216' date='06 November 2009 - 11:07 PM' timestamp='1257563238' post='274605']
You know, Fly. I think that deep down you really like Mark Clayton. He's that guy that you love to hate, and when he's gone, you're going to miss throwing him under the bus.
[/quote]


Hey now, I'll be driving the bus, and if he leaves, I'll just buy a map.

[flynismo]

[quote name='neepo13' date='06 November 2009 - 07:05 PM' timestamp='1257548712' post='274516']
The way you talk about the guy, you'd think defenses take him completely out of the game every week.
[/quote]


wwweeeeelllllll..............

When you consider what I just said about being held under 40 yards in 13 out of 16 games last year (and two or three, forgt which exactly, games without a single reception), that's exactly what is happening.

[hammer]

In 2006, Clayton faired well when compaired to NFL top line recievers.

1. M. Clayton, BAL, 67 catches, 939 yds, 14.0 ypc, 5 tds

2. D. Mason, BAL, 68 catches, 750 yds, 11.0 ypc, 2 tds

3. H. Ward, PIT, 89 catches, 875 yds, 9.8 ypc, 6 tds

4. L. Fitzgerald, STL, 69 catches, 946 yds, 13.7 ypc, 6 tds

5. W. Welker, MIA, 67 catches, 687 yds, 10.3 ypc, 1 td

6. P. Burress, PIT, 63 catches, 988 yds, 15.7 ypc, 10 tds

7. B. Edwards, CLE, 61 catches, 884 yds, 14.5 ypc, 6 tds

Judging by these stats, it appears that Clayton has NOT been a four year bust. That's just not fair.

[hammer]

[quote name='MagicianCamille' date='07 November 2009 - 01:11 AM' timestamp='1257570692' post='274702']
What is with the weekly apology threads? These are professional athletes, they get paid to produce on the field.

I think people on this forum are overly negative towards Clayton, but nobody owes him an apology because he did/does his job.
[/quote]

Yeah under normal circumstances I would agree with your rationale. But what we did to Clayton after the infamous "NE Drop" was ANYTHING BUT normal.

We had a rhetorical "lynch-mob" on this board, all liquored-up, and we tortured him. I'm not talking about that old-weak CIA waterboarding kinda torture either. We did a Mexican Mafia (below the border version) job on Clayton.

Honestly, it got so ugly that the Mods even ran for cover. I'm just questioning did we overreact, and do we need to apologize for it?

[flynismo]

[quote name='neepo13' date='06 November 2009 - 11:03 PM' timestamp='1257563011' post='274603']
Great, here we go with nick names again. I honestly dont see what was so bad about his play in those 5 games. He had a solid day, nothing more nothing less. You want a guy with eye popping stats, every week and thats not Clayton which is why you dont like him.



A scrub? lol. Give it up. If you think Clayton is a scrub, I dont think you know what a scrub is.


Uh, I think you need to go back and read. The arguement is not about whether in hindsight he was worth a 1st round pick. I think we can all admitt in hindsight, he wasnt. And I dont recall seeing anyone say otherwise. The point is even though he turned out not to be worth that 1st round pick, he's still got value to us right now. Clayton haters, Flynismo specifically, talks about the guy like he's so bad that he shouldnt even be in the NFL. If Clayton got cut today, he'd have a job on another NFL team as soon as he cleared waivers. Depending on his contract, he probably would be claimed off waivers by another team.

There is no point running around here bashing the guy because he didnt turn into the big stud wr, we were all hoping for when we drafted him in the 1st round. He isnt great but he's solid and he'll be with this team for a very long time. So get over it and get used to it.


I understand completely. You were expecting a solid number 1 and got a solid number 2 guy. But is that enough reason to get rid of the guy? Because thats what Clayton haters are argueing. They wanted him to be a number 1 guy. He's not a number 1 guy, so he has no value at wideout at all and we should get rid of him. Its not acceptable to have just a solid wr. He has to be one of the top wr's in league or he's a waste.

I'd rather have a solid wr like Clayton falling below expectations, rather than be stuck with a bunch guys Clarence Moore and Randy Hymes. Because thats the kind of depth you get when you get rid of guys like Clayton.
[/quote]


Well, I can agree that we're better off with Clayton than guys like Moore and Taylor.
That's part of my frustration with Clayton...he clearly has the physical tools to be doing much better, perhaps even a bona fide #1, like Mason in his prime.
But much like Boller, the physical tools are there, but the mental aspect is severly lacking, and is what held both of these guys back from realizing their potential.
And that's what makes it even more frustrating, because the mental part of the game can be improved. You can't teach speed and agility, but you sure as heck can learn how to identify defensive schemes and how to exploit them, how to overcome size mismatches and even use it to your advantage, and so on......it's not like he's a football mastermind but was blessed with the athleticism of a slug.
He CAN improve, but he hasn't, and doesn't look like he ever will. Nothing gets my goat more than wasted potential.

OT-

I get a kick out of how everyone has silently agreed upon names for each side of the Clayton fence....we have the Clayton lovers, and the Haters.

[flynismo]

[quote name='MagicianCamille' date='07 November 2009 - 01:11 AM' timestamp='1257570692' post='274702']
What is with the weekly apology threads? These are professional athletes, they get paid to produce on the field.

I think people on this forum are overly negative towards Clayton, but nobody owes him an apology because he did/does his job.
[/quote]


haha, yeah, I'm waiting for the Chris Carr apology thread. But that may be quite a while in coming.

[flynismo]

[quote name='hammer' date='07 November 2009 - 02:01 AM' timestamp='1257573686' post='274722']
Yeah under normal circumstances I would agree with your rationale. But what we did to Clayton after the infamous "NE Drop" was ANYTHING BUT normal.

We had a rhetorical "lynch-mob" on this board, all liquored-up, and we tortured him. I'm not talking about that old-weak CIA waterboarding kinda torture either. We did a Mexican Mafia (below the border version) job on Clayton.

Honestly, it got so ugly that the Mods even ran for cover. I'm just questioning did we overreact, and do we need to apologize for it?
[/quote]


Did we overreact? I guess it's possible, it all depends on how you thought of Clayton prior to the game. I don't think we did,collectively, because years of disappointment and frustration has been building, and then he pretty much cost us any chance of winning a tremendously important game; one that could have playoff implications.

Do we need to apologize? Heck no. Many of us have been very patient and supported him through some really bad times. Once upon a time, even I supported him and turned a blind eye in hopes that my faith would be rewarded.
But essentially, a lot of us felt that he "screwed us over" for the last time in NE.

Personally I love the guy; he's a good teammate and a better person. I wish he would get it together, for his sake just as much as for the sake of our team.
But I think that ship has sailed. I won't be surprised to see us find his replacement in the offseason. Doesn't mean he's going anywhere; but we gotta cut our losses at some point and move on.

[Ed_Reed_Pick_Six]

Mark Clayton threads are getting so old. He makes an error, people want to crucify him. He makes a nice play or two, and suddenly there's apology threads. Back and forth we go in this love-hate relationship.