Mitchell gone
-
Signed with the Texans
Signed with the Texans
Dang I’m bummed. I liked Mitchell and I don’t believe Greedy is the answer.
How rich was it? Never mind 2 yrs 7.5M...we couldn’t offer that!!!
-
2 years, up to $7.5mil.
W. T. F.
-
I'd rather have Mitch than someone named Takk
Mitch just had an amazing performance as a backup all year last year; Takk gained 35 pounds since he was drafted and has been [as one would expect w someone who gained that much weight] nothing but injured for 2+ years. And they're paid the same amount..
Cmon, man.
-
? Sad to see Money Mitch leave. Dude did everything we asked him to. Sucks.
-
Maybe we are trading for Lattimore.
-
We will pick a CB in one of top 3 rounds.
-
Mitch was ok, but he is just a guy who is easily replaced..
-
Mitch was ok, but he is just a guy who is easily replaced..
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
-
Perhaps they think that PS UDFA from last year, AJ Green, is ready to handle work? Profile for draft linked
-
#cents-less ?...
1225 snaps.. 99.4% of defensive snaps.. PPF's 33rd* overall ranked corner...
Learning a new* Joe Woods defensive system..
I'd say Money Mitch passed...
I'd have to question this AB move ?
️.. (Mitchell & Greedy were both Dorsey moves)...
Mitch must like Texas? He'll be making his 2nd stint in Houston & did the same in Dallas...If starting was the question? Yes! you will as a Houston Texan...
Good Luck, Money Mitch ! ! this fan will keep following your career..
-
I guess we can't keep everyone but losing a guy who was just about always there doesn't make me feel good.
-
Mitch was ok, but he is just a guy who is easily replaced..
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
No doubt we all have our opinions. If you want to dismiss it as arrogance or ignorance, so be it.
I would have liked to have kept the guy. When I say 'just a guy" that doesn't mean I think the guy was a stiff. I call them scrubs, or stiffs. Rookie type players are scrubs. Vets who can't play anymore are stiffs. Sendejo was a stiff. I just think he is replaceable. So does our front office. I am sure we would have kept him if the dollar amounts added up.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Mitch was ok, but he is just a guy who is easily replaced..
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
Nevertheless, I think he is eminently replaceable. We are not like the Steelers who have to lose a guy and cannot get another because of cap reasons. The Browns can find an equivalent player in my opinion. There are still some guys out their: AJ Bouye, Janoris Jenkins, even Malcom Butler....and even: Patrick Peterson. (Desmond Trufant/Sherman etc.)
-
Maybe he wanted to leave?
-
Mitch was ok, but he is just a guy who is easily replaced..
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
I agree Tmitch balled his ass off.. thats not gonna be easy to replace...
-
Maybe he wanted to leave?
Maybe he wanted to leave?
Never thought of that but maybe 2 yr 9M would have kept him here. And he’s Still worth that.
We will decide in the next year or so if Ward is worth 20M per for 12 games.
We are holding onto Greedy and potentially career threatening shoulder issue and don’t even really know if he can be a starting corner in the league.
I didn’t like this move but then again I can count on less than one hand how many times this regime has seemingly failed.
-
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
Nevertheless, I think he is eminently replaceable. We are not like the Steelers who have to lose a guy and cannot get another because of cap reasons. The Browns can find an equivalent player in my opinion. There are still some guys out their: AJ Bouye, Janoris Jenkins, even Malcom Butler....and even: Patrick Peterson. (Desmond Trufant/Sherman etc.)
Nevertheless, I think he is eminently replaceable. We are not like the Steelers who have to lose a guy and cannot get another because of cap reasons. The Browns can find an equivalent player in my opinion. There are still some guys out their: AJ Bouye, Janoris Jenkins, even Malcom Butler....and even: Patrick Peterson. (Desmond Trufant/Sherman etc.)
And All of which are likely to be more expensive
-
Nevertheless, I think he is eminently replaceable. We are not like the Steelers who have to lose a guy and cannot get another because of cap reasons. The Browns can find an equivalent player in my opinion. There are still some guys out their: AJ Bouye, Janoris Jenkins, even Malcom Butler....and even: Patrick Peterson. (Desmond Trufant/Sherman etc.)
And All of which are likely to be more expensive
And All of which are likely to be more expensive
Well....Mitchell was a FA, and clearly the Browns didn't want to pay what he wanted....so logically he too was "too expensive"...Or maybe they thought they could do better...and are willing to bear that expense. We shall see. Maybe its a draft priority.
-
This is eirher ignorance of how difficult it is to play CB or arrogant dismissal of replacing personnel. Mitch had a solid year being asked to play well over his head. In the interests of keeping quality players, especially on the cheap, that contract should have gone his way. Greedy is an enigma and it's rare that I'll trust a rookie CB THAT much. And ask anyone or any coach, continuity is a big deal.
No, this is a misstep by Berry. Symp is right, would rather that money given to Takk gone to Mitch.
No doubt we all have our opinions. If you want to dismiss it as arrogance or ignorance, so be it.
I would have liked to have kept the guy. When I say 'just a guy" that doesn't mean I think the guy was a stiff. I call them scrubs, or stiffs. Rookie type players are scrubs. Vets who can't play anymore are stiffs. Sendejo was a stiff. I just think he is replaceable. So does our front office. I am sure we would have kept him if the dollar amounts added up.
No doubt we all have our opinions. If you want to dismiss it as arrogance or ignorance, so be it.
I would have liked to have kept the guy. When I say 'just a guy" that doesn't mean I think the guy was a stiff. I call them scrubs, or stiffs. Rookie type players are scrubs. Vets who can't play anymore are stiffs. Sendejo was a stiff. I just think he is replaceable. So does our front office. I am sure we would have kept him if the dollar amounts added up.
The only difference is that yours is pure opinion, mine at least has some logical steps backing it up.
Outside of a small handful of names, every player in the NFL is "replaceable". At least, to some varying degree. The real question is, am I replacing the player and getting similar, less or more production? Which means we have a limited number of options to get at least similar production. The chances of getting more production are even smaller.
Also you said "easily" replaceable. Verbiage is a HUGE deal. Let's go over our options then, shall we?
- Do we depend on a red-shirt Greedy Williams, who in just his 3rd season has missed more games than he's played? Keep in mind, while GW had a couple flashes, like any young player he lacked consistency. So we'll be asking him to not only be versed in the defensive language game speed, but to be fully healthy and available while asking him to raise the level AND consistency of his play. Keep in mind, having willing and physical DB's in the AFCN is a huge deal when you face Lamar Jackson. Don't forget that was a knock on GW at times - he's lack of physical style and tendency to actively avoid contact. To recap our math on that one - a young, injury prone CB... somehow finding his footing after a full year off, being as available as Mitch and believing he can be a sure tackling corner? Sounds pretty easy, huh? I'm sure you caught the sarcasm there.
- Free Agency. Sure, very fucking possible. But at what cost:production ratio? Why would I over-pay for Malcolm Butler when I can get 85%+ of what he does, but at 3.75m/yr as opposed to the likely 8+ mil? Then I have to consider yet again bringing in a fresh face to learn new defensive language and to build chemistry over the course of an off-season as opposed to working at perfecting it. The word I love here is continuity. Especially when you can keep continuity for cheaper than the fresh face that isn't head and shoulders better. Remember, we have several big names coming up this time next year that will need paid. And you're going to need every available dollar in which to pull that one off.
- Rookie. I really don't have to say it. This isn't like dealing with current NFL personnel where I don't have to "hope" (at least, to a large degree) a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. With Mitch I know what I was getting and at least I can game-plan with that. If it's NFL personnel, I have a certain "know". Rookies? You can project, you can evaluate and all that. But most of what you're doing is hoping that player works out. Hope isn't a strategy. So I'd be asking a rookie to come in, play the 2nd most difficult position in professional football, and try to replicate the production of Mitch? Another possibility, but in the end not very likely.
So when you say "easily" replaceable. I'm just wondering which of those scenarios sounds just that easy to you? The enigma, the budget tightener or the dart toss?
No, easily is not a word you should have chosen.
Young Berry still has my trust along with the rest of this front office. Doesn't mean they can't make mistakes though. Barring a complete unforeseen or hitting a home run with a draft gem, this might come back to bite this team.
Maybe he wanted to leave?
As we saw just a few weeks ago, weather really can't be a deciding factor in leaving Ohio for Texas. So.... why would anyone jump ship from a team on the cusp, to a team that has taken a complete nose dive in the last 24 months? There isn't a player in the NFL right now who would look you dead in the eye and say "yeah, Texans have a better shot than Cleveland" as of this moment. Unless they play for the Texans then yeah sure.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login