Lessons from the current NFL best deep ball thrower.

Mike Wallace will be a Dolphin...so, both.

 

I find it hard to imagine that there would be anyone on this forum who doesn't think Wallace is overpaid based on what he provides (particularly to this team). The problem is when people feel compelled to take someone being limited and 1-dimensional and turn that into "he completely sucks" for the sake of an argument.

In my eyes, Wallace is a rich man's Ted Ginn Jr. The more time that goes by I'm not even seeing a difference--and considering how much we're paying him it's criminal. Ginn put up a pretty nice highlight real with Pennington & Henne as his QBs. It blows my mind that we can't get at least that type of big-play potential from Wallace and Tannehill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G3OsU5TDB4

 

The Steelers got it from Wallace. What's the difference between the 2 teams?

 

Bruce Arians

 

and who's been called out by his head coach AND his offensive coordinator for two straight seasons now? Hint:It isn't Wallace.

And yet they didn't connect. Notice I said the offense as a whole had problems with Haley's play design. Ben, and Antonio Brown numbers were all affected. 31 deep attempts with a crappy play design isn't 31 quality attempts. Antonio Brown took a 25% hit on YPA. He still hasn't recovered.

Your point? Finding a QB is infinitely harder than finding a WR, so if the WR doesn't fit, he's more expendable, especially since the previous GM signed him to a ludicrous contract. If they get rid of the Ferrari because Hoke Colburn can't drive it, that doesn't mean the Ferrari is defective or faulty. Time for a bunch of Yugos.

Wallace came here as a one trick pony. He's diversified his game a bit. He's better now, than he was when he got here. If Tanny could hit a deep pass every once in a while, you now have a guy who can play the short/intermediate game adequately, and get behind the defense on any given play. That's GOLD.

But we're about to get rid of him. Why? Because our QB can't hit him. Ben can. I bet Rodgers can. But Tanny can't. Them are the facts we as fans have to live with.

 

It's pretty dumb to call out a developing player in his second and third year. Especially when the position coaches he was given in his first two years were suspect.

 

At some point Ryan needs to be held accountable, forget a stupid message board he was called out by his superiors in REAL LIFE. That speaks volumes.

If I was Ryan I would hire Pete to walk beside me at all times with a PFF print out of how well he did in 2012 when throwing to Brian Hartline...that outta get the coaches off his back.

 

Accountable for what exactly? Who in their right mind calls out your developing QB in their second and third year? Should have called him out after his rookie year because he didn't set the rookie passing record and singlehandedly win the Super Bowl. I don't mind discussing what Tannehill needs to improve, but I completely disagree with needing to publicly call him out. The defensive "leaders" should have been called out. The receivers dropping gimme tds should have been called out.

 

lol you better tell that to Mike Tannenbaum, who was non-committal to say the least.

 

When was he called out?

 

Jim Mora called Peyton Manning out numerous times his first couple of years, worked out.

 

Inbox me his number

 

About 45 min ago

 

RT17 got called out before Week 4 this year because of his performances in the last two weeks of 2013 and his first 3 weeks of 2014 were EJ Manuel-esque.

 

It's a bit hard to take that seriously when you've got a coach who is a non-confrontational nebbish who can't bear to make eye contact with guys in uncomfortable situations trying to "correct" your preening, tantrum-prone man baby.

It's almost like a trend, where Mike Wallace is a hot house flower unable to perform and the team suffers because they're funneling all their deep attempts through him.

We're at three of Mike Wallace's four career offensive coordinators that apparently can't get him right.

Sure, Rodgers probably can, but most can't.

 

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/...lphins-player-development-20150108-story.html

That's in addition to Philbin and Tannehill. If he's jettisoned the only person who would be surprised might be you.

 

If he is a Dolphin next season will it hurt you personally worse than when we passed on that BEAST Greg Jennings for him???

 

Fin, the thing is, you clearly like Wallace, I mean, you made him your avatar. That's fine, I got no issue with that, but I think that your fandom of him colors your opinion on other things related to the offense. I would love to keep Wallace...at a much lower price, in a#2 receiver role...but do you think he'd be willing to do that? I really doubt it.

 

I appreciate the fact we have a WR who can beat defenses for big game changing plays. The fact that hasn't happened because our QB can't make it happen is frusterating.

I also respect that he worked to make himself a more complete WR this offseason and it showed. Is he overpaid?? Ofcourse...almost all of our WR corp is, but why should that cloud the fact he gets behind defenses and puts himself in game changing situations???

I remember many of the same posters accused Brandon Marshall of not being very good etc.....then he leaves Miami and Davone Bess is our best WR. Some people on this board hate flashy athletes and that normally is what a good WR is.

 

Mike Wallace and Brian Hartline are both vastly overpaid, I think with a true #1 WR, whether its a progressed Landry or someone we pickup in FA or draft, we can salvage Wallace as he would be better if he had a better #1 opposite of him. Wallace is a #2 at best, and he's built for a more play action heavy offense. Hartline is a scrub, every time he catches a football you would think he got hit by a 12 gauge shotgun. He gets no YAC, and its horrible that we resigned him to that contract.

 

There are worse fates than simply being called out, ask EJ Manuel.

And apparently the Sturgis "call out" was even worse. "you need to make field goals on the practice field tomorrow...or you're gone..."

 

Joe Philbin called him out last year, and this year Lazor specifically said they shrunk the field and got rid of stuff Tannehill wasn't good at.

 

As my opinion of Philbin probably parallels yours, fair point. But Lazor did the same.

To be fair, we DON'T know if Wallace would have excelled in Haley's offense if he stayed. Everyone's numbers took a hit in 2012 under Haley.

Without a history of success with Tanehill I wouldn't be so quick to blame Sherman or Lazor, if all along it was Tanny that is the problem. We don't know and won't know.

And that's all were saying. Rodgers, Ben. Wallace is a somewhat specialized tool. He's diversified a bit this year but I don't think he's worth what he's paid. But he isn't junk either. If we had a good deep passer he'd be invaluable. But Tanny so far hasn't shown us he's that. So we are stuck with an overpaid WR. I'm a fan of Wallace and think he's overpaid. I also think Hartline is overpaid. But whatcha gonna do?

 

Sure, you could have a mentally weak QB who gets called out, and starts trying to force stuff, and implodes.

Again, though, why in the world would any coach call out their second/third year project QB, who has developed nicely, when there were clearly other units who deserved to be called out even more?

 

Because they want him to become a better deep ball passer, actually tney both hinted he needed to "let it rip" when it's there.

That list is something Ryan should have hanging in his locker, it's a list he could build off of.

 

IT would seem logical that if the OC had to cut half the play book to accomidate the short coming of his QB that he would not be to thrilled about that or the QB.

 

When did Philbin call him out?

Shrinking the field could have just as much to do with the oline or Wallace as it does with 17.

 

Bahahahaha...

"Joe, we have to shrink the field....because of this Mike Wallace guy"

Actually the should've just sent Brian Hartline deep, everyone knows that's a recipe for success.

 

My bad, I forgot, you don't need to shrink the field for Wallace, because all he has to do is get past the secondary......right?

 

Yeah, they might want that. They might actually want the receivers to run good routes and catch balls. They may actually want the oline to block people. They may actually want the defense to make a stop on third down, or in the fourth quarter. They may want alot of things. My question is, WHY call out your 2nd/3rd year quarterback who is developing nicely? It doesn't make any sense. You're acting like everyone thought it was a good idea for Philbin or whoever to publicly question Tannehill. Alot of people didn't like that. It's just as likely that Tannehill turned his game up as a result of becoming comfortable in the offense, as having to do with being called out. My only point is that there were other units who deserved to be called out much more than your developing 3rd year quarterback.

 

I've said that numerous times regarding his throwing motion on deep balls, he throws it like he is trying to turn a double play. Can we get a new QBs coach in here please?

 

When did he say that? At the beginning of the season in year one of a new offense? Every playbook is shrunk year one

 

I agree that Tannehill's throws to Wallace aren't great. However, Da 'Fins, you bring up a point that I've talked about before, and I got roundly criticized for it. On the underthrows to Wallace, I feel like Wallace does a poor job of adjusting earlier in his route to the ball, thereby causing him to have to come almost to a complete stop late in his route, once he realizes that the ball is underthrown. This is not me trying to excuse Tannehill, either. He needs to throw a better ball to Wallace. I do see receivers every week, though, who adjust better, earlier, on underthrows, allowing them to not have to come to a complete stop. I argued with Finomenal a couple weeks ago about one such ball. Wallace took an extra 15 yards after looking back for the ball, to start slowing up on his route. He then had to come almost to a complete stop on the 50 yard line to wait for the ball. If Wallace ran a 4 second 40, that's almost two seconds before he slowed down. So, I don't think it's all as simple as faulting Tannehill. Yes, Tannehill bears some blame in the deep game, but Wallace bears some blame in how he adjusts to balls, and his awareness of sidelines sometimes. It's also why I can't fathom why they didn't run Wallace on deep post patterns, where the ball could be thrown way out in front and to the side, allowing Wallace to track it better, and not have to catch with his hands, as opposed to the deep fly routes that they seemed to always throw to him. Those routes certainly didn't seem to play into the strengths of Tannehill or Wallace.

 

Maybe Rodgers can help Brady as well...

http://nesn.com/2014/10/scout-tom-brady-has-worst-deep-ball-in-nfl-best-short-yardage-qb/

Same with CKap...

http://www.mercurynews.com/49ers/ci_27128959/good-kap-bad-kap-what-make-49ers-qb?source=infinite

Huh...

 

Having that ability is kind of a big deal, unfortunately he cant throw it to himself.

 

Said tanny needs to stop thinking and just chuck it. It's been widely discussed in all of the Wallace threads last year and offseason.

It could. Aside from the fact Lazor said he took things out that Tannehill isn't good at. He didn't say the offense, or WR/QB combo. He said Tanny.

It is what it is.

 

No. After I think game 3 or 4, when he saw Tanny with live bullets flying.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...-dolphins-considering-benching-ryan-tannehill

There you go, this is when he got called out, before the game in London.