The Clay Matthews effect makes me a bit nervous

[Sciz]

The argument that "player x didn't play well against us so he must not be good" is awful. There aren't too many Gronks and Crumplers out there. Plus you're dismissing his other games and narrowing your opinion to just one game.

The idea of him not being able to take on blocks is just something of a fantasy. He plays OLB in a 3-4, you have to be able to take on blocks. Hell, any player playing in the front seven has to be able to take on blocks if they want to succeed or even get playing time whether they play in a 3-4, 4-3, one-gap, or two-gap. You think a coach would let a player get on the field if they can't take on blocks? LMAO. Granted, there are certain players that are better at shedding blocks than others, but some of the stuff that's being posted about how awful Matthews apparently is in this thread is laughable. This is like when I go to another team's board and they dismiss Brady because he doesn't do certain things well. LOL.

I watched other games of him. My impression from those games was similar, but I have the game of him against the Pats, so that's the only game where I've seen any of his plays more than once. Gronk completely dominated Matthews, but there are other, lesser TEs who can still win their matchup, albeit in a less-dominating fashion.

And Matthews is a case of a player who is so good at going around blocks that his inability to take on blocks is lessened. But when a blocker gets his hands on Matthews, then the play is pretty much over for him. That's exactly what Bill doesn't want out of his OLBs.

This isn't "Brady sucks because he's slow." This is "I don't want Brady in a one read and then run offense because he's slow."

Matthews doesn't suck because he can't take on blocks. I just don't want Matthews in our blocker-engaging defensive scheme because he can't take on blocks.

 

[JackBauer]

He made a ridiculous post which I commented on. It doesn't matter who the poster is, i'll comment if a post needs to be addressed for it's stupidity. Unlike you, who is disregarding his idiotic post, and just coming to his defense because I called him out for his ******ed comment.

Whether you give a damn about what I say or anyone else, the one thing I do is give an objective and fair opinion about topics. Something that I know is foreign to you.

My original post merely weighed in on the patent fatuousness of your remark and nothing more. I wasn't expressing an opinion on his statement one way or the other, even though I happen to agree that Clay Matthews is one of the more overrated players in the league.

Furthermore, since you've declared yourself an arbiter of all things objective and fair, we'll all be sure to defer to your opinion on these matters in the future. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[condon84]

Furthermore, since you've declared yourself an arbiter of all things objective and fair, we'll all be sure to defer to your opinion on these matters in the future. Thanks for the clarification.

So because I said I'm fair you equate it to me saying "I'm an arbiter of all things objective and fair"? LOL.

 

[condon84]

I watched other games of him. My impression from those games was similar, but I have the game of him against the Pats, so that's the only game where I've seen any of his plays more than once. Gronk completely dominated Matthews, but there are other, lesser TEs who can still win their matchup, albeit in a less-dominating fashion.

And Matthews is a case of a player who is so good at going around blocks that his inability to take on blocks is lessened. But when a blocker gets his hands on Matthews, then the play is pretty much over for him. That's exactly what Bill doesn't want out of his OLBs.

This isn't "Brady sucks because he's slow." This is "I don't want Brady in a one read and then run offense because he's slow."

Matthews doesn't suck because he can't take on blocks. I just don't want Matthews in our blocker-engaging defensive scheme because he can't take on blocks.

I'm sure there are plays that Matthews gets effectively blocked out, but you're dismissing the other plays where he's making positive plays. Not one player in history went through their career without getting beat individually. You can take certain plays from any player's career and make a case why that player is not a good player. You can even do that to the best of the best. But what you're failing to look at with Matthews is the overall impact of his performance. He makes a hell of a lot more positive plays than negative plays.

As far as our scheme is concerned, it's a different position but Bruschi wasn't great at shedding blocks by any measure. But he more than made up for it with other aspects of his game that led to a lot of plays being made.

 

[JackBauer]

So because I said I'm fair you equate it to me saying "I'm an arbiter of all things objective and fair"? LOL.

Certainly. You said your opinion was objective and fair, and that I couldn't understand since from my perspective it's a foreign standard.

I could have simply called you a pompous windbag but I went for the snark instead.

 

[jays52]

LOL. You should edit this post because this sounds awfully stupid. You might as well have posted:

I thought being dumb as hell was implicit in every one of my posts.

You're right, I didn't substantiate my argument. Tell you what, tell me why he isn't overrated and I'll make my case in turn.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

I watched other games of him. My impression from those games was similar, but I have the game of him against the Pats, so that's the only game where I've seen any of his plays more than once. Gronk completely dominated Matthews, but there are other, lesser TEs who can still win their matchup, albeit in a less-dominating fashion.

And Matthews is a case of a player who is so good at going around blocks that his inability to take on blocks is lessened. But when a blocker gets his hands on Matthews, then the play is pretty much over for him. That's exactly what Bill doesn't want out of his OLBs.

This isn't "Brady sucks because he's slow." This is "I don't want Brady in a one read and then run offense because he's slow."

Matthews doesn't suck because he can't take on blocks. I just don't want Matthews in our blocker-engaging defensive scheme because he can't take on blocks.

2 tackles. That was the stat sheet that a 24 year old Julius Peppers had against our offense in Super Bowl 38. We were desperate for the team to sign him at the age of 30.

As I said earlier, I don't think it was a mistake to pass on Matthews but saying he wouldn't have been a good fit for us because he didn't play well against us IMO is unfair to how good a player he is.

 

[Deus Irae]

2 tackles. That was the stat sheet that a 24 year old Julius Peppers had against our offense in Super Bowl 38. We were desperate for the team to sign him at the age of 30.

As I said earlier, I don't think it was a mistake to pass on Matthews but saying he wouldn't have been a good fit for us because he didn't play well against us IMO is unfair to how good a player he is.

A lot of people wanted nothing to do with Peppers. Others liked the idea of bringing him in strictly as a pass rusher, rather than as a true OLB. Most people understood that he was a poor fit for the Patriots 3-4, but were intrigued by the idea of BB making some modifications of the system to accommodate him, as he did with McGinest. That's not the same as claiming he'd be a great fit.

 

[flycessna]

I think that the Pats have the framework of a good team on defense now. Their team speed is much improved. Mayo is indeed a tackling machine, and Spikes presence appears to free him up to do what he does best. McCourty is a bona fide #1 CB. Bodden will be coming back from injury and be solid as #2 assuming no complications happen in his recovery.

So where does that leave the need on defense? Another big DE would be nice. There are a lot of possible fits at 3-4 DE this year. There are probably 3-5 1st and 2nd round prospects that would fit this category.

An OLB who can rush the passer would also be nice. The way I look at it free agency might be the best way to address this need. Woodley comes quickly to mind. BB has attempted to address passrush through FA before with varying success. Colvin was a good rusher for us until he got hurt. AD well... that didn't work out but it doesn't mean you should stop trying to address the problem area.

Agreed! My fear is that we go into next year with out a full compliment.. Lets face it, it is "almost" a roll of the dice... any player can get injured at any point and the teams that stay healthy have luck on their side..

FA would be a place I wouldnt mind focusing.. BB made his mark in FA when he first came to the Pats and now he has made some pretty god moves in the draft..

Pass Rush, DE, ect... what ever.. impact..

back when we were burning the bridge with Mankins I was thinking Dallas needs a OL big time and a guard to boot.. (this was before Romo got injured) and dreamed of a trade with Dallas where we got D. Ware.. ...

I like Mankins but could you imagine our defense with a guy like ware on it..

 

[condon84]

I thought being dumb as hell was implicit in every one of my posts.

You're right, I didn't substantiate my argument. Tell you what, tell me why he isn't overrated and I'll make my case in turn.

Tell you what, how about you tell me why he's overrated. His play spoke for themselves. He dominated games even when offenses were focused on stopping him from disrupting their gameplan.

A highlight film can't justify how good he is because it doesn't show the effect of offenses focusing their attention on him and allowing his teammates around him to make plays. However, this clip of his first 8 games this year shows him using his speed and strength to fight off and get through blocks and make some amazing plays.

YouTube - Clay Matthews 2010 First 8 Games

 

[condon84]

A lot of people wanted nothing to do with Peppers. Others liked the idea of bringing him in strictly as a pass rusher, rather than as a true OLB. Most people understood that he was a poor fit for the Patriots 3-4, but were intrigued by the idea of BB making some modifications of the system to accommodate him, as he did with McGinest. That's not the same as claiming he'd be a great fit.

This kills me. Who are these people? And why wouldn't he be a fit? A 6'7" 283 lbs athlete who can run, is super strong, and make plays even when offenses are focused on stopping him wouldn't be a great fit for our defense? Really?

 

[Sciz]

However, this clip of his first 8 games this year shows him using his speed and strength to fight off and get through blocks and make some amazing plays.

YouTube - Clay Matthews 2010 First 8 Games

Not once in that video did he take on a blocker head-on in the running game. The lack of that ability is why he doesn't fit in New England.

 

[jays52]

Tell you what, how about you tell me why he's overrated. His play spoke for themselves. He dominated games even when offenses were focused on stopping him from disrupting their gameplan.

A highlight film can't justify how good he is because it doesn't show the effect of offenses focusing their attention on him and allowing his teammates around him to make plays. However, this clip of his first 8 games this year shows him using his speed and strength to fight off and get through blocks and make some amazing plays.

YouTube - Clay Matthews 2010 First 8 Games

Two paragraphs later the rough translation reads as: You tell me! He's shiny! I like!

 

[condon84]

Not once in that video did he take on a blocker head-on in the running game. The lack of that ability is why he doesn't fit in New England.

So because you don't see him taking head-on blockers means that he can't? When McGinest made that clinching tackle in Indy in 03 during the regular season, did he take on a block or did he use his instincts to go make a tackle?

Here is McGinest's career highlight film: YouTube - Willie McGinest Tribute - NFL Linebacker Go to 4:42 where he knifes in the backfield and makes the biggest play in the regular season to stop the Colts from scoring. Should he have waited to take on a blocker? Or wasn't it the right move to trust his instincts and make the play in the backfield? Maybe BB chastised him afterwards because he didn't take on a blocker. Or maybe BB don't want a guy that can possibly make those types of plays during the course of the game. Yeah that's it. Who needs playmakers. BB certainly doesn't.

Also, talking about players not "fitting our system", I guess BB had a brain fart when he tried to sign Zach Thomas. Or when he went after the one of the biggest freelancer in history in Junior Seau.

 

[condon84]

Two paragraphs later the rough translation reads as: You tell me! He's shiny! I like!

It's almost as good as, "hey we didn't draft him, so he must suck. We know better. The Pats have the bestest players! We da bess!!"

 

[Deus Irae]

This kills me. Who are these people? And why wouldn't he be a fit? A 6'7" 283 lbs athlete who can run, is super strong, and make plays even when offenses are focused on stopping him wouldn't be a great fit for our defense? Really?

Excellent point. The decades he's spent in the 3-4 have prepared him well for coverage, and he's the stoutest player against the run in the history of the NFL. Besides, all it takes is measurables.



Oh, wait....

 

[condon84]

Excellent point. The decades he's spent in the 3-4 have prepared him well for coverage, and he's the stoutest player against the run in the history of the NFL.



Oh, wait....

You're right. Because he hasn't played in a 3-4, he surely can't have the ability to play in it. Only players that have played in a 3-4 can ever succeed in a 3-4. Good logic.

Adalius Thomas says hi.

 

[Sciz]

So because you don't see him taking head-on blockers means that he can't? When McGinest made that clinching tackle in Indy in 03 during the regular season, did he take on a block or did he use his instincts to go make a tackle?

Here is McGinest's career highlight film: YouTube - Willie McGinest Tribute - NFL Linebacker Go to 4:42 where he knifes in the backfield and makes the biggest play in the regular season to stop the Colts from scoring. Should he have waited to take on a blocker? Or wasn't it the right move to trust his instincts and make the play in the backfield? Maybe BB chastised him afterwards because he didn't take on a blocker. Or maybe BB don't want a guy that can possibly make those types of plays during the course of the game. Yeah that's it. Who needs playmakers. BB certainly doesn't.

Also, talking about players not "fitting our system", I guess BB had a brain fart when he tried to sign Zach Thomas. Or when he went after the one of the biggest freelancer in history in Junior Seau.

Awesome. Clay Matthews could have been our situational goal-line player. Good to know. What a player does in 5% of the snaps doesn't take away the fundamentals of the defensive scheme that are used in the other 95%. Keep mentioning all of the situational exceptions that exist. Adding Clay Matthews and expecting him to be effective on even half of the defensive plays would require a scheme change, and he's not worth that.

 

[condon84]

Awesome. Clay Matthews could have been our situational goal-line player. Good to know. What a player does in 5% of the snaps doesn't take away the fundamentals of the defensive scheme that are used in the other 95%. Keep mentioning all of the situational exceptions that exist. Adding Clay Matthews and expecting him to be effective on even half of the defensive plays would require a scheme change, and he's not worth that.

Why would we require to change our scheme? Again, your insistence that he can't play in our system is mind-numbing. How do you know? Because right now he gets through blocks with his quickness instead of brute strength? How do you know he can't do what the Pats would require for him to do?

Here's a quote from Nick Casserio, you know, the guy that gets paid to evaluate these players for the Patriots.

"The things he's doing for the Packers, I would say there are probably some things that he would do if he were on this team," Patriots director of player personnel Nick Caserio said. "He's a good football player. I think if you line him up in any system, he's going to be a good football player whether it's our team, the Packers, any other team in the NFL."

Here's a quote from BB:

"He's a guy with a high motor, so even at times when it looks like he's blocked, he can still come out and get in on the play," Belichick said. "He's a good pursuit player, but I'd say his speed and his quickness are big assets. He's a guy that's never really out of the play. You can run away from him, but he can run you down -- or you can run to him and it kind of looks like you might have him blocked, but he spins out of things and uses his quickness and his athleticism to get out of tight situations, stay alive and make plays."

http://patsblog.projo.com/2010/12/patriots-could.html

To say that he can't play in our system where TBC is our starting OLB is so dumb.

 

[Deus Irae]

You're right. Because he hasn't played in a 3-4, he surely can't have the ability to play in it. Only players that have played in a 3-4 can ever succeed in a 3-4. Good logic.

Adalius Thomas says hi.

The point is that not every player can play every position in every system. 6'7" linebackers are a rarity, to put it mildly.

Could you kindly list, say, twenty 6'7" conversion projects that went from D-line to true OLB in the NFL, with a particular focus on those who played in a 2-gap system? If you can't think of 20 off the top of your head, perhaps you could start with just 5-10 of them.