-
[QUOTE=Oviedo;538995]That may be our best hope for retaining Wallace. Good teams already have good #1 receivers. Wallace is most going to be in demand by teams that don't have a good #1 WR which for the most part are bad teams. Maybe that convinces him to stay, but probably not.
The one exception that would scare me to death is New England. They don't have a true #1 receiver and Wallace would be a major coup for them.[/QUOTE]
In addition to the above
Arizona - He's be a #2
Chicago - #2
Giants - Hard to tell but I think Nicks and Cruz are better overall WRs
Eagles - #3
NO - #3
Texans - #2
Lions - #2
Falcons - #3 at best
Bengals - Likely the #2
Dallas - #2 or #3
49ers - Probably #2 (maybe)
I could keep going but I won't.
I could see the Browns, Carolina and Miami be a likely target. I'm sure there are a few others as well.
-
[QUOTE=Oviedo;538995]That may be our best hope for retaining Wallace. Good teams already have good #1 receivers. Wallace is most going to be in demand by teams that don't have a good #1 WR which for the most part are bad teams. Maybe that convinces him to stay, but probably not.
The one exception that would scare me to death is New England. They don't have a true #1 receiver and Wallace would be a major coup for them.[/QUOTE]
But we've already seen if a WR doesn't run good routes, Brady ignores him. See Chad Johnson from last year. NE would be better served spending money on D than getting another O weapon they are getting along fine without.
-
[QUOTE=Slapstick;538986]Antonio Brown has produced 60.7 YpG this season...he has 9 catches of over 20 yards and converted 38 1st downs...
Mike Wallace has produced 58.8 YpG this season...he also has 9 catches of over 20 yards and converted 32 1st downs...
There is no question that their roles are different...Wallace runs more deep routes and Brown is asked to work underneath and move the chains...but, it isn't like Wallace is having this epic season compared to Brown...[/QUOTE]
Good post. Good info...
-
[QUOTE=steelz09;538997]In addition to the above
Arizona - He's be a #2
Chicago - #2
Giants - Hard to tell but I think Nicks and Cruz are better overall WRs
Eagles - #3
NO - #3
Texans - #2
Lions - #2
Falcons - #3 at best
Bengals - Likely the #2
Dallas - #2 or #3
49ers - Probably #2 (maybe)
I could keep going but I won't.
I could see the Browns, Carolina and Miami be a likely target. I'm sure there are a few others as well.[/QUOTE]
I could see the Ravens having some interest.
-
[QUOTE=Mister Pittsburgh;539022]I could see the Ravens having some interest.[/QUOTE]
Tampa also has a ton of money but they already have Jackson as their #1, I think the Ravens view Torrey Smith as as good as Wallace and they won't spend $10M for Wallace because their defense is falling apart.
Seattle is also a good option because they feel they now have their QB and need a #1 WR.
I'm telling you, watch New England.
-
[QUOTE=Oviedo;539064]Tampa also has a ton of money but they already have Jackson as their #1, I think the Ravens view Torrey Smith as as good as Wallace and they won't spend $10M for Wallace because their defense is falling apart.
Seattle is also a good option because they feel they now have their QB and need a #1 WR.
I'm telling you, watch New England.[/QUOTE]
New England wouldn't even cough up money to keep Welker for the long term...
-
[QUOTE=Slapstick;539074]New England wouldn't even cough up money to keep Welker for the long term...[/QUOTE]
Age is the factor with Welker. Not a factor with Wallace.
-
[QUOTE=steelz09;538997]In addition to the above
Arizona - He's be a #2
Chicago - #2
Giants - Hard to tell but I think Nicks and Cruz are better overall WRs
Eagles - #3
NO - #3
Texans - #2
Lions - #2
Falcons - #3 at best
Bengals - Likely the #2
Dallas - #2 or #3
49ers - Probably #2 (maybe)
I could keep going but I won't.
I could see the Browns, Carolina and Miami be a likely target. I'm sure there are a few others as well.[/QUOTE]
So basically, what you are saying, is that if he went to a team with a stud WR, he'd be starting opposite that stud WR.
In Arizona, he would start opposite Fitz.
In Chicago, he would start opposite Marshall.
In Houston, he would start opposite Andre.
In Detroit, he would start opposite Calvin.
In Cincy, he would start opposite Green.
In Dallas, he would start opposite Dez.
Not much of a surprise there at all.
Atlanta has 2 bona fide studs in Julio and Roddy. I'll give you that one.
The Giants' Nicks and Cruz I have on the same tier as Wallace...neither is clearly better or clearly worse in my mind...it's a matter of personal preference here, I would say.
In New Orleans, I'd also put Colston on that same tier with Wallace and the Giants wideouts, but Lance Moore is only a slot guy (been in the league for 8 years and his next thousand yard receiving season will be his first, in spite of working with a QB who has multiple 5000 yard passing season).
Mike Wallace is better than anything Philly or San Fran has at wideout. Jackson? Maclin? Crabtree? Please.
-
yeah, saying he is #3 in philly really hurts your credibility.
-
[QUOTE=RuthlessBurgher;539107]
Mike Wallace is better than anything Philly or San Fran has at wideout. Jackson? Maclin? Crabtree? Please.[/QUOTE]
Crabtree's numbers are almost identical to Wally's this year.