I wouldn't play for 2.47 mill or whatever the tender is... it's not worth the risk.
What if a pizza hut delivery driver walked into his managers office and said: "I want to make 225K / year" or I'm not working. The manager says, "I'll give you $10/hr". The driver agrees on the $10.
Is there anything wrong w/ the pizza hut delivery driver asking for 225/year? I guess not but obviously he/she isn't worth that money. Same with Wallace. In both cases, they just look like a damn fool when the settlement is much less than the asking salary.
I'm pretty sure Wallace wants to be in the 50 Mill range so starting at 50 makes no sense...
The pizza delivery analogy doesn't make any sense either... if the best delivery guy makes 225 why start at 40 or 25 if you have great delivery times the last 2 or 3 years?
The overall value is probably not going to be the biggest issue in negotiations. The guaranteed money is really what's important. I am sure Wallace will sign in a heart beat if the Steelers guarantee 50 million dollars. I don't think the Steelers will guarantee Wallace 50 million.
Last edited by BURGH86STEEL; 06-30-2012 at 12:48 AM.
Wallace's last contract was for 3 years, $1.74 million. When you consider Uncle Sam's cut, his agent's cut, etc., Mike Wallace isn't even a millionaire right now. Since he's been underpaid on a 3rd round pick rookie deal (but put up big money performance on the field for the last three seasons), can you really blame the kid for finally wanting to get paid? Do you realize that Mike Wallace's only NFL contract is less than the deal that fellow Steeler WR Derrick Williams got (since Detroit drafted Williams 2 spots ahead of Wallace in the 2009 draft)?
[URL]http://triblive.com/sports/2126349-85/crosby-contract-penguins-concussion-million-cannot-center-deal-early-insured[/URL]For Pens, no assurances with Crosby deal
The Penguins can't insure themselves against an early Sidney Crosby retirement due to concussion, NHL sources told the Tribune-Review.
By Rob Rossi
Published: Friday, June 29, 2012, 10:44 p.m.
Updated 1 hour ago
The Penguins cannot insure themselves against a concussion-related early retirement by franchise center Sidney Crosby, NHL sources told the Tribune-Review on Friday.
Crosby, 24, has missed all but 63 games the past two seasons because of concussion symptoms. He and the Penguins agreed to a 12-year contract worth $104.4 million — all of it guaranteed. The team will present the contract to the league Sunday for approval.
Insurance companies offer teams protection against career-ending injuries, but Crosby’s concussion history is considered a pre-existing condition. If Crosby cannot finish his contract because of a concussion-related injury, he will still be paid in full, but the Penguins would not receive assistance from an insurance policy on the deal, sources said.
However, this will not cripple the franchise like the ailing health of current majority co-owner Mario Lemieux did in the 1990s, a sports business expert said.
“It’s so different now for the Penguins. They’ve got a sold-out new arena, a better TV deal, big sponsorship and deeper-pocketed ownership,” said Lynn Lashbrook, president of Portland, Ore.-based Sports Management World Wide. “The Penguins can withstand this even if Crosby can’t play out the majority of this contract.”
Lashbrook said the Crosby contract could contain wording for him to serve as a club ambassador, similar to what George Brett does for the Kansas City Royals. Crosby, who annually commands millions of dollars in endorsements, will generate interest among fans and sponsors long after his playing days, Lashbrook said.
The Penguins, playing in a traditionally smaller market, never have been in a position to take on a contract like the Crosby deal. But nowadays their season-ticket waiting list sits at 8,000, and their local TV ratings were tops among NHL and NBA teams last season. Their ownership group includes Ron Burkle, a California billionaire, and Lemieux as majority stakeholders.
The Lemieux-Burkle group purchased the team out of bankruptcy in 1999 when Lemieux was still owed most of a six-year, $42 million contract.
The Penguins benefit better financially from all non-hockey events at Consol Energy Center than they did at Civic Arena, where until the final two seasons they did not operate the facility. The majority of revenue for events at Consol Energy Center goes to the Penguins, who also are developing the old Civic Arena site.
Crosby’s deal will be front-loaded to pay him more money in the early years, sources said.
Crosby’s average annual salary will remain $8.7 million. He could have signed for the individual player maximum, which is 20 percent of the NHL salary cap, set tentatively for next season at $70.2 million. The maximum salary available to a free agent this summer is $14.04 million.
The Penguins have spent to the salary cap each of the past five seasons.
NHL rules require that clubs insure the top six contracts in terms of average annual value. A contract cannot be insured for more than seven years. However, a contract can always be insured for seven years, so the remainder of a long-term contract such as the one Crosby signed will always be insured.
The following Penguins contracts currently are mandated to be insured: Crosby and center Evgeni Malkin ($8.7 million each); goaltender Marc-Andre Fleury, defenseman Paul Martin and right wing James Neal ($5 million apiece); and defenseman Brooks Orpik ($3.75 million).
The salary-cap impact of a potential Crosby early retirement due to concussion cannot be determined because terms of the next collective bargaining agreement between the NHL and its Players Association have not been set. Currently, a team can place a player on the long-term injury list to get long-term cap relief. The current CBA expires in September.
Crosby was not available for comment. He has not addressed the contract since the team confirmed it Thursday. He is currently in northern California to attend Orpik’s wedding.
Penguins general manager Ray Shero has said he would not discuss the insurance of Crosby’s contract, calling it “a team issue.”
Shero also said he was not concerned about Crosby’s concussion history.
Crosby has spent the past several weeks training in Los Angeles, agent Pat Brisson said.
“This is an important summer for (Crosby),” Shero said. “We feel confident with where he is. We believe his best days are going to be ahead.”
The Rams' offense featuring weapons such as Marshall Faulk, Torrey Holt, and Isaac Bruce were known as "The Greatest Show on Turf"
The Steelers' offense featuring weapons such as Le'Veon Bell and Martavis Bryant should be known as "The Greatest Show on Grass"
This has nothing at all to do with respective playing surfaces at the Edward Jones Dome vs. Heinz Field.
2015 MNF Executive Champion!
Worth Of Mike Wallace: A Comparison To The Elite NFL Receivers
Friday, June 29th, 2012 by Jeremy Hritz
It’s the end of June and Mike Wallace still has yet to sign a contract with the Steelers. Although teammate Ike Taylor has now said on two occasions that Wallace will be in camp, there have not been any formal updates on the progress of a new contract.
Back on March 21st, 49ers beat writer Matt Barrows reported that a 49er’s team source said they inquired about Wallace but were turned off because "he reportedly wanted" a contract that exceeded the one of Larry Fitzgerald, which is worth $128.5 million over eight years. Whether or not that is true we just don't know. The Steelers do not have a reputation for paying big money for wide receivers, and in fact, they have a history of letting them walk (see Yancey Thigpen, Antwaan Randle El, Nate Washington and Plaxico Burress). If Barrows’ report is accurate, it could be the primary reason for the delay.
The question has since been debated of whether or not Wallace is worth such a contract, but an interesting question is does Antonio Brown make Wallace less valuable to the Steelers?
To draw a valid conclusion here, we need to look at other top receivers in contract years and the second and third receivers on those teams. For the purpose of this article, we will take a brief look at Larry Fitzgerald, Andre Johnson, and Calvin Johnson.
Firstly, Wallace’s production is very comparable to Fitzgerald’s in his contract year (Fitzgerald: 93/1137/6-Wallace: 72/1193/7. However, when looking at the number two and three receivers for Arizona from Fitzgerald’s contract year, it is apparent those players, Breaston and Doucet, were not as effective as Brown and Ward. So even with Fitzgerald drawing primary coverage, Breaston and Doucet combined could not equal Brown’s performance (it has to be noted that they had Derek Anderson and John Skelton throwing the ball). This makes a case for Brown’s effectiveness.
When looking at Andre Johnson and Calvin Johnson in their contract years, their stat lines eclipse that of Wallace. Andre Johnson outgained Wallace by 376 yards and three touchdowns, while Calvin Johnson outgained him by 488 yards and ten touchdowns. The second and third receivers for Houston did not achieve what Brown and Ward did, yet Burleson and Young had more receptions and seven more touchdowns for the Lions.
Is Wallace asking for too much money? When considering the performance of Brown, the answer to that question may be yes. While the counter argument will be made that Wallace absorbed coverage that freed up Brown, what to make of his production after he established himself as a legitimate receiver?
Another point to made is that you Wallace’s drop in production cannot completely be attributed to coverage schemes. If bolstered coverage always accounts for a decrease in production, then what to make of Andre Johnson, whom with less-than-stellar number two and three receivers, was still able to rack up nearly 1600 yards and nine touchdowns (I’ll acknowledge Owen Daniels here who had 40 receptions for 509 yards and five touchdowns, but tight ends are not our focus).
So what does it all mean in the end? The Steelers probably feel confident about the abilities of Brown to be the primary receiver in the event that Wallace doesn’t sign long-term, considering the depth that they have at the position. Consequently, they are not willing to part with exorbitant money to pay him in the range of any of the receivers mentioned above. While Wallace has proven his value by stretching the field, he has not proven himself to be a complete receiver like Fitzgerald or either of the Johnsons.
The amount of money that Wallace allegedly wants would make him the highest paid Steeler, but in reality, only the most important and critical players should be paid as such. While Wallace is a tremendous talent that has made several huge plays in his first three years, he is not as vital to the team as is Ben Roethlisberger, Troy Polamalu, or LaMarr Woodley. When either of these players misses a game, it impacts the win/loss column, and Wallace just isn’t in that category yet.
No one has ever said that Wallace shouldn't earn more than he had but the question is should he be paid what the Top 3-5 salaries are just because other people are? If you look at who gets that top money and especially the teams that have paid them its not like those teams have a history of making smart decisions or success, i.e. Arizona, Tampa, KC.
You also have to factor in that those WRs at the top of salary scale are probably the top players on those teams, Wallace isn't for the Steelers. Like I have always said I have no issue with Wallace getting a contract in the $7-8m range but beyond that is more than he is worth and would consume as part of the cap. Just my opinion but I bet the Steelers see it in that range too.