Mark Clayton Signs His Tender

[Milton145]

I have absolutely no problem with this. They guy can make the tough catch in between defenders and down the field and has a great set of hands and goes up to get the ball. Had consistency issues against Number 2 corners but can light it up with less pressure where he probably fits more naturally.

I think some people are too hard on Clayton. I think he has more natural hands than Mason because I usually see the guy get the ball at it's highest point and pull it down with his hands. He is a Derrick Mason clone. The way they run and their build has me confused sometimes when they are on the field haha. But both do have their own problems. Mason (not bashing him at all, he's my favorite player in the NFL), though able to make the tough catch, body catches a little too frequently sometimes which leads to more drops on his part. More than Clayton I would expect.

Clayton, has all the talent you need in a receiver except for consistency. Though having him with less pressure could help him. Plus, with our receiving core being very stacked at the moment, we might see the best out of Clayton this year so he can keep his job. Even though he has made plays for us in the past, he just isn't the consistent playmaker we need but can be a factor in a hopefully high powered passing game this season should he claim the #3 or #4 WR spot.

[i]Mod Note: Please include a link for posts like these [url="http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Clayton-Washington-Koch-sign-RFA-tenders.html"]LINK[/url][/i]

[Ed_Reed20]

I'm really interested to see what Mark's role will be next season. I read nothing of him getting reps as a returner in mini-camps, Stallworth is penciled in as the #3 WR right now and with the other TEs and Rice, I don't see the #4 WR contributing much.

We'll just have to wait and see.

[Boldinmore]

[quote name='Milton145' date='20 May 2010 - 03:56 PM' timestamp='1274388982' post='412496']
I have absolutely no problem with this. They guy can make the tough catch in between defenders and down the field and has a great set of hands and goes up to get the ball. Had consistency issues against Number 2 corners but can light it up with less pressure where he probably fits more naturally.

I think some people are too hard on Clayton. I think he has more natural hands than Mason because I usually see the guy get the ball at it's highest point and pull it down with his hands. [b]He is a Derrick Mason clone.[/b] The way they run and their build has me confused sometimes when they are on the field haha. But both do have their own problems. Mason (not bashing him at all, he's my favorite player in the NFL), though able to make the tough catch, body catches a little too frequently sometimes which leads to more drops on his part. More than Clayton I would expect.

Clayton, has all the talent you need in a receiver except for consistency. Though having him with less pressure could help him. Plus, with our receiving core being very stacked at the moment, we might see the best out of Clayton this year so he can keep his job. Even though he has made plays for us in the past, he just isn't the consistent playmaker we need but can be a factor in a hopefully high powered passing game this season should he claim the #3 or #4 WR spot.
[/quote]

That's where I stopped reading. That is very disrespectful to say. Mason is amazing.

Clayton signed for 2.5 million for one year. That's a lot of money for a 4th string WR. So basically if he doesn't beat out Stallworth, he is gone. Guaranteed.

[Milton145]

[quote name='Boldinmore' date='20 May 2010 - 05:03 PM' timestamp='1274389436' post='412504']
That's where I stopped reading. That is very disrespectful to say. Mason is amazing.

Clayton signed for 2.5 million for one year. That's a lot of money for a 4th string WR. So basically if he doesn't beat out Stallworth, he is gone. Guaranteed.
[/quote]

I love Mason too (as I said in my post) but I was more talking about the way they look on the field, nothing more

[XxSizzleXx]

Our 2nd string receiver from last year slides all the way down to 4, add in a couple young TE's and it feels good to be this spoiled on offense for once!

[Boldinmore]

[quote name='Milton145' date='20 May 2010 - 04:06 PM' timestamp='1274389617' post='412506']
I love Mason too (as I said in my post) but I was more talking about the way they look on the field, nothing more
[/quote]

I know what you're saying. I was a huge Clayton fan in 2006 and thought the world of him but he has let me down so much. I think it's time to just move on. Like I said, 2.5 million for an injured 4th string WR who struggles with seperation is way too much. He needs to beat out Donte to make the team.

[T-ray]

If this was a pass-happy offense like the Colts, Cardinals, or the Saints, then I'd give him a shot. But since this isn't a pass-first team, I cannot, in no way possible, justify giving him yet another shot when we have young, unproven talent at Wr just waiting for their chances.

[Romo Ravens]

What's so funny about Clayton, is that he'll be a stud anywhere else. But here, he cannot get it going. At first, before we had Flacco and even McNair, I thought his inconsistency was because of the QB play, but since getting those two, Clayton has shown a case of the dropsies and disappears from time to time.

But I have a feeling that if Brees, Warner, Brady etc., were his QB, he'd put up numbers that actually relate to the round he got drafted in. But either way, we don't need to keep developmental WR's anymore. Even though Stallworth [i]is[/i] penciled in as the number three, let's hope it's more than just lead. Bye-bye Mark, bye-bye D-Willie.

[JohnnyTsunami10]

I deffinently want this guy gone and Williams. We have young recievers that can do the same exact things as those two for less money and who are younger and haven't been given four-five years. I know Stallworth will beat him out so I'm excited too see the final cuts not have him or Williams.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='JohnnyTsunami10' date='20 May 2010 - 08:47 PM' timestamp='1274402852' post='412613']
I deffinently want this guy gone and Williams. [b]We have young recievers that can do the same exact things as those two[/b] for less money and who are younger and haven't been given four-five years. I know Stallworth will beat him out so I'm excited too see the final cuts not have him or Williams.
[/quote]

Who?

[grape drank]

i say cut him or trade him for any pick we can get. he's over paid for a 4th reciever who doesn't (and won't contribute on special teams, as he's just not a return type of guy). BEsides why pay him so much when someone like Parmele can do his job better for less.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='grape drank' date='20 May 2010 - 09:18 PM' timestamp='1274404738' post='412625']
i say cut him or [b]trade him for any pick we can get[/b]. he's over paid for a 4th reciever who doesn't (and won't contribute on special teams, as he's just not a return type of guy). BEsides why pay him so much when someone like Parmele can do his job better for less.
[/quote]

No one wants him.

[flynismo]

I agree that $2.5M is a heckuva lot of money to be paying a #4 WR.
I also agree that having Boldin, Mason, Stallworth and Heap affords us the luxury of exploring the potential of guys like Marcus Smith or Justin Harper (or whoever). Clayton is a known commodity, and since we know what he is and isnt capable of, I think it is time to let the young bucks get a crack.

But I also wouldn't go so far as to say I want him off the team. For whatever it is worth, he's undoubtedly the best #4 in the league. That may prove to be valuable when you consider how injury prone Boldin and Stallworth are, and Mason's age.
It may not be a good sign if your #4 reciever is on the field regularly, but in his case we could do much worse, so having him is a solid insurance plan in case of a dire emergency.

And OP, plesae don't ever mention Clayton and Mason in the same sentence ever again.

[flynismo]

[quote name='Romo Ravens' date='20 May 2010 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1274393200' post='412541']
What's so funny about Clayton, is that he'll be a stud anywhere else. But here, he cannot get it going. At first, before we had Flacco and even McNair, I thought his inconsistency was because of the QB play, but since getting those two, Clayton has shown a case of the dropsies and disappears from time to time.

But I have a feeling that if Brees, Warner, Brady etc., were his QB, he'd put up numbers that actually relate to the round he got drafted in. But either way, we don't need to keep developmental WR's anymore. Even though Stallworth [i]is[/i] penciled in as the number three, let's hope it's more than just lead. Bye-bye Mark, bye-bye D-Willie.
[/quote]


I strongly disagree with that, for two reasons.

1. Even a guy like Manning needs his recievers to get seperation in order to make us of them.

2. Mason and Heap have been highly successful in the same system Clayton failed in.

Mark has natural talent, but he doesn't have the savvy or route running skills needed to be successful.

[DocMartin]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='20 May 2010 - 05:02 PM' timestamp='1274389351' post='412502']
I'm really interested to see what Mark's role will be next season. I read nothing of him getting reps as a returner in mini-camps, Stallworth is penciled in as the #3 WR right now and with the other TEs and Rice, I don't see the #4 WR contributing much.

We'll just have to wait and see.
[/quote]
Agreed. I could see him switching with Stallworth and playing in the slot, depends on the distance and down. But if he could make catches in the middle - hey we could have another Wes Welker or Austin Collie.... just kidding
Anyway, I'm glad he's back, we could use him many different ways.

[flynismo]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='20 May 2010 - 08:26 PM' timestamp='1274405163' post='412626']
No one wants him.
[/quote]


I'm sure a team like Oakland, Detroit, Cleveland, Seattle or Jax who need a reciever would give us a draft pick for him.

[berad]

Fabian Washington and Sam Koch signed, too.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='flynismo' date='20 May 2010 - 09:39 PM' timestamp='1274405958' post='412630']
I'm sure a team like Oakland, Detroit, Cleveland, Seattle or Jax who need a reciever would give us a draft pick for him.
[/quote]

Not sure if the Ravens have dangled Mark but none of those teams have offered anything for him.

[DocMartin]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='20 May 2010 - 10:39 PM' timestamp='1274409580' post='412662']
Not sure if the Ravens have dangled Mark but none of those teams have offered anything for him.
[/quote]
Yes, we couldn't get any substantial deals, so we're better to keep him. Our WR corps are STACKED. Does it mean none of the rookies and 2nd year players would make the team?
I'm not sure if we would carry 6 WR's on the roster, would we?

[ZIBBY28]

I'd like to see Clayton contribute in the return game. Parmele stepped in nicely last year, but Clayton is quicker and more shifty.. not the downhill runner Parmele is, but I'd like to see if Clayton's college success in the return game could translate

[Mahatma_Sloth]

[quote name='berad' date='20 May 2010 - 08:01 PM' timestamp='1274407314' post='412634']
Fabian Washington and Sam Koch signed, too.
[/quote]
[color="#FF0000"][b][size="7"]GO BIG RED!!![/size][/b][/color]

[FerrariFan87]

Clayton used in the right role could be lethal. I want to see him return punts during the Pre-season; give him a chance to be the playmaker we drafted him to be:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulgiQFCREF8[/media]

[Mahatma_Sloth]

Clayton said he is more than willing to play ST and as i said before the talent dropoff after clayton is huge because of the unknown or the unproductive. The best 4 recievers we have at this point no matter how much you hate it is Boldin Mason Stallworth Clayton. you wanna see someone else come up well thats what TC and preseason is for, they gotta come up on their own and beat said receivers out. The coaches arnt stupid they will start our best players they will not plug in some unproven commodity because they feel Clayton is old hat. This is vary important for all the fanboys that want a new flavor of the week to understand. it is like what was said before he will be the best #4 in the league and a great insurance policy because you know(but god i hope not) that one of our top three will be out of the game at some point and baring a outstanding TC/PreSeason this is how our unproven talent will get their chance

that being said i would like to point out that we went from no depth to too much depth in one off season.... God bless America and God bless the Ravens WRs

[lowrider]

[quote name='DocMartin' date='20 May 2010 - 10:46 PM' timestamp='1274410015' post='412666']
Yes, we couldn't get any substantial deals, so we're better to keep him. Our WR corps are STACKED. Does it mean none of the rookies and 2nd year players would make the team?
I'm not sure if we would carry 6 WR's on the roster, would we?

[/quote]
Stacked is not the term I would use for our receiving corps. Solid, but not stacked. Stallworth has never had above 1,000 yards receiving, Boldin gets injured a lot, and Mason is 36. After that, it is a huge dropoff in talent. David Reed, the rookie we just drafted, could possibly be the next best receiver after Stallworth. Just trying to keep our feet on the ground here. Ravens recievers aren't amazing, but solid.

Another thing, Clayton is not that good. In fact I'm surprised he is still on the team. 2.5 million is too much for a receiver that can't get any seperation and can't get open. Yes there has been problems at quarterback, but [u]good wide receivers find a way to get the ball[/u]. Even Mark Clayton said himself before we got Boldin, that the Ravens need to find an explosive reciever. It's bad when a wide receiver on the team is talking about needing another receiver.

[WinnipegRaven]

Why can't every game be like this one?[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAtqf5OGO4o[/media]

[flynismo]

Ya know, since every time we see Clayton run down the field, he has an opponent attached to him at the hip, maybe we could convert him to CB? If BJ Sams could do it (how well he did so is another story)....
How bout it Mark? Pull a reverse Devin Hester for us? Just sayin...

[lowrider]

[quote name='flynismo' date='21 May 2010 - 11:39 AM' timestamp='1274456350' post='412829']
Ya know, since every time we see Clayton run down the field, he has an opponent attached to him at the hip, maybe we could convert him to CB? If BJ Sams could do it (how well he did so is another story)....
How bout it Mark? Pull a reverse Devin Hester for us? Just sayin...
[/quote]
Ooo. An opportunist, I like that idea. Then maybe he would earn his overpriced contract.

[flynismo]

[quote name='lowrider' date='21 May 2010 - 09:47 AM' timestamp='1274453246' post='412812']
Stacked is not the term I would use for our receiving corps. Solid, but not stacked. Stallworth has never had above 1,000 yards receiving, Boldin gets injured a lot, and Mason is 36. After that, it is a huge dropoff in talent. David Reed, the rookie we just drafted, could possibly be the next best receiver after Stallworth. Just trying to keep our feet on the ground here. Ravens recievers aren't amazing, but solid.

Another thing, Clayton is not that good. In fact I'm surprised he is still on the team. 2.5 million is too much for a receiver that can't get any seperation and can't get open. Yes there has been problems at quarterback, but [u]good wide receivers find a way to get the ball[/u]. Even Mark Clayton said himself before we got Boldin, that the Ravens need to find an explosive reciever. It's bad when a wide receiver on the team is talking about needing another receiver.
[/quote]


Yeah, I think stacked is a bit strong too.
Boldin is elite, no if ands or buts about it.
But Mase is 36 and starting to show it, Stallworth is at best a solid #2, Clayton is Gary Coleman's big brother, D-Will is even more injury prone than Boldin and Stallworth, if that's possible, and I have caught as many NFL passes as Marcus Smith, Justin Harper, David Reed and Erron Riley combined (more than them if you count dropsies).
Which is why I almost poohed myself when Dez Bryant nearly fell to us.

I'm not surprised we retained Clayton. His attitude and character are exemplary, and the staff has always shown a certain degree of faith in him.
I'm just glad he is no longer a starter, because now I can go back to liking him and enjoy having him on the team. (Wow, reading that, thats a pretty messed up thing to say lol)

[Romo Ravens]

[quote name='flynismo' date='20 May 2010 - 05:34 PM' timestamp='1274405647' post='412628']
I strongly disagree with that, for two reasons.

1. Even a guy like Manning needs his recievers to get seperation in order to make us of them.

2. Mason and Heap have been highly successful in the same system Clayton failed in.

Mark has natural talent, but he doesn't have the savvy or route running skills needed to be successful.
[/quote]

I can't disagree with number one. Clayton doesn't even get seperation against number two DB's. However, Manning can throw in some tight windows lol.

I think you're using reverse psychology on me in number two. Why do you think Mason and Heap have succeeded in the same system? Because [i]they[/i] have natural talent. Clayton's talent is artificial. One may question, does Mason and Heap succeed because Clayton does not? Check that out for a second.

[lowrider]

[quote name='Romo Ravens' date='21 May 2010 - 01:28 PM' timestamp='1274462911' post='412853']
I think you're using reverse psychology on me in number two. Why do you think Mason and Heap have succeeded in the same system? Because [i]they[/i] have natural talent. Clayton's talent is artificial. One may question, does Mason and Heap succeed because Clayton does not? Check that out for a second.
[/quote]
What does having artificial talent mean? In the NFL, everyone has natural talent. I have no idea what point your making with that.

His second point was just saying that we have had successful wide recievers in our system. The point of "our system was bad, so you can't blame our recievers" isn't relevant here because we have had successful receivers with a "bad system" and bad quarterbacks. Clayton has no excuse.

Then your last point is almost as confusing as the artificial point. Mason and Heap succeed because they are good. If anything it proves that they are so much better than Clayton, because Clayton sucks so bad and gets shut down by a number two or three corner, they double Heap and Mason and they still put up numbers.

I have a confession. Last year I defended Clayton and said that he would be a 1,000 yard reciever, and tried to believe in him as best as I could. I came up with every reason why he wasn't bad and there was reasons for his lack of numbers. I was wrong. I have learned my lesson.