PDA

View Full Version : Wallace signed his tender (for real this time)


Fire Arians
08-28-2012, 11:56 AM
http://www.steelersdepot.com/2012/08/steelers-mike-wallace-can-now-work-on-getting-a-new-long-term-contract-done-by-opener/

welcome back, mike!

Steelers>NFL
08-28-2012, 12:06 PM
:applaudit:

GoFor7
08-28-2012, 12:10 PM
But...... but...... but....... Mike Florio said he'd probably hold out until after the Steelers first 10 games! MIKE FLORIO IS NEVER WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




NEVER WRONG!

Bayz101
08-28-2012, 12:25 PM
Holy shit, didn't see this coming! :chuckle:

Seriously though. Awesome news.

MACH1
08-28-2012, 12:28 PM
Holy shit, didn't see this coming! :chuckle:

Seriously though. Awesome news.

Alright, I'm off to start a new "breaking wallace news'" thread. :wink02:

Bayz101
08-28-2012, 12:31 PM
Featured topics and announcement changed on homepage to reflect this.

MACH1
08-28-2012, 12:33 PM
Harrisons locker room interview with Da Kid.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=460957727269698

California-Steel
08-28-2012, 12:45 PM
Harrisons locker room interview with Da Kid.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=460957727269698

You beat me to it. Was just about to post this also. Funny interview by James. Guess he is not as mean and nasty as off the field. All he FB stuff is always funny.

Hawaii 5-0
08-28-2012, 01:48 PM
BREAKING NEWS!!! Wallace is BACK!!!!!! :thumbsup: :tt02:


Pro Bowl receiver Mike Wallace arrives at Steelers camp after holdout

August 28, 2012
By Gerry Dulac / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

http://d4493f2df0d1b95cfc62-773cd17a86049dd672fafb96394debed.r5.cf2.rackcdn.co m/2012/240/809/his-return_420.jpg

Wide receiver Mike Wallace enters the Steelers' South Side facility on Tuesday.

Pro Bowl receiver Mike Wallace arrived this morning at the Steelers' South Side practice facility and was warmly greeted by his teammates who say they had no problem with his long holdout.

Wallace reported shortly before 11:30 a.m. and signed the one-year, $2.7 million tender he was offered in March. The Steelers never lowered or rescinded the tender, something they could have done since June under the league's labor agreement

Wallace's arrival means Jacksonville's Maurice Jones-Drew is the only NFL player to remain a holdout.

"He's a part of this team, he's one of our brothers and we're going to embrace him," said Pro Bowl linebacker James Harrison. "What he does as far as the business is business, and he has to do what's best for him."

"It's part of the business," said safety Ryan Clark, the team's player representative. "Someone like me, who sees the uglier side of the business, you understand when it's your opportunity, when it's your time to get a contract for the long-term, you have to seize it and jump on it. That's what Mike did."

Wallace has to go through a three-day acclimation period before he is allowed to practice or play -- meaning he won't be in uniform Thursday night for the final preseason game against the Carolina Panthers.

It also means he won't be able to practice with the team until Monday when they start preparing for the Sept. 9 season opener in Denver. Right now, the Steelers are not scheduled to practice Friday, Saturday or Sunday after the Carolina game.

Harrison, who posted a locker-room interview with Wallace on his Twitter account, said he doesn't think it will take long for Wallace to get back in the flow of the offense under new coordinator Todd Haley.

"All he got to do is put a top on," Harrison said.

The Steelers have said they would not continue negotiations on a long-term contract until Wallace reported to the team. Now that he has, there is no guarantee that will happen.

For starters, the Steelers are not overly confident they can come to some long-term agreement because they believe Wallace wants to seek bigger money on the free-agent market.

Also, the window for signing Wallace to a new contract has diminished greatly -- if the Steelers hold to their long-standing rule not to negotiate contracts once the regular season has started.

But it appears that rule could be stretched, if the Steelers feel they are making some kind of progress with Wallace.

"We all have egos," Clark said. "It's the reason we play this game and the reason we want to do well. We don't want to be embarrassed. We don't want to go out there and not play well. As a receiver, you don't want to drop balls, you don't want to run wrong routes. Mike is going to come here with that frame of mind. If he wants to get the type of contract he's searching for, he has to play well. He knows that."

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sports/steelers/pro-bowl-receiver-wallace-arrives-at-steelers-camp-650844/#ixzz24rO7YlPE

TheDude
08-28-2012, 02:03 PM
Dulac is such a douche...he constantly adds his opinions and commentary in stories that only require him to REPORT whats going on....nobody asked you to try and read Mike Tomlin's mind Gerry

Douche

Vis
08-28-2012, 02:38 PM
Dulac is such a douche...he constantly adds his opinions and commentary in stories that only require him to REPORT whats going on....nobody asked you to try and read Mike Tomlin's mind Gerry

Douche


I must have missed the mention of Tomlin in the story. Can you point it out?

GoFor7
08-28-2012, 03:13 PM
I must have missed the mention of Tomlin in the story. Can you point it out?

Dulac thinks Tomlin will bench Wallace for the opener in Denver.

Vis
08-28-2012, 03:16 PM
Dulac thinks Tomlin will bench Wallace for the opener in Denver.

Not mentioned in the article.

sloppyjoe
08-28-2012, 03:51 PM
clark is an idiot. tell me how mike seized his opportui ity for a long term contract?

Bayz101
08-28-2012, 04:05 PM
clark is an idiot. tell me how mike seized his opportui ity for a long term contract?

Um, what?

Tell me how Clark is an idiot? Now that Wallace signed his tender, the Steelers will continue negotiations with him. He has twelve days to negotiate, and the Steelers recently signed Antonio Brown in under two hours!

The only reason he's held out to this point is because he'd be at risk of injury. If he we're to have signed his tender and participated in camp and the preseason, what happened to David DeCastro may have very well happened to him, and then he ain't gettin' a contract!

So, Clark is right. It's business. Just like Manny Sanders not going for that out of bounds grab that was thrown his way. A business decision. I think you'll see exactly how this all benefits Wallace within the next week.

pancake
08-28-2012, 04:27 PM
Um, what?

Tell me how Clark is an idiot? Now that Wallace signed his tender, the Steelers will continue negotiations with him. He has twelve days to negotiate, and the Steelers recently signed Antonio Brown in under two hours!

The only reason he's held out to this point is because he'd be at risk of injury. If he we're to have signed his tender and participated in camp and the preseason, what happened to David DeCastro may have very well happened to him, and then he ain't gettin' a contract!

So, Clark is right. It's business. Just like Manny Sanders not going for that out of bounds grab that was thrown his way. A business decision. I think you'll see exactly how this all benefits Wallace within the next week.

Excellent point. The FO wants him here long term and MW wants a long term contract. I think the only reason he didn't sign before camp, was he wanted more guaranteed money.

teegre
08-28-2012, 06:07 PM
Um, what?

Tell me how Clark is an idiot? Now that Wallace signed his tender, the Steelers will continue negotiations with him. He has twelve days to negotiate, and the Steelers recently signed Antonio Brown in under two hours!

The only reason he's held out to this point is because he'd be at risk of injury. If he we're to have signed his tender and participated in camp and the preseason, what happened to David DeCastro may have very well happened to him, and then he ain't gettin' a contract!

So, Clark is right. It's business. Just like Manny Sanders not going for that out of bounds grab that was thrown his way. A business decision. I think you'll see exactly how this all benefits Wallace within the next week.

That... n'at... n'at... n'all of that.

GoFor7
08-28-2012, 06:59 PM
Not mentioned in the article.

I know, but I heard him say so on the radio about a week ago.

Vis
08-28-2012, 07:02 PM
I know, but I heard him say so on the radio about a week ago.

if he doesn't start in Denver it will be because he's not in game shape or doesn't have the offense down. There won't be retaliation.

kan_t
08-28-2012, 07:31 PM
Great news. Still plenty of time to get the extension done.

Hawaii 5-0
08-30-2012, 04:54 PM
Mike Wallace Returns To Steelers Ė Should I Jump For Joy?

Aug 29th, 2012 by CraigSteelers

http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/58/files/2012/08/jumpingJoy_web.jpeg?6ba732

Hey did ya hear? #17 returned to the Steelers on Tuesday and signed his one year tender of $2.7 million. I want to be happy, but should I be jumping for joy?

I guess Iím just irritated about how all of this went down on his end Ė demanding a big paycheck but not quite living up to the Ďlegendaryí hypeÖ. yet. The Steelers were smart to not give in. And, perhaps they will be seen as smart by not trading him. But I still think this all went down wrong, and canít shake the feeling that in the end the Steelers are going to get the short end of the stick Ė meaning no long term deal and a snarky receiver who will have more complaints/excuses during the season than touchdowns. Just listen to what he said on his first day back:

ďMy teammates need me. Itís time to get ready for the season. I felt like it was time to go. Iím ready to roll. Iím here. Thatís really all that matters to me.Ē

Now Wallace either had a Ďcome to Jesusí with himself last week, or he is feeding us a bunch of bull. I canít help but assume the later and believe that Wallace needs to listen to himself spout that drivel into a microphone. Thatís all that matters? Really? Highly unlikely. If that were really the case, your rear end would have been in camp on day one, and you would have worked out your contract issues while you caught passes during drills. That little feeling of Ďit was time to goí was your pocket book crying and your future career pleading for you to salvage it. Itís true that your teammates need you Ė as in they need you to get on the field so reporters can quit pestering them with questions about Mike Wallace. But, in actuality you need them more than they need you.

And you should remember that.

Is it good overall that Mike Wallace is back? I think it depends on his route running. The offense needs to rely heavily on the quick pass due to the O-line still working things out. Donít expect to see the deep ball much in the first few weeks. Wallace will need to win us over with slants and quick curls. Letís hope he can lose guys in the flat after he catches the ball. Heíll need to evolve a little as a player. And, my Steeler Nation friends, if he can do that it will be WIN WIN for he and the Steelers.

Excuse me while I go try and find a trampolineÖ.

http://nicepickcowher.com/2012/08/29/mike-wallace-returns-to-steelers-should-i-jump-for-joy/

TheDoctorBeat
08-30-2012, 08:07 PM
How much do you guys think Wallace will be set back as far as the offense goes? I know Todd Haley is supposed to bring in a new system and all, but so far it doesn't seem like he's worlds away from Arians. Plus, he's so freakishly athletic that he'll catch anything that comes within five yards of him.

Blackout
08-30-2012, 08:10 PM
How much do you guys think Wallace will be set back as far as the offense goes? I know Todd Haley is supposed to bring in a new system and all, but so far it doesn't seem like he's worlds away from Arians. Plus, he's so freakishly athletic that he'll catch anything that comes within five yards of him.

Apparently Wallace knows the playbook already so there shouldn't be much of an issue.

Keep in mind that we won't really be seeing the true offensive playcalling until the season starts. There's also a deliberate attempt to keep things underwraps, say more no-huddle, to not give opposing teams chances to counteract ahead of time.

pete74
09-01-2012, 03:28 PM
Just heard Steelers and Wallace are negotiating again Wallace wants 5 year $55million and the Steelers are offering 5 year $50million with 25 guaranteed.

teegre
09-01-2012, 05:13 PM
Just heard Steelers and Wallace are negotiating again Wallace wants 5 year $55million and the Steelers are offering 5 year $50million with 25 guaranteed.

PITT's offer is more than fair (especially the guaranteed money).

The two sides aren't far off... I've stated that I think the deal gets done by Sept. 7th... 5 years, $52 million.
And, right now, they are close... maybe even by September 4th.

tanda10506
09-01-2012, 05:41 PM
Just heard Steelers and Wallace are negotiating again Wallace wants 5 year $55million and the Steelers are offering 5 year $50million with 25 guaranteed.

That's a lot of guaranteed money. The FO doesn't need to "negotiate" any more, that's a more then fair offer for Wallace.

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 05:59 PM
It may also have to do with DeSean Jackson's contract. He's making $51 million over 5 years. I would have to say Wallace is a little better than Jackson.

GBMelBlount
09-01-2012, 06:19 PM
That's a lot of guaranteed money. The FO doesn't need to "negotiate" any more, that's a more then fair offer for Wallace.

Absolutely.

Also, with Ben having 3 top shelf receivers and a supposedly increased emphasis on running more and shorter routes it would not be surprising to me to see Wallaces production dip this year.

Add the fact that we have Brown locked up on the cheap and it can be argued that the current offer is overpaying for Wallaces value to us.

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 07:44 PM
Absolutely.

Also, with Ben having 3 top shelf receivers and a supposedly increased emphasis on running more and shorter routes it would not be surprising to me to see Wallaces production dip this year.

Add the fact that we have Brown locked up on the cheap and it can be argued that the current offer is overpaying for Wallaces value to us.

Brown did very well because of the double-coverage Wallace drew. Don't underestimate his value to the offense. When he stretches the field it opens up the other receivers.

wera176
09-01-2012, 07:57 PM
Brown did very well because of the double-coverage Wallace drew. Don't underestimate his value to the offense. When he stretches the field it opens up the other receivers.

^ This

OX1947
09-01-2012, 08:01 PM
Brown did very well because of the double-coverage Wallace drew. Don't underestimate his value to the offense. When he stretches the field it opens up the other receivers.

Brown doesn't need Mike Wallace to be a stud no different then Larry Fitzgerald needs a competent QB. A great player plays well no matter who is on the team. Antonio is gonna be a star. If the Steelers sign Wallace, and if Sanders stays healthy, Steelers will make a run to the Super Bowl because Big Ben looks better the ever to me. This could be his best season.

GBMelBlount
09-01-2012, 08:09 PM
Brown did very well because of the double-coverage Wallace drew. Don't underestimate his value to the offense. When he stretches the field it opens up the other receivers.

I am not sure I underestimate his value, I am only pointing out that it may be wise to be careful not to overpay, all things considered.

...and while I agree that stretching the field helps open things up, to imply that Brown ONLY did well because of Wallace stretching the field, is, well, a bit of a "stretch" itself. :chuckle:

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 09:06 PM
Right now, Brown is a good #2 WR, but not a #1. Wallace is the better of the two and is probably the fastest deep threat in the NFL. Is he Fitzgerald or Megatron? No. But the Steelers aren't winning another Super Bowl by purely playing dink-and-dunk, throwing screens, and/or granddaddy's ground n pound offense.

I know Steelers fans are pissed that Wallace held out, but that doesn't make him a bad player, nor does it mean any of the other WRs on the team are better than him.

GBMelBlount
09-01-2012, 10:13 PM
Right now, Brown is a good #2 WR, but not a #1. Wallace is the better of the two and is probably the fastest deep threat in the NFL. Is he Fitzgerald or Megatron? No. But the Steelers aren't winning another Super Bowl by purely playing dink-and-dunk, throwing screens, and/or granddaddy's ground n pound offense.

I know Steelers fans are pissed that Wallace held out, but that doesn't make him a bad player, nor does it mean any of the other WRs on the team are better than him.

I did not realize we could not win a super bowl without wallace.

Thank you for clarifying.

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 10:22 PM
I did not realize we could not win a super bowl without wallace.

Thank you for clarifying.

I never said that. What I meant is the Steelers aren't winning another Super Bowl without a deep threat that can stretch the field. In 2008, that player was Nate Washington. Not as good as Wallace, but you don't think he helped open up Holmes and Ward at times?

GBMelBlount
09-01-2012, 10:34 PM
I never said that. What I meant is the Steelers aren't winning another Super Bowl without a deep threat that can stretch the field. In 2008, that player was Nate Washington. Not as good as Wallace, but you don't think he helped open up Holmes and Ward at times?

You said you never said that we could not win the super bowl without wallace and it now sounds like you are saying the same thing.

I am confused.

Is there another deep threat on our team besides wallace that you feel we cannot win the super bowl without?

I realize the great benefits of having a deep threat like wallace and I feel blessed and fortunate that we have him. I just do not believe that we can't win the super bowl without wallace.

Ben, and perhaps Troy, are probably the only two that are not expendable imo.

Just my two cents.

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 10:42 PM
You said you never said that we could not win the super bowl without wallace and it now sounds like you are saying the same thing.

I am confused.

Is there another deep threat on our team besides wallace that you feel we cannot win the super bowl without?

I realize the great benefits of having a deep threat like wallace and I feel blessed and fortunate that we have him. I just do not believe that we can't win the super bowl without wallace.

If you're confused it's by your own doing. I think it's pretty obvious what I meant.

Also, Brown and Sanders aren't legit deep threats. Fast receivers that can get yards after the catch no doubt. But if you think they're consistant deep threats you're kidding yourself, likely out of hatred for Wallace because he held out.

Steelersfan87
09-01-2012, 10:48 PM
How can you even quantify either's legitimacy as a deep threat when they've had so few opportunities? There's really no reason to believe that one of the two can't consistently catch balls down the field enough for it to impact the defense.

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 10:51 PM
How can you even quantify either's legitimacy as a deep threat when they've had so few opportunities? There's really no reason to believe that one of the two can't consistently catch balls down the field enough for it to impact the defense.

Maybe the coaches realize they aren't legit deep threats?

GBMelBlount
09-01-2012, 10:52 PM
If you're confused it's by your own doing. I think it's pretty obvious what I meant.

Also, Brown and Sanders aren't legit deep threats. Fast receivers that can get yards after the catch no doubt. But if you think they're consistant deep threats you're kidding yourself, likely out of hatred for Wallace because he held out.

OK. :noidea:

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 11:02 PM
Look, I get it. A lot of Steelers fans are pissed he held out. That mentality of "we don't need him then!" creeps in. Combine that with the fact some Steelers fans refuse to wrap their heads around the fact the NFL is a passing league, there's a lot of venom towards Wallace right now.

Without Wallace, this is a mediocre receiving core. Without him, the Steelers won't be staging many late game comebacks. With no one to stretch the field in that situation, the other team's defense will just give the Steelers offense the middle of the field, trading yards for time.

Be pissed at Wallace all you want, but don't act like he's not the 2nd best weapon on offense.

Of course, when he catches a 70-yard bomb for a TD you'll forgive and forget! :chuckle:

Hawaii 5-0
09-01-2012, 11:12 PM
Report: Steelers and Mike Wallace negotiating, but a deal is unlikely

Posted by Michael David Smith on September 1, 2012

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/610x-192.jpg?w=250

Itís not too late for receiver Mike Wallace to sign a long-term contract with the Steelers that will ensure he remains in Pittsburgh for the prime of his career.

But itís not likely, either.

The Steelers and Wallaceís camp re-started contract talks this week, shortly after Wallace reported to the team and signed his one-year, $2.7 million restricted free agent tender, according to Jason La Canfora of CBS. But while the talks may continue this week, it appears that the chances of a deal actually getting done are slim.

From all indications, Wallace wants a contract like the five-year, $55.5 million deal that Vincent Jackson got from the Buccaneers, and heís not willing to settle for less than that. La Canfora reports that the Steelers would be willing to go to five years and $50 million, with $25 million guaranteed, but Wallace is fixated on making $11 million a year.

And so it appears that Wallace and the Steelers are unlikely to come to an agreement. Even though theyíre willing to spend another week negotiating.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/01/report-steelers-and-mike-wallace-negotiating-but-a-deal-is-unlikely/

Steelersfan87
09-01-2012, 11:39 PM
Maybe the coaches realize they aren't legit deep threats?

Unlikely, as there's no evidence to suggest that.

GoFor7
09-01-2012, 11:46 PM
Unlikely, as there's no evidence to suggest that.

Well, they haven't put them in the position to be deep threats very often. Perhaps that's evidence enough. And considering the amount of money the Steelers are willing to pay Wallace (when they generally don't give WRs that kind of money), maybe they don't think anyone else currently on the roster fills that role.

If the Steelers are not able to sign/franchise Wallace, they'll need to find another deep threat via the draft.

Steelersfan87
09-02-2012, 12:36 AM
The only thing that suggests is they had Mike Wallace to do that. You don't think Brown and Sanders would have gotten their share of go routes if Wallace held out into the season?

teegre
09-02-2012, 01:32 AM
$11 million per year... 5 years, $55 million... structure it thusly: †

Year 1: †$10 million †
Year 2: †$10 million †
Year 3: †$10 million †
Year 4: †$10 million †
Year 5: †the year when he is supposed to make $15 million, restructure (or cut him) †

Also, if they want to give him a higher salary, their bargaining chip would be†reducing the signing bonus to, let's say, $20 million...†More salary, but less guaranteed.

GoFor7
09-02-2012, 09:52 AM
The only thing that suggests is they had Mike Wallace to do that. You don't think Brown and Sanders would have gotten their share of go routes if Wallace held out into the season?

Perhaps they are happy Wallace returned so they didn't have to find out. Why are the Steelers willing to give Mike Wallace at least $50 million over 5 years if they think Brown or Sanders could be deep threats? If these guys are legit deep threats, then why resign Wallace at all, especially for that kind of money?

Perhaps the Steelers realize while Brown and Sanders are good at what they do in their normal roles, they aren't going to stretch the field and prevent opposing defenses from stacking the box.

teegre
09-02-2012, 10:43 AM
Why are the Steelers willing to give Mike Wallace at least $50 million over 5 years if they think Brown or Sanders could be deep threats? If these guys are legit deep threats, then why resign Wallace at all, especially for that kind of money?.

Think of it this way:
Why re-sign Woodley, when you have Harrison?

GoFor7
09-02-2012, 11:17 AM
Think of it this way:
Why re-sign Woodley, when you have Harrison?

Well, Harrison's career is much closer to the end than the beginning. Although there's no comparison between Harrison/Woodley and Wallace/Brown. A 3-4 defense needs those two really good edge rushers on both sides.

Brown is a good number two and deserved the money he got, but he doesn't have the speed to be a consistent deep threat like Wallace does. Remember, the Steelers generally don't give big money to any WR, let alone two of them. If they're willing to give Wallace more, perhaps that should be an indication they don't feel Brown or Sanders can fill the same role Wallace does.

steelerchad
09-02-2012, 12:46 PM
Man. If you're Wallace then you need to sign this contract. If they are truly only $5M apart over 5 years, then meet at $52 and be done with it. Wallace would be crazy not to do this. One injury this season and he doesn't get the $55M he's looking for next year. Heck, even if he has a healthy year, if he's just avg. he may get less than the Steelers are offering now.
The Steelers could also tag him next year at around $10M and end up getting him for the next 2 years at $12.7M. He'd be real smart to get a deal done if they are that close.

MasterOfPuppets
09-02-2012, 01:52 PM
Um, what?

Tell me how Clark is an idiot? Now that Wallace signed his tender, the Steelers will continue negotiations with him. He has twelve days to negotiate, and the Steelers recently signed Antonio Brown in under two hours!

The only reason he's held out to this point is because he'd be at risk of injury. If he we're to have signed his tender and participated in camp and the preseason, what happened to David DeCastro may have very well happened to him, and then he ain't gettin' a contract!

So, Clark is right. It's business. Just like Manny Sanders not going for that out of bounds grab that was thrown his way. A business decision. I think you'll see exactly how this all benefits Wallace within the next week.
so he woulda still collected his 2.7 mill ... :noidea:

pete74
09-02-2012, 02:46 PM
But he wouldn't be getting his 11 million this year for sure and if he was seriously injured he wouldn't be getting it next year either

sluggermatt15
09-02-2012, 04:46 PM
But he wouldn't be getting his 11 million this year for sure and if he was seriously injured he wouldn't be getting it next year either

If he plays his @$$ off this year, I would pay him the $11 M he wants. If Antonio Brown outperforms him, forget it!

MasterOfPuppets
09-02-2012, 05:04 PM
But he wouldn't be getting his 11 million this year for sure and if he was seriously injured he wouldn't be getting it next year either
and the very same injury that "coulda" , happened to him the past few weeks that he's trying to prevent can STILL happen in the next 17 weeks....:noidea:

teegre
09-02-2012, 05:20 PM
Well, Harrison's career is much closer to the end than the beginning. Although there's no comparison between Harrison/Woodley and Wallace/Brown. A 3-4 defense needs those two really good edge rushers on both sides.

Brown is a good number two and deserved the money he got, but he doesn't have the speed to be a consistent deep threat like Wallace does. Remember, the Steelers generally don't give big money to any WR, let alone two of them. If they're willing to give Wallace more, perhaps that should be an indication they don't feel Brown or Sanders can fill the same role Wallace does.

So, are you saying "Don't sign Wallace"... yes or no? I am a little confused...

I think that they should sign Wallace. The team lines up two OLBs (and two WRs). They re-signed Woodley (when Harrison already had a big contract)... and I think that they should re-sign Wallace (even though AB already has a big contract).

Who's better 92 or 56? 84 or 17?
Who cares? Not me... sign 'em both (or all four).

MasterOfPuppets
09-02-2012, 05:24 PM
So, by your deductive reasoning, you are saying "Don't sign Wallace"... yes or no? I am a little confused...

I think that they should sign Wallace. The team lines up two OLBs (and two WRs). They re-signed Woodley (when Harrison already had a big contract)... and I think that they should re-sign Wallace (even though AB already has a big contract).

Who's better 92 or 56? 84 or 17? Who cares? Not me... sign 'em both (or all four).
agreed..the salary cap is for chumps..to hell with it , pay the man and worry about the consequences later...:tt03:

teegre
09-02-2012, 05:29 PM
agreed..the salary cap is for chumps..to hell with it , pay the man and worry about the consequences later...:tt03:

It's not that I'm disregarding the salary cap... †(although, in Omar Khan I trust)... †

I've mentioned (in other threads) about signing the offensive players, and they'd have a top-five offense for the next five years. †
QB, two WRs, TE, O-line... the only missing piece is the top-tier RB (and maybe a LT, depending on Adams' development). †

Then, they could use the vast majority of draft picks on defense. †

Steelersfan87
09-02-2012, 10:36 PM
Perhaps they are happy Wallace returned so they didn't have to find out. Why are the Steelers willing to give Mike Wallace at least $50 million over 5 years if they think Brown or Sanders could be deep threats? If these guys are legit deep threats, then why resign Wallace at all, especially for that kind of money?

Perhaps the Steelers realize while Brown and Sanders are good at what they do in their normal roles, they aren't going to stretch the field and prevent opposing defenses from stacking the box.

Perhaps you should not use unsubstantiated speculation to further your argument. You earlier cited Nate Washington as a key deep threat for the Steelers in 2008; Brown and Sanders are faster. They both have 4.4 speed. They are more than fast enough to run down the field and past secondaries.

GoFor7
09-02-2012, 10:57 PM
Perhaps you should not use unsubstantiated speculation to further your argument. You earlier cited Nate Washington as a key deep threat for the Steelers in 2008; Brown and Sanders are faster. They both have 4.4 speed. They are more than fast enough to run down the field and past secondaries.

So then why are the Steelers willing to give Wallace so much money if they already have deep threats in Brown and Sanders?

Perhaps they're better at evaluating their own talent then some of the fans. :noidea:

Steelersfan87
09-02-2012, 11:19 PM
They're willing to give as much money to as many great players on their team as they possibly can. I cannot for the life of me fathom why you think the Steelers having the desire to pay their best wide receiver #1 receiver money means that the Steelers don't believe that their other wide receivers can run fast enough to run deep routes, despite the fact that they're both faster than the deep threat that they had in 2008.

GoFor7
09-03-2012, 12:15 AM
They're willing to give as much money to as many great players on their team as they possibly can. I cannot for the life of me fathom why you think the Steelers having the desire to pay their best wide receiver #1 receiver money means that the Steelers don't believe that their other wide receivers can run fast enough to run deep routes, despite the fact that they're both faster than the deep threat that they had in 2008.

Maybe because the Steelers historically don't spend big money on WRs? Generally they spend the big money on defense. There's also a financial aspect to this too you seem to be forgetting. The Steelers are going to be above the cap in 2013 (and maybe longer as there's uncertainty as to what will actually happen in 2014). That means more restructuring must be done next offseason. If the Steelers really think Brown and Sanders are good enough to take on the "go route," they aren't going to make life difficult in the future by signing Wallace to do the same things Brown, Sanders, or a newly drafted WR could do. So by trying to sign Wallace, they understand his importance to the offense and therefore must be willing to deal with the future cap issues that go with it.

Give Brown and Sanders all the praise you want, they deserve much of it. But understand Wallace is a class above both of them as far as WRs go, and he makes them look better when he stretches the field.

Steelersfan87
09-03-2012, 03:26 AM
The "the Steelers historically don't" argument hasn't worked for many years now. The Steelers do a lot of things they used to not do ever since they opened up the ownership pool. They don't lose many players any more that they are really intent on keeping. They also historically had a pretty sucky offense with nobody to give contracts to between Bradshaw and Roethlisberger. Furthermore, they have regularly been over the cap in recent years, which causes many to panic for no reason as the team quickly makes a small handful of simple moves that solve the problem. Any deal with Wallace right now would contain a low cap hit in its first two years. In addition, their contracts are structured in ways that are friendly to being restructured.

Your argument was that they need Wallace to run the go route, not that they need him because he is their best receiver. I'm arguing that it's foolish to think that they need Wallace in order to execute the go route while simultaneously citing Nate Washington as an example of the go route necessary for the 6th Lombardi trophy when both Brown and Sanders are faster than Washington and have better hands than Washington had at the time (I honestly have not kept up with his post-Steelers career).

It is absurd to think that the Steelers would be unable to stretch the field without Wallace. I don't even have to cite Sanders' touchdown last week or Brown's 3rd and a mile in the playoffs two years ago to make the point. IF Wallace had moved on, Roethlisberger would still be able to stretch the field. The team would have adapted.

Earlier, you said that the Steelers won't win a super bowl without a deep threat to stretch the field. Over the course of the last few pages, you obviously do not believe that Sanders and Brown are capable of being deep threats. The best evidence that you have put forth to this end, however, is that "you're kidding yourself" if you believe that they are, and likely "out of hatred for Wallace". Would you care to attempt to actually substantiate your claim that Sanders nor Brown are incapable of fulfilling Nate Washington's role this time?

Steeldude
09-03-2012, 03:55 AM
. But understand Wallace is a class above both of them as far as WRs go, and he makes them look better when he stretches the field.

Well that is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. IMO, I find Brown to be a more complete WR than Wallace. Saying Wallace stretches is true, but is that really a talent deserving $11,000,000 a season? Brown is capable of running long routes also.

I wouldn't be surprised if Wallace struggles in the new offense. Wallace has had trouble with his routes numerous times in Arians' offense so I don't expect him to flourish in this new offense after missing training camp and pre-season.

What exactly has Wallace shown that suggests he is a class above Brown? Running long routes? It certainly isn't his hands or the way he runs routes. If I remember correctly didn't Wallace disappear around the 10th game and on?

dreegking
09-03-2012, 09:56 AM
Wont they just make him a fair offer. \\\\\\won't he just reject it again. Then, they'll simply put the franchise tag on him. Can't they franchise him next year? I don't really know how the franchise tag works, but haven't they suggested to him, that those are the plans, if a reasonable contract is not negotiated.

teegre
09-03-2012, 10:26 AM
Wont they just make him a fair offer. \\\\\\won't he just reject it again. Then, they'll simply put the franchise tag on him. Can't they franchise him next year? I don't really know how the franchise tag works, but haven't they suggested to him, that those are the plans, if a reasonable contract is not negotiated.

That has been exactly the "advice" that I would give to Wallace: †

Tender, franchise, franchise = $23 million †

Three years on his current offer = $30 million †

Of course, he "could" (& probably would) receive $14 million after he is finally a FA... but, he would HAVE to get that much, in order to make up the difference in the amount that he'd lose. †

Tender, franchise, franchise ($23 million), plus two $14 million years = $51 million †

His current offer = $50 million †

Were I Wallace, I'd take the bird in the hand, because the two in the bush aren't guaranteed (and, it's the same amount of money). †

Hawaii 5-0
09-03-2012, 04:13 PM
Ed: Wallace Says Ben's Arm Stronger

MONDAY, 03 SEPTEMBER 2012 14:28 WRITTEN BY ED BOUCHETTE

Here is a question-and-answer session with Mike Wallace today. Emmanuel Sanders told me he expects Wallace to start in Denver and play a lot. Wallace said today went well.

Q. On his first day practicing:
WALLACE: It just feels good to be back with my teammates, just to be out there learning the offense I like where Iím at but I still have a way to go.

Q. On difference practicing here:
WALLACE: Lot of faces, lot of smiles, lot of sweat. I like all that. Itís fun being with these guys. I wouldnít want to be anywhere else.

Q. On the difference in speed of the game:
WALLACE: I havenít been with Ben in awhile. His arm is stronger than when we left last year. He was throwing that thing pretty far. He can throw a lot better than coach [Tom] Shaw.

Q. Did you have any questions on the plays?
WALLACE: Not today, Iím not going to say itís going to be like that every day, but not today. I had a pretty good grasp of what we were doing. That was one day. I donít know how itís going to be like Wednesday but today I was pretty good.

Q. On running shorter routes:
WALLACE: I have to know everything, I canít just run down the field. I have to do be able to do short, long, I want to do it all. Today was a good start for me. We have a way to go but todayís only Monday. Weíll see Wednesday how it feels.

Q. On whether heíll be in a lot of plays:
WALLACE: Iím just happy to be out there. Iíll run all day until they tell me to come out. I need the extra work anyway.

Q. On wide receivers coach Scottie Montgomery working with him on Friday and Saturday:
WALLACE: He gave me a good jump. He loves working anyway. He didnít want me to go home, he wanted to keep me in there. All those days and those hours really helped me.

Q. On whether the Steelers might limit the plays he must know this week:
WALLACE: I donít know, but I donít think they should have to do that. I like where I am today. Iím excited about it, I donít think they have to hold back too much.

http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/pro-sports/steelers/117877-ed-wallace-says-bens-arm-stronger

GoFor7
09-03-2012, 05:13 PM
Would you care to attempt to actually substantiate your claim that Sanders nor Brown are incapable of fulfilling Nate Washington's role this time?

I think I explained my view already. If you think those two are deep threats based off two preseason games then I guess I can't change your mind. Perhaps you should write the coaches a letter, I'm sure you know more about the talent on the team than they do.

GoFor7
09-03-2012, 05:18 PM
Well that is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. IMO, I find Brown to be a more complete WR than Wallace. Saying Wallace stretches is true, but is that really a talent deserving $11,000,000 a season? Brown is capable of running long routes also.

I wouldn't be surprised if Wallace struggles in the new offense. Wallace has had trouble with his routes numerous times in Arians' offense so I don't expect him to flourish in this new offense after missing training camp and pre-season.

What exactly has Wallace shown that suggests he is a class above Brown? Running long routes? It certainly isn't his hands or the way he runs routes. If I remember correctly didn't Wallace disappear around the 10th game and on?

Wallace doesn't have to know the playbook in his sleep to run the "go route" the first few games. As for why he's better than Brown, gee I don't know? Maybe because he's faster? Has scored more TDs? More yards?

Yes, Wallace did drop off in the latter part of 2011, but he still drew double coverage and helped the other WRs out a lot.

If you don't think he's worth $11 million per year, you can blame the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Philadelphia Eagles for the Vincent Jackson and DeSean Jackson contracts.

Steeldude
09-03-2012, 06:20 PM
As for why he's better than Brown, gee I don't know? Maybe because he's faster? Has scored more TDs? More yards?

Is that a serious comment or sarcasm?

Steelersfan87
09-03-2012, 06:31 PM
I think I explained my view already. If you think those two are deep threats based off two preseason games then I guess I can't change your mind. Perhaps you should write the coaches a letter, I'm sure you know more about the talent on the team than they do.

That's a convenient copout, sure, but the two preseasons comment makes no sense. Both players have an extensive body of work already that in no way indicates an inability to run far, run fast, and catch a ball. I have been in Wallace's corner throughout this entire proceeding, but the idea that the offense would suffer because they wouldn't have a deep threat without Wallace is just not true. Would the offense suffer without him? Naturally. However, it wouldn't be because they can't run down the field. I already pointed out to you that both Brown and Sanders are faster than Nate Washington...

Hawaii 5-0
09-03-2012, 08:20 PM
Mike Wallace will start for Steelers, Sanders reveals

By Gregg Rosenthal
Published: Sept. 3, 2012

It's no surprise that the Pittsburgh Steelers plan to have Mike Wallace available for the season opener against the Denver Broncos. It's not even a surprise they plan to start him.

The Steelers probably would have just preferred to keep that information private.

Teammate Emmanuel Sanders told Ed Bouchette of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Monday that Wallace would start against Denver. Wallace did not confirm that during his media session, and we doubt the Steelers will say anything.

Apart from the team's new playbook, Wallace noticed one other big change.

"I haven't been with Ben (Roethlisberger) in a while," Wallace said. "His arm is stronger than when we left last year. He was throwing that thing pretty far."

Wallace said he had a "pretty good grasp" of the new system. He doesn't think he'll be limited in terms of what he can handle mentally. It sounds like he's fine to go physically.

Look for Wallace to play plenty against the Broncos. The Steelers just hope he's more effective against Champ Bailey on Sunday than he was in the wild card round last year.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000057891/article/mike-wallace-will-start-for-steelers-sanders-reveals

teegre
09-03-2012, 10:49 PM
For those interested:
In SuperBowl XLIII, Nate Washington has one reception, for 11 yards.

Do with that as you will...

Bayz101
09-03-2012, 11:06 PM
For those interested:
In SuperBowl XLIII, Nate Washington has one reception, for 11 yards.

Do with that as you will...

That's a first down. :noidea:

pancake
09-04-2012, 02:16 AM
In my opinion, a lot of Browns success was because Wallace was receiving double coverage. I think Brown is a really good WR, but will be better with Wallace.

I think Wallace would accept 50 mil, if more was guaranteed than the reported 8 or 9 mil.

teegre
09-04-2012, 08:24 AM
In my opinion, a lot of Browns success was because Wallace was receiving double coverage. I think Brown is a really good WR, but will be better with Wallace.

I think Wallace would accept 50 mil, if more was guaranteed than the reported 8 or 9 mil.

They offered $25 million guaranteed...
but Wallace wants $11 million per year.

steelfury02
09-04-2012, 10:16 AM
Wallace will get his looks @ Denver - my hope is that our offense gets a 1st quarter eating, demoralizing drive, finished with 7 points to set the tempo, much like the start of the AFC Champ Game v. Jets.

Hawaii 5-0
09-05-2012, 03:52 PM
posted by Dale Lolley

Tues, Sept. 4, 2012

@ It's beginning to look like Mike Wallace will start over Emmanuel Sanders. That's a surprising move by Tomlin, who usually likes to send messages through his actions.

I'm sure the fact that Wallace spent all day Friday and Saturday with receivers coach Scottie Montgomery had something to do with the decision.

@ The Steelers, by the way, continue to try to bang out a new deal for Wallace.

This could go down to the wire. A couple of years ago, the Steelers had strong safety Troy Polamalu sign his new deal on the plane before takeoff for their regular season opener.

http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/sidelines/

GoFor7
09-05-2012, 04:17 PM
It's beginning to look like Mike Wallace will start over Emmanuel Sanders. That's a surprising move by Tomlin, who usually likes to send messages through his actions.

Benching him really doesn't prove anything to begin with anyways.

Hawaii 5-0
09-07-2012, 01:45 AM
Former Steelers RB Jerome Bettis Says He's 'Fearful' Mike Wallace Will Suffer Injury Early This Season

by Neal Coolong on Sep 6, 2012

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/5334883/20120727_mse_se2_846_extra_large.jpg

Former Steelers RB Jerome Bettis recently joined Spirit of the Players (SOTL), an NFLPA partner company with the a stated goal, "to serve and honor the players, past and present, of the National Football League."

In Bettis's first blog entry, he perhaps dishonored the 2012 Steelers, and questioned the strength of WR Mike Wallace's hamstring.

In the section of his blog labeled "My Pittsburgh Steelers Have Me Worried," Bettis touched on problems he has with the Steelers' running game (based on the preseason) and the general ability of the offense.

The most prominent piece, though, was his thoughts on Wallace's hamstring due to Wallace missing all of training camp and the preseason.

With Mike Wallace finally reporting I expect him to jump right back onto the field as soon as possible, because that's what the Steelers need him to do, but I don't think that's the best scenario. With a speed guy like that who hasn't had any camp the odds of him pulling a hamstring are really great. There's a difference between running in training and running in game conditions. In game situations, you have to go out there and start and stop, make cuts, and you can't duplicate those on-field demands during training. I'm fearful he's going to come in and be injured early in the season and leave that offense in even more trouble.

It's certainly a viable concern, and one we've previously mentioned here. There really isn't much anyone, including Wallace, can do about it now, except stay flexible and try not to overdo it.

http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2012/9/6/3298204/steelers-jerome-bettis-comments-mike-wallace-injury-hamstring-offense

steelfury02
09-07-2012, 08:26 AM
this is something I haven't really given a whole lot of thought about until now - as we've all stated, there is no need to rush anyone back, however, even if he is there as deep ball decoy, I think that alone will open things up a little

I would prefer he doesn't make that many cuts for at least the first couple of games . . .

GoFor7
09-07-2012, 10:39 AM
Looks like it will be very anti-climactic if Wallace doesn't pull his hamstring.

But if he had to choose between a pulled hammy and getting his leg bent in the wrong direction during the preseason, he'd probably take the hammy.