Props to Mike Wallace for his impact in the Steelers win | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Props to Mike Wallace for his impact in the Steelers win

shouright said:
You're neglecting to consider Wallace's production as a function of how much he's targeted, which is a measure of his efficiency in the passing game. Right now he's averaging 7 yards per target, which is 55th in the league among wide receivers.

Often times the comparison here is made with the Green Bay offense Philbin and company are likely trying to emulate. Right now Green Bay has three wide receivers in the top 21 in the league in yards per target.

Compare that also with Charles Clay, who is 13th in the league among tight ends.
Click to expand...

I for one never thought we'd see an replica of the Green Bay offense. This is Sherman's offensive gameplan not Joe Philbins.
 
LDaniel7 said:
Reviewed the game today in NFL GameRewind -- and I have to give props to someone that no one seems to be mentioning: Mike Wallace.

For Fantasy Football guys (and people who only understand the game via Fantasy Football and Madden), Wallace had a relatively quit game. But when you go back and watch the game, on many key plays, Wallace is the one who drew coverage away from Clay and others. Steelers were NOT gonna let Wallace win the game. On key plays like the first TD to Clay and third down and redzone plays, Wallace virtually guaranteed single or loose coverage for Clay. Pretty cool.

Really makes a difference, having a weapon like Wallace on the team, even if he's not filling up the stat sheet that particular game, he's making it possible for others to make plays. Now, if we had true gamebreakers in those other slots -- wow! Look out. Explosive offense time.

As it is, Mike Wallace is making this team better, even on one of his "off" days.

That, my friends, is the definition of a difference maker. A playmaker threat every time he steps on the field.

LD
Click to expand...

Love the post. But don't get how you can end it with if we had true gamebreakers? That Hartline catch was not game breaking? Charles Clay last touchdown wasn't gamebreaking? DT run to set up the go ahead TD wasn't game breaking? What about all those absolute first downs Nolan Carroll knocked down ? None of those are game breaking ?

Because of the way the contracts are structure, Hartline, Wallace, Clay, Gibson, are here to stay for another year, yeah we may dream of 11 Wallace's but it aint going to happen..
 
CRAZYDOLFAN305 said:
Love the post. But don't get how you can end it with if we had true gamebreakers? That Hartline catch was not game breaking? Charles Clay last touchdown wasn't gamebreaking? DT run to set up the go ahead TD wasn't game breaking? What about all those absolute first downs Nolan Carroll knocked down ? None of those are game breaking ?

Because of the way the contracts are structure, Hartline, Wallace, Clay, Gibson, are here to stay for another year, yeah we may dream of 11 Wallace's but it aint going to happen..
Click to expand...

I'm not saying get rid of Hartline or Clay or Carroll, etc -- Gibson maybe, depending on injury time, etc. Gibson was already slow, and if the injury affects his quickness, it makes him a different player. What I AM saying is ADD TALENT at skill positions. Get a legit 1 or 1A WR. Let Hartline take his place as a natural three. Add talent at RB so if Miller goes down again, we've got a back that Ds have to account for -- workhorse w. some speed, or a Reggie Bush (I can't emphasize how much we miss him, imo).

What I'm saying is that "Not bad is pretty had" whenever you want to succeed at the highest level.

I said it with Bess and got the same response from people (no offense if you were one of them, CrazyD -- I can't remember them all). And I'm not a hater. I stood up for Carroll at a time when most were trashing him. I stood up for Starks, same way. I stood up for RT, almost from the start. IF I see talent there, I'll say it -- even if it's rough. BUT if I see a mediocre player or "not bad" player filling a key role, I'll say it loud and clear.

Please note that I'm not hating on Hartline or Clay. I'd LOVE to see Hartline's impact as a number 3 -- he'd be another Reggie Wayne in that role, imo.

Nor am I asking for 11 Mike Wallaces, lol. I love this team and I'll cheer for whomever we put on the field -- but I'll always ask to improve until we prove that we can excell.

LD
 
LDaniel7 said:
I'm not saying get rid of Hartline or Clay or Carroll, etc -- Gibson maybe, depending on injury time, etc. Gibson was already slow, and if the injury affects his quickness, it makes him a different player. What I AM saying is ADD TALENT at skill positions. Get a legit 1 or 1A WR. Let Hartline take his place as a natural three. Add talent at RB so if Miller goes down again, we've got a back that Ds have to account for -- workhorse w. some speed, or a Reggie Bush (I can't emphasize how much we miss him, imo).

What I'm saying is that "Not bad is pretty had" whenever you want to succeed at the highest level.

I said it with Bess and got the same response from people (no offense if you were one of them, CrazyD -- I can't remember them all). And I'm not a hater. I stood up for Carroll at a time when most were trashing him. I stood up for Starks, same way. I stood up for RT, almost from the start. IF I see talent there, I'll say it -- even if it's rough. BUT if I see a mediocre player or "not bad" player filling a key role, I'll say it loud and clear.

Please note that I'm not hating on Hartline or Clay. I'd LOVE to see Hartline's impact as a number 3 -- he'd be another Reggie Wayne in that role, imo.

Nor am I asking for 11 Mike Wallaces, lol. I love this team and I'll cheer for whomever we put on the field -- but I'll always ask to improve until we prove that we can excell.

LD
Click to expand...

This is a thought that has also crossed my mind because I still think a #1 WR should be able to throw his body in there, go up for the ball and catch it, regardless if it's underthrown or not. Brandon Marshall would have caught one of those long balls. Having said that, I am not 100% disappointed with Mike Wallace's play any more, I am just saying that to me he's not a #1 WR. But: while I was pondering the idea of how a true #1 WR would help this offense I am not so sure it really would. Josh Gordon has had the best 4 games of any WR in history, yet the Browns lost all 4 games. I think if we can add a dependable big possesion receiver, that's all we need.
 
Spiff said:
This is a thought that has also crossed my mind because I still think a #1 WR should be able to throw his body in there, go up for the ball and catch it, regardless if it's underthrown or not. Brandon Marshall would have caught one of those long balls. Having said that, I am not 100% disappointed with Mike Wallace's play any more, I am just saying that to me he's not a #1 WR. But: while I was pondering the idea of how a true #1 WR would help this offense I am not so sure it really would. Josh Gordon has had the best 4 games of any WR in history, yet the Browns lost all 4 games. I think if we can add a dependable big possesion receiver, that's all we need.
Click to expand...

You're drawing the wrong inference from those Browns' losses. Josh Gordon's dominance did not lead to the losses -- it was simply that which allowed the Browns to have a chance to win those games.

You put Gordon on the Phins, with Wallace across from him and Hartline in the slot -- and the exact D we have right now -- and you have a playoff team IMMEDIATELY. And likely division winner.

LD
 
This Hartline is a 3 stuff is funny. Guy is about to have back to back 1000yard seasons and is considered a very good WR throughout the league. He is a 2, a good 2. Get used to it because he will be a 2 in this offense this year and 2 more years at least based on all of the WRs contracts.
 
I'm glad someone said it...

I thought going into year one that Wallace's biggest attribute would be drawing attention away from the underneath WR (which is exactly what happen) I did think that he would have had a few more big plays, but that not on him and they will come as Tannehill and Wallace get more familiar with each other. Hartline and Gibson are both good route runners, have good hands, and make the absolute most of their ability, but they are limited in what they can do. If the Dolphins cannot add a number 1 WR this offseason (I don't see how after the money spent on the position last offseason) I would like to see them add a "ture seem threat TE....Ebron out of UNC could do wonders and be a match-up nightmare.
 
Ruckus45 said:
This Hartline is a 3 stuff is funny. Guy is about to have back to back 1000yard seasons and is considered a very good WR throughout the league. He is a 2, a good 2. Get used to it because he will be a 2 in this offense this year and 2 more years at least based on all of the WRs contracts.
Click to expand...

It's as funny as the idea of improving on Bess, when he was leading the team in receptions.

I promise you we're a better football team w. a true 1 or 1A across from Wallace and Hartline as a 3.

You probably couldn't imagine someone taking Bess's position overnight and playing it better, but hey! Some people only have the ability to see when looking backwards, not looking forward on what can be. I called what would happen w. Bess's position long before it happened. And was proven true in spades.

Same thing would happen here.

LD
 
Wallace IS benefitting the team just by being there - AND - his timing with Tannehill is still not there. The two are not mutually exclusive.

If Wallace and RT ever get on the same wavelength, forget about it ... they would strike fear in the heart of any secondary.

IMO - Tannehill and Wallace need to go out in to a field alone together with a football and drop acid. ... It's the only way to be sure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Penthos said:
Wallace IS benefitting the just by being there AND his timing with Tannehill is still not there. The two are not mutually exclusive.

If Wallace and RT ever get on the same wavelength, forget about it ... they would strike fear in the heart of any secondary.

IMO - Tannehill and Wallace need to go out in to a field alone together with a football and drop acid. ... It's the only way to be sure.
Click to expand...

Thats what i'm talking about. Nothing like a 'trip' to clear the cobwebs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom