Why Packers should keep Clay Matthews in 2018.

[woodbuck27]

http://packerswire.usatoday.com/2018/01/11/why-packers-should-keep-clay-matthews-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?"

[Tony Oday]

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

[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.

[texaspackerbacker]

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

Exactly!

[texaspackerbacker]

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.

We should risk the "cap hell" that some people whine about while we still have Aaron Rodgers playing at a top level. Then when he is gone, either it will take care of itself because his big contract is gone too, or else we suffer for a couple of years - which we probably would anyway when he's gone, but the ride to get there will be worth it.

[mraynrand]

We should risk the "cap hell" that some people whine about while we still have Aaron Rodgers playing at a top level. Then when he is gone, either it will take care of itself because his big contract is gone too, or else we suffer for a couple of years - which we probably would anyway when he's gone, but the ride to get there will be worth it.

Is that what Belichick does?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

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.

Too lazy at this moment to do the math, but the math says that with a Brady or a Rodgers, your odds of winning more than a fluke Super Bowls are excellent via Belichickism. Just gotta be smart with the cap, ala Belichick.

And while I'm not Nostradamus, I'm fairly certain that the Packers would've won more than a fluke Super Bowl by now in this century had Thompson acquired pimps like Jimmy G, Tony G, V-Dave, Beast Mode, Randy Fucking Moss, and Revis Island when he had the chance. Hell, Packers might've won the SB last season had the Polar Bear signed Cro while bums like Gunter, Randall, Goodson, Hyde and Rollins were disgracing the corner position.