Is Chris Matthews the Real Deal?

[seahawks08]

From what I saw, he is bit fast, he us not shifty and gas very poor reflexes. I think he can fight the ball but a bug body DB can easily disrupt him from catching or running routes. He did great in SB, but I rewatched the game and looked at his game. It was a pleasant surprise he made all the plays, he just had very limited routes he was running. I am sure he can learn a lot and keep practicing. I just don't know about his shiftiness and speed.

 

[Mick063]

His biggest play to date is recovering an onside kick to win a playoff game. He made every play that he was asked to make in the Super Bowl.

What is there not to like?

Why would anyone knock the guy?

 

[StoneCold]

Pete was over for dinner the other day an we were doing a few shots after some amazing baby back ribs when I asked him what's up with Mathews. He said they are really high on his potential. Tall with good hands, decent speed, but he has issues recognizing defenses and getting separation on a regular basis. He's a work in progress and will definitely get a shot at showing what he can do, but he's not there yet.

Pete got a little sloppy after that and I honestly was a bit drunk myself at that point and don't remember much else.

SC

 

[scutterhawk]

Malcom Smith had a great SuperBowl wouldnt you say? Anyone care to look up his snap count and satistics? Ill save you the pain, worse than Aaron Curry. Matthews is a big dude who appeared to catch with his hand and position himself pretty well but there has to be a reason he wasnt getting run during the regular season wouldnt you think? Need a bigger sample size and after all, the coaches see him everyday in practice. Id think if he dominated in practice the way he did in the Super Bowl that hed declared the next best thing by now. He looked amazing, I loved what I saw but Im really not sure what to think.

Well if the coaches knew Richard Sherman and Maxwell were so good how come they didn't supplant the starters until those starters were injured for them to even get a chance to play. Tate wasn't good the first year but when he did get more time to play he looked great now he's doing good in Detroit, and the only reason he got a chance to play was cause of the injury to Sidney. I get the whole practice thing, but what about someone who plays better when it's an actual game.

Malcom Smith I knew was going to be gone after being the MVP of the superbowl, and I think the FO knew that too, last year was his last contract year, and they rather give snaps to guys who will actually be with the team in the future.

All i'm saying is don't look too much in practice, heck even Wilson threw multiple INT in practices but we don't put too much thought in that.

At the same time we also have to think what happened to Norwood was he in the dog house, and why did Chris Matthews moved up from practice squad to 53, if Norwood should have beaten him out. Pete Carroll mentioned that guys get suited due to the matchups. I'm looking forward for all our WRs to start contributing small or large I think we will finally have an offense that would match well against our defense.

Yep, it's the old "Practice Makes Perfect" gig.
I think that Mathews has shown some good play with the limited games that he's played, like the On Sides Kick in the NFCCG with GB, where he located the ball, and jumped up and brought the ball down play, to help seal the win there.
CM being jammed by Browner worked fairly well, but, considering his limited playing experience, he did better than I thought he would.
I'm betting that he can be coached up to dealing with physical Corners, especially with having JG lined up on the other side, Defenses will have to pick their poison.

 

[scutterhawk]

I'd put money on Norwood being a bigger factor than Matthews this year. I think Norwood is going to have breakout year.

Based on?

Not based on anything. I think Norwood's more talented. I think he's being overlooked.

Overlooked by who?
I like the hell out of Norwood, but having said that, I'm thinking that the Coaches have a pretty good idea what they're doing, and it could very well be that they are wanting to give Norwood more time to develop, and hone his skills.
It could also be that they liked what they saw in Mathews and the NFCCG game, and maybe felt that he would be a good option (secret weapon) for the SB game.
+ I doubt like hell that Norwood would have faired any better against Brandon Browner than Mathews did either.

 

[scutterhawk]

Pete was over for dinner the other day an we were doing a few shots after some amazing baby back ribs when I asked him what's up with Mathews. He said they are really high on his potential. Tall with good hands, decent speed, but he has issues recognizing defenses and getting separation on a regular basis. He's a work in progress and will definitely get a shot at showing what he can do, but he's not there yet.

Pete got a little sloppy after that and I honestly was a bit drunk myself at that point and don't remember much else.

SC

What an ass.....I bet you gave him the rot-gut to drink, and kept all the good stuff for yourself eh? :thirishdrinkers:

 

[scutterhawk]

I love this trade. Lynch will benefit enormously.

Yep.

 

[IndyHawk]

I think the kid will be as good as he wants.He has the size and is fast enough with good hands.It's all up to him.You have to train and workout hard to be rewarded with Pro Bowls/All Pro but he could be that.He will get his chance and will have to make the most of it.I'm rooting for him.

 

[StoneCold]

Pete was over for dinner the other day an we were doing a few shots after some amazing baby back ribs when I asked him what's up with Mathews. He said they are really high on his potential. Tall with good hands, decent speed, but he has issues recognizing defenses and getting separation on a regular basis. He's a work in progress and will definitely get a shot at showing what he can do, but he's not there yet.

Pete got a little sloppy after that and I honestly was a bit drunk myself at that point and don't remember much else.

SC

What an ass.....I bet you gave him the rot-gut to drink, and kept all the good stuff for yourself eh? :thirishdrinkers:

Not sure why you have to make this personal. I'm not a big tequila drinker and since Pete brought the bottle if it was rot gut that's on him. I was in charge of the ribs and they came from Missouri, duroc-berkshire cross and delicious.

SC

 

[KiwiHawk]

It's unusually difficult for the Seahawks to get a good read on a guy like Matthews who isn't a great route runner because we have exceptionally tall defensive backs. He doesn't show as well in our team practices as he would in a game situation against smaller opposing DBs.

I think in the Super bowl he showed what he could do against smaller guys until they put Browner on him, then he looked just like he does in our practices, which isn't so encouraging.

I think he's a horses-for-courses kind of player.

 

[sutz]

It's unusually difficult for the Seahawks to get a good read on a guy like Matthews who isn't a great route runner because we have exceptionally tall defensive backs. He doesn't show as well in our team practices as he would in a game situation against smaller opposing DBs.

I think in the Super bowl he showed what he could do against smaller guys until they put Browner on him, then he looked just like he does in our practices, which isn't so encouraging.

I think he's a horses-for-courses kind of player.

...which would make him valuable to keep around.

 

[netskier]

One way to get an accurate reading on Matthews would be to pit him against defensive backs with heights comparable to be deployed against him the next week. Testing him against the lob unnecessarily underestimates his performance next week, i.e., gives our coaches the wrong info.

 

[netskier]

For example, hold Sherm out against Matthews, and give Sherm extra time drilling against Graham and the other tight ends.

 

[KiwiHawk]

It's unusually difficult for the Seahawks to get a good read on a guy like Matthews who isn't a great route runner because we have exceptionally tall defensive backs. He doesn't show as well in our team practices as he would in a game situation against smaller opposing DBs.

I think in the Super bowl he showed what he could do against smaller guys until they put Browner on him, then he looked just like he does in our practices, which isn't so encouraging.

I think he's a horses-for-courses kind of player.

...which would make him valuable to keep around.

Yes and no. If you have a potential replacement who isn't a liability when route precision counts then Matthews gets cut. Similarly if you have a similar player who can play special teams like Lockette.

We have an extremely competitive roster. We have little space for situational wide receivers who don't contribute to special teams.

 

[McGruff]

And let's cut out the "if he was the man we would have seen him earlier" talk. Pete does things differently and we all know it. He brings young players along very slowly. Are we pretending that we don't know this?

Earl was a rookie starter
Okung was a rookie starter
Baldwin was a rookie starter (slot)
Wagner was a rookie starter
Wilson was a rookie starter
Britt was a rookie starter
Richardson was a rookie starter
Sweezy was a rookie starter
Wright was a rookie starter
Willson was a rookie starter

Bailey started sophomore starter
Chancellor was a sophomore starter
Irvin was a sophomore starter
Lane was a rookie starter (nickle)
Simon was a sophomore starter

Now, some of those guys were injury subs, but they would've played significantly anyway (Willson, Simon esp.), and Irvin wasn't a rookie starter, but he was a major contributor his rookie year. Carroll USED to hate rooks, now he uses them with a vengeance . . . IF they can compete. He won't hesitate to bench or cut a vet if a rookie is equal. The FACT that Lockett and Bryan Freakin' Walters were playing significnatly on offense in front of Matthews tells you all you need to know.

I am encouraged and discouraged by the Super Bowl performance of Matthews. Encourage that he broke out as a match up problem, but discouraged that a fairly simple adjustment neutralized him. I need to see a LOT more from Chris to annoint him as "the real deal."

 

[scutterhawk]

I am encouraged and discouraged by the Super Bowl performance of Matthews. Encourage that he broke out as a match up problem, but discouraged that a fairly simple adjustment neutralized him. I need to see a LOT more from Chris to annoint him as "the real deal."

So, you're saying that there's too small a sampling of CM to make a call, one way or the other?
LOL, Browner is hardly what I'd call a "simple adjustment"....He was, after all, one of the "Original" members of the LOB.
Has he reached his ceiling?, I suspect we'll have our answer soon enough.

 

[KiwiHawk]

I am encouraged and discouraged by the Super Bowl performance of Matthews. Encourage that he broke out as a match up problem, but discouraged that a fairly simple adjustment neutralized him. I need to see a LOT more from Chris to annoint him as "the real deal."

To be fair, the Seahawks' defense, of which Browner was a part, was specifically designed to neutralize the league-wide trend toward larger, more physical wide receivers.

When Megatron was dominating everyone's diminutive defensive backs, it was clear that having some size in the secondary would be critical in the Passing Era.

 

[canfan]

Any receiver that's the proverbial "real deal" would've burned Brandon Browner all day long, not gotten shut down by him.

It was his first real burn in a game, the SB nonetheless, and he finished with well over a hundred yards and looked very good in the process.

I just think responses like that are lacking. He looked great in the SB, and NE made some adjustments to neutralize him. That happens to some of the game's best receivers (say hi, Jimmy).

He won't be a Megatron or Dez Bryant, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see this kid rack up a few 600-800 yard/8-10 TD seasons.

And let's cut out the "if he was the man we would have seen him earlier" talk. Pete does things differently and we all know it. He brings young players along very slowly. Are we pretending that we don't know this?

Let's give the kid a chance. We might have something with him.

At least he was good enough that the Pats had to make adjustments to cover him! Since Rice retired, have we had any receivers that have had an impact on the defense? He is not a top tier receiver, but he may just be an effective weapon when you have Graham on the inside and some speed on the outside (I sure hope Richardson makes a recovery from his knee injury!)

 

[jammerhawk]

I suspect the sample size is yet far too small to know. The very fact he made the team shows he was special enough for this FO. Is he a Pro Bowl quality player? I suspect we all know the answer to that already, but he is a slow starter. Will he get better and become a quality addition? Ans: it's too early to say with certainty, but he was a nice scrap heap find and just might turn out to be a quality big WR.

 

[themunn]

The FACT that Lockett and Bryan Freakin' Walters were playing significnatly on offense in front of Matthews tells you all you need to know.

Fun fact, Jermaine Kearse wasn't promoted off of the practice squad until week 9 of his first season, and made 3 catches in the entirety of that year for 31 yards and 0 TDs.

Matthews obliterated that with his first career catch.

Fast forward 2 seasons and Kearse has had back-to-back NFC Championship-winning TD receptions.

Now, there might be a question of whether or not Kearse is "the real deal", but it goes to show that you don't need to make an immediate impact to make a massive impact in future seasons.

Oh, and the players in front of Kearse that 2012 season?
Braylon Edwards, Charly Martin, Deon Butler and Ben Obomanu among others.