Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Clay Matthews, Doug Dieken H.O.F.

Clay Matthews, Doug Dieken H.O.F.

The Browns Board
5 4 385
  • BrownsfaninPaB BrownsfaninPa wrote on
    #1

    I have a question on how many fellow Browns fans feel that Clay Matthews & Doug Dieken should be in the H.O.F. Clay holds Browns team records at his LB position for years of service, and I feel his NFL years of service at his LB position should make him a candidate. As for Doug Dieken, I feel he should be in as well. I look at other OT players that are in, and one specifically ponders my thoughts of how or why. Iam thinking of Cardinals, Dan Dierdorf. The Cardinals had no better records as a team than what the Browns were doing diuring the same era. Doug played almost the same exact years as Dan Dierdorf. Whats your opinion?

  • Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on
    #2

    Clay is a no brainer.

    Doug? Not "the other" overlooked Brown that I'd choose to champion. For me that's Jerry Sherk.

    "When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196
    hoortaH 1 Reply
  • The GipperT The Gipper wrote on
    #3

    Clay Matthews is a viable HOF candidate. Dieken likely is not. In fact...if a Browns OT should be elected to the HOF, it should be Dick Shafrath.

    Doug Dieken made one single Pro Bowl in his career.

    Dick Shafrath made 7 Pro Bowls, and was All Pro 4 times..and SHOULD be in the HOF

    Cody Risien actually made the Pro Bowl more times than Dieken.

    Dieken was steady...but not spectacular.

    And of course we have Joe Thomas...a certain HOF at LT

    If there were other former Browns that deserved HOF mentioned they could include the likes of Gary Collins, Hanford Dixon, Jim Houston, Walter Johnson or MDP....but none of those will actually come close.

  • Tour2maT Tour2ma

    Clay is a no brainer.

    Doug? Not "the other" overlooked Brown that I'd choose to champion. For me that's Jerry Sherk.

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on
    #4

    @tour2ma said:

    Clay is a no brainer.

    .

    I've always said if Clay had played for the Steelers, he'd have been in long ago.

  • hoortaH hoorta

    @tour2ma said:

    Clay is a no brainer.

    .

    I've always said if Clay had played for the Steelers, he'd have been in long ago.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on
    #5

    @hoorta said:

    I've always said if Clay had played for the Steelers, he'd have been in long ago.

    If you just go by the PFR Career Average, it breaks down to this:

    Ham 148

    Greene 137

    Lambert 136

    Blount 134

    ...............Matthews 124

    Shell 120

    While the most direct comparison would be Jack Ham and Clay....it is still difficult to do:

    Clay, in his career played 19 years, had 32 Ints. 1561 tackles, 69.5 sacks.....but had 5 years pre 1982 when sacks where not kept as a stack.

    With Ham...all we know from things is that he played 12 years, had 32 Ints....but sacks and tackles were not kept track of.

    So...I guess I am wondering how the PFR stats for total production can be compared....when they give no tackle/sacks data for Ham.

    As an entire career I would wager Matthews was far more productive. And I am wondering if they are just giving a number to Ham that seems good.

    Or....as you say....are they heavily weighting his number because he played on so many title teams.

    FYI: Ham played in 16 playoff games.....Matthews in 11.

Log in to reply