Greg Jennings vrs Mike Wallace..a year later.

Show me a play where Wallace was "hit in the bread basket"...I'll be waiting.

 

I didn't know you needed clarification on the rest.

 

You act like slowing down a little is fighting for the ball. You show me where he fought for the ball.

 

Huh? You're the one that doesn't think running proper routes, fighting for the ball, catching the ball, down field blocking, drawing PIs, etc. are part of a WRs job since all Wallace did was run fast and you've decided he did his job perfectly.

 

Go watch the Carolina game.

 

Just as you don't think throwing an accurate ball to a wide open WR matters when it comes to Quarterbacking.

 

I do absolutely. I also know that the majority of throws that deep are not accurate for most QBs. I know Tannehill had less time to throw then most QBs. I know that most #1 WRs don't "b|tch the ball™". i also know that its 1000x tougher to throw an accurate ball 40+ yards with the entire defense coming at you, to a WR who won't even put extra time into getting the timing right.

Wallace's effort sucked. I'd be singing his praises if his stats were exactly the same except he had went up for the ball. Maybe Charles Clay will rub off on Wallace.

 

Wallace was inconsistent with tracking and adjusting to the ball while it was in the air. That doesn't mean he sucked, it does mean he didn't earn that $12 M. Not even close.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

Mike Wallace is going to be the highest paid receiver in the NFL next season. He most certainly hasn't earned that. He isn't the best receiver on his team.

 

That wouldn't surprise me at all. I wasn't a fan of the signing and I doubt the consensus opinion will ever be that Wallace lived up to that contract (even w/ a great year), but I do think that just by adjusting the timing on some of the plays that some of the perception will change. A few big plays will do that and Wallace does have a fairly special ability at getting behind the D. I don't believe Wallace will ever be the guy who consistently fights for or wins contested balls or that it would be best for the offense to force him the ball an inordinate # of times. But he is a guy that worries DCs and impacts coverages. If you can have Wallace and RT connect on a few more well-timed plays then that coverage impact will be more pronounced. At a minimum it should increase how often the D just plays you honest if you can make them pay on more occasions when they don't.

That is one area where I believe Sherman did a poor job. Early on it was obvious that some of the play-action plays where to slow developing relative to Wallace's speed. That should have been seen in practice. Changing the pattern or the QBs fakes would have helped and may have yielded a few more completions. Wallace was simply running free deep too many times that were just wasted. That resulted in a bunch of finger pointing between the QB and the WR. IMO the coach should/could have increased the player's odds of success in those situations. The coach couldn't have eliminated all of the players' warts, but he could have utilized the strengths better and hidden the weaknesses more.

 

Even with that, Wallace's routes are so inconsistent that it is difficult to develop any sort of timing with him. He won't run the same route on the same play the same way twice. He's just not a good route runner or a fit for a timing passing offense.

 

1000 yards and 80 catches doesn't come close to what Wallace needs to be producing at his price point. He is the highest paid WR in the NFL. 1400 yds and 10+ TDs should be his baseline.

 

You still dont get it

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Deep balls over 40 yards in the air? Might as well offer a 4th for this guy, he's available...
[video=youtube;zE1NpOlLB_k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE1NpOlLB_k[/video]

 

Regardless, there was still a timing issue that didn't put the players in their best position to succeed. Far too often I saw RT running through multiple fakes and having no chance to get the ball up in time. If you know your WR may shorten a route in a certain situations then you give your QB a chance to adjust to that. It's about understanding your players strengths and weaknesses.

 

No I don't. That's why I said that Greg Jennings was categorically better than Mike Wallace in 2013.

The problem is Wallace is 28 years old and Jennings is 31 years old. At some point soon Jennings will start to slow down but Wallace should still be somewhat in his prime (as much as a speed receiver can be in his late 20's).

But then again there's lots of serious talk about jettisoning Wallace after 2014 and in that case the comparative ages of the two players would have been a non-factor.

 

People really don't take account of how much Tannehill showed trust in Mike Wallace deep and how this actually benefited Wallace's numbers.

Tannehill threw the ball 40+ yards down the field at about twice the rate most quarterbacks do. Even though he and Wallace lacked chemistry (which was as much Wallace's fault and the fault of the play designs as it was Tannehill's fault) he targeted and trusted Wallace deep so much that it meant Wallace had MORE deep receptions than most other guys in the league.

Wallace averaged 43.5 yards per catch on the balls thrown 20+ yards beyond the line of scrimmage. He dropped 2 of those so he only has himself to blame for not having had 348 yards on deep balls as opposed to his 261 yards. At 348 yards he would have been averaging 9.7 yards per attempt on deep balls. This is not uncommon. As it stands even with the drops Wallace averaged 7.3 yards per target on deep balls as opposed to 6.6 yards per attempt on short and intermediate passes.

Wallace's yards per attempt was actually HELPED by how much he was trusted deep by Tannehill. Tannehill gave Mike Wallace a BENEFIT by throwing deep to him so often...and it didn't matter, because Wallace was so deficient in every other area of his game. And contrary to popular belief he was NOT always open on those deep throws.

League-wide, quarterbacks average 11.6 yards per attempt when they throw the ball 20+ yards down the field. The fact that Tannehill threw the football a whopping 36 times to Wallace deep actually helped Wallace be more efficient, even though it proved detrimental to the offense. Only Torrey Smith and A.J. Green were targeted deep more than Wallace. Greg Jennings was targeted deep literally half as much. If he had been, his numbers would be that much better than Wallace's.

 

Eh...you can only argue the Mike Wallace signing before it begins to sound like this:

There's, um, shrimp kebabs, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo, pan fried, deep fried, stir fried. There's pineapple shrimp and lemon shrimp, coconut shrimp, pepper shrimp, shrimp soup, shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes, shrimp burger, shrimp sandwich... That's, that's about it.

 

but what about skrimp?

 

I guess he should have known he wouldn't be the best WR when he signed his contract and refused such a large amount of money, and told the team he wanted less money that was commensurate with his ranking among the league's WR.

 

Which NFL teams have a passing offense that does not involve timing?

 

I'm not sure what your point is, Mike Wallace's contract vs. his contributions are a pretty central issue here, and will likely lead to him no longer being on the team in the future.

 

The misunderstanding of the WR position around here is bad

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

I agree with this.

 

The better question is how many teams are willing to totally forgo it and let it rip as frequently as the Bruce Arians Steelers offense did.

I don't think it's that many of them, and it's a pretty big part of why Mike Wallace has been pedestrian in two offensive schemes since then, and probably a third.

 

Greg Jennings in the same discussion as Mike Wallace?? Let's start a thread comparing Tannehill to Tom Brady, comedy central.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

No, this is really more about the team trying to get out of such a bad contract. I don't think anyone is blaming Mike Wallace for being overpaid.

 

I missed this.

Let me see if I'm clear.......

The only example of Wallace fighting for the ball is a game where he caught 5 passes for 127 yrds and a TD and you think that proves your point and not mine?

Interesting.....

 

You asked for one, I gave you 2.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Thank you for bringing up Bruce Arians. Guy was practically worshipped in Pittsburgh, and yea he's doing pretty freaking well since he left.

He's one of the best offensive coaches in the League with a pretty unbelievable track record. Coached WRs for years, taught and utilized a unique QB in Ben, and drew up a nice scheme for a one-dimensional weapon like Wallace.

 

This board HATES one of the few guy's doing his job on the field, but because they are scorned they praise a QB who struggled to make the plays necessary to satisfy your statistical fetish.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Let me hold your hand through this....

My argument is that the main problem with the Wallace Tannehill connection is that Wallace has questionable effort and doesn't fight for the ball. You say its because Tannehill is inaccurate.

I say give me an example of Wallace fighting for the ball, and the example you give me is one of his better statistical games for us.

Basically what you've done is prove that when Wallace fights for the ball big time results happen.

 

Again, he's not doing his job. He's doing one part of his job.

 

Big Ben had basically the exact same accuracy throwing to Wallace deep in 2012 without Arians around and people are still intent on exclusively blaming Tannehill.

Seriously. No joke. PFF had Wallace with only a 19.4 percent catch rate on deep balls in 2012. It was 16.7 percent this year in Miami. Median leaguewide catch rate on deep balls is about 37.7 percent.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc

 

Sorry old man but you're not off the hook, nice try though.

You claimed HE DOESN'T FIGHT FOR THE BALL THEN ASKED FOR AN EXAMPLE. ..I gave you one. Now your deflecting as usual. And with some accurate passes he would've had 200+ yards in that game.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Fighting for the ball in 1 game out of 16 is not a goddamned accomplishment. Nor is it enough to say he does it. You're flailing here.

 

You claimed he didnt fight for the ball. I proved you wrong. Wheres that pass in stride?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk