Everson Griffen and the Seahawks

[xray]

Dirty player but still good to have on your team. People think Clowney is dirty.

It's not a fan popularity contest about who gets signed . As far as dirty players ; that's debatable who is or isn't . Winning through intimidation and hard nosed play works just fine . Bring in Mathews ...why not ?

 

[Grahamhawker]

Dirty player but still good to have on your team. People think Clowney is dirty.

It's not a fan popularity contest about who gets signed . As far as dirty players ; that's debatable who is or isn't . Winning through intimidation and hard nosed play works just fine . Bring in Mathews ...why not ?

Does Matthews fit what Hawks want in a DE? Seems like he's always been more a 3/4OLB?

 

[Uncle Si]

Dirty player but still good to have on your team. People think Clowney is dirty.

It's not a fan popularity contest about who gets signed . As far as dirty players ; that's debatable who is or isn't . Winning through intimidation and hard nosed play works just fine . Bring in Mathews ...why not ?

He's not very good?

 

[Appyhawk]

Matthews is kind of a Bennet type in that he can play most anywhere on the front, and has historically generated solid statistical success. I don't believe the "dirty" talk. He plays hard and fast, and anytime you do that mistakes can happen. To me dirty is when they aren't mistakes, but intentional. I don't believe Matthews is anything like that.
The thing about adding new guys is you risk losing the excellent chemistry built up among current roster. That can be disastrous. Seems like vets such as Matthews and Griffin understand and appreciate those things and would probably be good stop gap bets, just not long term solutions.

 

[beaumaris]

Matthews is kind of a Bennet type in that he can play most anywhere on the front, and has historically generated solid statistical success. I don't believe the "dirty" talk. He plays hard and fast, and anytime you do that mistakes can happen. To me dirty is when they aren't mistakes, but intentional. I don't believe Matthews is anything like that.
The thing about adding new guys is you risk losing the excellent chemistry built up among current roster. That can be disastrous. Seems like vets such as Matthews and Griffin understand and appreciate those things and would probably be good stop gap bets, just not long term solutions.

He’s definitely Dirty, believe it.
Having said that,I’d take him in a minute. :2thumbs:

 

[Grahamhawker]

Matthews is kind of a Bennet type in that he can play most anywhere on the front, and has historically generated solid statistical success. I don't believe the "dirty" talk. He plays hard and fast, and anytime you do that mistakes can happen. To me dirty is when they aren't mistakes, but intentional. I don't believe Matthews is anything like that.
The thing about adding new guys is you risk losing the excellent chemistry built up among current roster. That can be disastrous. Seems like vets such as Matthews and Griffin understand and appreciate those things and would probably be good stop gap bets, just not long term solutions.

Matthews has been known to move around, but seeing him play some over the years I've always thought of him as a true LB rather than a DL...? I can't remember seeing him with his hand in the dirt much.

 

[HawkStrong]

Matthews is kind of a Bennet type in that he can play most anywhere on the front, and has historically generated solid statistical success. I don't believe the "dirty" talk. He plays hard and fast, and anytime you do that mistakes can happen. To me dirty is when they aren't mistakes, but intentional. I don't believe Matthews is anything like that.
The thing about adding new guys is you risk losing the excellent chemistry built up among current roster. That can be disastrous. Seems like vets such as Matthews and Griffin understand and appreciate those things and would probably be good stop gap bets, just not long term solutions.

Anywhere on the front? Have you actually seen Matthews play?

 

[RealDeal]

I think it is time to just sign him and trade for Yannick, we can't wait to much longer. Right now we have the upper hand but the longer this goes on it will be more in his favor.

 

[Appyhawk]

Matthews is kind of a Bennet type in that he can play most anywhere on the front, and has historically generated solid statistical success. I don't believe the "dirty" talk. He plays hard and fast, and anytime you do that mistakes can happen. To me dirty is when they aren't mistakes, but intentional. I don't believe Matthews is anything like that.
The thing about adding new guys is you risk losing the excellent chemistry built up among current roster. That can be disastrous. Seems like vets such as Matthews and Griffin understand and appreciate those things and would probably be good stop gap bets, just not long term solutions.

Anywhere on the front? Have you actually seen Matthews play?

I've seen him quite a lot actually, with different teams but mostly GB. I was impressed with his speed, intensity, and versatility. Saw him line up in a variety of positions. More on edge than elsewhere, but they moved him often looking for favorable matchups.

 

[toffee]

I really want Matthews, with him and Irvin we have two lower cost vet that still have nuff in their tanks. Green, Irvin, Matthews and hopefully Courier would be the ‘supporting cast’. We can get a stud on top of those four.

Clowney would be ideal as he demands double team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Don't the Packers and Rams primarily play the 3-4 defense?

Not saying Matthews wouldn't fit in here, but he seems like your prototypical 3-4 outside LB.........so where would he play, he's too small to be anything other than a pass rushing end only.

 

[TAB420]

He started following Pete and Russ on Twitter...just saying.

 

[RealDeal]

He started following Pete and Russ on Twitter...just saying.

Well if we go off that then that means Clowney will be going to Tennessee.

 

[TAB420]

No one said we're going off that. Just found it interesting.

 

[CPHawk]

Dirty player but still good to have on your team. People think Clowney is dirty.

It's not a fan popularity contest about who gets signed . As far as dirty players ; that's debatable who is or isn't . Winning through intimidation and hard nosed play works just fine . Bring in Mathews ...why not ?

He's not very good?

Get him back on his mexican supplements, and he will be just fine.

 

[bigskydoc]

Matthews is among my top five least like players in the NFL. Dirtier than Suh, just not as dumb. He hides his dirty play better. He's really a LB, and I don't see where he fits here. He also isn't half the player he used to be. ukeface:

 

[QuahHawk]

I really want Clowney back, but adding Griffen and Mathews without having to cut Britt or KJ would be nice. I have a feeling we are bringing in two more DE's and if they go Clowney and Griffen, Britt is a goner and possibly KJ.

 

[Sun Tzu]

I really want Clowney back, but adding Griffen and Mathews without having to cut Britt or KJ would be nice. I have a feeling we are bringing in two more DE's and if they go Clowney and Griffen, Britt is a goner and possibly KJ.

I think if they were going to move on from KJ it would have happened yesterday before his $1 million roster bonus. Unless that bonus was already locked in regardless of when he was cut, not sure how the roster bonuses work as far as timing.

 

[Appyhawk]

I think a lot of this stuff will not be decided until a bit over a month from now, after we have a chance to look at our rookie class. Then we can address the gamble on who stays/who goes decisions. It would be nice to get the Clowney thing settled. That would bring everything into much better focus. In the meantime I'm beginning to think it's Britt in the hot seat. That contract may be what's holding up the Clowney deal. Wags will not accept losing his partner.

 

[KitsapGuy]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/christomasson/status/1245071386172891137[/tweet]