Was DT Earl Mitchell a Loss: Apparently Not | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Was DT Earl Mitchell a Loss: Apparently Not

NYPhin24

NYPhin24

Scout Team
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
4,353
Reaction score
8
http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/5884/earl-mitchell

Couldn't agree more with this mini analysis, guy was a complete bust as a signing, when he actually made it on the field he was invisible, good riddance

Niners do 4-year, $16M deal with DT Mitchell

5884.jpg

49ers signed DT Earl Mitchell to a four-year, $16 million contract.

He'll get $5.5 million in year one. Mitchell drew a surprising amount of interest for a nearing-30 defensive tackle who hasn't recorded a sack in two years, and hasn't earned a positive run-defense grade from Pro Football Focus in a half decade. A 6-foot-2, 296-pound undersized nose tackle, Mitchell's on-field play has been nondescript at best. He has also missed 11 games the past two seasons due to injury. The 49ers need to keep searching for good football players. They have very few of them right now.
Source: Mike Garafolo on Twitter
Feb 24 - 7:52 PM

 
This guy was one of the first FA SIGNED BY the PHILBIN regime, our run defense went down since then. He would've been a good 3-4 DE but not 4-3 DT. Good riddance!
 
I have no problems with Mitchell's play for us because he produced for us early on. When we signed Suh, Mitchell was essentially replaced in his role. Jordan Phillips has shown enough flashes to make Mitchell obsolete even though he too doesn't seem to compliment Suh as much as we hoped when drafted.

Mitchell has not been able to produce this past couple years which explains him getting cut. The 9ers may be looking back to his early days as a Phin as to why he got the money he did, taking into account that he may have been more productive pre-Suh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Our run defense sucked with him. One of the worst in the league. It wasn't all his fault but he was a big part of the problem. He was pushed around and not very good vs the run.

Just because another team signs him doesn't mean he is now all of a sudden good.
 
MikeO said:
Our run defense sucked with him. One of the worst in the league. It wasn't all his fault but he was a big part of the problem. He was pushed around and not very good vs the run.

Just because another team signs him doesn't mean he is now all of a sudden good.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point, should be more obvious that such a bad team like the 49ers right now would waste this spot to play and develop younger players when you have a 30 year old injury plagued undersized non impact DT
 
The niners must have watched tape of that one splash tackle for loss he made late in season. Highlight reel stuff. Too bad he has a short reel.
 
After Chip Kelly destroyed the 49ers and alienated damn near every NFL quality player, the 49ers bringing in a Earl Mitchell for his locker room presence and a not his on the field play is really about signaling other players the 49ers have their checkbook open. Yes they are going to tank and suck for the next 2-3 years but at-least their checkbook is open.
 
the last time I check suh play dt as well. the both seem not good again run
 
He was good in his first season until the entire team fell apart/got injured around week 10. Gets an unreasonable amount of hatred from this forum. Moving on...
 
Yeah letting soliai wall and replacing him with undersized Mitchell was a mistake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom