[QUOTE=SteelCrazy;510532]This writer is on CRACK! Fitz shouldn't be paid 15 mil per, let alone Wallace. Wallace has done well, but there are still question marks concerning ability and potential. I think a fair contract would be 3 years/15 mil (5 mil per) and if he is still on top of the league standings, give him a huge contract or let him walk.[/QUOTE]
Wallace already proved himself. What more do you need to see? Wallace would be crazy to settle for 3 years at 15 million. With the Steelers or another team, Wallace needs to get as much money as he can while he can.
[QUOTE=BURGH86STEEL;510534]Wallace already proved himself. What more do you need to see? Wallace would be crazy to settle for 3 years at 15 million. With the Steelers or another team, Wallace needs to get as much money as he can while he can.[/QUOTE]
I agree he needs to get all he can while he can, but as far as proving himself I disagree. He was great for 8 games then when he became a target he cooled way down. Fitz doesnt get stopped with double teams or triple teams, but Wallace did. He still needs to prove himself to the tune of not being able to be stopped. So far, he has yet to do that.
Nobody who understands football and has watched these players extensively would claim that Wallace is a talent on the level of Fitzgerald. Please. This guy has zero credibility in my book. His use of stats is convoluted as well.
While I understand the authors argument, the fact that Wallace's contributions slowed significantly in the second half of last season would give me pause. Do I believe that the Steelers have gotten an incredible bargain for the past three years? Yes. Do I think it would be stupid of Wallace to sign that tender unless/until he absolutely has to? Yes.
The biggest issue to me is not one of stats, but of consistency. That said, Wallace should be paid like a top NFL receiver because he is one.
all i can do is laugh at these piece of trash article...................seriously?
Just ignore it. Planted article by his agent. Fitzgerland on the steelers would have a lot more touches at this time. Apples and oranges
If someone would like to write an article that has a hint of realism, the basis for comparison would be players like Desean Jackson, Vincent Jackson, Colston, Lloyd etc.
All these guys cashed in nicely this off season and, if not restricted, Wallace would have been in the same ballpark. A story saying that he should be gunning for $10M a year would represent his market value a lot more than placing Wallace in a class with Fitz or one of the Johnsons. Those three stand above.
[QUOTE=Slapstick;510528]That's why the author had to "remove the QB's statistics"...
Now, THIS is an ACTUAL case of someone looking only at stats as Crash often accuses others of doing...[/QUOTE]
yea, it's amazing to me that Fitz was able to put up the stats he did with those qb's
Here is why Wallace does not deserve Fitzgerald money:
Larry Fitzgerald - 6 postseason games - 42 catches - 705 yards - 9 TDs
Mike Wallace - 4 postseason games - 16 catches - 142 yards - 1 TD (+ 1 rushing TD)
It isn't even close...
Hell, Megatron has only played in one postseason game and compares favorably to Wallace's four...
Truly elite guys step it up in the postseason...
The answer is not to give Wallace so called Larry Fitzgerald money but he does deserve fair market value. His market was set with Vincent and Desean Jackson!!! He probably deserves somewhere in the neighborhood of 6 years/55 Million. He does make the rest of the WR's look better because he opens up coverages underneath for Brown, Miller, Sanders and Cotch. He knows that he doesn't deserve Fitzgerald money. Fitzgerald didn't sign that kind of contract after his rookie deal, he signed that after a second deal. That's the difference to me. He shouldn't expect or deserve anywhere close to what #7 makes. If he does then his tenure in Pittsburgh will be done after 2012.