Hickey And Wallace Had A Sit Down To Discuss Future

Whether the failings of the downfield passing game to Mike Wallace is the fault of Tannehill or Wallace himself is really a moot point, unless theres any consideration of getting rid of Ryan Tannehill. The two don't compliment one another, and the team would be much better off allocating resources to players that do compliment one another.

 

Problem is that is you excusing Ryan for not making those throws, both QBs you mentioned have also shown the ability to make the down the field pass consistently and well. Wilson was outstanding with these passes in the playoffs. Ryan hasn't shown that he can make these throws at all, and while the coaches and players (including Ryan) have made these statements, you still have a lot of fans that will look everywhere for a problem that is staring them right in the face.

And that's what we have here, and have had for 2 years.

 

And unless Ryan gets better at hitting these passes....they will part ways with Wallace in 2016.

 

Huh? Are you asking me why guys like Barry Jackson don't model out the potential scenarios for Miami's salary cap situation dependent on Mike Wallace's contract from another team? How about you stop reading ill-informed articles? And they've mentioned dead-money when Mike Wallace is cut - which is absolutely accurate. As soon as Miami cuts him, that creates $9.2M in dead money. As soon as he signs with another team, that offsets the dead money for that amount.

They could release him with ease, but the preferable option for Miami is for him to re-negotiate to match his value. Why do you think Mike Wallace agreed to meet with anyone? The Dolphins have the leverage here, and its because of the offset language. They're essentially at the point of re-negotiation.

Would he choose that path? Miami is on the hook for the difference, so is he going to choose $9M from someone like the Raiders over $6M from a team that he prefers?

 

Here is a fairly informed opinion on the Mike Wallace situation, since apparently everyone is in the dark that Mike Wallace has offset language:

http://overthecap.com/dolphins-2015-salary-cap-outlook/

 

Again, not saying you are intentionally spreading false rumors....simply stating that all the facts of the offset language in Mikes contract may not be so cut and dry. Again, if they are that easily let off the hook then cutting him makes a lot of sense.

 

That paragraph goes to my point....the offset language covers GUARANTEES, which is 3M for this season.

 

What does dead money consist of? Why are they suggesting Miami has leverage?

 

Mike Wallace has a base salary of $9,850,000 and $3,000,000 guaranteed.

So you are telling me that we will be off the hook completely if Mike signs a 9,850,000 contract with Minnesota tommorow???

 

There's the fantasy that Mike Wallace will be catching Randy Moss-esque bombs from Ryan Tannehill in the near future, and there is the reality that Ryan Tannehill's strengths are very similar to those of the quarterback who just defeated the league's best defense in the Super Bowl, predominantly with accuracy and YAC in the short passing game.

 

Releasing him immediately not an option. IIRC, that would put them over the cap, which would be illegal.

They would not be off the hook completely either. They would have the prorated portion of his signing bonus, which they have already paid.

The functional difference between cutting him this offseason or next is $2.2M in 2015 salary cap space.

 

When a GM sits down with a player to discuss the future, its usually a discussion about trading the player or about his contract. I think this is the beginning of the end for Wallace. If this were really a "sit down" to clear the air and to show our desire to keep Wallace, or to talk about his distractions during the season, that "sit down" would have been with Philbin and not the GM.

The fact that this sit down was with the GM and not the HC tells you all you need to know about Wallace's future.

 

Once again you are creating strawmen arguments then contradicting yourself.

I think every non Wallace hater in this thread has basically come to terms that Mike should move on, the discrepancy is some want to cut him now with no immediate plan, because they think Ted Ginn can come back and catch 10Tds.

You act as if Brady when he actually had a legitimate deep threat didn't break NFL records or something.

Tom has excellent pocket awareness and is as smart of a QB as their is, what similarities are you speaking of? Tom throws his targets open something Ryan has yet to show he can do, to have good YAC you need to have very good ball placement and not all offenses are designed to create YAC opportunities. Tom anticipates as well as anyone I've ever seen, Ryan isn't even in that discussion.

I like Ryan, but you aren't doing him any favors comparing him to Tom Brady.

 

This is simply untrue. What I have said, all along, is that Tannehill is not solely at fault for the struggles with the deep ball. He has part the blame, Wallace has part the blame, coaches with poor play design had part, and the oline had part of the blame.

You, however, seem to want to pin all the blame solely on Tannehill. It is you who is not acknowledging other parts of the team's failures which also affect the deep ball.

 

I don't think it's a given that Wallace catches 10tds next year. Receivers have notoriously varied dramatically from year to year.

 

Here is your post I quoted, if someone walks into this thread pretty sure they will plainly see you first apologizing for Ryans deep ball, then criticize Mike for why they don't connect.

It's not hard to sniff out your agenda here, you think Ryan is like the 4th reason we can't connect on deep plays so spare the "I'm objective, you're not" drama

 

Great post.

 

The biggest travesty is signing Hartline and not Golden Tate a year later.

If Torrey Smith comes cheap and we take a rookie WR ... I don't mind seeing Wallace go

 

Golden Tate would've been ideal for Tannehill and this offense.

 

He was insulted by the Hawks offer and signed with the lions for cheap. We could have made a play for him. Damn Hartline.

 

I have never listed an order of fault when it comes to the deep ball. I've simply listed those parties who all bear blame in it.

The reason you take that other post as apologetics for Tannehill, is because that's what you've decided I do. All that post pointed out was certain limitations of Wallace, which other receivers, who aren't considered really good, seem to overcome. That in no way absolves Tannehill of blame when he doesn't hit a wide open Wallace. Of course, there are usually other factors at work, like Tannehill getting planted right after he throws, or while he's throwing. Of course, it's easier in your world, to ignore those other factors, and simply point to Tannehill as the root all the problems. It's a very simplistic view you have, but you go through great lengths to make it seem as though my view is that Tannehill is perfect and everyone else is the problem. I've said so many times that Tannehill is not perfect, but he's only one part of the issues with deep ball.

 

Wallace simply does not fit in lazors offense! Truth be known he needs to go to the Seahawks! And we need to find big physical receivers who have great hands and yac potential or smaller, shifty types with great hands and route running ability!


Sent from my  6+

 

I think, I truly think, that Tannehill started to just let it go toward the end of the year and he made some progress in that department. Granted, it takes two, so props to the receivers. I hope this continues into next year.

I would like to believe Tannehill is a guy who will work his *** off to get it right if it isn't. Some guys have a knack for it, Tannehill is not one of those guys. But I get the feeling he could come away being efficient at those.

One of my buddies who is a helo pilot started golfing with me a few years ago. I am a pretty decent weekend golfer who can shoot in the low 70s on occasion when things go right (honestly, no mullies). I never practice and have only had one lesson in my life. He practices his butt off and is now very proficient from tee-to-green. If his putting were better, he would put be one the better golfers I have played with in a while, save a couple of pros I have met on the course. My point is, he put in the work, and looks like he has been playing for years. Folks are genuinely impressed when they get coupled up with us. I, on the other hand, have a knack for the game. Not that I am great or anything, but I am pretty good because I have been doing it consistently since I was a teen. He, on the other hand, busted his *** to get pretty good, and he deserves it. He is quiet, letting his game speak for itself. I kind of think this is how Tannehill handles himself.

I have questioned his leadership at times, but I think, I hope, he can come through. I was one who didn't believe in him his first couple of years, and even in the beginning of last year. Now, I see progress in several areas. True progress. We, as fans, can be a little critical, even myself. But this progress reminds me of my golfing buddy. I think it's just a matter of time before they both truly start becoming bad asses.

 

This seems like the appropriate point in the thread to again post how much worse Mike Wallace is in terms of catch radius than the guys who have consistently put up deep production:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2014/catch-radius-bigger-better

When you've got the genuinely elite guys in the league capable of catching balls outside of the numbers roughly 30% more often than Wallace has been able to, it's really the kind of thing that should prompt a degree of critical thinking.

 

Nice reference to the 2013 season...and you could pay Mike 150 million a year and that doesn't grant him tne physical attributes of a Calvin Johnson, Anquan Bolden or Larry Fitzgerald. Those who thought we were getting that type of WR? The joke is on them.

Either way, kudos to Wallace for making some strides in that regard this PAST SEASON. Here's to hoping he keeps getting better in 2015.

 

The joke is paying Wallace like one of them. I liked what he did last year, but he needs to restructure.

 

You can always Google Jeff Ireland and try and contact him to complain...damage is done just need to make the best of it.

 

Oh, I know that full well.

 

It's certainly got 2013. And 2012. And 2011.

And there's loads of guys who are nowhere near the stratosphere of Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald who are wildly outperforming Mike Wallace in that regard.

The damage is not in any sense done except for the 2013 and 2014 seasons.

 

You're right, some people are way over the top with that stuff. He's not Moss, never will be.

Still, he's dangerous in his own right and his overall affect on the game, IMO, is significantly larger than what his numbers suggest.

 

The last time he was genuinely dangerous and had a significantly larger impact than his numbers suggest was 2013.

It's just that the danger he posed was to our offense rather than opposing defenses, unfortunately.

 

Not sure what you mean.

 

Wallace's performance was flat out detrimental to the team in 2013. He was so bad you would be better giving his reps to other players.

Before that if you want to find an instance where he was particularly noteworthy either way you're talking what, 2011?

 

His QB got better in 2014, must be a coincidence.

 

That isn't even a semi-coherent argument.

Are you suggesting that Mike Wallace improved his ability to catch outside the numbers on his uniform because Ryan Tannehill got better? Because he still sucked at that when Big Ben was throwing him the ball.

 

Yeah I got that part, I was asking what you saw to make you feel that way. We only had Wallace, Hartline and Matthews after Gibson went down. Who was he taking reps from, Marlon Moore?

 

I get the feeling you don't like Wallace very much. As in not at all lol.

 

Understatement of 2015

 

He was among the worst in terms of whatever way you want to cut it in terms of production and efficiency in a guy thrust into his position.

He should have lost his starting job to Rishard Matthews, as bad as he was.

That's what happens when you judge him on the merits rather than some assumed magical upside that's going to come out of who knows where.

 

Thats a very strong opinion. I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from there, no offense.