Clay Matthews’ move inside has fans gaga

Posted by Vic Ketchman, editor on November 9, 2014 – 9:02 pm


Mark from Sheboygan Falls, WI

“Turned loose, Matthews and Peppers could dominate.” Did you know they were moving Matthews inside? Looking good so far!

I’ll never tell.

Ryan from Eagan, MN

Vic, if this switch of Matthews to ILB is successful tonight, I feel the scheme-freaks will start chortling, much to my disappointment. What are your thoughts on the switch? What are we gaining and what are we giving up?

They’re using him inside on running downs, outside on passing downs. This is a gimmick. It’s working tonight but the next opponent will be prepared for it. There is no permanent scheme fix. This is just one game but it says everything about Dom Capers’ acumen for defensive football. The Bears got pencil-whipped.

Josh from Tyler, TX

Thanks for such a great daily read, Vic. The announcers seem to be making a real big deal about Matthews playing inside. Is it really that unusual?

Coach Capers did it with Chad Brown a long time ago, except he’d move Brown from inside to outside. This is what I mean when I write “empty his bag.” Coach Capers has a lot of tricks in his bag, but he has to have the personnel to use them.

Mark from Yucaipa, CA

Vic, another gutsy call by the coach. The conventional wisdom is this early in the game you take the three points. He obviously doesn’t read the fan comments in your column.

When you have Aaron Rodgers as your quarterback, you can do anything you want.

Lee from Marshfield, WI

Dom is a genius.

You don’t want to fire him tonight?

Steve from Austin, TX

Does it seem to you Eddie Lacy is thinking too much in the backfield, or am I just thinking too much?


Andrew from Somers Point, NJ

You sly devil, you. You knew about the Matthews move to inside the whole time but didn’t want to blow the surprise.

You grossly overrate my access to inside information.

Clark from Kansas City, KS

Vic, has Matthews’ early success at ILB been an example of plays, not players? Is it possible the constant call for new schemes by the readers is actually justified?

Oh, you want credit for this move? This isn’t a new formation, it’s just a new man playing at a new position. That’s plays, not players? I say it’s players, not plays. It’s an old defensive formation with a new body. The body is what makes it work. Let’s put it this way: It’s a nice mix of scheme and execution.

Danny from Madison, WI

The Packers are a totally different team at home. I know there’s an element of home field advantage, but why the huge discrepancy?

That’s the way it’s supposed to be.

Matt from Scottsville, KY

The Packers have Cutler scared to death.

The Bears’ game plan is curious, to say the least. Against the league’s No. 32 run defense, 14 of the Bears’ first 18 plays were pass plays. I don’t get it.

David from Maitland, Australia

Get a big lead early. No huddle offense at its best. That’s how you stop the run (although they’ve been doing a good job of that today anyway).

I think the run defense is going to move up the rankings this week.

Matt from Huntington, IN

Fighting the urge to turn off the game. The Bears have given up. It’s sad.

This won’t wash well in Chicago. Rivalry?

Paul from Phoenix, AZ

Vic, I remember reading your column at the beginning of the year and someone asked you about Matthews playing inside linebacker. What is your take on his performance and do you think this change will stay the same way?

He’s played beautifully but I don’t expect him to be used in this capacity as much in the future. Why not? Because future opponents will be happy to have Matthews defending against the run, or play-action, instead of rushing the passer.

Posted in Blog
blog comments powered by Disqus
%d bloggers like this: