The point of signing him for one day is so he can officially retire as a Redskin.

And how does this matter?

He was officially signed byt the Redskins 14 years ago, and officially release 4 years ago. Do we have to officially sign him so he can retire a Redskin? I thought he was a Redskin for 10 years, why do we need to make it official?

Probably because Mitchell would like to retire as a Skin, I think it's great that both sides have patched things up. Call it a bit of closure.

What's the harm anyway??

Can anybody recall why we let him go. Did we think he was washed up? Did we have a person we thought would be better? Or was it just a dumb move by snyder?

the skins brought somebody in who was, supposedly , pretty good. i cant remember his name at the moment and i'm not completely sure if he was here to replace mitchel. the most i remember about him is he had a kickoff return for a td against the giants (i think) to give the skins their 2nd win of the year when marty shottenhiemer was the coach. dont think i spelled shottenhiemer correctly.

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]the skins brought somebody in who was, supposedly , pretty good. i cant remember his name at the moment and i'm not completely sure if he was here to replace mitchel. the most i remember about him is he had a kickoff return for a td against the giants (i think) to give the skins their 2nd win of the year when marty shottenhiemer was the coach. dont think i spelled shottenhiemer correctly.[/QUOTE]


Eric Metcalf. He returned a punt for a TD in that game. Don't know if he returned kickoffs. That may have been Michael Bates.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Probably because Mitchell would like to retire as a Skin, I think it's a great that both sides have patched things up. Call it a bit of closure.

What's the harm anyway??[/QUOTE]
No Harm Matty, I just don't understand why players must sign and retire on the same day. Seems pointless. You can patch things upanytime, and Brian seem to be slaming Clinton a few weeks back on Camcast Sports Net after game program. If he is able to slam Portis then he should be able to say his amends in public and be done with it. Just never understood the reason behind the sign and retire thing, other then to make someones ego happy. How many Redskins have done this. Don't seem to recall Riggins or Monk having this done. But then again there egos aren't that big.

Monk did do it, when he was done he was a jet but he signed a one day contract to officly retire as a Redskin. Not sure on Riggins.

Glad To Hear It I Loved B Mitch.
Riggins Finished His Playing Days With The Skins

I am glad to hear B. Mitch retired in the Burgunday-n-Gold. It is ashame that he did not stay in Washington the entire time. I hope the team keeps him around in some sort of capacity, if anything just so that Gibbs can point at B. Mitch and show the young bloods who a "Redskin" is. I remember the infamous 'Body Bag' game, and for that alone B. Mitch deserves accolades for being a warrior and not giving up. Hail to the Redskins.

[QUOTE=manicd]Eric Metcalf. He returned a punt for a TD in that game. Don't know if he returned kickoffs. That may have been Michael Bates.



your right, it was a punt return for a td by metcalf and bates was the kickoff returner i was thinking of. thanks for the correction

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]the skins brought somebody in who was, supposedly , pretty good. i cant remember his name at the moment and i'm not completely sure if he was here to replace mitchel. the most i remember about him is he had a kickoff return for a td against the giants (i think) to give the skins their 2nd win of the year when marty shottenhiemer was the coach. dont think i spelled shottenhiemer correctly.[/QUOTE]
I thought Mitchell was a casualty of the Deion signing. Wasn't Deion's ability as a returner the reason they used for cutting Mitchell before the 2000 season? Mitchell subsequently signed with the Eagles out of spite, and scored 2 TDs for them that season, one on a punt return and one on a kick return, while Sanders had a grand total of 185 yards and 0 TDs on punt returns in his lone season for the Skins.

[QUOTE=CRT3]I loved that B Mitch, played great for us. He also trashed talked about the Skins to. If you ever have meet him around town he is one arrogant son of a bitch. And I just don't get the value of signing someone for 1 day and having them retire. We know he played for the Skins for 10 years, what value does this serve? No one signed him this year becuase the feel he can not contribute to a team so what is the point fo signning him for one day.[/QUOTE]
My wife and I were debating the same thing after we heard about Mitchell's sign-and-retire on the radio. She feels it's dumb and frivolous, too. My feeling is that it's as much a gesture of respect towards his long-time fans in Washington on Mitchell's part, as it may be an inane and self-serving means of stroking his own ego, and perhaps subsequently warming-- if only slightly and temporarily-- Snyder's rather chilly relationship with the fans.

Whatever the case, it's obvious from the posts on here that there are fans that appreciate the gesture, so I think it served the interests of all three parties (Mitchell, Snyder and the fans). Sometimes seemingly meaningless sentimental gestures like that can go a long way towards rebuilding bridges that were once thought to be irreparably burned.

I think Mitchell being shown the door left a sour taste in a lot of fan's mouths, especially when they used that money to bring in Deion.

Letting him retire as a Skin is closure for both parties, plus I think it's a sign that Gibbs' emphasis on having pride in wearing the burgundy and gold is starting to shine through.