Exactly. And the notion of Wallace not being a good fit has proven nonsensical. He seems to be a good enough route runner, which was the biggest knock against him. In fact we don't take near enough advantage of throwing the ball to him short and letting him run. We've run the bubble screen for him once and it resulted in a TD. With the kind of pressure we're facing the screen game should be a staple. Instead, it's a rarity
No, I don't realize it, because it's not really true. You see specific coverage because of Mike Wallace, but the idea that basically any offensive success is dependent on the presence of Mike Wallace is really ridiculous. Nothing is dramatically better in terms of passing offense this year than it was last year to this point. We've seen Brian Hartline and Brandon Gibson have similar levels of success to what they are doing now without Wallace, or someone like Wallace. Charles Clay doesn't even enter into this. Seeing a deep safety consistently on one side of the field is nice, but it's not revolutionary by any means. At a certain point, this weird cult has to justify itself through something that is actually demonstrably happening.
Don't forget KB21, he pretty much said signing Wallace would be the nail in Ireland's coffin. And no, it's not a 5 games thing but it's way too early to start with the I told ya so's. Wallace has run hot and cold throughout his career so it's no surprise that it's happening here nor does it indicate that he's not a fit in the offense. During the first half yesterday, when the protection was good, Wallace put up 100 yards. He could have have a lot more, including 2 TDs if RT led him on the first deep ball and they were on the same page on the red zone crossing route (same crap happened twice vs Nawlins). There were at least two other occasions where I thought Wallace had an advantage but had to slow down for the deep ball and of course there were a few drops mixed in as well. The offense is struggling as a whole. The run game is atrocious, much worse than the pass protection that everyone is going crazy about. Tannehill was pressured 3 times in the first half yesterday. One was a stunt where Incognito was picked from the inside while a LB blitzed in from the outside. Jerry was beaten cleanly on a 3rd and 5 near mid-field, he didn't even give RT a chance and from what I saw didn't have the decency to even help RT up afterwards. What a bum. Number 3 was a blitz off the right side where RT rolled left and hit Hartline on the sideline on a 3rd and 10, IIRC. That's it, his protection was good for the rest of the half. Meanwhile Flacco was under siege for most of the first half, but I digress. If by some miracle the run game improves then the pass protection will improve with it and Wallace will have more opportunities to work down field. Right now the protection issues are making things difficult and there are clearly some chemistry issues between he and Tannehill but those will subside over time, over the bye week I hope.
I really wish we would have won going into the bye so my team still had a chance of winning the AFC East.
They Don't say a thing because Wallace gets big MONEY to make big catches I like the guy but he is not worth at this moment what we paid him. On a side note we finally threw it his way on this game the most so it might be a start.
Read the last two lines I bolded to yourself about 4 times. Maybe 3. See? BTW, you said nothing is dramatically better in the passing offense this year as compared to last year? Tanny's YPA has increased almost a full yard and the WR production is set to increase by the mere fact of having three capable WR's. This is a much better passing offense. Wallace has a alot to do with that.
Yes, I want them both replaced with someone better, but I am not concerned about restructuring them. They dont affect our future cap at all. Wallace is killing the cap...RJ not as bad, but hes expensive as well.
Now you are making things up...I never said "cut him after five games". I asked if there was an out, after the season, if we cut him. Or did he collect a huge bonus up front that would hit our '14 cap to make cutting him untenable.
It's not contradictory. The entire point I'm making is there is an effect, but it's not the mystical, primordial force that is being advertised. I didn't say nothing increased, I said nothing was dramatically better. Neither of those things are dramatically better, and your point is especially dubious when you've managed to find two things, one of which you pretty well admitted had nothing to do with the inherent magic of Mike Wallace.
In my OP, I didn't advocate "cutting Wallace" or anyone else right now. I asked if anyone knew the cap implications, and even admitted, that it may be impossible to cut them because of the cap hit. But if we have an opt out after the season, as we signed someone to big money, we need to give that option due diligence. There is no one on the team, besides Hartline, Fields, and the DL earning their money, IMO.
Just my natural skepticism of this team. If they had beat the Ravens and gone into the bye 4-1, I would still be able to believe they would supplant the Pats and win the East. Since they lost, I find myself doubting that they have the talent to do it. 4-1 at the bye, you probably only have to go 7-4 the rest of the way to win the East, the way the Pats are playing, as long as at least one is against NE. 3-2, you have to go no worse than 8-3 and I just don't see that happening the way our O line is playing.
You're still talking about moving on from Wallace after only 5 games. It's way too early to even be thinking about this.
Originally Posted by Rick 1966 I really wish we would have won going into the bye so my team still had a chance of winning the AFC East. Someone said they wish we had won so they wouldnt have to read a post like this brilliant OP. Rick is saying that's nonsense...you should wish we had won so we'd be in first place in our division in the bye week.
I still don't understand why people to continue to respond to the op. Stop replying and he'll go away.
Its not too early. Their are only 16 games. We are a third of the way through the season. We have to consider that Mike Wallace got over on us--that he's a fraud and he's completely overrated. Some players are only good in the system of the team that drafted him. He was taken in the third round by Pittsburgh. Hes playing like a third round pick for us. There is nothing at all special about him.
Oh okay...then we may have to deal with him this year and next. Great. A whole lotta dropped passes are in our future. ::
One of those was clearly a bad pass thrown well behind Wallace, so Tannehill gets credit for that one.
yes, that's depressing. You should give up and abandon this website for 1 year due to your overwhelming grief.
It'd nice if your boy Ireland wasn't so inept at finding weapons in the draft, then we wouldn't have to shop for a speedy receiver in the expensive land of free agency and shell out $60 mil to a guy so he can make up for the deficiencies of the "weapons" Ireland did draft
I Fist Bumped this post without first reading the opening post, but I'm sure the FB was deserved, Sec.
Of course you are right. Hartline and Gibson have certainly had drops themselves. Wallace gets most of the blame because he is suppose to be the teams top receiver and he is also one of the highest paid players in the entire NFL at his position. When you get the most money and you complain about your limited role in the offense, you have to expect to take most of the heat when you play a very average game, especially when you were the main go to target during that game. The fact is that all the WR's on the team need to step up their play and come down with some of the difficult catches in the game. It is these type of catches when separate the top receivers from the very average receivers. There have just be far too many drops by this entire receiving corp this season and that includes the RB's and the TE's.
Wait? Because Mike Wallace drops passes, I should go away for one year? Oh, okay, I get the logic. Because me talking about him dropping passes is somehow worse in your mind than him actually dropping passes. Perfect homer-logic right there.
When the season is over....I am pretty sure that I will be able to point to plenty that suggests that the Passing Offense dramatically improved. Till then, I guess we disagree.
Not way in hell, Wallace should have caught that one. It might have been behind him, but not that bad.
You can excuse dropping a pass that is thrown behind you...ONCE....but when you drop every single pass that is thrown behind you..then you can be accused of not making any extraordinary catches.
Not to point out the obvious here, but we didn't pay Wallace $60.0M for 5 games; we're paying him $60.0M for 80+ games. Obviously he's been a mixed bag so far, but we still have 75+ games left to make that big contract worthwhile. Clearly the drops are annoying but there's also a chemistry ailment that can only be cured via repetition, so hopefully those 16 targets yesterday go a long way toward it.
IMO part of the problem is Wallace only being targeted 17 combined times against Cleveland, Atlanta, and New Orleans when he should be receiving a few high-perentage, designed receptions every game like the screen against Indy for a TD. Utilize his goddam speed and some creativity for cryin' out loud. If corners are playing off to respect that speed, Tannehill should be checking into quick passes for easy 5 yard gains like an extension of the run. At least that way Wallace is catching the ball where he can quickly hit the jets and get upfield rather than being thrown all these short outs and hitches where his momentum is bringing him back to the LOS or sending him out of bounds. If the ground game is blundering then why not incorporate a Wallace speed sweep to freeze the linebackers and safeties momentarily, then give it to him a few times to enforce the defense's need to respect that option. How about a few more reverses or end-arounds with Pouncey out front blocking? How about running the read option with Wallace as the pitch man after he's gone in motion?.... or make it seem like we're spreading it out and then motion him into the backfield and run the read option against a nickel defense expecting pass.
No one is allowed to blame the receiver. Wallace is targeted 16 times, has 3-4 drops, fails to make a toe tap. "He had 7 catches for 105 yards". Ryan Tannehill doesn't hit him in stride, with a guy in his face, on a 60 yard throw. "If Tannehill leads him 12" on a 60 yard throw it's a touchdown". I give up.
On topic: As poor as Wallace has been at times, and I think he's been terrible at times, he has changed this offense IMO. Reshad Jones was getting WORKED yesterday and has been pretty awful. Sure, he made a game changing play but Helen Keller makes that play, it does not give him a free pass on how bad he's been. It's early though and he has shown he can be really, really good.
Has anyone noticed if Reshad's responsibilities are different this year after tweaking the defensive scheme following the addition of new linebackers and an alteration to the defensive front? If so, perhaps he's going through an adjustment.
Now you know why you were getting your balls busted yesterday. [video=youtube;IJ_R-G_i4Xk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJ_R-G_i4Xk[/video]
Oh, I already knew...there are always those on the internet who lack the maturity to argue a point rather than insult the person making it.
Wrong. We haven't paid him 60 yet. We have planned to pay him 60, unless his performance gives us a reason to rescind that offer. IMO, so far, he's not worth half that. He's worth Brandog Gibson's contract at best.
