9-7 good enough?

[Sky King]

Just out of curiosity, for those proponents of continuing to pay Clay on his current contract, at what point do you declare a guy as injury prone and not being able to play up to his contract?...

It would take more than one season. The last half of 2014 and 2015 he played a new position by the request of his coaches, so less productivity playing inside should have come as no surprise. As it was, he actually was far better than the guys he replaced even if he was not as good as on the outside. The hamstring has been an issue since he was a rookie. They were fully-aware of that when he was signed to the last contract.

TT and MM have been patient in the past with players that have been injured. Starks, for example, as well as Perry (several times) and Shields over the past two seasons. They have also been patient with those who have had down years. Crosby and Adams come to mind. They've even been patient with those who have had problems with the drug protocol. Guion, Goodson, and Jones for example. Why single-out Matthews?

 

[Half Empty]

The cap hit?

 

[Sky King]

The cap hit?

I'm not sure if this was directed at me. But my response would be that the hit has already occurred for this season. Matthews health for next season is not yet known. If he comes back at 31 anything like Jordy has done at 31 then he'll be worth what TT has already determined what he's worth to the team, not any of us. I'm 100% certain that TT could not care less what any of us think about that. If there's ever any proof that he reads this forum I'll eat my favorite Packer hat.

 

[Half Empty]

Yes, it was a reply to you. I try not to quote when I'm responding to the post immediately preceding. Your final question was 'why single-out Matthew', and I offered a possible answer. As to the rest of your response, I (and nobody else that I remember) ever even implied that this forum is just a bunch of people trading comments/opinions/insults/suggestions with absolutely zero effect on the Packers or anyone in the organization.

 

[Sky King]

...As to the rest of your response, I (and nobody else that I remember) ever even implied that this forum is just a bunch of people trading comments/opinions/insults/suggestions with absolutely zero effect on the Packers or anyone in the organization.

Sorry, but that was not a jab at you or anyone else.

 

[Half Empty]

OK, but then I just totally don't understand the

not any of us. I'm 100% certain that TT could not care less what any of us think about that. If there's ever any proof that he reads this forum I'll eat my favorite Packer hat.

part.

 

[Mondio]

I'm sure he doesn't read the forum, and i don't plan on eating anything that isn't delicious and fattening for the next 10 days at least. If it can't give me diabetes, i don't want it!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Why single-out Matthews?

66 Million reasons, but that has been responded too already. If you have a guy who is earning the kind of money Matthews is, the mistake of over paying him is much larger then any of the guys you mentioned. Bringing Shields into the conversation is very valid now. There probably should have been concern last year with him, but if they keep Shields around after this year and pay him what is due, then I just don't know what to say.

 

[Sky King]

I'm sure he doesn't read the forum, and i don't plan on eating anything that isn't delicious and fattening for the next 10 days at least. If it can't give me diabetes, i don't want it!

It's easy to stay away from fruit cake, no? Otherwise it's prime season for high blood sugar and Oshkosh bib overalls.

 

[Sky King]

66 Million reasons, but that has been responded too already. If you have a guy who is earning the kind of money Matthews is, the mistake of over paying him is much larger then any of the guys you mentioned. Bringing Shields into the conversation is very valid now. There probably should have been concern last year with him, but if they keep Shields around after this year and pay him what is due, then I just don't know what to say.

TT agreed to the contract, so it's his baby. Nobody thinks their baby is ugly. Do you really believe he'll ask Matthews to take a pay cut for agreeing to play hurt this season and also for playing out of position the previous two seasons, all for the good of the team? I sure have my doubts about that. I'm not saying it can't happen, just that I doubt that it will.

 

[Sky King]

OK, but then I just totally don't understand the

part.

Just my way of emphasizing that I don't believe that TT thinks that he has over paid Matthews the way some folks around here seem to, especially under the circumstances.

 

[Poppa San]

It's easy to stay away from fruit cake, no? Otherwise it's prime season for high blood sugar and Oshkosh bib overalls.

too constricting. I go with draw-string sweat pants and oversized shirts. Over the years I've acquired a few XXL that I rarely wear. Perfect opportunity.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

TT agreed to the contract, so it's his baby. Nobody thinks their baby is ugly. Do you really believe he'll ask Matthews to take a pay cut for agreeing to play hurt this season and also for playing out of position the previous two seasons, all for the good of the team? I sure have my doubts about that. I'm not saying it can't happen, just that I doubt that it will.

This isn't TT asking Clay to make up for the past, its TT, as well as Clay and his agent possibly having to decide what Clay is worth in the future. Although what Clay has done in the past is information to decide that value, I doubt any NFL player comes to the bargaining table with a bag of money saying "ok, here is the money I owe you because I didn't live up to my contract".

 

[Mondio]

Only guy I can think of doing that was Rivera when he offered to give money back to Dallas after signing that big deal and then getting hurt right away

 

[Sky King]

This isn't TT asking Clay to make up for the past, its TT, as well as Clay and his agent possibly having to decide what Clay is worth in the future. Although what Clay has done in the past is information to decide that value, I doubt any NFL player comes to the bargaining table with a bag of money saying "ok, here is the money I owe you because I didn't live up to my contract".

It seems like just yesterday that Matthews was an up-and-coming rookie. The time sure has flown by. Unless he manages to play for the better part of the next decade he very well could be approaching the final turn of his career. His Dad played effectively well into his late 30s, so maybe he can, too. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

What would greatly help to judge whether that inevitable decline is significant enough right now to warrant a parallel reduction in pay would be if Matthews was 100% healthy and playing at his usual OLB position. Since he's a likely candidate for surgery post-season, including a fairly long (total) rehab of that shoulder, the team may not really know until well into next season what he's still capable of doing.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not the one calling for Matthews or his contract to be replaced. I agree that it would be best to retain Matthews and he already has a contract. Even though his health has been less-than 100% nearly all season long, his snaps are down, plus he's missed several full games this season because of injury, despite these handicaps he's still one of the team's top three in sacks. So, who do you propose should replace him with, now or in the future? Will TT ask him to renegotiate after the team has also asked him to play out of position for much of the two last three seasons, plus one-armed and one-legged for most of this season? Perhaps. Would Matthews ask for his outright release if he were asked to renegotiate, all things considered? Perhaps.

Nonsense that I'm ignoring his performances of late. Which games was he 100% healthy? He's been on the injury report for the past eight games. Prior to that he missed the game against Detroit. Since defensive snap counts, per game, are an indicator of a starter's health. Matthews high-water mark for snaps this year occurred in the season opener against Jacksonville at 74% of all defensive snaps. He recorded one sack in that game. Despite playing only 50% of the snaps against NY he also recorded a sack. Against Minnesota he played 66% of the snaps and recorded another sack. His sacks tailed-off as the season progressed and the injuries compounded. So if stats tell the story, and we all know that you live and breath by the stats, he's been ailing since week 2. I repeat, it's you who is ignoring that his performances have been affected by his injuries and that for most of the previous two seasons he played out of position.

C'mon now. All those scheduled to become FAs after this season are already known. But will TT compete to sign any of the premier FAs who will become available when the NFL calendar allows it? History can answer that quite accurately, same as it can answer whether he will pay-up to retain his own. If Hell freezes over between now and March maybe he'll sign a top-tier FA. But the signing of a premiere FA replacement for Matthews (in TT's world) would be amongst the longest of long-shots. I wouldn't bet the farm on it. Second tier FA? Maybe, if cheap enough and nobody else aggressively competes for them. Third-tier or lower / street FAs? Now that's TT's playground.

Availability is a big part of successfully playing in the NFL and Matthews has either missed or wasn´t able to compete at full strength during a lot of games because of injuries. Unfortunately he hasn´t been a dominant pass rusher on the outside even when healthy therefore there is absolutely no reason to allot close to 10% of the team´s cap towards Matthews.

A lot of players currently headed for free agency will be re-signed before March. Therefore it doesn´t make any sense to speculate on who might be able to replace Matthews next season. Once again, I´m not advocating for the Packers to release him but to renegioate his contract. I´m surprised any Packer fan would question that idea.

It would take more than one season. The last half of 2014 and 2015 he played a new position by the request of his coaches, so less productivity playing inside should have come as no surprise.

TT and MM have been patient in the past with players that have been injured. Starks, for example, as well as Perry (several times) and Shields over the past two seasons. They have also been patient with those who have had down years. Crosby and Adams come to mind. They've even been patient with those who have had problems with the drug protocol. Guion, Goodson, and Jones for example. Why single-out Matthews?

Matthews is actually better rushing from inside as he has troubles beating above average tackles off the edge even when healthy. I agree there are and have been other players on the team that didn´t play up to their contract but none of them earned as much as Clay.

But my response would be that the hit has already occurred for this season.

There´s nothing the Packers can do about Matthews´ cap hit for this season but it´s possible to reduce the one for next year.

TT agreed to the contract, so it's his baby. Nobody thinks their baby is ugly. Do you really believe he'll ask Matthews to take a pay cut for agreeing to play hurt this season and also for playing out of position the previous two seasons, all for the good of the team? I sure have my doubts about that. I'm not saying it can't happen, just that I doubt that it will.

Unfortunately I doubt the Packers will renegotiate Matthews´ contract as well but it would for sure be a smart move.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

His Dad played effectively well into his late 30s, so maybe he can, too. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

I doubt that would have much bearing on Clay's decision, his grandfather, Clay Matthews I, only played 4 seasons. While I don't know his Dad or grandfathers injury history or financial status, I think those 2 things will probably ultimately influence what Clay III does. With his lucrative contract and many endorsements, one would think CMIII no longer financially needs to play football. Coupled with his recent injury issues, it wouldn't even surprise me to see him contemplate retirement sooner than later.

 

[Sky King]

I doubt that would have much bearing on Clay's decision, his grandfather, Clay Matthews I, only played 4 seasons. While I don't know his Dad or grandfathers injury history or financial status, I think those 2 things will probably ultimately influence what Clay III does. With his lucrative contract and many endorsements, one would think CMIII no longer financially needs to play football. Coupled with his recent injury issues, it wouldn't even surprise me to see him contemplate retirement sooner than later.

I guess it's all in how one views retirement. Personally, I retired for the third time this past October. This one may stick. We'll see. While financial security is a big part of it, even when that's already been established there is still the thrill and enjoyment that comes from doing something not everyone has the opportunity to do. As I got older the more I cherished what it was I did more easily in my youth, although I did not appreciate it as fully when I a younger man. I guess we tend to think we'll always be youthful. Too bad there's a shelf-life for a lot of the best things in life. If I were Al Bundy I may look forward to retirement. Fortunately, I was blessed with other more gratifying opportunities. It was not easy to give those up. I doubt it will be for Clay, either, unless the aches and pains begin to overpower the spirit.