Mark Clayton

[Lady.hawke]

After being nearly invisible last night, now the Huddle doesn't even include him at all on the "Rest of Season Player Rankings" list?

 

Is he hanging out with Jimmy Hoffa?

 

Anybody know?

[whoopazz]

Gotta be an oversight. Can't remove him from the list over one game.

[Bronco Billy]

Overreaction = opportunity for savvy FFers.

 

[peepinmofo]

Is it really an over reaction though? McNair looked putrid, and if he is out any time, Boller is in, and we all know how that goes...

 

Clayton is talented, no doubt. But the QB has to get him the ball, and Im not sure the Ravens "potent" offense is going to be as potent as a lot of people thought.

[Bronco Billy]

Is it really an over reaction though? McNair looked putrid, and if he is out any time, Boller is in, and we all know how that goes...

 

Clayton is talented, no doubt. But the QB has to get him the ball, and Im not sure the Ravens "potent" offense is going to be as potent as a lot of people thought.

 

That Clayton was only targeted 2 times for the entire game is worrisome. I would expect that to be remedied next week, given his talent level & what he showed us in the second half of last season. It could have simply been BAL's coaching staff taking what they thought CIN was giving them and targeting Mason & Williams so much.

 

If the number of targets stays so limited in the next couple of weeks, then I'd start to get worried.

[SuperCharger]

McNair is a mediocre QB, always has been outside one good season. That O looked no different then the last few years, crap.

[MPetro]

That Clayton was only targeted 2 times for the entire game is worrisome. I would expect that to be remedied next week, given his talent level & what he showed us in the second half of last season. It could have simply been BAL's coaching staff taking what they thought CIN was giving them and targeting Mason & Williams so much.

 

If the number of targets stays so limited in the next couple of weeks, then I'd start to get worried.

 

The problem was that Clayton wasn't even on the field very often. It is certainly due to his sprained ankle from my perspective. But as bad as the Ravens played last night, it wouldn't have helped much to have him on the field anyways.

 

Clayton owners should be thankful he got time to rest his ankle this week. He'll be back strong soon enough.

Edited September 11, 2007 by MPetro

[bushwacked]

Demetrius Williams is hurting Clayton's value.

[millerx]

McNair is a mediocre QB, always has been outside one good season.

 

 

[rattsass]

McNair is done. Clayton will have limited value until they let Boller start winging it. Demetrius Williams is also going to cut into Claytons numbers. I thinkg D.Williams will be the best FF receiver to own on this team, and I think McNairs days as a starter are numbered.

[SuperCharger]

 

Season Team Passing Rushing Fumbles G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate Att Yds Avg TD FUM Lost

2007 Baltimore Ravens 1 1 20 34 58.8 203 6.0 0 1 2 15 63.7 1 0 0.0 0 3 3

2006 Baltimore Ravens 16 16 295 468 63.0 3050 6.5 16 12 14 84 82.5 45 119 2.6 1 7 1

2005 Tennessee Titans 14 14 292 476 61.3 3161 6.6 16 11 20 134 82.4 32 139 4.3 1 7 4

2004 Tennessee Titans 8 8 129 215 60.0 1343 6.2 8 9 13 95 73.1 23 128 5.6 1 5 3

2003 Tennessee Titans 14 14 250 400 62.5 3215 8.0 24 7 19 108 100.4 38 138 3.6 4 12 6

2002 Tennessee Titans 16 16 301 492 61.2 3387 6.9 22 15 21 121 84.0 82 440 5.4 3 9 2

2001 Tennessee Titans 15 15 264 431 61.3 3350 7.8 21 12 37 251 90.2 75 414 5.5 5 5 3

2000 Tennessee Titans 16 15 248 396 62.6 2847 7.2 15 13 24 141 83.2 72 403 5.6 0 12 6

1999 Tennessee Titans 11 11 187 331 56.5 2179 6.6 12 8 16 74 78.6 72 337 4.7 8 3 1

1998 Tennessee Oilers 16 16 289 492 58.7 3228 6.6 15 10 33 176 80.1 77 559 7.3 4 5 2

1997 Tennessee Oilers 16 16 216 415 52.0 2665 6.4 14 13 31 190 70.4 101 674 6.7 8 16 5

1996 Houston Oilers 9 4 88 143 61.5 1197 8.4 6 4 9 45 90.6 31 169 5.5 2 7 3

1995 Houston Oilers 4 2 41 80 51.3 569 7.1 3 1 6 63 81.7 11 38 3.5 0 3 0

TOTAL 2620 4373 59.9 30394 7.0 172 116 245 1497 83.0 660 3558 5.4 37 94 39

 

http://www.nfl.com/players/stevemcnair/profile?id=MCN033803

 

Besides the bolded 2003 season he averages in the teens in both TDs and INTs and his yards in high 2000's low 3000's. that is the definition of middle of the road QB, hence mediocre.

Edited September 11, 2007 by SuperCharger

[Ulterior Motives]

Tim Van Prooyen here...the guy who did the WR rankings. Had a couple of emails on this waiting for me...possibly from a couple of you, so figured I'd jump in and address it - one thing I'm not is afraid to defend my actions.

 

Some have hit on it on here already but there are a number of reasons he dropped. If we went beyond 70 he'd probably end up around 75 right now - and falling. However, I don't consider it too much of a reaction. The preseason rankings and in season rankings are done by different folks and obviously different folks will have varied opinions. I would not have had Clayton ranked at 25 overall, so that obviously had some play in my overall decision. The fact is, regardless of the 'hype', Baltimore's offense is what it is...and that rarely has been a gun slinging, wide receiver friendly offense. They win with a solid running game, a tight end and short dinky passes and a hellacious defense. That is what they do. Every year it seems there is talk that it will change, but bottom line, it's not a receiver friendly team. Now, take into affect that Derrick Mason didn't seem to be going anywhere last night as many had predicted, and D Williams was looked at more than any of the receivers (had quite a few knocked away by solid defenders) it bodes badly for the future of Clayton. Not all preseason happenings have a lot behind them, but there was a lot to the fact that Williams was the star of the team in the early games. Clayton's bum ankle doesn't help things either. By the time he comes back it is highly likely he'll be the third receiver on a small throwing team. Boller possibly being the starter again may actually help the passing game, but not likely.

 

Keep in mind folks...there are some great offenses (San Diego comes to mind) that are just not friendly to the receivers. Right now Clayton is the third receiver...fourth if you count Heap...on a bad passing offense...and that to me doesn't give him any right...at the moment anyway...to be in the top 70. That's why he dropped.

[Duchess Jack]

I am actually curious about what Boller could do. He has shown flashes. Maybe sitting behind McNair a year has been good for him.

[Big Red]

Clayton only played on preseason game due to injury, and may not have been 100%. He is small and even though this is his third year, he's been probable a good part of his career.

 

So, with Clayton a bit small and gimpy and Mason old, the Ravens WR/TE you want is either Heap now or Williams. Williams will be the man soon. He is the long threat on the team and has had hands of glue.

[Brentastic]

I don't know - I don't see Williams as being that studdly. i saw a few dropped passes that should have been caught. I'm going with the presumption that Clayton's lack of targets is a result of his ankle injury. If healthy, he is BALT's best receiving option other than Heap - IMO.

 

We won't know until the end of the season - but I personally aint buying into the Demetrius hype.

[rattsass]

I don't know - I don't see Williams as being that studdly. i saw a few dropped passes that should have been caught. I'm going with the presumption that Clayton's lack of targets is a result of his ankle injury. If healthy, he is BALT's best receiving option other than Heap - IMO.

 

We won't know until the end of the season - but I personally aint buying into the Demetrius hype.

Trust me on this one. As soon as McNair is unable to go (which by the looks of last night could be any time now) Boller will take over and the offense will improve, especially Williams. All he needs is a QB that can get the ball downfield and he can make some magic for this team.

[FishFreak]

Season Team Passing Rushing Fumbles G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate Att Yds Avg TD FUM Lost

2007 Baltimore Ravens 1 1 20 34 58.8 203 6.0 0 1 2 15 63.7 1 0 0.0 0 3 3

2006 Baltimore Ravens 16 16 295 468 63.0 3050 6.5 16 12 14 84 82.5 45 119 2.6 1 7 1

2005 Tennessee Titans 14 14 292 476 61.3 3161 6.6 16 11 20 134 82.4 32 139 4.3 1 7 4

2004 Tennessee Titans 8 8 129 215 60.0 1343 6.2 8 9 13 95 73.1 23 128 5.6 1 5 3

2003 Tennessee Titans 14 14 250 400 62.5 3215 8.0 24 7 19 108 100.4 38 138 3.6 4 12 6

2002 Tennessee Titans 16 16 301 492 61.2 3387 6.9 22 15 21 121 84.0 82 440 5.4 3 9 2

2001 Tennessee Titans 15 15 264 431 61.3 3350 7.8 21 12 37 251 90.2 75 414 5.5 5 5 3

2000 Tennessee Titans 16 15 248 396 62.6 2847 7.2 15 13 24 141 83.2 72 403 5.6 0 12 6

1999 Tennessee Titans 11 11 187 331 56.5 2179 6.6 12 8 16 74 78.6 72 337 4.7 8 3 1

1998 Tennessee Oilers 16 16 289 492 58.7 3228 6.6 15 10 33 176 80.1 77 559 7.3 4 5 2

1997 Tennessee Oilers 16 16 216 415 52.0 2665 6.4 14 13 31 190 70.4 101 674 6.7 8 16 5

1996 Houston Oilers 9 4 88 143 61.5 1197 8.4 6 4 9 45 90.6 31 169 5.5 2 7 3

1995 Houston Oilers 4 2 41 80 51.3 569 7.1 3 1 6 63 81.7 11 38 3.5 0 3 0

TOTAL 2620 4373 59.9 30394 7.0 172 116 245 1497 83.0 660 3558 5.4 37 94 39

 

http://www.nfl.com/players/stevemcnair/profile?id=MCN033803

 

Besides the bolded 2003 season he averages in the teens in both TDs and INTs and his yards in high 2000's low 3000's. that is the definition of middle of the road QB, hence mediocre.

 

Stats don't mean everything and to say McNair is a mediocre QB is pretty rediculous. Remember, the Titans have always been a run first offense so the system is going to dictate the stats a QB puts up. Jon Kitna is a mediocre qb that happens to be in a pass happy offense. He will put up better stats but he's still pretty mediocre. Troy Aikmen never posted huge stats but the man was solid and is now a Hall of Famer. McNair led his team to a SB had a few great seasons with the Titans and was a co-MVP although that was questionable in my book. He's been a solid pro that played in pain showed a lot of heart and played pretty well in the clutch. He might be a little washed up now due to age but he's always been solid. Meiocre is a poor description of a good career IMO.

[Randall]

I don't know - I don't see Williams as being that studdly. i saw a few dropped passes that should have been caught. I'm going with the presumption that Clayton's lack of targets is a result of his ankle injury. If healthy, he is BALT's best receiving option other than Heap - IMO.

 

We won't know until the end of the season - but I personally aint buying into the Demetrius hype.

 

 

It's one frickin game. I'm keeping him on my bench for now.

 

2003 Tennessee Titans 14 14 250 400 62.5 3215 8.0 24 7 19 108 100.4 38 138 3.6 4 12 6

 

Besides the bolded 2003 season he averages in the teens in both TDs and INTs and his yards in high 2000's low 3000's. that is the definition of middle of the road QB, hence mediocre.

 

 

How have the Chargers QB's fared in the Super Bowl> McNair did pretty well.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Randall

[Lady.hawke]

I find it fascinating that at the time I drafted (and admittedly having no time to do my own research this year) The Huddle ranked Clayton #21, and not a bad choice in a 12 team league that requires 3 WR's be played.

 

Apparently, Tim did not have a voice in the pre-season decisions. One game and Clayton is off Tim's radar, dead and all but buried.

 

Perhaps the guy that ranked him higher earlier and Tim shoud talk occasionally. Just a suggestion.

 

Clayton didn't even get a down arrow! Too funny.

 

The Huddle might consider a new icon/designation for this. Put the name at the bottom with a skull and crossbones. It will reduce emailed questions.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Lady.hawke

[Ulterior Motives]

I find it fascinating that at the time I drafted (and admittedly having no time to do my own research this year) The Huddle ranked Clayton #21, and not a bad choice in a 12 team league that requires 3 WR's be played.

 

Apparently, Tim did not have a voice in the pre-season decisions. One game and Clayton is off Tim's radar, dead and all but buried.

 

Perhaps the guy that ranked him higher earlier and Tim shoud talk occasionally. Just a suggestion.

 

Clayton didn't even get a down arrow! Too funny.

 

The Huddle might consider a new icon/designation for this. Put the name at the bottom with a skull and crossbones. It will reduce emailed questions.

 

Actually, we do a fair bit of talking...obviously not going to catch everything, not to mention what is expected prior to the season starting and what happens in the season often are quite different...but hey, it is what it is. As for the down arrows...there are only direction arrows for those in the top 70...there were others dropped out that weren't noted either. Obviously it is noticeable because of the large fall, but if a guy isn't worth keeping high, there shouldn't be a stipulation that you not drop him more than a certain amount if it is justified...otherwise what good is that. If you drafted Clayton based on preseason rankings to be your third receiver, he still may produce some for you this year in that role. At the moment I believe it's not looking good for that, however, I could be wrong...someone may get hurt, Boller may go airborne, who knows. Bottom line is that I do not believe that right now he justifies being called one of the 70 best receivers for fantasy football players looking forward into the season.

 

Just kinda thought of this case in point. Many prognosticators had reservations about Cadillac Williams and Cedric Benson before the season started...however, most rankings from most sites and magazines kept them in the top 15 backs or so. Week one bore out the naysayers warnings. However, many experts still would have taken either of them in the first couple of rounds over some other backs. It all comes down to analysis and opinion. If you read the analysis for a given player on an expert site or magazine it gives that person's thoughts. Read three magazines, usually get three thoughts. You then have to judge where those fit with your analysis. If you think Clayton deserves to be top 70...keep him in your lineup and make me eat crow. I said before, I'm not afraid to stand by what I say/do, and if I'm wrong I'll say it. Right now I believe I'll be born out...we shall see.

 

Oh yes, and note, he's not 'off my radar dead and buried'. I rank about 125-130 receivers....then submit the top 70. He sits at 75 right now and a good outing this week likely puts him just above 70 next week...so he's definetly not off my radar. And I never mind email questions...and wouldn't use skull and crossbones for Clayton just yet either

Edited September 12, 2007 by Ulterior Motives

[ReturnToSender]

They are going to target Williams a lot, and for the love of god, B-more, just bring in Leftwich, they have such a town-crush on him, get it over with.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Actually, we do a fair bit of talking...obviously not going to catch everything, not to mention what is expected prior to the season starting and what happens in the season often are quite different...but hey, it is what it is. As for the down arrows...there are only direction arrows for those in the top 70...there were others dropped out that weren't noted either. Obviously it is noticeable because of the large fall, but if a guy isn't worth keeping high, there shouldn't be a stipulation that you not drop him more than a certain amount if it is justified...otherwise what good is that. If you drafted Clayton based on preseason rankings to be your third receiver, he still may produce some for you this year in that role. At the moment I believe it's not looking good for that, however, I could be wrong...someone may get hurt, Boller may go airborne, who knows. Bottom line is that I do not believe that right now he justifies being called one of the 70 best receivers for fantasy football players looking forward into the season.

 

Just kinda thought of this case in point. Many prognosticators had reservations about Cadillac Williams and Cedric Benson before the season started...however, most rankings from most sites and magazines kept them in the top 15 backs or so. Week one bore out the naysayers warnings. However, many experts still would have taken either of them in the first couple of rounds over some other backs. It all comes down to analysis and opinion. If you read the analysis for a given player on an expert site or magazine it gives that person's thoughts. Read three magazines, usually get three thoughts. You then have to judge where those fit with your analysis. If you think Clayton deserves to be top 70...keep him in your lineup and make me eat crow. I said before, I'm not afraid to stand by what I say/do, and if I'm wrong I'll say it. Right now I believe I'll be born out...we shall see.

 

Oh yes, and note, he's not 'off my radar dead and buried'. I rank about 125-130 receivers....then submit the top 70. He sits at 75 right now and a good outing this week likely puts him just above 70 next week...so he's definetly not off my radar. And I never mind email questions...and wouldn't use skull and crossbones for Clayton just yet either

 

I think Michael Clayton has permanent reservations for the skull and crossbones.

[Ulterior Motives]

I think Michael Clayton has permanent reservations for the skull and crossbones.

 

No argument there!

[MikesVikes]

I've given up on players too soon before. He's worthy of a roster spot, imo. I usually don't have receivers ranking around 75th on my roster though.

Fortunately I have several Atlanta receivers (who also moved up and down in the rankings during the preseason), Drew Bennett, and Hackett that I can give up on first.

[SuperCharger]

It's one frickin game. I'm keeping him on my bench for now.

How have the Chargers QB's fared in the Super Bowl> McNair did pretty well.

 

How did the Chargers get into this conversation? I never said anything about the Chargers. This is a FF forum talking about Fantasy Football. McNair is a mediocre QB in that context and always has been. I stand by my statement. Therefore any of his WRs will be mediocre at best.