No NFL linebacker played more seasons than Hall-of-Famer Junior Seau, who played 20. But no linebacker in league history played more games than Clay Matthews. No linebacker started more, either. Not only that, but only two defensive players -- Bruce Smith and Darrell Green -- played more games.
Clearly, Clay Matthews is one of the most durable players of all time. But Hall-of-Fame candidates need more than longevity to reach Canton. They must be elite, too.
Clay Matthews was. Yet he's been a Hall-of-Fame finalist only once.
The first pick of the Cleveland Browns in the 1978 draft, he played 19 seasons -- finishing his career in 1996 when, at the age of 40, he was a nickel pass rusher for Atlanta. A four-time Pro Bowler and a second-team All-Pro, his greatness wasn't measured by post-season recognition. It was measured by an independent scouting firm ... and Canton should pay attention.
I'm talking about Proscout, Inc., which annually ranks all players at all positions since the 1970s -- thus, covering the entirety of Matthews' career. It assigns colors for each season, with blue the highest (elite), red (very good) next, then purple (average) and so on. In 13 seasons Matthews was graded as "blue," and in four others he was "red" -- 17 of 19.
The two years he missed were his rookie year of 1978 and the strike-shortened 1982 season when he played just two games.
Still, players and coaches didn't always agree when they handed out free trips to Hawaii. Matthews only received four invites (1985, 87-89) and was a first alternate in 1986. He had another season (1984) where he was an AP second-team All-Pro, and where the Sporting News and NEA -- All-Pro teams included in the NFL's official encyclopedia -- tagged him first team.
So, essentially, he had six seasons with some sort of "all,' and, that almost certainly kept him from breaking through as a Hall-of-Fame candidate. First eligible in 2002, it took him 20 years -- or until 2021, his last year as a modern-era candidate -- to become a finalist after six tries (2012, 2017, 2019-21) as a semifinalist.
Remarkably, he advanced to the final 10 in 2021 before his candidacy expired, and that's a shame. Had he had one more year of eligibility, he would've been set up for a deep run in 2022. However, like cornerback Albert Lewis two years later (also a first-time finalist in his last year of eligibility), the clock ran out on Mathews, and he moved into the seniors' category where he's yet to be a finalist.
And that's the rub.
The senior pool is so deep with qualified candidates that it may be a long time before Mathews emerges as one of its nominees ... if he emerges at all. And that's because his "All-Pro" profile doesn't match his skills. Matthews played a different role in his 3-4 defense than others at his position in the 1980s -- players like Lawrence Taylor and Andre Tippett, for example. The vast majority of the time, they rushed the quarterback.
Not Matthews. His game was more varied and more diverse in terms of assignments. In any given year or game, you could see a different role -- a strong-side linebacker with responsibilities to cover the tight end or back. In likely pass defenses, he sometimes was an off-the-ball linebacker who played the edge with his hand in the dirt. Opposing players never knew where to find him ... until, that is, he was tackling, covering or sacking them.
Even with split responsibilities, he ended his career with 82-1/2 sacks, with 69-1/2 listed as official (post-1981). A review of NFL gamebooks, however, shows he had over 1,000 solo tackles, forced 27 fumbles, had 16 interceptions and was credited with 78 passes defensed.
Had he been asked only to rush on third downs, he almost certainly would've doubled his sack total.
“The thing about my brother," Hall-of-Fame lineman Bruce Matthews told Hall-of-Fame voter Tony Grossi, "which is the thing I think that is keeping him out (of Canton), is his versatility. He could play over the tight end, be stout against the run, be stout taking on blocks.
"He did all the dirty work. He could cover. He was a nickel linebacker, great in coverage. When they finally cut him loose rushing the passer, he got 12 sacks. He did everything, and he did it very well."
OK, so that's his brother, not exactly an unbiased source. But he was supported by his coaches, too. Shortly after Matthews was drafted, his head coach -- Sam Rutigliano -- predicted that "he'll be a Jack Ham-type linebacker before it's all over with" -- a comment Marty Schottenheimer later echoed almost word for word.
On another occasion, Rutigliano explained that he saw Matthews "becoming the 'big-play' man on defense. He’s going to get more interceptions, sacks and fumbles. He has all the skills you look for in an outside linebacker — strength, speed and intelligence."
But a third coach, Bud Carson, raised the bar in his praise of the 6-2, 245-pound Matthews, and that's significant. Not because, like Rutigliano and Schotteneheimer, Carson served as Cleveland's head coach; but because he coached Ham in Pittsburgh.
"There aren’t many people who can do what he does," he said of Matthews. "I'm talking in terms of rushing the passer and covering. As great as some of our linebackers (at Pittsburgh) were — Ham. Lambert. Andy Russell — none of them could do it all like he can.
"There's not much more you can ask for from a linebacker than he gives you. On third down, there's a two-dimensional thing you have with him that most people don't have with their nickel linebackers. He is a bona-fide pass rusher. You can put him down (in a three-point stance). You've got a guy that's not someone that can be picked up by the average back that's sitting back there picking up the average linebacker. If you get a one-on-one situation with him on a back, we get great pressure ... there's nobody in the league like him. Nobody."
The comparisons to Ham are not surprising. In fact, they were by design. Shortly after he was drafted, then-Cleveland defensive coach Dave Adolph (who once told Matthews, "Don't you realize that, with your talent, you can do anything you want at linebacker?") handed Matthews films of the Steelers' great and urged him to study them.
He did.
"(The Steelers) were our main rivals," Matthews told Cleveland.com in 2010. "But I studied Jack Lambert and Jack Ham -- their linebackers. I wanted to play like them."
He did. In fact, he played so well that someone else joined the chorus, and it wasn't another of the Browns' coaches. It was Jack Ham himself.
"He's the most complete linebacker I've ever seen in the National Football League," he told the Cleveland Plain Dealer's Chuck Heaton in 1993.
Which raises the question: Why hasn't Clay Matthews been more than a one-time finalist for Canton? A couple of reasons, one of which I explained: He didn't have enough post-season recognition to satisfy voters. But I believe there's another: Cleveland's failure to win a championship. Three times the Browns came close, but each time (1986-87 and 1989) they lost to Denver in the conference championship game.
When Matthews missed the Pro Bowl in 1984 despite a career-best 12 sacks, he indirectly alluded to the importance of Super Bowls, saying that "in the end, to be remembered, you have to be part of a Super Bowl team, not the Pro Bowl."
He was prophetic. Cleveland's lack of postseason success probably hinders Matthews's case as much as anything.
So what does all this mean for his Hall-of-Fame chances? Only members of the seniors' committee know. Though Matthews didn't have a surfeit of All-Pro recognition like Ham or Seau, that shouldn't exclude him. Others with Gold Jackets don't, either, including offensive lineman Jackie Slater, a 20-year pro. He wasn't all-decade and never was first-team AP All-Pro, though he was second-team several times and made NEA's (voted on by players) All-Pro teams in 1987 and 1989 and Pro Football Weekly's All-NFL team in 1988.
However, Slater did make seven Pro Bowls, as did another 20-year veteran -- Darrell Green. Both bested Matthews' total of four. Green had one year as an AP All-Pro, plus three other "all" seasons, essentially from the same sources as Slater. But Green also was a 1980's all-decade selection.
The point is that Matthews's credentials are not that much different from that pair of players, both of whom lasted in the NFL for two decades.
"How many players are so good for so long?" the late Joel Buchsbaum of Pro Football Weekly asked of Matthews. "However, he was not flashy."
There should be a place in Canton for a distinguished linebacker who wasn't "flashy" but had a complete skill-set; someone who could play the strong and weak sides in 3-4 and a 4-3 defensive schemes and excel as a cover backer, rush backer and someone who stuffed the run.
Clay Matthews did what was asked, and he did it so well that his coaches compared him to one of the best ever at his position. That should be enough to emerge as a senior candidate in the near future, and, hopefully, it happens.
He deserves it.
100% agree John.....your case for Matthews adds up to a "no-brainer" (which of course has nothing to do with the mentality/thinking/qualifications of HoF voters.....the metric of "endorsements from those in the crucible of combat" is consistent and clear.....one slight change of emphasis if I may.....you rightly suggest Matthews had "durability".....yes, but a stronger word would be "longevity"....the man played 19 seasons and more games than anybody....one can't last in the darwinian world of pro football for that long (2nd to Seau) unless one has extraordinary and in this case, HoF worthy talent
ReplyDeleteI can see it either way ... I think the talent is there, what is holding him back is the lack of "alls". Not sure voters can get past that.
DeleteJholt I agree that Matthews is a HOF caliber player. A guy like Marcedes Lewis has durability but not the longevity of high caliber play of a Clay Matthews.
ReplyDeleteI guess Pro Scout Inc said they never saw Matthews have a bad game. I think I have seen a bad game from Matthews though and it was 1980 week 1 against New England. He missed a few tackles and was out of position a few times. Most other games I saw where Matthews played he was really good though.
I will check that out --- if I saw that game it was 20 years ago. I had in on VHS and hopefully I transferred it to DVD.
Deletewatched the game --- I wouldn't call it a bad game but I did see a poor 1st quarter. Agree with you there.
DeleteAfter that played well but no real big key plays. so I might disagree with you a little bit for last 3 quarters.
Late in game they blitzed him --- when they got behind.
Certainly not a blue or red game ... but not what I'd call orange or green either. Maybe between red and orange -- purple would be a guess -- for the game.
Took TE a few times ... cover WR underneath once decently, I think. Ferguson go a completion in 4th Q ... but it was 4th and long, no 1st.
Best plays were closing on run plays away. Could see some speed there, 1 error on last play of game, blew contain there.
For me, maybe a B- or so ... give or take
Matthews made a good play in run pursuit near the end of the game in garbage time but I thought he should have been pursuing those runs away from him more earlier in the game. Overall he just didn't seem to make a big impact in the game and PSI said they never saw less than Pro Bowl game from him so I wonder if they saw this one. The 7 other games I saw from Matthews in 1980 he was pro bowl caliber so this New England one stood out to me.
DeleteI would give C- for this game but just my opinion.
Matthews made a good play in run pursuit near the end of the game in garbage time but I thought he should have been pursuing those runs away from him more earlier in the game. Overall he just didn't seem to make a big impact in the game and PSI said they never saw less than Pro Bowl game from him so I wonder if they saw this one. The 7 other games I saw from Matthews in 1980 he was pro bowl caliber so this New England one stood out to me.
DeleteI would give C- for this game but just my opinion
I don't know if they saw it or not -- opening week -- hard to know.
DeleteI saw him pursue away from him all game down the line, pretty fast -- I guess were are seeing that the same way.
Otherwise, agree, no key big plays. And to me, anyway, he did make errors in 1st Q ... but only saw 1 after that.
1st Q seemed like he misjudge Morgan's speed ... another play he got caught not containing -- wrong position as you'd say. He did that once on last play of game.
So, agree, not a great game, but we only differ by one grade ... B- or so to a C- ... Average those and it's a C --- certainly not a Pro Bowl game --- but I think the few poor plays isolated in 1st Q and last play.
I did see some good drops, hard to see, but when ball went by you could see he had good coverage most of the time. And on replays you could catches his drops, looked pretty textbook.
As PSI, they have a dozen of more things they look out. Big plays and Big errors part of it. But hitting drop spot, closeness to receiver, but also feet, hands, pass rush ... so I don't know what they say if they saw it.
SO, there could be some things they saw on all-22 we cannot see, but I'd suspect opening week was not one of their "views". I bet Week 2 was, in fact I am sure they saw week 2 of 1980 ... have see files on that for a couple of players. Sadly, all the individual game files were thrown out a few years ago. Had they let me I would have taken them, but didn't find out until after the fact. That was like a punch to the gut.
Wow that PSI game file news is heartbreaking. I would have paid a few k for them in a heartbeat. That stuffs irreplaceable.
DeleteFrom Brian wolf ...
ReplyDeletePro Scout Inc. would know more about Matthews play than I have seen or remembered but I remember him as being mostly a pass rusher. Let's face it, the Browns didn't have a particularly flashy defensive unit but rather a group of guys that played well together.
They got rid of their one pass rush ace in Alzado and spent the rest of the decade trying to find another, though Al Baker helped them much later with Matthews giving them a good charge and Perry disrupting blocking inside. The secondary had more skill and notoriety than their front seven but had the team had more of a Fred Dean or Charles Haley type pass rusher to get to the QB more, they might have gotten by the Broncos but we can only speculate. Hairston helped as well and Banks seemed to play when he was motivated but Matthews may have had too much on his plate, similar to Mecklenburg in Denver, who excelled as well, despite being asked a lot of responsibilities.
I think Matthews, Mecklenberg and Cornelius Bennett are all in that no-man's land. Kind of do-it-all but don't have high sacks or huge INTs but IMO all were elite most season.
DeleteNot sure they can make the hurdle to HOF ... none ever made it to Final 15 as moderns.
BW ...
DeleteOn the offensive side of the ball and hoping his own case can make it to the month of February in 2025 is Roger Craig, who could also do everything, including blocking and catching but doesn't have the voter-friendly running
numbers that would enable induction.
Mecklenberg and Bennett seemed more comfortable playing near the line of scrimmage than playing in man coverage 10-15 yards downfield like Matthews. I think that the pass coverage ability makes Matthews stand out from the pack.
Delete100% agree on Mecklenberg. Bennett, when he moved to off the ball was pretty good for his age. First part of his career he was definitely a rush backer/Nickle Left end. But seemed to be pretty good a zone coverage starting in mid-1990s ... I mean, not great, but he intrigues me because he had two careers and two positions ... but never "changed" position.
DeleteReally from a DE to a coverage backer. I guess losing a little speed when you run a 4.5 is okay -- maybe drop to a 4.7
Saw a thing in a paper that Matthews ran a 4.75 in late 1980s ... after running a 4.7 in college. Forty times can be suspect ... especially back then. (surface, hand timing, etc) but still running well in 1989 or so, whenever the clip was from
Don't think Matthews may even get notice because of lacking All-Pros. Evne 1984--- to the "AP only" people makes him a zero All-Pro guy.
Interestingly Mecklenberg is 3-time All-pro but all three he was the 2nd ILBer, there was the creation of the 3-4 All-pro team helped him ... and then ended up helping Zach Thomas who was 5-time All-Pro but all five he was second-leading voter getter.
As far as Meck on coverage, I'd say not great. His 3rd down role was as a DE or DT ... to me, the comparison is that he missed out on a lot of pass rush opportunities on early downs. And Matthews and Bennett (late in career) missed out on pass rush opportunities (sacks) on 3rd down due to varying assignments in nickel defenses.
So the comparison is 70-80 sacks --- and HOF LBers who rush --- usually 100 or more. They just missed in different ways, IMO.