Page 13 of 23 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 224

Thread: Steelers WR Mike Wallace deserves Larry Fitzgerald money

  1. #121
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,635
    Quote Originally Posted by hawaiiansteel View Post
    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.

    http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/ar...tside/11125595
    Wallace shouldn't even be listed in the same sentence (except this one) as Fitzgerald, Calvin Johnson or Andre Johnson. They are better overall receivers and it's not even close. They are also much more difficult to defend. Another thing people fail to mention in all the "stats talk" is the QB. Look at Fitzgerald's current QB situation. Andre Johnson has been playing hurt and Shaub is no "Big Ben". Neither is Stafford. Stafford has almost missed a considerable amount of games.

  2. #122
    Legend RuthlessBurgher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Where the Rubber Meets the Road (in NEPA)
    Posts
    21,692
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    Wallace shouldn't even be listed in the same sentence (except this one) as Fitzgerald, Calvin Johnson or Andre Johnson. They are better overall receivers and it's not even close. They are also much more difficult to defend. Another thing people fail to mention in all the "stats talk" is the QB. Look at Fitzgerald's current QB situation. Andre Johnson has been playing hurt and Shaub is no "Big Ben". Neither is Stafford. Stafford has almost missed a considerable amount of games.
    Schaub's started all 16 games twice. In those seasons, he threw for 4770 yards with 29 TD's and 15 INT's in 2009 and 4370 yards with 24 TD's and 12 INT's in 2010.

    Stafford's started all 16 games once. In that season, he threw for 5038 yards with 41 TD's and 16 INT's in 2011.

    Ben's best seasons were (yardage-wise) 4328 yards with 26 TD's and 12 INT's in 2009 and (efficiency-wise) 3154 yards with 32 TD's and 11 INT's in 2007.

    I'm not saying that Schaub and Stafford are better than Ben, but those stats show that neither of them are scrubs by any means.

  3. #123
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,635
    Quote Originally Posted by RuthlessBurgher View Post
    Schaub's started all 16 games twice. In those seasons, he threw for 4770 yards with 29 TD's and 15 INT's in 2009 and 4370 yards with 24 TD's and 12 INT's in 2010.

    Stafford's started all 16 games once. In that season, he threw for 5038 yards with 41 TD's and 16 INT's in 2011.

    Ben's best seasons were (yardage-wise) 4328 yards with 26 TD's and 12 INT's in 2009 and (efficiency-wise) 3154 yards with 32 TD's and 11 INT's in 2007.

    I'm not saying that Schaub and Stafford are better than Ben, but those stats show that neither of them are scrubs by any means.
    I guess they both belong ahead of Ben on the top 10 QBs in the league list so we can hear more whining. Seriously though, do you think a team would have given up a 1st rounder in this years draft if Fitzgerald, C. Johnson or Andrae Johnson could be had? I think so. Wallace? Not so much.

  4. #124
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,635
    Quote Originally Posted by RuthlessBurgher View Post
    Schaub's started all 16 games twice. In those seasons, he threw for 4770 yards with 29 TD's and 15 INT's in 2009 and 4370 yards with 24 TD's and 12 INT's in 2010.

    Stafford's started all 16 games once. In that season, he threw for 5038 yards with 41 TD's and 16 INT's in 2011.

    Ben's best seasons were (yardage-wise) 4328 yards with 26 TD's and 12 INT's in 2009 and (efficiency-wise) 3154 yards with 32 TD's and 11 INT's in 2007.

    I'm not saying that Schaub and Stafford are better than Ben, but those stats show that neither of them are scrubs by any means.

    Wait, I thought running attacks couldn't be 'had' in this "passing league". See Houston.... See New Orleans. Last time I checked, they had pretty good running attacks.

  5. #125
    Legend hawaiiansteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hawaii 5-0
    Posts
    15,537
    Can Mike Wallace Be Happy Playing In Pittsburgh?

    July 2, 2012
    By LG



    Lets face it Mike Wallace wanted the Pittsburgh Steelers to show him the money this off-season. The Steelers haven’t done that. The question is Can Wallace be happy playing for a team that doesn’t think he is worth the kind of money he wanted?

    Wallace is a talented receiver, the Steelers have always took a hard stand when it comes to contract negotiations. Pittsburgh has had a rich history in picking guys who turn into NFL star receivers, Wallace is one of those guys.

    Training camps start this month and Wallace is still a Steeler. Will He come into camp and play his heart out for a team that doesn’t want to pay him?

    There is no question about the fact Wallace can help the Pittsburgh Steelers win. Why the Steelers won’t pay him the money he thinks he is worth is anyone’s guess.

    The Steelers made a lot of changes in the off-season to their offense. The Steelers will come into this training camp with lots of new things in place. If Mike Wallace is truly UN-happy in Pittsburgh, you have to wonder what his resolve will be.

    http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/ar...burgh/11133506

  6. #126
    It's a shame, Todd Haley's offense could help him blossom in some of the intermediate routes that he has not been as productive running, but if he holds out he will probably be utilized to still be a one-dimensional threat and not be able to command the Fitzgerald money that comes with being an all-around threat. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money, even if that means only (only?) playing for $2.7 million

  7. #127
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,611
    Quote Originally Posted by hawns View Post
    It's a shame, Todd Haley's offense could help him blossom in some of the intermediate routes that he has not been as productive running, but if he holds out he will probably be utilized to still be a one-dimensional threat and not be able to command the Fitzgerald money that comes with being an all-around threat. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money, even if that means only (only?) playing for $2.7 million
    That's the point I made when this all started. Wallace is missing out on what he needs to do to really be worth more money. Working out on his own is OK for cardio but it won't help him with the technique improvements he needs to have to really be great. Add to that he is now behind everyone else in learning offense, not insurmountable but needless for the needless and unproductive holdout he went through. The Steelers aren't going to cave so he is wasting his time not being here.

    IMO all Wallace did is open the door for Brown and Sanders to prove to the Steelers they don't need to spend a huge amount of money on Wallace.
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  8. #128
    Legend hawaiiansteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hawaii 5-0
    Posts
    15,537
    Report: Steelers, Mike Wallace still not making any progress

    JUL06 2012 WRITTEN BY PAUL JACKIEWICZ



    According to Len Pasquarelli of The Sports Xchange, there’s been very little negotiating and no progress made between the Pittsburgh Steelers and wide receiver Mike Wallace.

    I get the feeling that Wallace may decide to hold out for most, if not all of training camp. But sooner or later he’ll show up and play this season. I don’t see him holding out for the entire year. At the end of the day, he needs to make money just like everyone else.

    http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articl...gress/11168699

  9. #129
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,611
    Quote Originally Posted by hawaiiansteel View Post
    Report: Steelers, Mike Wallace still not making any progress

    JUL06 2012 WRITTEN BY PAUL JACKIEWICZ



    According to Len Pasquarelli of The Sports Xchange, there’s been very little negotiating and no progress made between the Pittsburgh Steelers and wide receiver Mike Wallace.

    I get the feeling that Wallace may decide to hold out for most, if not all of training camp. But sooner or later he’ll show up and play this season. I don’t see him holding out for the entire year. At the end of the day, he needs to make money just like everyone else.

    http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articl...gress/11168699
    Another piece of proof on how Wallace is wasting his time. Accomplishing nothing. The Steelers control him and until he bends to their will why should they negotiate with him.
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  10. #130
    Legend RuthlessBurgher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Where the Rubber Meets the Road (in NEPA)
    Posts
    21,692
    No progress between Steelers, Wallace
    Posted by Mike Florio on July 7, 2012, 9:31 AM EDT

    To no surprise, the Steelers and receiver Mike Wallace remain at impasse.

    Len Pasquarelli of the Sports Xchange reports that “there has been no progress, and, in fact, very little negotiation” between the team and the player, who is a restricted free agent.

    There’s no reason for any progress to be made, because there’s no specific date before the launch of camp on which the two sides would move toward their bottom-line positions. Unlike franchise players, who have a July 16 deadline for signing multi-year deals with their current teams, the Steelers and Wallace can work out a long-term contract at any time before the Tuesday after Week 10 of the regular season. And if Wallace signs his one-year RFA tender before that in-season deadline, a multi-year deal can be done at any time thereafter.

    Of course, not signing the one-year offer represents Wallace’s primary hammer for a long-term deal. But the Steelers have yet to show an inclination to give Wallace the kind of money he wants.

    Wallace reportedly will sign the tender when he “has to.” The question remains when he believes he has to. Technically, he can hold out of training camp and the preseason and still get the full $2.77 million for 2012. But if he does that, he’ll be woefully unprepared to function in a new offense led by former Chiefs coach Todd Haley.

    But once Wallace signs the one-year tender, his leverage for a multi-year contract disappears.

    And while the Steelers didn’t use their own hammer on June 15, the day on which they could have cut his offer by more than $2 million, don’t look for the Steelers to blink. They know Wallace will want to have a big year as he approaches unrestricted free agency or the franchise tender. If they sit tight, he’ll likely eventually take the money early enough before the September 9 trip to Denver to ensure that he won’t be lost in Antonio Brown’s dust.

    Then again, some would say that’s already happened.
    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...elers-wallace/

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •