1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

MERGED-I hear Wallace quit??

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by speed, Dec 28, 2014.

  1. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    In defense of Tannehill's decision on the first example, Todd:

    Tannehill may have been looking Clay's way to look off the middle safety, then strike. But he had a bunch of bodies directly in front of him when that throw should have been made to Wallace. The safety stayed with Wallace, and Tannehill looked elsewhere.

    I do not think Wallace was the decoy, but rather, the first option. Could the ball have been fit through there? Sure, and that may have been Wallace's contention. But the look didn't fool the safety; the safety gave the look he was headed Clay's direction only to jump the route on Wallace. The middle-fielder seemed to be in perfect position to jump the play if the throw would have been to Wallace. And while it looks open in a still, I'm not sure that it is all that open in the game.

    To say he is a decoy for a play to develop over a good period of time against a Jets D that had been slamming Tannehill to the ground all day is not the way I see it.

    I see it as a play that was meant for Wallace. Tannehill did not like what he saw, so he went with option 2. I think it was a heady play by Clay, and Tannehill just happened to have enough time to hit him.
     
    brandon27, NJFINSFAN1 and Puka-head like this.
  2. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    Yes, but what if that coach were Joe Philbin, the same guy we fans had already mailed it in on and have basically mailed it in on for next year even though the season hasn't started? Would you fight tooth and nail to win for a coach you can't stand, whom you know is costing your team games, and whom you hope gets befittingly fired? Why is ok for us to be frustrated to no end with Joe as a head coach but a guy who has actually invested real time with him can not?

    Wallace worked harder on his game this offseason than most of the team. That means he's more emotionally vested and thus is more susceptible to an emotional outburst if he feels his hard work has been slighted or gone underused. All the extra routes run this offseason and in practice. All the extra running in general. How many extra, tiring miles of routes do you think Wallace ran this year to improve his route running and to get himself acclimated quickly to the new offense? How many extra, tiring miles run by Wallace to work on his ball skills? How many extra miles of sprints to condition himself better for the X receiver job in Lazor's offense? Do linemen and linebackers have to run and sprint all those extra miles to work on their trade? Does Shelley Smith have to sprint 30 yards down the field first in order to engage a block? Does Misi have to sprint 30 yards first to work on his form tacking? As the alpha X receiver in this offense, he was probably also responsible for learning more and doing more than anyone not named Tannehill.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  3. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    I always respect your opinion, but in this case I gotta disagree with it [even though I know there isn't a clear answer until a coach or player discloses what the play was designed for].

    Firstly, Tannehill is looking directly up the middle in the pic above. A fraction of a second earlier and there were 10 yards between Wallace and the safeties. With Wallace matched on a linebacker and the safeties playing back, Tannehill should've anticipatingly hit this as soon as Wallace cleared the linebacker, especially if he's the first option as you suggest.

    Secondly, Ryan was 5 yards behind his blockers, and the mass of them appear to be falling over, so there should be no excuse for not making the throw. Here it is from a different angle. Drew Brees stands on his tippy toes and makes this throw when his line is standing upright and a yard closer to him. Not to mention there's an unobstructed lane to step into if need be.

    [​IMG]


    Thirdly, how much more open in a still photo do you feel a play needs to be for a completion? It's the NFL. If it's open that much in a still, it's open that much in a game b/c the game is played with anticipation. There were 7 yards between Wallace and the safeties when he first looks back, and Tannehill's arm gets the ball there before they can make up 5 yards, especially with the frontside safety back-pedaling.

    Fourthly, this isn't Hartline we're talking about here. It shouldn't be difficult to fathom Wallace as a decoy when he's acted as one all year, and on this particular play he was sent directly between the safeties which always makes for a nice attention getter. On the replay you get to see Clay's special route that made this appear like a designed play to him, unless he pulled off one of the greatest improvisational routes in Dolphins memory while Tannehill is synced perfectly to his thought process. You also see Tannehill looking down the middle first before turning to Clay at the last second, so it seems to me like he was using Wallace to look the safety off Clay rather than looking at Clay to pull the safety from Wallace. That would make him the decoy. If Wallace were the first option, then there'd be no excuse to not complete it to him.

    What I think happened was Wallace, the decoy, quickly realized he was wide open and believed he should've been hit for the completion while it was there for the taking as he was the only open target at the time. However, Tannehill wasn't in the mindset of throwing to Wallace b/c it was drawn up for Clay, which is why Clay ran what appeared to be a specially designed route meant to buy time and disguise the play's intention so that he would emerge open while Wallace is at the apex of his route occupying the safety. But, with the play being somewhat long-developing, Wallace should've been the first option regardless because the timing of his route chronologically fell ahead of Clay's. 15 prior games of using Wallace's special speed as a decoy might've culminated during this one play where he's wide open for a solid gain or potential score but the throw goes elsewhere because he was perceived by Tannehill as solely a decoy when he should be perceived as a target first and foremost if the opportunity presents itself. Maybe Tannehill has gotten so accustomed to Wallace serving as a downfield decoy that he forgot he can actually throw him the ball if he happens to be open in his decoy state.

    I thought it wasn't until the 3rd and 4th quarter when Tannehill began getting obliterated. Looking at one of the still shots, it says Tannehill was 15/21 for 161 and a TD shortly into the 3rd quarter. Those numbers don't sound like a QB who had been under heavy fire the first half.
     
    Colmax and MrClean like this.
  4. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Man-coverage underneath with a safety over the top isn't extraordinary coverage. Sending a receiver into that safeties zone and then having someone else take advantage of it is deep safety manipulation 101. Both safeties looking at Wallace when he's the only guy at their depth isn't special either, it's the safeties doing their job on the play. It would have happened to an eligible linemen running deep.

    It's not an extraordinarily selfless act on the behalf of the guy who wasn't being thrown to, again...it's his ****ing job.

    We've seen this exact phenomena happen repeatedly with Mike Wallace on the field, and Brian Hartline basically had a pretty typical Mike Wallace half in his position.

    We didn't miss much.
     
    Tannephins likes this.
  5. NJFINSFAN1

    NJFINSFAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    17,358
    9,641
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Northwest New Jersey
    I think where it hurt us was when Gibson took his spot and ran deep routes a few times, Gibson had no separation at all, Wallace would have and Tanny's throw were over Gibson.
     
  6. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA

    To me, I look at these still shots, and it's obvious to me that Tannehill made the right decision to throw to Clay. I know Wallace looks open, and I'm sure he think's he was, and you could say he is. However, if I'm Tannehill, the thought process in my head is two LB's in front of Wallace, I have to get it over them, and fit it in to Wallace with two safeties just behind him. You're going to get him killed likely by one of those safeties. Once you see both Safeties leaning towards Wallace, Clay getting behind his guys, Clay is the obvious throw... from looking at those still shots anyways.
     
    Disgustipate likes this.
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I'm not sure why we're complaining about Tannehill throwing a touchdown to Clay instead of a completion to Wallace.

    And Tannehill was getting smashed after pretty much every throw all game. That is one reason why people are pleased with him...making tough throws even when he gets pounded after the throw.
     
    bran, 77FinFan and MAFishFan like this.
  8. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    It's sad that we have to talk about it because Wallace had to be a baby about it. I can understand his frustration at the time, because there's alot of green grass around him, so yeah he's under the impression he should get the ball. Again though, I'd think if you show it to him in film study, based on what these images show us... I think he'd see for the benefit of the team, the right decision was made by the trigger man. Even if he throws it to Wallace, like you said, it's maybe a completion, and we're around the 5 unless Mike makes a great play and fights through two guys to get it in. The throw to Clay is wide open, thrown a bit away from the safety which allowed Clay to take the steps back to his right to get him into the endzone. If he leads Clay more to his left, we're probably still down at the 5. Again, I'm basing it on the stills. I'd have to see it in live action again if that last part is the case, it looked that way though a bit.
     
  9. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    From my POV, 3 guys went into this game expecting to pad stats: Tannehill (4000 yards, TDs), Miller (1000 yards, TDs), and Wallace wanting 11 TDs and a chance at 1000 receiving yards. Tannehill was getting his, Miller was getting, Wallace was not getting his.

    All of these guys knew full well how many TDs and yards they needed for personal records and you KNOW they talked about it before the game started. Tannehill had probably assured Wallace before the game that if Wallace was open and that if the play was there, Tannehill would try to feed him the ball. On that particular play, Wallace was open, but we don't know if Tannehill saw him during the progression as from his pre-snap read, Wallace was covered and obviously drawing extra attention. We don't know the progressions Tannehill went thru after the snap, but given the extra coverage and that the OL was screening off Wallace's side of the field where the extra defenders were, it made sense to throw the deep TD to Clay in that instance.

    While I think Wallace had a legitimate complaint about not getting fed or more looks from Tannehill, I also think Wallace completely mishandled the situation and by doing so, hurt himself with his actions and his best chances at getting that magic 11th TD and a shot at a 1000 yard season. He also hurt our best chances at scoring more points and winning this game - as did Philbin by not managing the situation better and allowing his best scoring threat to check out of the game. Poor maturity on Wallace's part, but damned poor coaching on Philbin.

    YMMV.
     
  10. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    Good insight. Then again, only two of those guys (Tannehill and Miller) actually deserved whatever performance bonuses might've been coming to them for those milestones. Wallace on the other hand was underperforming with regard to his contract and didn't deserve one.
     
  11. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Actually, come to think about it why is ToddPhin holding up that play as an example of the hidden benefits of Mike Wallace? His primary coverage is coming from a linebacker who isn't even lined up over the top of him.
     
  12. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    There's no way Mike Wallace was going to hit 1000 yards.
     
  13. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    11 TDs were more likely, but then he only needed 138 yards for a 1000.

    And stranger things have happened - like Eric Decker catching 10 balls for 221 yards and a 74 yard TD. He had a record setting day as jet.
     
    Boik14 and dolphin25 like this.
  14. emocomputerjock

    emocomputerjock Senior Member

    5,649
    1,853
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    DC
    Well if we could have put Finnegan against Wallace, then I'm sure things would have went much better.
     
    GARDENHEAD likes this.
  15. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    To quote Will Munny:
    I don't care about his contract. He was never going to get all of that to begin with. None of them ever do. I wasn't a fan of Wallace at Ole Miss or in PB and I really disliked him last season, but he has been very good for us this season. Not great, but very good. I would have liked for him to have padded his stats some in this game to keep his head in the right place and to give him something to feel good about going into next season and a reason to look forward to continuing to build chemistry with Tannehill. That's all.
     
  16. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    His contribution to the team's talent and the winning culture it's trying to build comes nowhere near matching the percentage of the salary cap devoted to him in my opinion. That's someone you have to jettison.
     
  17. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    because it created busted coverage that Clay capitalized on for a TD. Watch Demario Davis after the play. He chews out the strong safety for screwing the coverage because he knew Clay was his responsibility....... but with Wallace on the field, all his attention went to him instead.

    If Hartline, Gibson, Landry, or Sims were in the slot, do you seriously think 2 pairs of safety eyes would be steadfast on them, with both safeties at a depth of 15 yards and dropping, and with the strong safety [responsible for Clay] in a backpedal off the snap dropping to 19 yards even though the receiver was 7 yards in front of him and the back of the endzone was behind him serving as an extra defender? Cmon. If Wallace isn't on the field, there's zero reason for NY to employ a 2 deep safety look. There would've been no need to go 5 on 3 to Miami's left side [which is what it ended up being with the strong safety blowing the coverage] and leave the right side 2 on 2. They could've walked that safety up or put him on Clay and then blitzed with that freed-up linebacker, and the play wouldn't have had the time to develop. Oh wait, that's exactly what they did in the 2nd half with Wallace off the field when they were consistently teeing off on Tannehill with 5 man pressure.

    So you're saying the pre-snap look showed a favorable matchup to Wallace? The bracket combination of the linebacker underneath with the safety over the top who is fairly deep and looking to stay there should've automatically clicked with Tannehill. If that's Clay or Landry in that exact situation, Tannehill is licking his chops for the easy completion down the seam, especially with the linebacker in zone quickly passing the receiver off to the safety who is no where in sight.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  18. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    Who said he wasnt happy with big Ben? The Steelers didnt want to keep him.
     
  19. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    His contract was structured to make him more appealing in 2015. http://overthecap.com/player/mike-wallace/519/

    It takes a huge dip to $9.8M next season and his 2015 Cap # is 12.1M.

    He only made $1M last season with a Cap hit of $3.2M.

    There is little chance that Wallace either finishes this contract or is here in 2016. If you figure that we only rented him for 3 seasons and average it up, his numbers are extremely palatable and works out to about $8.6M per year.

    Contrast that to Hartline, who is going to make roughly $4M over the same span for his 6 total TDs (based on 2 TDs per season) if he returns. I'd rather pay Wallace an average of $8.6M per year. If you figure you're paying Wallace 1M per TD, then that is a Hellova lot better bargain than paying Hartline $2M per TD... ;-)

    YMMV.
     
  20. Fin-Omenal

    Fin-Omenal Initiated

    36,936
    10,264
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    Thee...Ohio State University
    Steelers offerd him a pretty damn good deal, he didnt take the hometown discount and left. They wanted him
     
  21. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    The problems in PB in 2011 were more to do with Todd Haley and the changing of the offense away from Ariens deeper passing offense. Wallace wasn't a huge fan favorite there though with a lot of the fans having the same issues with him that many do here in that they thought he was limited and not enough of a team player.

    The Steelers did offer Wallace a $50M contract though, which they thought was fair for what he brings to an offense. He rejected it, so they paid it to Brown and we offered him a $60M if he were to play it out, which isn't likely. Instead, he should end up with around half that.
     
  22. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    OK, but still no where does it say he did not like Ben
     
  23. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    The reasons Wallace wanted out of PB was more to do with his rep of being a selfish player than anything else. The Steelers offered him a contract and he held out for more. They upped it to a $50M contract and he refused it.

    He held out during training camp in 2012, his final year with the Steelers, upset he didn't get the fat contract extension he wanted. Then coming in late and having his role changed, he never meshed with then OC, Todd Haley. During that season, he was vocal about how he didn't think he was being used properly in Haley's offense. Which rubbed people long and sounds familiar here now.

    After arriving here and being asked about his last season in PB, he was quoted as saying:
    But I never read anything about him and Ben personally having problems - just that Wallace was more interested in being one of the highest paid WRs than he was setting records or playing with Ben... hence the "selfish" rep that continues to follow him.
     
  24. Fin-Omenal

    Fin-Omenal Initiated

    36,936
    10,264
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    Thee...Ohio State University
    Ben, was VERY public in his dislike of Todd Haley and the offense. I don't think that makes him selfish.
     
    Boik14 likes this.
  25. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    I think you'll agree that Ben has handled his contract negotiations and teammate interactions very differently...
     
  26. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    Yes, at the time, the throw to Clay was wide open, but initially it wasn't. When Wallace hit the seam, he was the only target open at the time, as there was a corner and linebacker tightly on Clay who wasn't even working upfield [as you can see below]. You can also see that Tannehill's view to Wallace isn't nearly as bad as people want to make it out as [see the 2nd pic below]. It might not be a perfect lane that Emmanuel Lewis could see through, but this is the NFL so it doesn't need to be and rarely will be. Tannehill is right handed, not left, so we cant look at his body positioning; we have to go by his release which is gonna be along the inside of that hash mark. The pile of linemen is falling over to the left. For Tannehill to hit Wallace along the left hash, he only has to clear Pouncey's shoulder who is slightly leaning forward to his left with his knees bent, which should be a piece of cake for a 6'4 NFL QB.

    The 2nd pic occurs a fraction of a second earlier in time than the one below. Here, I synced it up perfectly with the bottom pic. At this point in time, Wallace has already cleared the linebacker [who is breaking forward to cover Landry] and has 8 yards between himself and the safety. He's pretty close to wide open, meanwhile Clay is smothered. Look at the linebacker [#52] in the 1st & 3rd pic. Harris's eyes are fixed on Landry while the receiver is planting his outside foot to break back inside into his zone. He's paying no attention to Tannehill. The ball could've been thrown by Davis's earhole and he wouldn't have known a thing. Look at the bottom image where Tannehill is at the top of his drop and should be scanning the field and starting his progressions. Using anticipation and knowledge of the routes and coverage, who is the one running into open space? It's Wallace, certainly not Clay. Who is likely the first option? Probably Wallace, and by his reaction to the play, I'm guessing he was. Aaron Rodgers hits these up the seam to Cobb for TDs every other game it seems like. Do you think Aaron's opposing safeties are playing even deeper than 15-19 yards this close to the endzone or are standing next to the sidelines with the linebacker sitting down Indian style to leave the middle wide open for Rodgers to complete these WADR? This is about as open as this throw will get.

    But just to humor this argument about Tannehill's "view", if that pile of lumped-over linemen actually is an issue, this isn't backyard football. Tannehill knows the routes before the ball was snapped. He knows exactly where Wallace will be and knows the coverage. There's an unobstructed passing lane for him along the right hash which began opening BEFORE Wallace cleared the linebacker, and by the flow of the play you could tell is wasn't about to close. If Tannehill anticipates all of this [which he should be doing], then there's no reason to not improvise his footwork by sliding a smidge to the right to utilize that lane and zip it in the Wallace while the linebacker has his back to the throw. Andrew Luck does this allllll the time.

    So yes, it was great that the play resulted in a TD, but Tannehill ignored a wide-open Wallace and instead opted to wait for Clay who was smothered at the time. If you run this long-developing play to Clay 100 times with the only thing changing is the blocking/pressure, it could've very well been a sack as often as it was completed; meanwhile, the throw to Wallace is the significantly higher-percentage option, and it was still a downfield throw with scoring potential. The play luckily resulting in a TD shouldn't change the fact that Tannehill subjected himself to a potential unnecessary sack that would've dropped us to 2nd & 20 and left us potentially facing a 50+ yard FG, and it's not like Tannehill getting sacked and taken out of FG range is a rarity in this offense. How often have we frustratingly witnessed that?


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  27. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    You're romanticizing a Cover-2 shell. Literally one of the most common coverages in the NFL, if not the most common still despite waning from it's heyday. It's not an extraordinary reaction to Mike Wallace. It is literally the base coverage scheme of several NFL teams.

    Nor is the fact that a player was challenging the vertical seam between the deep safeties drawing causing them to pay attention particularly noteworthy. That's what they would do regardless of who that player was, because it's one of the core weaknesses of the coverage shell.

    There's good reasons both on that specific play, and in general why Wallace wouldn't be the target there. It in reality would be a much tighter window than it looks, and the play was clearly designed to go to beat the cover shell through Charles Clay's nifty move to get behind his coverage.

    Why would Tannehill trust Wallace on that play, anyway?
     
    speed and resnor like this.
  28. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    We're faulting the QB for throwing a 23 yard TD (31 yards in the air) in this situation instead of going for either what would have been a first down to Wallace there as he had zero chance of scoring with both defenders over the top and the defender at the 10 marker charging in on Wallace or getting Wallace blown up. Tannehill makes that throw and there is a chance that either defender takes Wallace's head off, or he gets the INT.

    In pic 3 of the first set of pics you posted, you can see the shadow of the ball at the 18 yard line as it was already released in anticipation of where both the defenders were (covering Wallace) and Clay was. It was right play for the situation.

    [​IMG]

    If Tannehill was only playing it safe and checking down, he could have thrown it underneath to Landry or the running back... instead he threw the ball 30+ yards in the air to Clay.

    I have no doubt that as Tannehill went thru his progressions that he in fact saw Wallace coming open around the 15 yard line and that he also saw the 2 defenders over the top with 1 charging forward. I also have no doubt that if he had thrown to Wallace there, that he would have been heavily criticized for "panicking", "rushing the play", "settling for the 1st", and for not allowing the play to develop and hitting a "wide open" Clay for the TD...

    So he's wrong even when throwing TDs. lol...
     
    speed and resnor like this.
  29. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    C'mon man. The fastest starting receiver in the NFL with one of THE BEST yards per target and yards per catch in the league since 2009 was turned into a possession receiver slash decoy in Miami who now averages 12.8 yards per catch b/c of it, yet how much whining did we hear from him this year about it? Give the guy a break. Did Wallace use year 1 here as an excuse to bi*** and moan about it and give up? I mean, that's what a selfish person would do, right? No, he openly criticized his play and expressed a need to improve areas of his game and his focus. For a selfish person, those would just be words to pacify us, right? Did they end up being just words? No. He actually did work hard on his game, and it clearly showed this season, as he was an asset to Tannehill and the offense all season leading up to the NY game except for one play that he tried to 1-hand. What did Tannehill and the offense do to reciprocate? They completed 4 passes to Wallace beyond 20 yards all season and missed him deep or left him open deep time and time again on plays that Wallace and everyone else keenly watching knows should be impacting games, perhaps even winning an extra game or two that Philbin was unable to get for us.

    Getting paid to do a job doesn't change the fact that emotions still get involved, and this had to be incredibly frustrating for Wallace. It's not selfishness. It's simple human nature. It's knowing that you have the ability to directly and instantaneously impact the game and help your team in a way that few receivers can, yet this valuable asset to his team is going unused b/c Tannehill couldn't hit a deep ball to a stationary leer jet and seems to now have a psychological aversion to chucking it deep when Wallace is open.
     
  30. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    I'd appreciate it if you actually quoted the part of my post that pertains to this post of yours rather than shortening everything to a partial sentence in order to alter the context and make your argument easier.
     
  31. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    Are we actually legitimizing Mike Wallace's reaction to not getting the ball on a play in which a touchdown was scored?
     
  32. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    Grass is greener situation... Wallace had a very nice set up in PB with an elite QB with who he meshed with very well and with whom he had a great relationship. This would've been like Duper walking out on Danny and expecting to have the same results elsewhere. Not very realistic and hasn't worked out.
     
  33. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    Sorry Todd. I just deleted a large portion of it for easier reading. Not everyone is as garrulous as you and JW when posting. You should know me better than to think that I was trying to smear or misconstrue your message.

    I got what you were saying, but still think that the 2 defenders over the top was why he went elsewhere - and if he had tried to complete the ball to Wallace, that Wallace either end's up getting carted off or fails to score.
     
    resnor likes this.
  34. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    For a guy wanting 11 TDs and 138 yards to capitalize on an already very good season, it's somewhat understandable that he'd be upset if he weren't getting more targets and opportunities.

    He came open around the 15 yard line and was expecting the ball. He knew where he was in the progression tree and probably thought that he could beat the coverage over the top. The QB may have thought otherwise.

    What happened on the sideline is where it went to Hell and I put that on Philbin for not being able to difuse the situation and get his best playmaker back on the field and engaged. We still don't know the entire story, but if Philbin did bench him, then Philbin is a complete idiot.

    We play a three receiver set 90% of the time and we went into this game with 4 active receivers. Philbin had both Matthews (suspended for team violations) and Matt Hazel listed as inactive. By either benching Wallace, or not being able to get him back mentally into the game, he crippled our best chances of winning.

    YMMV.
     
  35. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    ...in a meaningless game, in which the message sent to the team by benching Wallace (team first, me second) was probably more important than winning.
     
  36. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    Meaningless only in terms of playoffs perhaps. Not meaningless to the players though. Fine him or punish him some other way...

    Think Tannehill didn't want to throw 30 TDs, or Wallace get 1000 yards, or Wake his 12th sack? Wake and Odrick were livid about the defense giving up the big plays, the busted coverages, and making Geno look like a competent QB out there while Decker had a career day... They play for pride as well.

    No one is excusing Wallace creating a distraction, just saying it should have been managed better by Philbin.
     

Share This Page