Stud n dud boys

[Deleted member 6794]

So now we're upset that Clay didn't have an amazing impact against the best oline in the NFL?

And the above comment is exactly why players are generally wrong when sacrificing for the team; how quickly we forget that Clay was playing out of position the past two seasons at inside linebacker, a position that doesn't play to any of Clay's strengths. He sacrificed his play for the team to get better....and now he needs to be "forced to renegotiate".

Matthews has struggled for most of the season against mediocre tackles as well. There´s absolutely no doubt he hasn´t played up to his contract and I really have a hard time understanding how any Packers fan would think differently because he performed on an elite level early during his tenure with the team.

 

[HardRightEdge]

In a typical game this is only a three-quarters defense. The fourth quarter is a time for prayer.

I've been making this point for years. Winners close. Little possums walk early, big possums walk late. Yada, yada.

Now, in the free agency / salary cap era even great teams have have exploitable weaknesses on one side of the ball or the other. I pointed out pre-game that the Dallas pressure point was their slow linebackers. We got an early illustration of that fact with our #2 TE who runs 4.75 on a good day getting behind Dallas' "All Pro" LB. Also, Cook's productivity in this game was at least partially attributable to this fact.

Having an exploitable weakness that a coach can't mitigate in some way amounts to average performance. Such is the case with our perimeter corners. If your perimeter corners are known to be vulnerable, you'd like to think there'd be a zone answer to this problem, but Capers does not have that in his tool kit, at least not when he doesn't have All Pros like Woodson and Collins and a near-Pro Bowler in Williams to make it work. Again, if your best answer to a shortcoming is having All Pros, you have not proved yourself to be better than average.

And that's pretty much the state of affairs in the first 3 quarters.

Then we get to the 4th. quarter. At what point since 2010 have we every seen the defense step up late to close out a win in a big game? Rarely? Never? You can't win 'em all, and maybe you can't win half, but you'd expect that defense to win one.

As it stand, just outscore 'em, baby!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This guy needed Divine intervention, or maybe it's his landlord that needed it:

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

LOL....some people just shouldn't be allowed to watch Sports/TV

 

[Poppa San]

This guy needed Divine intervention, or maybe it's his landlord that needed it:

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

Really? This loser was breaking stuff before the game was even over. Some people shouldn't be near alcohol.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

One of three things happened on that Crosby kick. I've already mentioned divine intervention from St. Vince and kismet (could it be fate?). There's a third possibility. I don't know about AT&T Stadium, but other domes have been known to have a very slight "wind", just 2 or 3 mph. I guess it's a peculiarity of the ventilation system that creates a tiny bit of swirl in some of these stadiums. Might it have been "wind" aided?

I prefer the first option...divine intervention.

Or all NFL games are already decided like the WWE ?. Just saying

 

[goldplater]

For me Jason Witten earned a lot respect because he still made things happen (ok, against an Burnett-missing GBDB-Corps).

Cook is maybe one of the top-3-FA-aquisitions of TT (besides Woodson, Peppers). And he came on waaaayyy cheaper, so maybe the best -per-dollar.

Crosby is the best keeper on the roster after his failed 2012 (?) season.

AR is his best draftchoice.

I gess my Stud is Ted Thompson today.
Also because he did not fire MM and traded AR in the name of press- and fan-coverage
being stubborn is a well underappreciated virtue.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Matthews has struggled for most of the season against mediocre tackles as well. There´s absolutely no doubt he hasn´t played up to his contract and I really have a hard time understanding how any Packers fan would think differently because he performed on an elite level early during his tenure with the team.

Yes. This year he underperformed. No doubt, however, claiming that he's underperformed for some time now ignores the fact that he has been sacrificing by playing ILB for the past two seasons. Had Matthews refused to move inside and put up good numbers on the outside for the past two seasons, then one poor season wouldn't be enough for some to start insisting he take a pay-cut.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes. This year he underperformed. No doubt, however, claiming that he's underperformed for some time now ignores the fact that he has been sacrificing by playing ILB for the past two seasons. Had Matthews refused to move inside and put up good numbers on the outside for the past two seasons, then one poor season wouldn't be enough for some to start insisting he take a pay-cut.

As a Packer GM, at what point would you say $15M+ is too much to pay Clay?

If it is even on the table this off season, this could be a very tough decision for Green Bay and a lot of it will depend on Clay as well. What is best for the team? This is a guy that is one of the faces of the franchise. Yes, he earned his initial contract, but this is a business about "what are you doing now?".

My hope is that the deal can be restructured in a favorable way for both sides. Clay bends a bit for the good of the team, as do the Packers for the good of keeping Clay in GB until he retires. I have no problem with Clay being one of the top paid Packers, but not if he doesn't earn it and at the expense of using that money to improve the team elsewhere.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

As a Packer GM, at what point would you say $15M+ is too much to pay Clay?

If it is even on the table this off season, this could be a very tough decision for Green Bay and a lot of it will depend on Clay as well. What is best for the team? This is a guy that is one of the faces of the franchise. Yes, he earned his initial contract, but this is a business about "what are you doing now?".

My hope is that the deal can be restructured in a favorable way for both sides. Clay bends a bit for the good of the team, as do the Packers for the good of keeping Clay in GB until he retires. I have no problem with Clay being one of the top paid Packers, but not if he doesn't earn it and at the expense of using that money to improve the team elsewhere.

I am not trying to argue that Clay is worth $15m+ a season, I am simply pointing out that the team needs to take into account the sacrifice that Clay made when he moved inside. If, in the future, another player is asked to move to a less glamorous position for the good of the team and that player looks back and sees that the move did nothing but hurt Clay's paycheck, why would that player make the move? Players will make that move so long as they believe that the team will take that into account when contract time comes up. No, Clay isn't worth that much, but I would be hesitant to start talking massive pay cut with a guy who helped the team so much the past two seasons at the expense of his career.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I am not trying to argue that Clay is worth $15m+ a season, I am simply pointing out that the team needs to take into account the sacrifice that Clay made when he moved inside. If, in the future, another player is asked to move to a less glamorous position for the good of the team and that player looks back and sees that the move did nothing but hurt Clay's paycheck, why would that player make the move? Players will make that move so long as they believe that the team will take that into account when contract time comes up. No, Clay isn't worth that much, but I would be hesitant to start talking massive pay cut with a guy who helped the team so much the past two seasons at the expense of his career.

Like I said, if something happens and no guarantee it will, it won't be an easy conversation between the Packers, Clay and his agent. He is under contract through 2018, he holds most of the cards, but will be aware that the Packers would save $11.1 M by trading or releasing him.

I agree with you, his salary shouldn't reflect him having to shift to ILB last year, as well as playing hurt part of this season, but it should ultimately reflect his future value to the organization. $15.2M?

 

[AmishMafia]

People want these players to perform at a level that a starter capable of..

OK they were drafted at 2nd round or at ever.. That isn't Doms fault or Moss, or Perry's fault (coaches)..

People so fast to blame Dom... But how can you make porter house if they get you chopped liver?

Im not a Dom fan. I have seen other coaches do more with less. But I cant blame him with a 3rd string guy. Shields and williams were low level CBs before gaining experience and becoming impactful players.

 

[PackerDNA]

Why restructure to begin with? Cut bait. He's not only not worth the huge cap hit, he's in decline. So 'renegotiate' from $15.2 to $11.2. You save $4M, then we start talking about how he's not worth that.
Cut or trade, save the whole shebang and get a better player(s).

 

[thisisnate]

You don't just go to the great-player store to find someone more impactful than Clay. It's highly unlikely you find that in FA or in a first year player. Clay is still reasonably young, and we may be looking at losing Peppers and Shields this off-season already. Their veteran leadership is going to be very difficult to replace. Add losing Clay on top of that? I don't think so. I agree that he's overpaid for what he's been giving us, but cutting or trading him is not a reasonable response, imo.

 

[El Guapo]

I don't have a problem with Clay. I think that he's undersized for his position, but plays with a high motor and uses speed and better-than-expected strength to win matchups. The downside is that he gets injured, generally hamstrings which I think is also from the stress of trying to move LTs. His production has suffered because of injuries, and there lies the entire problem. Are we paying too much for a guy that gets an injury or two per season that hamper his talents?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Why restructure to begin with? Cut bait. He's not only not worth the huge cap hit, he's in decline. So 'renegotiate' from $15.2 to $11.2. You save $4M, then we start talking about how he's not worth that.
Cut or trade, save the whole shebang and get a better player(s).

I think this would be a mistake. Would be the Josh Sitton move all over again. Why would you outright cut a player that has trade value? Any type of trade can include Green Bay absorbing part of his salary, which they would have to with the cap hit if they cut him. But it would also include the Packers getting something in return, another player or draft pick.

 

[goldplater]

I don't have a problem with Clay. I think that he's undersized for his position, but plays with a high motor and uses speed and better-than-expected strength to win matchups. The downside is that he gets injured, generally hamstrings which I think is also from the stress of trying to move LTs. His production has suffered because of injuries, and there lies the entire problem. Are we paying too much for a guy that gets an injury or two per season that hamper his talents?

maybe to much guaranteed.
Maybe should get more based on playtime, like with Perrys contract?

When he was fit the D got an big lift. He gets the doubleteams more often and then others can impact the QB or RB.

I hope Clay reads this here and will make more impact like in the 2010 postseason.

"it's time!"

 

[PackerDNA]

I think this would be a mistake. Would be the Josh Sitton move all over again. Why would you outright cut a player that has trade value? Any type of trade can include Green Bay absorbing part of his salary, which they would have to with the cap hit if they cut him. But it would also include the Packers getting something in return, another player or draft pick.

Like I said, cut or trade. Maybe the better question would be why continue to grossly overpay for a player in decline with a lot of wear and tear on him?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Like I said, cut or trade. Maybe the better question would be why continue to grossly overpay for a player in decline with a lot of wear and tear on him?

I would add, renegotiate his contract into that.

That is my dilema. Clay is still a valued member of the Green Bay Packers, but are you overpaying him at the expense of not being able to still afford Lang, Cook, Perry or a top notch FA CB? For all we know, Clay could stay healthy and have a Pro Bowl type season in 2017.

Extreme example, but what if Aaron Rodgers started to play like Jay Cutler?

 

[Mondio]

I can't see anybody trading for a guy with ~5 sacks and a looming 20+ million dollars in salary coming in the next 2 seasons. If he's not worth it to us, he's not going to be worth picks to someone else either. regardless if we're eating any bonus money. We're restructuring, keeping him as is, or cutting ties. I don't see any other situation arising with Matthews. I prefer the restructure over all else.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Or all NFL games are already decided like the WWE ?. Just saying

You mean like Goodell in a skybox with one of those giant fans? I mean the kind that blows wind, not a Giant's fan. Oh, wait, I didn't make that clear either.

 

[easyk83]

Matthews is paid like an elite pass rusher therefore I expect him to have an impact when facing a top notch left tackle as well. There´s no doubt in my mind that he hasn´t performed up to his contract for quite some time and should be forced to renegotiate his deal next offseason.

He's produced double digit sacks only once in the last 4 years. I agree with you, he needs to restructure and IMHO he needs to change his conditioning and preparation. I cant fault durability for the shoulder sprain but the guy never seems to get over the nagging ankle and hamstring injuries that he always seems to develop.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes. This year he underperformed. No doubt, however, claiming that he's underperformed for some time now ignores the fact that he has been sacrificing by playing ILB for the past two seasons. Had Matthews refused to move inside and put up good numbers on the outside for the past two seasons, then one poor season wouldn't be enough for some to start insisting he take a pay-cut.

Matthews had only 2.5 sacks over the first eight games in 2014 before moving inside.

I am not trying to argue that Clay is worth $15m+ a season, I am simply pointing out that the team needs to take into account the sacrifice that Clay made when he moved inside. If, in the future, another player is asked to move to a less glamorous position for the good of the team and that player looks back and sees that the move did nothing but hurt Clay's paycheck, why would that player make the move? Players will make that move so long as they believe that the team will take that into account when contract time comes up. No, Clay isn't worth that much, but I would be hesitant to start talking massive pay cut with a guy who helped the team so much the past two seasons at the expense of his career.

The Packers shouldn´t renegotiate Matthews´ contract because he moved inside for 1 1/2 seasons but because he doesn´t perform on an elite level anymore playing outside.

Why restructure to begin with? Cut bait. He's not only not worth the huge cap hit, he's in decline. So 'renegotiate' from $15.2 to $11.2. You save $4M, then we start talking about how he's not worth that.
Cut or trade, save the whole shebang and get a better player(s).

The Packers currently have only two outside linebackers under contract for the 2017 season in Matthews and Fackrell. The position will be in need of an upgrade next offseason even without releasing or trading Clay, therefore I don´t support that idea.

maybe to much guaranteed.
Maybe should get more based on playtime, like with Perrys contract?

When he was fit the D got an big lift. He gets the doubleteams more often and then others can impact the QB or RB.

Opponents hardly double-team Matthews anymore.

 

[longtimefan]

I would add, renegotiate his contract into that.

That is my dilema. Clay is still a valued member of the Green Bay Packers, but are you overpaying him at the expense of not being able to still afford Lang, Cook, Perry or a top notch FA CB? For all we know, Clay could stay healthy and have a Pro Bowl type season in 2017.

Extreme example, but what if Aaron Rodgers started to play like Jay Cutler?

Cutting Shields saves close to 9 mill per the article posted on him being cut..

Re do clays and may have a nice nice chunk saved

 

[OldSchool101]

Why restructure to begin with? Cut bait. He's not only not worth the huge cap hit, he's in decline. So 'renegotiate' from $15.2 to $11.2. You save $4M, then we start talking about how he's not worth that.
Cut or trade, save the whole shebang and get a better player(s).

I agree. However my fear is TT would not utilize his Salary savings properly to reinforce our LB core. Personally, I would rather have 2 OLBs that play to their $8 mil pay grade to replace him and this would also aid in the injury dept., but I know it would be unlikely for TT to use FA and positively not twice.

I have nothing personally against Clay but I don't think we are even close to getting $15 mil production out of him. That forced fumble against the Giants was the Old Clay that we used to see every other game, now we're lucky if he had a play like once in every 5-6 games.. that's if he's even playing

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I agree. However my fear is TT would not utilize the $15 mil savings properly to reinforce our LB core.

Once again, the Packers would "only" save $11.1 million in cap space next season by either releasing or trading Matthews.