Clay Matthews: Long Overdue for His Hall of Fame Props

It's about freaking time Clay Matthews (Clay III's pappy) got his Hall of Fame nomination.

Clay came out of college at 230 lbs and excelled in coverage (along with everything else).  He'd be covering a running back, and it looked like the guy was screwing around in front of a mirror.

He kept pumping iron and getting bigger and bigger.  He played outside in 3-4's and 4-3's.  Marty Scottenheimer had him in tight end's faces for awhile, jamming them or tossing them aside, depending.  

He became a terrifying passrusher, a year or two after Lawrence Taylor made his big splash in his huge market.

He's not quite like his son, who plays for Green Bay.  The younger Clay is faster and lighter.  Clay didn't "bend the edge" much, but then he didn't have to.

As I've written before, I saw this guy stop half way through a rip move, jack a 310 lb left tackle up onto his toes, and drive him into the quarterback.  He hardly even slowed down!!!

Just try running at him!  He's stone your lead blocker and still make the tackle!  He was still manning up on tight ends into his thirties, too.  Gotta check but think he got 17 sacks in 14 games one season.  18?

I give LT his props--he was amazing too.  But Matthews was just as good as he was (if a little different).

LT was a converted defensive end, while Clay was always a linebacker.  I haven't checked these stats either, but I think if you average out their respective stats (you have to because Clay played a lot longer), you'd find that Clay made more tackles and interceptions, and was even competitive with LT in sacks.

But Matthews played for the Browns, and LT for the Giants.  LT won a Superbowl, and Clay didn't.  Clay Matthews should have been in the Hall of Fame ten years ago, shortly after his brother Bruce (damn what a gene pool!!!).

Just a couple more unrelated notes: Clay was a Rhodes Scholar.  They nicknamed him "Conan" not only for his patented long hair, but for his bodybuilder's physique.

His son may be following the same pattern.  Clay III walked on somewhere at around 180 lbs., and kept getting bigger through college.  Who knows? In a couple years he might be Conan himself.

Clay the elder was a legacy himself.  His father Clay Sr was a really good NFL player too (did I mention the gene pool?)

Anyway raise some hell and correct this injustice.  Clay Matthews was a Pro Bowl player in every scheme.  He got interceptions, sacks, and more tackles than a lot of middle linebackers.  He could bull-rush a left tackle, man-cover a passcatching tight end, and if you look up "football player" in your Funk&Wagnall, you'll find his picture there.

Dammit.

Ok I found this CBS Sports Browns depth chart.  Unlike Ourlads and everybody else, they distinguish between free and strong safeties.

To my amazement, they've got Nacua indeed backing Kindred at strong, and Campbell backing Peppers at free.

I'm still trying to figure this out.  I need to watch an actual game for myself, because everybody else is too lazy to bother with these "details".

I need to know if Gregg is running cover two, or cover one and three.

You think I'm silly?  Cover two is totally different, ok?  The two safeties cover half the field each in cover two, and there is no such thing as free and strong dammit!

All the "odd" coverage schemes use a center-fielder free safety, and a strong safety who plays underneath.  Are you yawning and rolling your eyes?

Nevermind I'll figure it out and let you know, but for right now I think he's mixing it up and running more cover two than he ever has in the past.

That makes sense, because of the safeties he has (except for Nacua).  They're all cover two types, ie strong/free hybrids.  The best free safeties are faster and better in coverage, and the best strong safeties are...well except for Nacua...these guys!

But I don't know for sure yet.  I'll get back to you on this.

The guys on NFL Radio (including Brady Quinn, who is a lifelong Browns fan), are picking the Ravens to beat the Browns in Baltimore.

That's okay.  Now that I've seen more highlights and checked the stats in the massacre in Cincinnati, I get it.

But Flacco attacked their safeties verticly inside.  That's not going to work as well vs the Browns safeties.  They gashed the Cinci D with the run here and there, but most were stifled.  Flacco had time to throw, but I don't think he will (as often) vs the Browns passrush.  Cinci shut his outside targets down, mostly.

Jeremy Maclin tore the Bengals a new one, mostly on one big play, and is a scary guy, but he's not Antonio Brown, and while I'm at it, Flacco isn't Big Ben either.

Everybody is ranting and raving over the Ravens defense (and rightfully so--they were awesome), but there's too much hype here:

Sorry to repeat myself, but the Bengals offensive line is inferior to the Browns offensive line, especially at left tackle (Suggs rote the majority of that havoc).

The Bengals are built differently too.  They run 3-wides most of the time, and don't have tight ends that block well.  They can't run "max protect" as well as the Browns can, and the Ravens rarely sent more than four guys vs the Bengals, because their passrushers overmatched the Bengal blockers.

The Browns five offensive linemen can handle the Ravens built-in passrush, especially with tight ends chipping (on their way upfield as receivers), and Crow can hang around long enough to make sure nobody got through before peeling out as the "outlet" "check-down" receiver that Kizer talked about.

I expect the Ravens to stifle the run like the Steelers did, and put the game on the rookie quarterback's shoulders.  But they won't be able to pressure him like they pressured Dalton without blitzing.

Is that an eye-roll I see?  You think Gramps Suggs will blow by Joe Thomas?  You think somebody will knock Bitonio or Zietler on his ass?  What are you thinking?

The hype over the Ravens defense has (more importantly) masked the fact that the Browns defense held possibly the most prolific offense in the AFC to two touchdowns.

1: The Bengals offensive line is inferior to the Browns offensive line, and the Ravens beat the Bengals in the trenches, while keeping SEVEN guys in coverage more often than not.

2: The Ravens offense is really inferior to the Steelers offense, and if the Browns held the Steelers to two touchdowns, what do you think they'll do to Flacco and company?

I know I've painted the perfect picture of a Browns victory in the bowels of Baltimore, but full disclosure:

The Ravens safeties (and a linebacker) can probably shut down (or at least stifle) the Browns tight ends.

Their cornerbacks are also pretty good, and don't screw up.  Coleman and Johnson can shake them off, but the pass needs to be in the air, and perfect.

Hue (sigh) will probably use Britt at least a little.  It's a Head Coach thing.  Even the smartest ones like that eggzzbeeriunnnzz.

Jeremy Maclin is lethal.

Flacco can RUN if he needs to.

Kizer is a rookie, and so are a lot of other players here.  Rookies screw up.

That being said, I still feel the Browns should win.  And that's my inner-analyst talking!  My inner FAN wonders how they'll manage to lose.

Some baseball team in northeast Ohio seems to have won 21 games in a row.  That's interesting.  Maybe I'll check it out.

CLAY MATTHEWS BELONGS IN THE HALL OF FAME.