Why Packers should keep Clay Matthews in 2018.

[woodbuck27]

http://packerswire.usatoday.com/2018...thews-in-2018/

Why Packers should keep Clay Matthews in 2018

Clay Matthews Career Statès:

http://www.nfl.com/player/claymatthews/80431/profile

[Pugger]

If we add another EDGE player I want to see what Pettine can do with Clay and Nick this year.

[bobblehead]

He can move to the middle and have a huge impact on the game. Unfortunately we need to find another edge rusher no matter how you slice it or dice it.

[texaspackerbacker]

He can move to the middle and have a huge impact on the game. Unfortunately we need to find another edge rusher no matter how you slice it or dice it.

Absolutely! This is what I've been saying also. Clay has lost a step and seldom finishes the job from OLB, but he did a damn fine job at ILB, and paired with Martinez would be a definite asset to our D. And Perry/Brooks/Biegel/Fackrell all would be decent second best OLBs if we could just find a star-quality pass rusher to pair them with.

[King Friday]

He certainly still has gas left in the tank to play 2-3 more years, but I believe the days of being a continual threat as a pass rusher from OLB are now behind CM3. He should now be in a rotation with Perry and some other younger guys, and he should expect time at ILB as well.

If he wants to stay in Green Bay for another 3 years, I would offer to extend his deal 2 more years for a total of around $21M. Give him a $6M signing bonus and roughly $7M / $5M / $3M base salaries for the next 3 years. That reduces his cap number this year by about $2.5M and ensures his cap number will reduce along with his expected contribution in coming years. If he's not willing to accept an offer like that, then you let him play out his deal this year and wave bye-bye after 2018.

[Fosco33]

I'd be fine letting clay walk or restricture. For the 10-12 games he plays - ugh.

[Pugger]

I'd be fine letting clay walk or restructure. For the 10-12 games he plays - ugh.

Would a rookie EDGE player be able to step right in Clay's shoes? If not would a FA pass rusher be any better and/or cheaper? Most teams hang onto their good pass rushers. If one hits the market he'll cost more than what we'll be paying Clay so he better be a hell of lot more effective.

[mraynrand]

Would a rookie EDGE player be able to step right in Clay's shoes? If not would a FA pass rusher be any better and/or cheaper? Most teams hang onto their good pass rushers. If one hits the market he'll cost more than what we'll be paying Clay so he better be a hell of lot more effective.

Right. The FA(s) who solves all your problems has to exist in reality, not just in fantasy. And he/they had better work out great or you are screwed. Not every foray into free agency works out like it did for the Jags this year. But there will be those who will cherry pick the good outcomes and ask "why didn't the Packers do that?"

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Right. The FA(s) who solves all your problems has to exist in reality, not just in fantasy. And he/they had better work out great or you are screwed. Not every foray into free agency works out like it did for the Jags this year. But there will be those who will cherry pick the good outcomes and ask "why didn't the Packers do that?"

Signing every hotshot free agent is fantasy, not reality - not even if the owner is a trillionaire - due to that dreaded thing called salary cap. But if you have an elite QB on your roster, the best strategy to subscribe to is Belichickism.

That means trading for Cook even if you already have 3 good receivers on your roster. AND signing a lockdown corner in free agency even with another lockdown corner already on the roster.

Btw, how do y'all type in the trademark symbol next to a word? I wanna trademark Belichickism.

[mraynrand]

Signing every hotshot free agent is fantasy, not reality - not even if the owner is a trillionaire - due to that dreaded thing called salary cap. But if you have an elite QB on your roster, the best strategy to subscribe to is Belichickism.

That means trading for Cook even if you already have 3 good receivers on your roster. AND signing a lockdown corner in free agency even with another lockdown corner already on the roster.

Btw, how do y'all type in the trademark symbol next to a word? I wanna trademark Belichickism.

THat's fine. Just spell it out - ID the player(s) the contracts and who you have to let go to make it happen from a financial and roster perspective. I'd be interested to see whet specifically you have in mind.

One caution: there is but one Belichick; even if you like his protege, it doesn't guarantee similar success. It's likely that Belichickism™ may only work for Belichick.

[Tony Oday]

Keep Clay, sign a vet top CB, draft pass rush, TE and line. Sign Jimmy at TE and let's do this.

[texaspackerbacker]

Keep Clay, sign a vet top CB, draft pass rush, TE and line. Sign Jimmy at TE and let's do this.

Exactly!

[Pugger]

Keep Clay, sign a vet top CB, draft pass rush, TE and line. Sign Jimmy at TE and let's do this.

This sounds like a plan!

[pbmax]

You are more likely to get a shutdown corner at 14 than top flight pass rush. Draft the corner, sign some pass rush.

Put Fackrell in an incubator so he can finish developing.

[Tony Oday]

You are more likely to get a shutdown corner at 14 than top flight pass rush. Draft the corner, sign some pass rush.

Put Fackrell in an incubator so he can finish developing.

Draft Landry and sign a vet CB. I think it's easier to rush the passer for rookies than cover WRs.

[3irty1]

The Packers have no business drafting anything but BPA.

Plug all the emergency holes with FA as cap permits but for godsakes use the draft to reel in a star with a rookie contract at any position.

[Joemailman]

The Packers have no business drafting anything but BPA.

Plug all the emergency holes with FA as cap permits but for godsakes use the draft to reel in a star with a rookie contract at any position.

There are some positions that can be eliminated from 1st round consideration though:

QB: You have Rodgers
TE: Nobody rated that high
G: Can find them later
C: See Guard
ILB: Nobody rated that high

Pretty could chance there will be an OLB, WR, OT or CB worthy of the 14th pick.

[Tony Oday]

There are some positions that can be eliminated from 1st round consideration though:

QB: You have Rodgers
TE: Nobody rated that high
G: Can find them later
C: See Guard
ILB: Nobody rated that high

Pretty could chance there will be an OLB, WR, OT or CB worthy of the 14th pick.

RB is stacked, wouldn't pick a WR that high unless it's a Moss talent.

[run pMc]

RB is stacked, wouldn't pick a WR that high unless it's a Moss talent.

What about Calvin Ridley? they need to figure out what to do at WR -- they have Davante and a bunch of #3/#4 level WRs, and that's not good enough even with Rodgers IMO.

(I ask that even though I agree with most that CB and especially pass rush need help.)

[Tony Oday]

What about Calvin Ridley? they need to figure out what to do at WR -- they have Davante and a bunch of #3/#4 level WRs, and that's not good enough even with Rodgers IMO.

(I ask that even though I agree with most that CB and especially pass rush need help.)

I would not draft a 6'1" WR in the first round, I know dumb to think that, but if you are burning a top pick I want a 6'4" WR that runs a 4.4 40.

CB is the TOP need but I think that is a Free Agent Need, King will be decent (I hope) Randall is a headcase but played OK toward the end and we have Rollins and I am pretty sure a couple of undrafted CBs that will turn into Shields and Tramontana I hope.

I don't know how much a difference the 4-3 is between the 3-4 at OLB but we need a pass rush and I would be ok an actually happy to see us switch but that would mean drafting a stud, pass rushing DE. I just don't know where Clay would play.