Clay Matthews back in Green & Gold ?

[Pokerbrat2000]

This was a lot like Jordy. Matthews wanted to stay in Green Bay, but Gute wasn't interested. Even before he signed on the dotted line with the Rams, Matthews and his agent went back to the Packers to see if they’d be interested in essentially matching Los Angeles’ offer. The Packers declined and Matthews had found his new home. The deal that Matthews signed in L.A. was for less money than what other teams were offering, but he favored playing in L.A. then Baltimore or a few other places.

I can see the Rams renegotiating if that is what it took to keep him in L.A., but his production last season doesn't really seem like a reason to think they overpaid him.

I doubt he would resign with the Packers, even if the Packers wanted him back, but I also think Gute and the Packers have (and should) moved on.

 

[HardRightEdge]

For the record Matthews proved last season he was still good enough. He put up 37 tackles, 9 tfl, 8 sacks, 2 ff, 3 pds, and 11 qb hits in 614 snaps. That's a good contribution for a guy who played only 13 games on a roughly 4.5 m a year contract.

Yeah, well, from what I saw he did that teeing off and free lancing on the pass rush. I'm going to say he probabably graded poorly in run D. In fact, he broke his jaw face planting himself diving for a guy after blowing edge contain.

It's not as though the Rams were unaware of their 2020 cap situation when they signed him while also obviously being all-in for "win now". If they decide to release him with $2 mil in dead cap, then you can assume they were happy to have him as one year rent-a-player at $5.5 mil where only one year ever mattered. Somebody who needs a passing down specialist on the edge will probably pay that again.

The Packers are not that team. They have two high-priced edge players on long term contracts who we already know to be very good players in their primes. The Packers will give Gary more snaps and bank on his progression until he proves otherwise.

Spending $5 mil, give or take, on Matthews is about the last place I'd expend those resources.

The idea of playing him at ILB, though perhpas not your idea, is ludicrous. Why mince words? He wasn't up to the task in the first go-round and he's noticeably slower now. He would be disasterous as a coverage player and he's not a guy you want trying to plug holes.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Matthews was an average inside linebacker at best five years ago and definitely hasn't improved since. The reason the Packers defense improved in the second half of the 2014 season was mainly because they faced a lot of terrible offenses over their last eight games.

Yeah, okay. Clay had nothing to do with that. Gotcha

 

[HardRightEdge]

Yeah, okay. Clay had nothing to do with that. Gotcha

Good to realize that because it is a fact.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Good to realize that because it is a fact.

No, it's not. As high as I'm sure you are on yourself, your opinion does not equate to a fact.

And a lot of people from Packers coaches to sports writers to other fans have shared the opinion that he played very well at ILB.

 

[Sky King]

I liked Clay when he was hungry and healthy but he`s gone. A bit like Paul McCartney

He's on the right side of 64 and already you don't love him?

 

[XPack]

Clay is always welcome...on a veteran minimum.

 

[melvin dangerr]

One thing I really liked about Clay was his aggressiveness, I watched a lot of his play and tackles and he went head on, and threw his body into it, the thing that was never said about Clay was that he was soft..

 

[AKCheese]

Well he might be just his plain old liability as a ROID’d up cheap shot artist penalty flag magnet... but then if we get in another NFCCG he’ll shut it down again like he did against Seattle... so I vote... No!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Well he might be just his plain old liability as a ROID’d up cheap shot artist penalty flag magnet... but then if we get in another NFCCG he’ll shut it down again like he did against Seattle... so I vote... No!

How do you really feel though?

 

[HardRightEdge]

No, it's not. As high as I'm sure you are on yourself, your opinion does not equate to a fact.

And a lot of people from Packers coaches to sports writers to other fans have shared the opinion that he played very well at ILB.

What ILB goes two consecutive games without a single tackle? Only Clay Matthews. That is a fact, not an opinion.

http://www.startribune.com/clay-matthews-making-noise-but-not-tackles/364038501/

That fact has been raised in these pages numerous times over the years and a couple of times in this thread. That fact was raised here when it happened with nary a critical peep as you note. If coaches, media and fans are reluctant to criticize a star player taking one for the team by playing out of position, so be it. But that does not make him better than he was or is.

He was never very good in coverage either, not when Capers would drop him in coverage on occasion from OLB, not from ILB. And he's 4 years older now. Playing him at that position is an extremely bad idea. I imagine if the Packers offered him a contract with the expressed intent of playing him at ILB, which they certainly will not, he'd turn it down.

 

[Mondio]

I'm not in favor of having him play in the middle. Cheap situational rusher is all i'd consider and it's not anything i'm really going to argue for, but if it's cheap and for limited play I'm not going to really argue against it either. But I hope he's not a part of a plan to get better, because it's not a great plan

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'm not in favor of having him play in the middle. Cheap situational rusher is all i'd consider and it's not anything i'm really going to argue for, but if it's cheap and for limited play I'm not going to really argue against it either. But I hope he's not a part of a plan to get better, because it's not a great plan

Except for the occasional top 5 pick, the preponderance of rookie first round edge players play in rotation in their first seasons. They're out there to rush the passer on limited snaps, 50% give or take, until they figure things out. Some never figure it out. A 3-4 team that believes they are competitive but needs help at edge as one of their top needs can get comparable or better performance from Matthews in a rotational role than they'd get with a first round pick as a short term solution.

Would I sign Matthews for the vet minimum to play in rotation? In a heartbeat. But that's a pipe dream.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

For the record Matthews proved last season he was still good enough. He put up 37 tackles, 9 tfl, 8 sacks, 2 ff, 3 pds, and 11 qb hits in 614 snaps. That's a good contribution for a guy who played only 13 games on a roughly 4.5 m a year contract.

FWIW PFF graded Matthews at 54.2 last season which isn't good at all despite those numbers.

 

[Pugger]

again with the lets get the has beens back...meh....he is an injury liability. He would not be able to last even in the middle. time to move on.

There is a reason why we let him walk and why LA is losing interest too. He isn't the player he once was. I'd rather spend our FA capital on a younger player.

 

[thequick12]

FWIW PFF graded Matthews at 54.2 last season which isn't good at all despite those numbers.

There's a good amount of the nfl community that don't put much stock in pff grades...

 

[thequick12]

There is a reason why we let him walk and why LA is losing interest too. He isn't the player he once was. I'd rather spend our FA capital on a younger player.

That may be true I just think he'd be a better 4th olb than Kyler Fackrell. He'd also be cheaper and less of a long term commitment, most likely.

The Rams linebacker that I think gute should really Target is ilb Corey Littleton. He's only 26 and hes, according to pff one of the top ten in coverage while also racking up similar tackle and sack numbers as Blake Martinez

 

[Mondio]

I think Fackrell actually brings more to this defense now than Clay would. He's a flexible player and though he doesn't always get sacks, he does provide pressure most times. He's also good at the point of attack in the run game and he always surprised me how he can actually cover in the passing game rather than looking lost in a zone like some of our other LB'ers.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

While I can't say that I watched Clay Matthews a lot this past season, I did see him in a few games. He seemed like the exact same player that made him an overpaid/over hyped player in Green Bay in his final years. He was all or nothing. One mad rush at the QB, if he picked the wrong angle, he missed. If it was a run play, the back often shot right by him. I also think the Rams have a better DL than Matthews played behind in those final years in Green Bay, so that helps pad your stats.

I loved the early in his career Clay Matthews, but felt like he became an all or nothing sack stat guy towards the end in Green Bay.....Thanks Clay, but we are moving on.

 

[tynimiller]

Could we please stop advocating to bring former players back that were deemed not good enough anymore???

Only if some folks stop thinking the mere mentioning of past players back is the same as advocating to pay them what we once did or what they got when they left. Tramon was not worth the price to keep when he walked away, he was very much worth the cost when we brought him back.

A guy like Clay at the right price is 100% a logical and smart choice...however, I still suspect he will get more money than the figure I'd say he is worth in a support/depth style role we'd expect him to provide.

 

[tynimiller]

I think Fackrell actually brings more to this defense now than Clay would. He's a flexible player and though he doesn't always get sacks, he does provide pressure most times. He's also good at the point of attack in the run game and he always surprised me how he can actually cover in the passing game rather than looking lost in a zone like some of our other LB'ers.

If a Fackrell contract and a Clay contract are sat the desk of Gute right now for the same price and same years Fackrell wins that hands down, without blinking by me.

 

[melvin dangerr]

Gutes is not going backwards by signing Clay when he knows there is Much more valuable talent out there for the cap money..

 

[tynimiller]

Gutes is not going backwards by signing Clay when he knows there is Much more valuable talent out there for the cap money..

Oh my bad I didn't know we knew what the market was going to be for Clay?? Please share the crystal ball you got, because I think we all would benefit from it. I said it with Blake, Tramon and now Clay. At the right price he would most certainly be worth it....I suspect someone out there (or multiple) is going to go above whatever that figure is to Gute and Co.

 

[melvin dangerr]

S

Oh my bad I didn't know we knew what the market was going to be for Clay?? Please share the crystal ball you got, because I think we all would benefit from it. I said it with Blake, Tramon and now Clay. At the right price he would most certainly be worth it....I suspect someone out there (or multiple) is going to go above whatever that figure is to Gute and Co.

sorry I don’t use a crystal ball, just going by what the Packer management has stated by upgrading the Packer defense, “upgrading”! Clay is talented but if Gute thought he was worth keeping, price wise or talent wise he would still be in GB....

 

[tynimiller]

S

sorry I don’t use a crystal ball, just going by what the Packer management has stated by upgrading the Packer defense, “upgrading”! Clay is talented but if Gute thought he was worth keeping, price wise or talent wise he would still be in GB....

Again you folks are missing the point of the discussion some are merely trying to have. Clay wasn't even close to worth what it would have taken to re-sign when he left the team, no one is stating such.

He could be however, for depth, be worth it...however as stated I think some team will still overpay for his services. However, "upgrading a defense" does not mean only signing three down starters. At the right price for the right role Clay could easily help upgrade the defense overall.

FTR, at the rate I assume Clay will get I'd much rather have Fackrell...however I suspect he will price himself out of us as well honestly.