and replace him with Rishard Matthews on the outside. We play a three receiver set 90% of the time anyway and you can rotate Hartline in. But he's starting now and he's just not getting it done. Since the 6 catches and 74 yard performance in London week 4 vs the Raiders (that was his best game of the season by the way)... he's done the following: vs GB... zero catches, zero yards... @ Chicago... 3 catches... 35 yards... @ Jacksonville.. 1 catch... 19 yards... vs SD... 5 catches.... 50 yards... and today vs the Lions... 1 catch for ONE yard! for the last five games... for a starting wide receiver in the NFL, he's caught 10 catches for 105 yards... He's well off the pace of the last two year's performances (70 plus catches for over 1,000 yards each)... currently at 26 for 266 yards. That's just not going to cut it in today's pass happy league. It's got to the point where Tannehill doesn't even look to him on important 3rd down plays in the redzone or at the end of the game (see today's game). Landry is now his favorite target and Brian should send him his paycheck for he is certainly earning more than his rookie salary at the moment. Clearly, Hartline will not be back next year, we may as well start preparing for that eventuality by seeing more of Matthews.
I agree with him needing to be benched. I thought his catch was like 12 yards. How did he end up with getting credit for 1 yard?
Both Lazor and Hickey deserve heat for their handling of Brian Hartline. You know what Brian Hartline does well. That hasn't changed, and it's fairly ****ing obvious to even the casual observer. Use him in that capacity or don't have him on the roster. It should have been worked out before pre-season. Likewise, you've got an under-performing Mike Wallace, and an under-utilized Rishard Matthews and Brandon Gibson.
Can't get open and has had trouble catching the ball of late; and when he does catch the ball he's useless in terms of getting YAC
Exactly, it is not like he has forgotten how to play football, he is not seeing targets this yr, very rarely does the ball come his way THill would rather miss Wallace deep...too soon?
He's on pace for 80 catches, 922 yards and 8 touchdowns. He's making Calvin Johnson money to do it. He's seriously under-performing.
Yup. I'm on board with this 100%. I said it at halftime today. Hartline provides us nothing in this offense. Whether that's by design, or because he just simply doesn't fit it well, or he's not playing well, I don't really care. The fact of the matter is, he's an option in the passing game right now, that provides us nothing. We have guys in Matthews and Gibson that can probably contribute. Really, it's not going to take much for either of them to contribute more than Hartline has.
Hartline was really good for us for a couple of seasons, he and Tannehill seemed to have a good thing going but he's been terrible this year. There is just no way he sticks around at his salary.
He got himself in position for a deep TD as often as Johnson did today. You can't see that in the statsheet though.
the difference being Johnson is a physical monster who can go up and get it. Part of the problem with Wallace is that his window (catch radius) is so small and Johnson's is the size of a ****ing garage door. Johnson doesn't catch that ball Thill threw to wallace today, no, but tannehill probably wouldn't feel the pressure for the throw to be absolutely ****ing perfect if hes throwing to Johnson. You can put it up there in 50/50 situation and trust johnson to get it. (It's exactly what Stafford did today on their td) Wallace would have never scored on that td to johnson today.
Dumbest thing I've read in a while. You don't know how free agency works. Period. So tired of people comparing contracts.
Understanding how it works and not being happy it happened are two different things. I know we had to pay out the *** for a wr. But did we have to pay out the *** for Mike Wallace? (he's making 17 million this year.)
He has 6 TDs through 9 games. That would put him on pace for roughly 10-11 TDs not 8. Also, Calvin Johnsons deal had 60 mil in guaranteed money…8 years 132 million and nowhere near the 5/60 mil Wallace got. I get it…Mike Wallace was an overpay. But lets not skew numbers to make it look worse than it is.
No, you can't, because those aren't suddenly going to make it onto the stats sheet. Wallace doesn't run routes well, track balls well, or out-position defenders for them. It should be pretty obvious now that the magic Wallace contributed to what occurred several years ago in Pittsburgh was just his speed. Pittsburgh's replaced him, and Miami is throwing deep just as often- just not to Wallace.
I agree. But Wallace does other things like he did today by getting 2 yards behind the last defender. That's not a small window either. And that's a catch he probably would have made had the ball been thrown closer to him.
This isn't an argument and by far and away the most insulting element to your comment is its apparent laziness. I'm assuming(and maybe being generous), that you're asserting that it's OK to overpay for Wallace because you inherently pay a premium in free agency. That really doesn't come close to accounting for the extent to which Wallace has been overpaid. There aren't many current, big-money contracts that are as genuinely awful as Mike Wallace's right now.
My error, I extrapolated off of 5 not 6 for the year. Regardless, it's pretty likely Wallace fails to keep that pace going than it is he improves on his yardage numbers. Also, I'd like to point out what Wallace is making in re: to other wide receivers including Johnson: http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/average/wide-receiver/limit-25/ Go click through the next couple years. Larry Fitzgerald won't finish that contract, and there are rumors Calvin Johnson won't either.
heres the thing, the ball was about two yards too far in front of him. but we all know damn well what happens when it's two yards behind him. He makes a terrible adjustment on the ball and more times then not it's picked because he has no ability to come down with it. Thus tannehill has to be perfect. Which is asking a lot.
Yes, I saw that last year, agreed. But this year!? Was there one deep ball that was underthrown? I honestly don't know. And if so, did Wallace fight for it? I know he didn't do it last year, but this year he doing many things much better and being more physical is one of the things.
Good post. On my phone or I'd pull up something similar. With all the problems with the offense this is officially the dumbest thing to harp about, and they do it near every day.
I distinctly remember being told that it didn't matter if you overthrew Wallace, so long as he had space he'd just run under the ball.
As far as Wallace goes, when you miss on draft picks as much as we have in the last 10 years, you have to resort to overpaying for players in FA. It appears that trend has changed with the last couple of drafts and Jordan made some plays today that show a lot of promise. As far as losing todays game goes, Wallace was hardly the problem. He got open deep on a play that could have changed the outcome of the game. His skillset is being under utilized because we don't have a QB who can throw the deep ball accurately. Our OL got manhandled today, we couldn't stop the Lions when it counted, we left far too many plays on the field, Clay needs to catch that f'ing TD and we need better QB play. I'm not going to blame this on one player, one play, one moment. this was a complete team loss today. Our offense only scored 16 points. Our special teams gave up a critical 4th down on a fake. And our defense couldn't stop the Lions on the last drive.
That's right. The goal is to give Wallace a chance to run under the ball. If he's overthrown, so be it. The problem with RT is placement on overthrows, not overthrows per se. Today he threw it behind Wallace, not in the direction of where Wallace was running, so Wallace had to change direction. RT certainly should not underthrow him because that is not accomplishing the goal, and the ball is at great risk of int. Underthrow is the last thing you want to do, especially with a QB who has trouble with placement.
It's largely on Wallace, and his numbers are fairly pedestrian in context. You're paying an obscene amount of money to chase performance that came four seasons and three offensive coordinators ago, because why? Fans have a hype-boner that they might suddenly see highlight reel plays from 2010? Brian Hartline should go unless you're running a bunch of comebacks and other routes he does well, Mike Wallace should go unless you're pulling Big Ben and Bruce Arians out of your *** in the off-season.
actually he's on pace for 11 TDs. He's on pace to have his career best in receptions and TDs. So, he's at least living up to his production that make him a marquee free agent. and he's not making Calvin Johnson money. he's making 12 million/season, not 16. expecting him to dominate like Calvin Johnson is silly. Only a small handful of WRs can dominate like that and you're not going to get one likely on FA market. is he getting overpaid? yes. but he is a bonafide #1 WR right now. you always have to overpay for one on the market. and it's not largely on Wallace. guys is working his butt off. we lost today because we couldn't stop Detroit's Dline. I do agree that Hartline needs to be benched. what this team really lacks is a TE that is a redzone threat. been saying it for months. I love Charles Clay, he's a playmaker, but not a redzone threat.
