Michael Mitchell... still laughing?

[Rayman]

oh yeah, the 'prime' roy williams, how could I forgot, what was that like 15 years ago? lol

so, the guy has been in the lg 7 years, he was a beast his first what, 2 or 3 years and now he lost all his skill the last 3 years? please

he was never rodney harrsion, john lynch, etc level even in his 'prime'...how dare they ask him to play some coverage, he was always a LB playing safety and was a liability in coverage

only people pumping up roy williams were cowboy fans and people who watch HL reels

You just continue to feed into what the media tells you when it comes to the Cowboys.

I watched every one of the Cowboys' games from 2002-present. In those first three years, not only was Roy Williams lacing the crap out of every receiver in his area, he was also making many INTs. Some were actually great athletic plays on the ball where he actually displayed coverage skills. Two that immediately came to mind were one against Jacksonville where he ran stride for stride with Jimmy Smith down the sideline on a deep ball and outplayed him for the ball, and another where he robbed Marvin Harrison over the middle.

It wasn't until those misplays against Santana Moss that people started to even think Roy Williams had coverage issues, and if you paid attention the last 2 years, it wasn't just his coverage that suffered, but his all around game. He was simply not the same player he was when he came into the league.

I'll go back to what Beli-cheat said - He simply was in the league at an unfortunate time because of how the safety position was evolving into something where he had to have the coverage abilities of a corner, and he clearly did not have that. Coupled with the dropoff of his tackling and all around awareness, and he simply fell off.

But his first few years in the league, he was elite and at the time you'd be hard pressed to find someone who disagreed.

 

[Liquidrob]

You just continue to feed into what the media tells you when it comes to the Cowboys.

I watched every one of the Cowboys' games from 2002-present. In those first three years, not only was Roy Williams lacing the crap out of every receiver in his area, he was also making many INTs. Some were actually great athletic plays on the ball where he actually displayed coverage skills. Two that immediately came to mind were one against Jacksonville where he ran stride for stride with Jimmy Smith down the sideline on a deep ball and outplayed him for the ball, and another where he robbed Marvin Harrison over the middle.

It wasn't until those misplays against Santana Moss that people started to even think Roy Williams had coverage issues, and if you paid attention the last 2 years, it wasn't just his coverage that suffered, but his all around game. He was simply not the same player he was when he came into the league.

I'll go back to what Beli-cheat said - He simply was in the league at an unfortunate time because of how the safety position was evolving into something where he had to have the coverage abilities of a corner, and he clearly did not have that. Coupled with the dropoff of his tackling and all around awareness, and he simply fell off.

But his first few years in the league, he was elite and at the time you'd be hard pressed to find someone who disagreed.

lol, please

you said that he would have been at least as good as Ronnie fucking Lott if he played in his era, so he would have been at least as good as the greatest safety, so Roy 'Ronnie Lott' Williams was elite for 3 years and than 'the game changed' and he became crap, yeah sounds just like Ronnie Lott

Ronnie Lott would be elite now and in 2040, Roy Williams is nowhere near Ronnie Lott in any era

just stop, I cant believe I even responded in the first place

 

[Tailback U]

Right here:


Silly me for thinking "at the beginning" means the start.

No need to be a smart ass.

You think? Proof? Because that's not what Haugh says.

So now Haugh is a credible source to you?

That's not what your source says. It says they started trying to deal the pick right after Robiskie was drafted. If they liked Mitchell well enough to call him 17 picks ahead of where the Bears were drafting they would not be actively trying to trade out of the round.

Actually they had Robsikie targeted there. They had Mitchell targeted in Rd 4 and later.

And after Robiskie was drafted they had to have been targeting someone, right? Who is to say the Bears didn't target Mitchell once Robiskie was taken?

Maybe because he was mistaken and the Bears meant for him to be ready later in the day. Not at 49. Not one person I have talked to said the Bears had him on their radar in the 2nd Round as a pick. Once Robiskie was off the board all the guys they had targeted they felt they could get in the 3rd round and later so they started to look to trade down right away. Mitchell was NEVER the plan at 49.

Just because they started to look to trade down does not mean that they still didn't have someone targeted at 49.

Then Mitchell is sorely mistaken. Mitchell would have been lucky to be picked by the team in the 4th Rd, let alone the 2nd.

LOL @ you telling Mitchell that he is mistaken. Who are you? You're nobody, you don't know what goes on behind the draft scene, even though you are acting like you do. Your "source" probably doesn't give two shits about you and is most likely feeding you whatever he wants to keep the Bears from looking as dumb as the Raiders.

I don't really care that much about this, either way. You obviously want to believe that the Bears didn't want Mitchell in the 2nd because it makes you feel better about your organization. That's fine, I don't really care if the Bears or any other team had him on their draft board or not.

I'll believe Mitchell himself over everyone else.

 

[Rayman]

lol, please

you said that he would have been at least as good as Ronnie fucking Lott if he played in his era, so he would have been at least as good as the greatest safety, so Roy 'Ronnie Lott' Williams was elite for 3 years and than 'the game changed' and he became crap, yeah sounds just like Ronnie Lott

Ronnie Lott would be elite now and in 2040, Roy Williams is nowhere near Ronnie Lott in any era

just stop, I cant believe I even responded in the first place

The players and position were different in the 80's, in case you didn't realize.

Ronnie Lott wouldn't be considered the greatest safety of all time if he played today.

If you can't believe you responded, maybe you should just, you know, not.

 

[Liquidrob]

The players and position were different in the 80's, in case you didn't realize.

Ronnie Lott wouldn't be considered the greatest safety of all time if he played today.

If you can't believe you responded, maybe you should just, you know, not.

please, if you're going to fall back on 'players, positions, the game, etc... were different' than this arguement is dumb

you made a stupid staement and you're trying to cover it up

ronnie lott played 14 years in the NFL, I'm sure the game changed during his 14 YEARS and he was still the dominate safety, Roy has played 7 and has been below average for more than half of that, very similar if you look at it like that

tony romo would have been at least as good as joe montana if he played in the 80's I guess...

 

[FirstTimer]

So now Haugh is a credible source to you?

No. Obviously not. You missed the point by a mile. You presented Haugh as YOUR source for what YOU have been saying up to this point. You then proceeded to say something that Haugh, YOUR source, did not say. I was asking where you got this idea from. Because seeing as Haugh did not say it, you either A. Had another source or B.Were just speculating. That's what I was saying. I really didn't think it was that complicated to grasp.

And after Robiskie was drafted they had to have been targeting someone, right? Who is to say the Bears didn't target Mitchell once Robiskie was taken?

The Bears. Who came out and said Mitchell wasn't a consideration for them until the 4th or 5th round at the earliest. Plus they had Iglesias targeted, as well as Jarron, both of whom they felt they could have gotten in the 3rd. Thus the immediete activity to trade down out of the 2nd Rd.

LOL @ you telling Mitchell that he is mistaken. Who are you? You're nobody, you don't know what goes on behind the draft scene even though you are acting like it. Your "source" probably doesn't give two shits about you.

1. The Bears said he was mistaken by their statements about the 4th or 5th Rd stuff.

2. I'm me. Who are you?

3. My source has been spot on for years and there's a good reason for that. Known the guy for years and he's a good friend of mine. Have some others that I know through him but mainly I just use my one.

. You obviously want to believe that the Bears didn't want Mitchell in the 2nd because it makes you feel better about your organization.

Ha! I am openly critical of our organization on many subjects and rip them to shreds when the time calls for it. I have no problem looking down on the organization. All I am doing here is correcting a false story because what is being presented is not the case.

I'll believe Mitchell himself over everyone else.

Fine. Believe the kid. He's wrong.

 

[Rayman]

please, if you're going to fall back on 'players, positions, the game, etc... were different' than this arguement is dumb

you made a stupid staement and you're trying to cover it up

ronnie lott played 14 years in the NFL, I'm sure the game changed during his 14 YEARS and he was still the dominate safety, Roy has played 7 and has been below average for more than half of that, very similar if you look at it like that

tony romo would have been at least as good as joe montana if he played in the 80's I guess...

I guess Bill Belichick's a moron then, because he said the exact same thing as far as the different era and Williams' abilities as a player.

It's a combination of many things, but that played a huge role in it and there's no getting around it. You can stop puffing your chest out now.

 

[Liquidrob]

no, belichick is a cheat

lott > williams in any era, any time, playing flag football or wearing sumo suits

you even putting them in the same statement is just silly

 

[Senser81]

The players and position were different in the 80's, in case you didn't realize.

Ronnie Lott wouldn't be considered the greatest safety of all time if he played today.

If you can't believe you responded, maybe you should just, you know, not.

What was different? Lott was a pro bowl cornerback early in his career...I can't imagine Roy Williams ever playing cornerback. Lott was an over-sized cover safety...Roy Williams was like a monster man. He was like if the Bears put Urlacher at safety. I think Williams would have a tough time playing in the 80's because teams passed just as much but they threw deep way more often. Williams would be a liability.