Belichick and Caserio on Clay Matthews

[Kontradiction]

Belichick makes it a policy of carefully overpraising the opposition. Part of his relentless attention to detail. Probably seldom matters, but you never know when a particular player might have something going on in their life that is distracting them. Insults, accidental or otherwise, can have a focusing effect. Caserio's remark is uncharacteristic of the way Belichick coaches press interactions.

Your OP suggested that this would give Matthews bulletin board material, IE make him play harder. That alone suggests that he wouldn't be coming to play hard in the first place. I understand that Belichick compliments opposing players the vast majority of the time, but Matthews was going to bring his A-game regardless. As I said before, the Packers are fighting for their playoff lives on top of playing the best team in the league. With or without that comment, Matthews was coming. I have faith that Vollmer can handle him though. He did a good job against Peppers.

 

[ATippett56]

Given the choice LaMarr Woodley or Brandon Meriweather from the first round of the 2007 NFL Draft, who would you rather have? LaMarr Woodley definitely has the size to set the edge while Clay Matthews would be a liability against the run in the New England Patriots defensive scheme.

 

[NEPats1]

Caserio added that Matthews primarily plays in a two-point stance for the Packers, even when he rushes on third down. That would be an interesting fit in New England, as the team's outside linebackers usually rush out of a three-point stance on third down. Reading between the lines, it sounds like the Patriots had a challenging projection on Matthews coming out of USC, wondering if he'd be sturdy enough at outside linebacker in their 3-4 alignment, which is different than Green Bay's.

Patriots focusing on Pack mentality - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Does anyone know why the Pats do this?

For instance, is it considered a better strategy to rush from a 3-point stance as opposite to 2-point stance or does it not make a big difference?

 

[Kontradiction]

Given the choice LaMarr Woodley or Brandon Meriweather from the first round of the 2007 NFL Draft, who would you rather have? LaMarr Woodley definitely has the size to set the edge while Clay Matthews would be a liability against the run in the New England Patriots defensive scheme.

I'd still take Meriweather.

 

[jsull87]

I wish Caserio hadn't put it that way -- that kind of faint praise is locker room material for Matthews.

I don't think it was faint praise at all... packers are happy with him and we are happy with chung brace and butler... how is that in some way a put down?

 

[Kasmir]

I don't think it was faint praise at all... packers are happy with him and we are happy with chung brace and butler... how is that in some way a put down?

Compared to Matthews league rep, that's a put down. Not even sure many on this board would honestly say they'd not make that trade today - I sure would, we'd find a way to feature Matthews and his 12.5 sacks in this defense.

But having read the context for the Caserio interview, I can better understand his statement. He was specifically put on the spot to defend the trade down, so in the process he had to pump up his guys vs Matthews to support the decision.

 

[andrewgarrr]

Does anyone know why the Pats do this?

For instance, is it considered a better strategy to rush from a 3-point stance as opposite to 2-point stance or does it not make a big difference?

You could probably push off from the earth more and gain more leverage underneath your blocker in a 3-point stance as opposed to standing up right.

I don't know if it's something characteristic to a specific scheme or the physical ability of the player. I think it's the more the latter than the former. But when you're playing 3-4, an OLB is often setting the edge against the run and is typically standing up.

I'm not entirely sure. Someone else might have some better insight.

 

[Hok]

He wouldn't have fit in our 2 gap. Knock on him in college was his zone coverage skills, which our system requires- he had a tendency to overpursue which is good for the Packers 1 gap, but not for us.

This is what i always notice about him when I watch the Packers - all I ever see him do run to the QB as fast as he can. It gets him a lot of sacks and gaudy numbers, but it also leads to a lot of big plays for the opposing offense. He looks like he'd be a terrible fit for our system, where OLBs are asked to set the edge and defend the run first, and rush the passer second.

 

[Uncle Rico]

Good article on te Pats and Matthews in the Globe today.

Clay pieces - The Boston Globe

 

[The_Riddler]

He wouldn't have fit in our 2 gap. Knock on him in college was his zone coverage skills, which our system requires- he had a tendency to overpursue which is good for the Packers 1 gap, but not for us.

That's interesting, did you read today's article in the Globe ?

http://www.boston.com/sports/footba.../12/15/they_took_a_pass/?p1=Well_Sports_links

 

[Synovia]

Compared to Matthews league rep, that's a put down. Not even sure many on this board would honestly say they'd not make that trade today - I sure would, we'd find a way to feature Matthews and his 12.5 sacks in this defense.

But having read the context for the Caserio interview, I can better understand his statement. He was specifically put on the spot to defend the trade down, so in the process he had to pump up his guys vs Matthews to support the decision.

I'd much rather have the stud safety, and the developing CB and DT (who both look to have the potential to be starters) than a good pass rusher.


Mathews is very good, but I don't think hes a whole lot better than Chung is at their respective positions.

 

[jays52]

On Sunday night I want all the Matthews lovers to watch what happens when he tries to drop his hips and square up a blocker. Crumpler is going to eat the most overrated player in the league alive.

 

[The_Riddler]

I'd much rather have the stud safety, and the developing CB and DT (who both look to have the potential to be starters) than a good pass rusher.


Mathews is very good, but I don't think hes a whole lot better than Chung is at their respective positions.

Stud safety ? Chung wasn't part of that deal.

 

[Synovia]

Stud safety ? Chung wasn't part of that deal.

No, he wasn't. But there's no way to tell whether BB picks Chung, Brace, or Butler with that pick if he doesn't have the other picks.

He picked Chung first, but there's no way to tell if that was because he was more worried about someone else grabbing him than the other two, or because he thought he was a better player.

 

[Sciz]

This is what i always notice about him when I watch the Packers - all I ever see him do run to the QB as fast as he can. It gets him a lot of sacks and gaudy numbers, but it also leads to a lot of big plays for the opposing offense. He looks like he'd be a terrible fit for our system, where OLBs are asked to set the edge and defend the run first, and rush the passer second.

We have a winner. I'm glad I'm not the only person who sees this. I swear I've given this speech hundreds of times, to both Pats fans and non-Pats fans.

 

[SuperPatsFan]

On Sunday night I want all the Matthews lovers to watch what happens when he tries to drop his hips and square up a blocker. Crumpler is going to eat the most overrated player in the league alive.

Maybe Matthews is a one-dimensional player.

Maybe too many Pats fans believe the hype.

Maybe the Pats knew what they were doing when they didn't draft him.

Or maybe not.

 

[BlueThunder]

Looks like Pats got at least a 2fer on that deal.....

and more

Filling 4 holes is better than filling one.....

After all.....how much better than 11-2 can a team really be?

 

[convertedpatsfan]

We have a winner. I'm glad I'm not the only person who sees this. I swear I've given this speech hundreds of times, to both Pats fans and non-Pats fans.

It seems like he's going to be the "one that got away" that Pats fans yearn for forever. He was perfect! We would have been so happy together!

I think there were some questions about how he'd fit into our scheme. It's clear that he was extremely talented, well worth a 1st rounder to someone. If he was a great fit for our system, BB had two chances to draft him, yet declined to both times.

I'm not saying he would have been awful with us, just saying it's clear he wasn't a perfect fit and there were definitely question marks, otherwise he would be a Patriot.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

At the very least, he would be a big upgrade over TBC who is this years version of Jarvis Green 2009, A pass rushing specialist who can't rush the passer. (I know they play different positions).

 

[SuperPatsFan]

Seems like somebody doesn't respect Tully's spin move.