His lack of effort and piss poor performance certainly has me wanting to look for a replacement long term(next couple of seasons). Having said that, all of our receivers benefit from the defenses concern that he can outrun anyone on the defense. If RTH could throw a deep ball and hit him in stride, we could have a couple more TD's this season. It doesn't excuse his piss poor effort, he's a professional and getting paid a lot of money.
I think there's this fantasy that every deep ball hits the WR in stride as they go off to the races (like the Henne to Ginn over Revis) and its that fantasy you guys are comparing Tannehill too and since its a fantasy, there's no way he can ever measure up. In reality, that couldn't be further from the truth. Most deep passes require adjustments from the WR. Wallace is making no effort to play the ball. All he does is adjust his speed. He doesn't adjust his hands or go for the ball. He plays every deep catch as if there weren't DBs around him and he's just playing catch with friends. He assumes all balls should hit him in stride and he won't adjust anything.
Pot meet kettle. Mike Wallace has always been like that. He runs, catches, plays exactly the same way as he always had. The difference is that Ben Roethlisberger had an accurate deep ball, while Ryan Tannehill does not. I hope you said that 6 months ago. Because there is literally nothing different about Mike Wallace's game today compared to the last several years. Nothing. No Miami fan should act shocked that Mike Wallace is a body catcher with bad hands. He's always been that way. For several years, Roethlisberger & the Steelers were able to use his strengths, work around his weaknesses, and turn Mike Wallace into the premier deep threat in the NFL. Tannehill/Sherman/Miami have not been able to do it. Ultimately, Mike Wallace might not be a good fit for Miami (Tannehill doesn't have an accurate deep ball, and body catchers with bad hands don't do well in west coast offenses). Greg Jennings probably would have been a better fit.
Yeah...but what if Tannehill makes that throw plus at least 4 others this season? We all know the answer to that. Wallace would be headed for another 1,100 season and everybody here would be talking about trying to get him the ball more.
and just for ****s and giggles, I consulted my notes for every game.... Mike Wallace has been under thrown and one time actually OVER THROWN, on 6 deep routes this season (30 yards or more) of which there was late safety help. Which means there was a reasonable chance he outruns a safety to the end zone. Now, let's not get greedy. Just give him 2 of the 6, and 1 other completion. He would be headed for 1,000...and this board would just be mildly disappointed
Now, let's be clear. I want to get rid of him as well. But I want to get rid of him, because this coaching staff and Tannehill can't make use of him. I think we should trade two second rounders for Brandon Marshall. That should fix our WR1 problem.
That's another thing that kills me about Irish...Marshall, while having his own issues, is EXACTLY the type of receiver this staff covets... Good thing we got rid of him though. Could you imagine what would happen if we had players with questionable character or potential emotional issues? oh wait ...
For what? How does that even make sense? Virtually none of that is true. Ryan Tannehill had one of the more accurate deep balls in the league his rookie season, Mike Wallace has basically as many dropped passes this year as he does the last two years, his career seasons he caught a way higher % of his passes then he has this year, and I don't know what the **** planet you're from where a guy whom is so renown for making over the shoulder catches is a "body catcher". There's also plenty of Dolphins fans whom a couple months ago would throw their hands up and scream bloody murder over the idea that Mike Wallace was just a deep threat.
Did the DB deflect it? I thought he missed it completely and it just bounced of Wallace's arms. Just watched it again, I didn't see the deflection just the ball bouncing off of Wallace. I'm not trying to defend Tannehill btw, it was a God awful throw and he should have hit Wallace in stride BUT Wallace still has to make an adjustment and catch that ball.
Not for hitting a go route in stride (which is Mike Wallace's specialty). Other than the over-the-shoulder catches, Mike Wallace has always been a body catcher. The QB has to hit him between the numbers. Roethlisberger understood that. Tannehill, Sherman, and many fin fans still don't get it, and still act perplexed when Mike Wallace isn't snaring balls out of the air like Larry Fitzgerald. --------------------- March 11, 2013 "..Wallace is a dependable receiver, but most evaluators would describe him as a "body catcher." He prefers to trap and cradle the ball against his chest rather than snatching the ball cleanly out of the air.." http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...greg-jennings-which-freeagent-prize-will-rise
I think it's a bit charitable to call it his specialty when it appears his singular competency at this point. He can't be that much of a specialist, and it's hard to throw it all on Tannehill's shoulders when the only thing you've got to put it in context is Wallace.
Yeah Wallace could have walked into the end zone if Tannehill had a stronger arm on that play. I think we minimize the success of the likes of Clay and Matthews because of Wallace. He demands the best of the secondary and other players can step up. I would argue Matthews is producing better than Gibson, I haven't seen him drop a key pass yet.
How about just for ****s and giggles, Wallace catches just two of the balls he dropped...especially that one where he would have been off to the races?
And that's a big problem also. Sherman seems to lean on him a bit too much as a decoy. WR screens and other attempts to get him the ball in space have been few and far between, IMO.
Yep, no offense to anyone, however one can see Tanehill sucks at throwing deep passes, he is wasting Wallace's talents
He throws deep passes well to the rest of the players on this team. Methinks the problem is with Wallace alone?
And someone who charted it in the Club showed this may be more of an aberration, because the years before, and this year, shows Tanny's deep ball completion % to be fairly low. If the trend holds up, it's Derek Anderson throwing 29 TDs.
Mike Wallace is doing a far greater disservice to this offense than is being done to him by the offense.
I think there's enough blame to go around. Tannehill misses the long throws to Wallace, Mike Wallace doesn't fight for the ball in the air, the OL doesn't hold up long enough, and the OC could do a better job setting up plays that confuse the defense.
What I've seen it is THill sticking certain routes, his success on deeper throws is on comebacks and curls, Wallace runs the GO route at an Elite level, Tanehill cannot hit that throw consistently as it requires both anticipation AND throwing to a spot not a Wr. In that sense it's a bit like asking a pitcher with great control to throw a pitch out...it just feels unnatural to them
He has made that type of throw to all receivers in this team with a higher success. He has hit Hartline, Clay and even Matthews in perfect stride for deep balls. Not saying he doesn't need to work on them, just that the evidence shows his problem is more with Wallace, than with the actual throw. Even if he does indeed need to work on the throw itself.
His effort on running plays is pathetic and unacceptable. Saw three running plays yesterday that his blocking was half ***.While I knew we were not getting Hines Ward kind of a blocker, I thought he would give an effort in that category. His blocking,or lack of it,affected plays in the game.Plays that can change games! Terrible throw by Ryan on that bomb yesterday, no excuse for that. Even less of an excuse for Mike's effort on his blocking
Not so, for all of the flack Bline takes for falling down, what people won't recognize is the ball is not hitting him in stride, BLine is making sure he catches the ball first and foremost and basically has to get off stride to make sure that the catch happens Ask yourself this, BLine is a past master at the comeback and out route, why do you suppose it never turns into an out and up?
Would anyone like to entertain the idea of trading Wallace and a fourth round pick to the Texans for Andre Johnson? He will be 33 years old next season though, so I don't know if that is a turn off for most people.
Like I said in the opening post, there were at least two plays where the ball was snapped and Wallace walked forward...walked, mind you, and then stood in front of the corner. No contact, no fake....just stood there and stared at him. Both times, the corner made the easy tackle.
If it is 50/50, then its more on Wallace to fix it. All Wallace has to do is go after the ball whereas the entire offense has to change its rhythm and Tannehill has to throw a different kind of ball to Wallace then everyone else. Wallace has to be less of a ***** and play the ball and the fact that he isn't is significantly more egregious than Tannehill not hitting him in stride.
Saw exactly what you saw..Do the coaches see the same thing when they watch the film? Can only hope they see it too? Film never lies!
On "the throw", you basically have a situation where three wrongs make a wrong. Wallace's effort was extremely poor. He made no effort to come back to the ball and his body language spoke of frustration and apathy during the play itself. Tannehill could have thrown it better. If he'd thrown 55-56 yards instead of 51 yards, the timing gets delayed a little bit more, but the lack of synchronization would have slightly improved. But the play design was poor as well and that's the factor I think deserves more attention. Look at the backfield timing of the play. Shotgun snap, play fake, 3 step drop, hitch, throw. Tannehill executed the timing exactly as it's drawn up but the timing itself put Wallace and Tannehill somewhere between 3 and 5 tenths of a second out of sync because of the speed with which Wallace is able to create vertical separation and then run through a ball. Essentially even timing the drop and release perfectly, Tannehill couldn't get the ball physically out of his hand in under 3 seconds and that was a major problem because the final throw depth ended up about 42 yards from the line of scrimmage and Mike Wallace runs the 40 yard dash in 4.3 seconds. This meant the ball physically arrived at the depth in question about 5.5 seconds after the snap, at a distance Wallace CAN clear in 4.3 seconds. Did Wallace clear it in 4.3 seconds? No. He's running a route and had a jab step at the line of scrimmage and an outside release, and all of that detracted from what could in theory be a 4.3 second 40 yard dash. But given Wallace's speed advantage versus what is built into the play design, all of that stuff didn't take enough time and as a result he was ready for a ball at about 5.0 to 5.2 seconds that was destined not to arrive until 5.5 seconds...purely by play design. Could Tannehill have thrown the ball farther in order to negate some of the desynchronization? Sure. He threw it 51 yards. Functionally I rarely see a quarterback go longer than 56 yards. It just doesn't happen, and I've looked at those distances for a long time across a wide stratum of quarterbacks. So he could have done that. But the ball doesn't just magically go 56 yards as opposed to 51 yards in the same exact amount of time. You throw the ball farther, it's going to take more time to get there. You have to lift your arc higher. The average ball speed is going to diminish. At that distance the extra 5 yards is probably costing you 3 tenths of a second, but Wallace himself can cross that distance at top speed in about 4 to 5 tenths of a second...you're improving the desynchronization but not making it disappear. Short story short I saw three things wrong with the play between the design, the throw and the finish, and of the three things the throw was the third-worst offender.
Nobody is trading for Mike Wallace. I think the better question is whether Miami could give a team a 2nd rounder to take Wallace's contract off the books. I highly doubt even that would happen.
People need to live with the fact that Wallace isn't going anywhere for at least 2 more seasons. The sooner people accept that, the better off we'll be.
Somebody probably would after next year, when his cap numbers are very reasonable. The guy is still a good player. I have no doubt that if he was released right now and signed with Pittsburgh he would roast us on December 8 for 150 yards and 2 TDs. This offense just doesn't know how to incorporate his skills. That would be ok, if the rest of your offense was functioning at a high level, but it isn't. I'm tired of hearing about schemes and systems. Use the players you have and maximize what they do best until you can teach them your system or get players you like better. Bill Parcells played a 4-3 his first year in Dallas because that's what he had the players for. He didn't switch to the 3-4 until he had brought in those players. We are doing the opposite here, on both sides of the ball. Trying to fit square pegs into round holes instead of getting square holes.
Mike Wallace drops balls like AT&T drops calls... Maybe I'll email that to Eminem! Have him use that on his next album
Pittsburgh wouldn't sign him. They had no interest in re-signing him. Theres really only been one scheme Wallace has looked good in, and thats Bruce Arians' scheme with Ben Roethelisberger at QB. Thats a pretty unique situation, and I'm not sure its reasonable to expect it to be replicated.
Completely false. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...mike-wallace-essentially-dead-for-2012-season The Steelers offered him around $9 million per season. They eventually pulled that offer completely and gave essentially the same contract to Antonio Brown. Wallace gambles, correctly, that he would get more on the open market. The difference between what we signed him for and what Pitt offered is only about $3 million per season. Maybe the Steelers got lucky that he didn't take the offer, but the notion that the Steelers didn't want him anymore is complete nonsense
lol Pick a stance. Having no interest and being willing to give someone $9 mil a year is sliiiiightly different.
There's a lot of other little issues. Is Tannehill keeping his eyes down the field instead of reacting to pressure with the idea of utilizing Wallace better? Is he being forced the ball despite his massive inefficiencies? Is he ****ing up Tannehill's progressions? How much is he(and has he been) taking away targets from guys whom are more efficient and productive in terms of playing time like Matthews, Gibson, and Clay?