will unhappy Wallace leave in 13

Good read from espn

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_ ... lers-in-13

 

Yes, he will.

 

I hope so. He causes Ben to throw deep far too often. Get rid of Wallace and Ben has no choice but to throw short to medium passes much, much more.

 

Many fans also want to stop having a run-stuffing nose tackle on the roster in order to improve our passing defense. Me? I want to get rid of all our running backs to help our receivers and quarterback.

 

ESPN radio NEW YORK;

Jets have interest in Mike Wallace and might offer their 47th pick in 2012 (this friday) and their 4th rd. pick in 2013 draft (next year). I thought I heard Wallace couldn't be traded until later? What's the rule on that, is he or isn't he? and I don't understand why the Jets always target our WR's and they already failed to sign Cotchery this year.

I do believe Wallace will be traded if teams do put out proposals like this....

So Wallace leaves in 2012 not 2013...

 

I'd rather have Wallace for another year and get rewarded a 3rd round comp pick in 2013 than take that offer. Wallace is a first-round talent and I'd expect equal compensation in a trade, especially considering he's only what, 25, and has never had a serious injury.

 

IMO, Wallace better not be traded for anything less than a first rounder and then a 3rd or 4th rounder. If the Steelers let some team take him for no less than a 1st rounder, then it would appear to me, that our FO has no BALLS! Regardless of his his second hald drop off last year, he still remains a huge deep threat and the Steelers (if no having no choice), better not just give him away. I think they lucked out with Holmes, although a fifth rounder for Holmes was a joke and basically said the Steelers just "gave" him away! Have some BALLS FO!!!!!

 

This is an interesting perspective and it's what I've been saying all along:

http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/artic ... o/10617052

This line from the article encapulates the entire situation with Wallace:
The feeling amongst most teams is that he does one thing well and that he needs another year of solid production to prove that he is an elite receiver.

So why is it when I, and others, get on this MB and criticize Wallace and point out some of the exact same things that many "professional" analysts and sports writers point out, and that other teams are obviously concerned about, we are accused of being unreasonable and irrational Mike Wallace haters?

 

JUST A QUESTION? so why would we expect to get a 1 and maybe a 3 or 5 for wallace in trade when no one signed him for a 1 alone? and why would we expect to get a 1 and 3 or 5 when all we got for santonio was a lousey 5th round... and the shocker of all hell the h**l did the bengals get a 1 and 2 for carson and we got a 5 for santonio? im just trying ot understand why we would get so more for wallace then the super bowl MVP ? the 5 seemed so low to me?

 

Wallace is saying he won't sign, "until he has to."

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-o ... -he-has-to

 

Nobody submitted an offer sheet to him because "sources" said he priced himself too high (Fitz money/etc). So with a offer sheet they'd have to offer him a decent amount of money so the Steelers couldnt match AND give up a pick...they're taking more of a chance with this. With a trade...they could have him for the year and work on a long term deal that is much more friendly to both sides and not worry about having to outbid the Steelers and such. So a team COULD be willing to give up a first and other pick to get him, especially if they feel with NORMAL negotiations they can work out a deal with him.

Holmes got a 5th because of his off the field issues far outweighed what he did on the field...and he was going to be CUT if they didnt trade him...so I'd rather get a 5th than nothing. Plus what has Holmes done since? NOTHING! Obviously just looking at the player he WAS and such...you'd like to get higher...but based on the situation you get what you get.

 

Exactly...I'm tired of "sources", "reports", etc. Until I hear something from the team...him or his agent DIRECTLY, then I could care less about the rest.

 

The way some folks are talking, Haley's going to sort our offense, make Redman a 2000 yard back, magically recreate Ben's passing style, and achieve peace in the Middle East, all in the space of one off season. Good luck to the man.

 

Haley can only do so much. As long as there are deep routes in the playbook, Ben is going to want to throw deep, and often. I hope Haley reigns him in and gets him to be more consistent and take less risks, but that's on Ben. Normally I would agree that you don't get rid of a player to curtail your QB from using him, but Ben is very stubborn, and it's no secret he enjoys throwing the deep ball. It wasn't just BA that caused all that, Ben loves to throw bombs. If we lost Wallace and replaced him with a WR who is more complete, then we wouldn't have to worry about Ben wanting to go deep so often.

 

Personally, I think that the Steelers will do what they have always done in these kinds of situations. If they get a fair offer for him in trade - and can get value for him now, they'll trade him. If they can't, they'll give him the rope he needs to hang himself. They'll keep the tender open - maybe reduce it when that time comes that they can, let him play out the season - probably a good one if he wants a good payday - make him a fair offer at the end of the season and let him go if he won't accept.

This philosophy has worked to make the Steelers the MOST DOMINANT team over the past 4 decades. I don't see them not using it in this situation.

 

I'd rather have Wallace for another year and get rewarded a 3rd round comp pick in 2013 than take that offer. Wallace is a first-round talent and I'd expect equal compensation in a trade, especially considering he's only what, 25, and has never had a serious injury.[/quote:1b5ssqct]

Why would you want a player who is playing to protect himself ? He feels he has already earned his big pay day so why would he risk injury next season? I hope we can trade him for a round #2 pick ay least.....

If the 2 sides where even close to making a deal we would have one in place or there would at least be rumors instead we have rumors of Fitz type of money,we have Wallace making statements about Teams he would like to trade for him,now we also have rumors that he will not sign until the last possible moment.....

So all the signs point to a guy who will not be putting the Team 1st. this season and with a new OC and a new Offense to put in ,we might as well trade him now....

If he doesn't think he deserves a big contract and he is willing to come in this season and prove his worth then the Team would be better off keeping him this season....As I stated I see no signs pointing in that direction....

 

I think you're reading a bit too much into ONE comment from that link that states there are some teams that see him do one thing well and want to see him prove himself a little more before offering their 1st rd pick and Fitz money. That doesn't sound like anyone pointing out the exact same things some have said about him on here at all.

And what about the OP's linked article? Here's a quote from that as well. "Wallace is a key part of the Steelers' deep passing game. His receiving yards (3,206) and touchdowns (24) both rank as the second most by an NFL receiver in his first three seasons. And, even when Wallace isn't catching the ball, the threat of him running deep opens up the underneath for wide receiver Antonio Brown and tight end Heath Miller.

That quote seems to hold a bit more water than some random article by some guy stating teams want to see more out of Wallace before giving him a big contract and their 1st round pick.

 

I see your point that the kinds of rumours might be telling, even if they are still rumours. But I'm not sure how much stock I'll put in that. I think somehwere in another thread TTF mentioned about the reliability of these 'sources'; likewise, HugeSnack mentioned about Colon declaring he wouldn't restructure, then next week restructuring. Rumours are fun to speculate on, but I'm not going to build up a comprehensive character assasination on the back of them.

Also, I see your point about 'team-first' players and playing to protect themselves. But I'm just reminded of Holmes in the SB43 - his whole play was about him being the star. He didn't put the team first, and his off-field activities may well reflect that. However - we still won the superbowl with him. Possibly because he was so insistent that Ben threw to him. I'm glad he's gone now, but I'm just saying that having players with arrogance isn't always harmful, so long as they're managed well.

I also think we can put too much on players who 'don't want to get injured'. I mean, what player does want to get injured? I want players who play sensibly and passionately. "Wanting to win" doesn't necessarily equate to throwing yourself in front of a truck. To win over the course of a season, you need athletes in good shape, and you need them there to make clutch plays. I'm not saying Wallace is always there on the clutch play, but I don't think the evidence really suggests that he's never there. You're writing as though Wallace struts aorund like Randy Moss, giving up on plays where the QB doesn't look at him.

 

I don't think he is Moss yet,,,but if his mind set is protection 1st. to reach a pay day not from us then he will look a lot like Moss at that time IMO...We have to speculate ,but the Team does not....If he wants Fitz type money and he really doesn't think he needs another great season to get it the only smart move is to trade him.....

 

Fair enough. You're right that the team doesnt have to speculate, and I guess if Wallace is going into the negotiating room declaring himself to be as good as Fitz, and doesn't think he needs to improve at all, then that's really the writing on the wall. But from our perspective as fans, I don't think he's done anywhere near enough of that kind of thing to warrant these calls to trade him. And my speculation is that Wallace isn't doing that in the negotiating room.

 

For a "one trick pony" like wallace you will be lucky to get a 3rd. I would take that and run. Only way you will get Wallace to be worth wild this season is if he signs a long-term deal. And it seems like they are FAR away from agreeing on numbers. If he signs his tender, you will get a "half-hearted" effort from Wallace all year when you could of got a 3rd round pick who will give 100%. Especially if it is a WR. Now, Wallace is not going to wait until june 15 where his salary reduces significantly. So, you'll get Wallace at his tender price, playing half-heartly" because he is looking for a long-term deal next year and doesn't want to get hurt. Take the 3rd or 4th and be done with him.

How many players from the steelers has moved on to better careers? I can think of about two. Woodson and maybe Faneca. Chad Brown? Mike Vrabel?

Also we one a super bowl with Hines Ward, Cedric Wilson and Antwan Randle El. I think the group we have without Wallace is better than the former.