Haha, Cobb, and Matthews extensions?

[Mike McCarthy]

Not my narrative at all. Possibly your typical negative interpretation of how you read things?

I was simply pointing out to the poster, who made the statement below, that he was incorrect in his observations. Pretty simple, but you can feel free to continue to be that negative poster who wants to spin everything in a negative light, its who you are.

I feel like I’m talking to someone that has the walls of their bedroom plastered with Matthews posters. My point was simple in that your stats contradicted what you had said in your post. Please feel free to continue to put your spin on the stats it makes for interesting reading.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Maybe before you make that statement and try to put too much weight on it, you should look at who those top 15 teams were first? After you do that, look at who of those 15 teams did the Packers play against and after that, what games Clay played in and how many snaps. I will do the math for you. Clay did not get sacks in 4 games against the top 15 teams in fewest sacks allowed.

1 LA Chargers 18 Packers Did not play
2 New Orleans 20 Clay played....0 sacks
3 Atlanta 24 Clay had 1.5 sacks
Oakland 24 Packers Did not play
Pittsburgh 24 Clay Did not play
Jacksonville 24 Packers Did not play
7 Minnesota 27 Clay played 1 game....0 sacks
Baltimore 27 Clay had 1 sack on only 13 plays
9 LA Rams 28 Packers Did not play
10 Dallas 32 Clay played....0 sacks
11 Miami 33 Packers Did not play
12 NY Giants 34 Packers Did not play
13 Tennessee 35 Packers Did not play
New England 35 Packers Did not play
Carolina 35 Clay played....0 sacks

I'm puzzled by your conclusion:

2.5 sacks in 7 games against the top 15. 6.0 sacks in 7 games against the bottom 16.

Of course, on balance, you would expect players, elite or otherwise, edge rushers or otherwise, to outperform their averages when lined up across from the weaker competition. Whether the differential in this case is an outlier I would not venture a guess.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

I'm puzzled by your conclusion:

2.5 sacks in 7 games against the top 15. 6.0 sacks in 7 games against the bottom 16.

Of course, on balance, you would expect players, elite or otherwise, edge rushers or otherwise, to outperform their averages when lined up across from the weaker competition. Whether the differential in this case is an outlier I would not venture a guess.

As far as I call tell this belongs in 1 of 2 categories:
1. Fake news
2. If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with b.s.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm puzzled by your conclusion:

2.5 sacks in 7 games against the top 15. 6.0 sacks in 7 games against the bottom 16.

Of course, on balance, you would expect players, elite or otherwise, edge rushers or otherwise, to outperform their averages when lined up across from the weaker competition. Whether the differential in this case is an outlier I would not venture a guess.

It was 2.5 sacks in 6 games and one of those games was against the Ravens, where Clay only played 13 snaps. My point is pretty simple, for a poster to say:

"I really believe Matthews is starting to become a AJ Hawk . The reason being is because Matthews hasn’t been able to create any sorts of pressure unless we play a mediocre team. We should really consider parting ways and not prolong anymore."

Isn't a correct statement IMO. Only 2 out of 7 of Nick Perry's sacks came against top 15 teams, should we say the same about Perry? Chandler Jones who led the NFL in sacks (17) only had 6 of them against top 15 teams.

I'm not debating that Clay Matthews isn't currently being overpaid based on his current contract and production, but for someone to say that Matthews can only produce pressure against mediocre teams isn't correct. Further, to base that solely on sacks, isn't looking at the big picture.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

It was 2.5 sacks in 6 games and one of those games was against the Ravens, where Clay only played 13 snaps. My point is pretty simple, for a poster to say:

"I really believe Matthews is starting to become a AJ Hawk . The reason being is because Matthews hasn’t been able to create any sorts of pressure unless we play a mediocre team. We should really consider parting ways and not prolong anymore."

Isn't a correct statement IMO. Only 2 out of 7 of Nick Perry's sacks came against top 15 teams, should we say the same about Perry? Chandler Jones who led the NFL in sacks (17) only had 6 of them against top 15 teams.

I'm not debating that Clay Matthews isn't currently being overpaid based on his current contract and production, but for someone to say that Matthews can only produce pressure against mediocre teams isn't correct. Further, to base that solely on sacks, isn't looking at the big picture.

Yes the same can be said about Perry as well.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As far as I call tell this belongs in 1 of 2 categories:
1. Fake news
2. If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with b.s.

Says the poster who always contributes such relevant posts.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

Says the poster who always contributes such relevant posts.

Here’s another one for ya bud....”to be the man you gotta beat the man.” Not look like a choir boy singing soprano when you go up against equal or better talent.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Here’s another one for ya bud....”to be the man you gotta beat the man.” Not look like a choir boy singing soprano when you go up against equal or better talent.

LOL.....your quoting of Rick Flair has really boosted my impression of you.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Mike McCarthy]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes the same can be said about Perry as well.

It should be pretty obvious the same could be said about every other pass rusher in the NFL.

 

[gopkrs]

Too me it has been too long that Mathews cannot seem to do well against good tackles. And of course I think that is important. I still like his motor but the coaches need to line him up in accordance with who we are playing. If I can see that he is getting absolutely no pressure from watching the game on TV; then the D coach needs to move him around. Need to do something different than just allowing one tackle to take out one rusher on every single play.

 

[gbgary]

Too me it has been too long that Mathews cannot seem to do well against good tackles. And of course I think that is important. I still like his motor but the coaches need to line him up in accordance with who we are playing. If I can see that he is getting absolutely no pressure from watching the game on TV; then the D coach needs to move him around. Need to do something different than just allowing one tackle to take out one rusher on every single play.

bakhtiari neutralizes guys all the time. there's no shame in not getting many sacks when you're going against the other team's best guy. after all...they get paid too. he gets pressure. he's just not getting many sacks. they used to move him around more but they didn't have a perry back then either...but yes they need to get back to moving guys around some. i think the Packers will have a pretty good year in the sack dept this year.

 

[King of Jeans]

Haha @ Cobb and Matthews extensions indeed

 

[AKCheese]

I wouldn’t chase Cobb or Mathews. Mathews is on his last legs. Cobb is very replaceable. Offer Mathews a chance to retire a Packer. Offer Cobb a chance to compete for a roster spot.... or not.

 

[Poppa San]

a pretty good year in the sack dept this year

You been talking to my wife again?

 

[Mondio]

I wouldn’t chase Cobb or Mathews. Mathews is on his last legs. Cobb is very replaceable. Offer Mathews a chance to retire a Packer. Offer Cobb a chance to compete for a roster spot.... or not.

Matthews isn't retiring in a year unless there is career ending injury. I don't think he's getting another blockbuster deal from anyone either. his age, miles on the field and injury stigma will prevent any huge deals from happening for him, but he won't be signing for the famous "vet minimum either. A great year might price him out of GB I guess that's ok too. I think he's going to have a decent year and be around that 10 sack mark +-2 and he could easily be signed by GB for another 3-4 years. but if he's not, he's not retiring.

 

[AKCheese]

I don’t care if he retires or not. He can go take a blow with a trip to the Super Bowl on the line for some other team. Go ahead and pay him “role player” money, but he’s easily replaceable/upgradeable a year from now if the team decides to make that a priority