Originally Posted by
Captain Lemming
Are you talking about comparable to Brown's numbers? A fraction of what he actually got? It was said at the time that Wallace was offered MORE than Brown got and he wanted to test the market.
There is not basis whatsoever to assume Wallace would have signed regardless the offer because he wanted to see what his value was.
And if he is honest in saying he was offered more by the vikings, the point is entirely moot. Miami is more appealing to him PERIOD.
He is a southerner to begin with. Based on his playing for LESS in Miami he likely just likes warm weather period. Maybe the beaches.
The Steelers cannot pay him with a guaranteed warm winter on the beach contract.
We tried to sign him so how can we blame the team? We SETTLED on Brown for less.
Regardless of how much less we offered than the Fins based on his actions and not going with the Vikes it was not possible for us to sign him.
You wanna blame someone for Wallace not being a Steeler BLAME HIM. I dont it is his life he needs to do what makes him happy.
As for Brown and his far lesser deal. Had we not signed him (when it was clear we had no chance at Wallace) we would have NO VETERAN receiver under contract. They would ALL have great leverage meaning we would HAVE to overpay somebody. Yes, it was a risk, but there was a risk of having nobody too. Unlike Wallace Brown has a third the guaranteed money. We can cut him with far less of an impact if the gamble fails.
Bottom like it WAS NEVER choosing Brown over Wallace, we settled on Brown at far less cost.
Bookmarks