Mike Wallace to be Tendered, not tagged (1 Viewer)

[Kenny Powers]

People should face it that this is being done out of necessity, not genius and that there IS a big risk. The Steelers could very well end up in a situation where they pay him MORE than the franchise tag to keep him and then have to get back into this boat WITH Antonio Brown next year or they could just outright lose him. If they lose him, say what you want about "shaking his hand" and wishing him well and laughing all the way to picking up an additional pick, etc. If the Steelers lose Wallace, there are going to be a lot Steelers fans bemoaning the season in 2012. You WILL regret losing him.

No way this happens. Without repeating what has already been said numerous times for the most part, if teams want to get him, I think all they need to do is offer him around what the tag is longterm, and I dont think the Steelers would match it (and IMO that would be the right call). If a team offers him a deal in the $6-7M range, I would have to think they are doing know knowing the Steelers would match that. I personally think that's what he's worth. If a team offers him $8M+ per yr on a longterm deal, I think that would be enough to acquire him, not the ungodly $12M+ some people have mentioned in here.Money is of course the biggest factor in whether Wallace stays or goes, but the team/pick that makes him an offer (if in fact a team does), would also have an impact. Sure, it is most likely for a team picking after the Steelers to be the one that makes him an offer because the pick has less value, but everyone in here seems to think that's guaranteed. I dont expect it to be the case, but I wouldnt be shocked if a team picking 16-23 made an offer for Wallace (Yes, WR isnt a top need for a few of these teams, but you never know who values Wallace the most). If that did happen, I think it would be even more likely the Steelers let him go, ie they would value the 18th pick with a $8M offer to Wallace similar to a $10M offer from 30th pick.

I feel good that the Steelers arent paying Santonio Holmes $9M right now. I will also feel good if they dont have to pay Wallace $9M and get a 1st round pick out of it. I think theyll be fine with Brown, Sanders, and either bringing Cotchery back as the #3 or an FA WR with similar value.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here. Losing a really good player is not a good thing. Even for the 28th pick, or whatever they'll end up with.

People get too hung up on the magic of draft picks. He's already likely a better player than you'll ever get with that pick.

They don't just get a pick. They get a pick plus cap room.

True, but there's a good chance they get a lesser talent at WR to replace Wallace, which hurts their chances at gunning for another SB. It's definitely not a "no-lose" situation. They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?

I trust in Kevin Colbert if we lose Wallace and get a #1 pick2000 8 Plaxico Burress WR Michigan State

2001 19 Casey Hampton DT Texas

2002 30 Kendall Simmons G Auburn

2003 16 Troy Polamalu DB USC

2004 11 Ben Roethlisberger QB Miami (OH)

2005 30 Heath Miller TE Virginia

2006 25 Santonio Holmes WR Ohio State

2007 15 Lawrence Timmons LB Florida State

2008 23 Rashard Mendenhall RB Illinois

2009 32 Evander Hood DT Missouri

2010 18 Maurkice Pouncey C/G Florida

2011 31 Cameron Heyward DE Ohio State

Im also not so sure the WR corps would be better longterm by signing Wallace at what most expect to be $9M this year but not being able to retain Brown and Sanders next year

 

[Kenny Powers]

I am curious, do Steelers fans here think Deshawn Jackson is better than Mike Wallce? Or do they think the steelers are just more savy than the Eagles?

I do actually think DJax is a better WR, by a small but distinct margin, but considering he fits the diva mold of a WR and is somewhat of a headache, Id probably rather have Wallace.As mentioned earlier though, different situations as DJax was a UFA and Wallace is a RFA.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?

What if they franchise tag Wallace, pay him nearly 10 million this season, negotiate a long term-deal in the offseason that gives him what amounts to 9+million against the cap for 4-5 years to keep him around, thus eliminating them resigning Brown as RFA in '13(and maybe Sanders too)....and then Wallace blows a knee in this first week of TC next year, then what? You can play the "what if" game until the world stops turning. It's counterproductive/pointless. The Steelers have put a valuation on Mike, whether it's wholly being forced upon them by cap ramifications or otherwise, and they aren't likely to exceed it. At least they haven't done anything like that in similar situations in the past, sometimes when it has involved better players.There isn't a "no lose" situation here for Pittsburgh, but neither is there an "only lose" situation, as seems to be the commonly held opinion.

 

[inzanitee]

They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?

What if they franchise tag Wallace, pay him nearly 10 million this season, negotiate a long term-deal in the offseason that gives him what amounts to 9+million against the cap for 4-5 years to keep him around, thus eliminating them resigning Brown as RFA in '13(and maybe Sanders too)....and then Wallace blows a knee in this first week of TC next year, then what? You can play the "what if" game until the world stops turning. It's counterproductive/pointless. The Steelers have put a valuation on Mike, whether it's wholly being forced upon them by cap ramifications or otherwise, and they aren't likely to exceed it. At least they haven't done anything like that in similar situations in the past, sometimes when it has involved better players.There isn't a "no lose" situation here for Pittsburgh, but neither is there an "only lose" situation, as seems to be the commonly held opinion.

Some people in this thread are saying it's a "no lose" situation with Wallace, with clearly isn't the case. They can lose. They could also lose if they pay Wallace. You can play the "what if" game all day long, but anyone saying it's a "can't lose" seems incredibly strange to me.

 

[Crazysight]

Losing Wallace is a loss, plain and simple, and that goes doubly so if he should happen to end up in Cincy. Pitt lost mendenhall at the end of last season and it can ill afford to lose its biggest playmaker, That however may be inevitable as Wallace wants to get paid.

 

[Crazysight]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here. Losing a really good player is not a good thing. Even for the 28th pick, or whatever they'll end up with.

People get too hung up on the magic of draft picks. He's already likely a better player than you'll ever get with that pick.

They don't just get a pick. They get a pick plus cap room.

True, but there's a good chance they get a lesser talent at WR to replace Wallace, which hurts their chances at gunning for another SB. It's definitely not a "no-lose" situation. They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?

I trust in Kevin Colbert if we lose Wallace and get a #1 pick2000 8 Plaxico Burress WR Michigan State

2001 19 Casey Hampton DT Texas

2002 30 Kendall Simmons G Auburn

2003 16 Troy Polamalu DB USC

2004 11 Ben Roethlisberger QB Miami (OH)

2005 30 Heath Miller TE Virginia

2006 25 Santonio Holmes WR Ohio State

2007 15 Lawrence Timmons LB Florida State

2008 23 Rashard Mendenhall RB Illinois

2009 32 Evander Hood DT Missouri

2010 18 Maurkice Pouncey C/G Florida

2011 31 Cameron Heyward DE Ohio State

Im also not so sure the WR corps would be better longterm by signing Wallace at what most expect to be $9M this year but not being able to retain Brown and Sanders next year

Plax had 273 yards with no TDs his rookie year, this from a guy picked 1.08. Holmes did better with 824, but had only 2 touchdowns. Even if the pick doesn't bust, rookie wideouts often need a year to acclimate to the NFL before they truly start producing, so its a real gamble to assume that void could be filled this year simply by drafting a rookie.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here. Losing a really good player is not a good thing. Even for the 28th pick, or whatever they'll end up with.

People get too hung up on the magic of draft picks. He's already likely a better player than you'll ever get with that pick.

They don't just get a pick. They get a pick plus cap room.

True, but there's a good chance they get a lesser talent at WR to replace Wallace, which hurts their chances at gunning for another SB. It's definitely not a "no-lose" situation. They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?

I trust in Kevin Colbert if we lose Wallace and get a #1 pick2000 8 Plaxico Burress WR Michigan State

2001 19 Casey Hampton DT Texas

2002 30 Kendall Simmons G Auburn

2003 16 Troy Polamalu DB USC

2004 11 Ben Roethlisberger QB Miami (OH)

2005 30 Heath Miller TE Virginia

2006 25 Santonio Holmes WR Ohio State

2007 15 Lawrence Timmons LB Florida State

2008 23 Rashard Mendenhall RB Illinois

2009 32 Evander Hood DT Missouri

2010 18 Maurkice Pouncey C/G Florida

2011 31 Cameron Heyward DE Ohio State

Im also not so sure the WR corps would be better longterm by signing Wallace at what most expect to be $9M this year but not being able to retain Brown and Sanders next year

Plax had 273 yards with no TDs his rookie year, this from a guy picked 1.08. Holmes did better with 824, but had only 2 touchdowns. Even if the pick doesn't bust, rookie wideouts often need a year to acclimate to the NFL before they truly start producing, so its a real gamble to assume that void could be filled this year simply by drafting a rookie.

Where did I say theyre going to draft a WR with that pick? No way they use the pick on a WR. If they lose Wallace, they will almost certainly bring back Cotchery or another FA in his price range to be the #3 WR.

 

[fatness]

I think theyll be fine with Brown, Sanders, and either bringing Cotchery back as the #3 or an FA WR with similar value.

That would be a significant step down from Wallace, Brown, and Sanders/Cotchery.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I think theyll be fine with Brown, Sanders, and either bringing Cotchery back as the #3 or an FA WR with similar value.

That would be a significant step down from Wallace, Brown, and Sanders/Cotchery.

Of course, but saving $10M in cap space and getting another #1 pick is a huge gain for the rest of the team. For the Steelers, I think Wallace is more a luxury than a necessity, and they would be better off with the extra cap room (considering their situation this year and the future) and #1 pick to fill their holes/age issues.

 

[Grid71]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here. Losing a really good player is not a good thing. Even for the 28th pick, or whatever they'll end up with. People get too hung up on the magic of draft picks. He's already likely a better player than you'll ever get with that pick.

They don't just get a pick. They get a pick plus cap room.

True, but there's a good chance they get a lesser talent at WR to replace Wallace, which hurts their chances at gunning for another SB. It's definitely not a "no-lose" situation. They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?

Not sure why you are saying "no-lose" situation. It's more like the Steelers will at least get decent compensation for losing a great player. Would prefer to keep him at a reasonable price, but if the market is willing to "over-pay" by Pittsburgh's standards, then so be it. It's called prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

I wonder if the Stevie Johnson contract is going to color what types of offers Wallace will receive?

It should. They're really very similar players, both in age and production. I think Wallace's agent will have a hard time convincing a lot of teams that Wallace is two/three million a year better than Stevie(if that's the kind of deal he's truly going to be looking for, as rumored).

It only takes one team, I guess, but now there is at least a "comp" for teams to point at if Bus Cook comes knocking and starts demanding upwards of 9 million a season for Mike's services.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?

What if they franchise tag Wallace, pay him nearly 10 million this season, negotiate a long term-deal in the offseason that gives him what amounts to 9+million against the cap for 4-5 years to keep him around, thus eliminating them resigning Brown as RFA in '13(and maybe Sanders too)....and then Wallace blows a knee in this first week of TC next year, then what? You can play the "what if" game until the world stops turning. It's counterproductive/pointless. The Steelers have put a valuation on Mike, whether it's wholly being forced upon them by cap ramifications or otherwise, and they aren't likely to exceed it. At least they haven't done anything like that in similar situations in the past, sometimes when it has involved better players.

There isn't a "no lose" situation here for Pittsburgh, but neither is there an "only lose" situation, as seems to be the commonly held opinion.

Some people in this thread are saying it's a "no lose" situation with Wallace, with clearly isn't the case. They can lose. They could also lose if they pay Wallace. You can play the "what if" game all day long, but anyone saying it's a "can't lose" seems incredibly strange to me.

Well I was one that said "almost a no lose situation" and even that probably wasn't worded the best way that I could.Basically w/o the crazy extrapolations some people want to apply there's basically 3 scenarios that can directly arise out of the Steelers applying the tender tag, instead of the franchise tag:

1. Best Case Scenario: No team offers Wallace a contract because they don't want to lose a first round pick and Pittsburgh retains his services at a very reasonable $2.7 MM contract.

2. Middle Scenario: A team offers a contract somewhere bewtween the $2.7 MM and the $9 MM franchise tag figure. The Steelers match and retain Wallace at a price they were willing to pay.

3. Worst Case Scenario: A teams signs Wallace to a contract beyond what Pittsburgh is willing to pay. Pitssburgh loses Wallace, but gain an extra first round pick and some cap flexibility that can be used to fill any hole they wish.

When No. 3 is a "worst case scenario" (once again this is only discussing the immediate results of the initial action and not the endless possibilities that can arise under any of the above scenarios) that isn't as bad as some people want to crack it up to be.

 

[Bojang0301]

Steelers arn't out of the woods yet but Welker being tagged sure helps. There is still a market though with Stevie Johnson, Welker and DJax off the market thus far.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Steelers arn't out of the woods yet but Welker being tagged sure helps. There is still a market though with Stevie Johnson, Welker and DJax off the market thus far.

Bowe was tagged also.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

A few teams rumored as potential landing spots tagging their own players helps(NE, Baltimore).

I still feel the 49ers represent the biggest threat.

 

[Hoosier16]

When No. 3 is a "worst case scenario" (once again this is only discussing the immediate results of the initial action and not the endless possibilities that can arise under any of the above scenarios) that isn't as bad as some people want to crack it up to be.

Until you realize the Steelers offense consists of Brown, Sanders, Cotchery, and Redman (or Dwyer) next year.

 

[Return of the Sheep]

If I were a divisional rival, say the Ravens, I would offer Wallace a contract that would be high, but yet low enough (6-9mil) to where the Steelers wouldn't be able to let him go so cheaply, and in turn end up using a lot of their cap. This would then kill them in free agency. I know they don't bring many guys in, but with all the cuts I expect them to fill some needs with some value pickups. Losing the cap would put them in a bad position going into this year. I think this would be the worst case scenario.

 

[Kenny Powers]

If I were a divisional rival, say the Ravens, I would offer Wallace a contract that would be high, but yet low enough (6-9mil) to where the Steelers wouldn't be able to let him go so cheaply, and in turn end up using a lot of their cap. This would then kill them in free agency. I know they don't bring many guys in, but with all the cuts I expect them to fill some needs with some value pickups. Losing the cap would put them in a bad position going into this year. I think this would be the worst case scenario.

I dont know the in and outs of the cap, but I think BAL would have to offer something over multiple years. If they did this and the Steelers didnt match, it would really strap them.Also, I think Im the only person here saying Wallace will get an offer from elsewhere in the $6-7M range. I expect he either gets much bigger than that or nothing

 

[Kenny Powers]

When No. 3 is a "worst case scenario" (once again this is only discussing the immediate results of the initial action and not the endless possibilities that can arise under any of the above scenarios) that isn't as bad as some people want to crack it up to be.

Until you realize the Steelers offense consists of Brown, Sanders, Cotchery, and Redman (or Dwyer) next year.

Until you realize Ben Roethlisberger is this team's QB

 

[Tackling Dummies]

If I were a divisional rival, say the Ravens, I would offer Wallace a contract that would be high, but yet low enough (6-9mil) to where the Steelers wouldn't be able to let him go so cheaply, and in turn end up using a lot of their cap. This would then kill them in free agency. I know they don't bring many guys in, but with all the cuts I expect them to fill some needs with some value pickups. Losing the cap would put them in a bad position going into this year. I think this would be the worst case scenario.

I dont know the in and outs of the cap, but I think BAL would have to offer something over multiple years. If they did this and the Steelers didnt match, it would really strap them.Also, I think Im the only person here saying Wallace will get an offer from elsewhere in the $6-7M range. I expect he either gets much bigger than that or nothing

Shoot, 6-7M for Wallace is a massive value, I'd give him that in a nano second. A much inferior WR (Stevie Johnson) got 5/36M w/ 19M guaranteed, so set the bar higher for Wallace. . In no world does Wallace get nothing, the pick and salary is worth it for a ascending talent like Wallace.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

A much inferior WR (Stevie Johnson) got 5/36M w/ 19M guaranteed, so set the bar higher for Wallace.

I don't know that Johnson is "much inferior." It is not like Wallace has no flaws.Plus, "setting the bar higher for Wallace" could, technically, just mean 8.5 million a year for 3 years and 6.5 million for the two years following that....and in all honesty, 8 million per is probably about the ceiling for what Mike is worth at this stage of his career. I think Pittsburgh will make a strong push to match most anything that's under $9 million. If a team wants him they're likely going to have to pay him as if he's elite.

When No. 3 is a "worst case scenario" (once again this is only discussing the immediate results of the initial action and not the endless possibilities that can arise under any of the above scenarios) that isn't as bad as some people want to crack it up to be.

Until you realize the Steelers offense consists of Brown, Sanders, Cotchery, and Redman (or Dwyer) next year.

Until you realize Ben Roethlisberger is this team's QB

And until you realize that removing Wallace from the equation doesn't preclude Pittsburgh from replacing him with another FA wideout. They are not being forced to chose between only "Wallace/Brown/Sanders" or "Brown/Sanders/Cotchery."

 

[The Hank]

VJax is still out there and he doesnt cost a 1st rder to secure his services. I think SF will go after him first.

 

[Jason Wood]

With DeSean Jackson, Dwayne Bowe and Wes Welker tagged, and Steve Johnson re-signed, I would think the chances Wallace gets signed are much higher now.

Vincent Jackson appears to be the #1 option in the market if you listen to the talking heads, although I probably would prefer Wallace all things being equal. You've also got Marques Colston out there, who isn't of Wallace's caliber (IMHO), but comes without the cost of a 1st round pick.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

A much inferior WR (Stevie Johnson) got 5/36M w/ 19M guaranteed, so set the bar higher for Wallace.

I don't know that Johnson is "much inferior." It is not like Wallace has no flaws.Plus, "setting the bar higher for Wallace" could, technically, just mean 8.5 million a year for 3 years and 6.5 million for the two years following that....and in all honesty, 8 million per is probably about the ceiling for what Mike is worth at this stage of his career.

I think Pittsburgh will make a strong push to match most anything that's under $9 million. If a team wants him they're likely going to have to pay him as if he's elite.

There's no question that Stevie Johnson is inferior to Wallace, it's a matter of the getting out the measuring tape and seeing how far Johnson is behind Wallace. It's not "as if" he's elite, he is. To be transparant, I've liked PIT since Bradshaw, Swann, Lambert, so I'm not taking potshots at them. 2011 WR rankings

2010 WR rankings

 

[Kenny Powers]

If I were a divisional rival, say the Ravens, I would offer Wallace a contract that would be high, but yet low enough (6-9mil) to where the Steelers wouldn't be able to let him go so cheaply, and in turn end up using a lot of their cap. This would then kill them in free agency. I know they don't bring many guys in, but with all the cuts I expect them to fill some needs with some value pickups. Losing the cap would put them in a bad position going into this year. I think this would be the worst case scenario.

I dont know the in and outs of the cap, but I think BAL would have to offer something over multiple years. If they did this and the Steelers didnt match, it would really strap them.Also, I think Im the only person here saying Wallace will get an offer from elsewhere in the $6-7M range. I expect he either gets much bigger than that or nothing

Shoot, 6-7M for Wallace is a massive value, I'd give him that in a nano second. A much inferior WR (Stevie Johnson) got 5/36M w/ 19M guaranteed, so set the bar higher for Wallace. . In no world does Wallace get nothing, the pick and salary is worth it for a ascending talent like Wallace.

I didnt really make the point I wanted to last night. What I meant, and said in a previous post, was that any team team offering Wallace 6-7M would seemingly be doing so knowing the Steelers will match it. As for the Ravens, I dont know if they will even have the cap space after franchising Rice, and needing to sign Flacco, Grubbs, and RFA Lardarius Webb. If they do have the space, and made an offer like the OP proposed and the Steelers didnt match it, theyd get a good player but almost wasting cap space to do it to spite their rival. Especially since they already have their deep threat in Torrey Smith.And I agree with 5-ish and think Stevie and Wallace are/should be similarly valued WRs. I personally dont think Wallace is worth much more than what Johnson got, although in the hands of Todd Haley maybe we will see a more complete WR. On the other hand, despite being young I wouldnt necessarily call him an ascending talent. For all we know he already peaked, example A being the Wallace vs VJax thread this past year where many people expected Wallace to improve upon his 2010 numbers however he didnt match those yards or TDs this past year despite having more receptions.

 

[Bad_Mo]

I am curious, do Steelers fans here think Deshawn Jackson is better than Mike Wallce? Or do they think the steelers are just more savy than the Eagles?

Desean Jackson is a UFA that will leave without compensation if the Eagles don't tag him. Mike Wallace is a RFA. Using that RFA designation will cost the Steelers $7 million less than a franchise tag. The high RFA tender also allows the Steelers time to match an offer or receive a 1st round pick. Totally different situations.

fair enoughquestion withdrawn

LOL...I just found this very funny.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

If I were a divisional rival, say the Ravens, I would offer Wallace a contract that would be high, but yet low enough (6-9mil) to where the Steelers wouldn't be able to let him go so cheaply, and in turn end up using a lot of their cap. This would then kill them in free agency. I know they don't bring many guys in, but with all the cuts I expect them to fill some needs with some value pickups. Losing the cap would put them in a bad position going into this year. I think this would be the worst case scenario.

NFL teams don't play Russian Roulette - anyone that offers Wallace a contract, will do so knowing that there's a good chance they may end up him. This isn't a fantasy auction where you are only making a bid hoping to bump up the money spent so you can get a bargain later in the draft. Baltimore could end up with serious egg on their face in that situation, giving away a first roun pick while burdening themselves with something they don't need (I'm not necessarily saying they don't need Wallace, but may need those resources elsewhere).I think that any offer tendered to Wallace will be designed in such a way that Pittsburgh can not match it.

 

[Hoosier16]

When No. 3 is a "worst case scenario" (once again this is only discussing the immediate results of the initial action and not the endless possibilities that can arise under any of the above scenarios) that isn't as bad as some people want to crack it up to be.

Until you realize the Steelers offense consists of Brown, Sanders, Cotchery, and Redman (or Dwyer) next year.

Until you realize Ben Roethlisberger is this team's QB

Yes, but I didn't realize he could run and catch also.

And until you realize that removing Wallace from the equation doesn't preclude Pittsburgh from replacing him with another FA wideout. They are not being forced to chose between only "Wallace/Brown/Sanders" or "Brown/Sanders/Cotchery."

Of course not, but do you think they'll get someone in FA the quality of Wallace at a discounted price? Likely, the players of his quality are going to cause the same cap problems.

 

[Kenny Powers]

When No. 3 is a "worst case scenario" (once again this is only discussing the immediate results of the initial action and not the endless possibilities that can arise under any of the above scenarios) that isn't as bad as some people want to crack it up to be.

Until you realize the Steelers offense consists of Brown, Sanders, Cotchery, and Redman (or Dwyer) next year.

Until you realize Ben Roethlisberger is this team's QB

Yes, but I didn't realize he could run and catch also.

And until you realize that removing Wallace from the equation doesn't preclude Pittsburgh from replacing him with another FA wideout. They are not being forced to chose between only "Wallace/Brown/Sanders" or "Brown/Sanders/Cotchery."

Of course not, but do you think they'll get someone in FA the quality of Wallace at a discounted price? Likely, the players of his quality are going to cause the same cap problems.

They dont need a WR of his quality to keep this a top 10 offense. They would need a dependable WR3.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

It's not "as if" he's elite, he is. To be transparant, I've liked PIT since Bradshaw, Swann, Lambert, so I'm not taking potshots at them.

I will respectfully agree to disagree. I'm a 30+ year Steelers fan, so I'm certainly not taking potshots at Wallace either....but he's not elite. Elite players don't disappear for half a season and only run a couple routes.Wallace is a good WR. Johnson is a good WR. Mike is better than Johnson, I'm not arguing that, but I don't see some Great Divide between the two of them at all.

 

[duaneok66]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

Perhaps. We will see though. Certainly the bottom feeders wont give up a high first rounder to sign him. But some teams drafting in the lower levels of round one will be interested.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

Really ?I think a couple of teams with mid to low draft picks and cap space will DEFINITELY make a big offer to Wallace.

 

[Return of the Sheep]

If I were a divisional rival, say the Ravens, I would offer Wallace a contract that would be high, but yet low enough (6-9mil) to where the Steelers wouldn't be able to let him go so cheaply, and in turn end up using a lot of their cap. This would then kill them in free agency. I know they don't bring many guys in, but with all the cuts I expect them to fill some needs with some value pickups. Losing the cap would put them in a bad position going into this year. I think this would be the worst case scenario.

NFL teams don't play Russian Roulette - anyone that offers Wallace a contract, will do so knowing that there's a good chance they may end up him. This isn't a fantasy auction where you are only making a bid hoping to bump up the money spent so you can get a bargain later in the draft. Baltimore could end up with serious egg on their face in that situation, giving away a first roun pick while burdening themselves with something they don't need (I'm not necessarily saying they don't need Wallace, but may need those resources elsewhere).I think that any offer tendered to Wallace will be designed in such a way that Pittsburgh can not match it.

I agree that something like that would be a possibility, and that would be why they would have to have some very good info as to how high the Steelers are prepared to go. Or you could throw in the Pats and have them pull a similar move, driving up the cost for pitt or coming away with a great deal on a top WR. I actually can see multiple low offers (pats,SF,Cin) with the hope of stealing Wallace away.

 

[Return of the Sheep]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

I think any deal that offers him more money than he is tendered for this year will lead him to sign on the dotted line. If the Steelers don't match, I think he is gone.

 

[Kenny Powers]

If I were a divisional rival, say the Ravens, I would offer Wallace a contract that would be high, but yet low enough (6-9mil) to where the Steelers wouldn't be able to let him go so cheaply, and in turn end up using a lot of their cap. This would then kill them in free agency. I know they don't bring many guys in, but with all the cuts I expect them to fill some needs with some value pickups. Losing the cap would put them in a bad position going into this year. I think this would be the worst case scenario.

NFL teams don't play Russian Roulette - anyone that offers Wallace a contract, will do so knowing that there's a good chance they may end up him. This isn't a fantasy auction where you are only making a bid hoping to bump up the money spent so you can get a bargain later in the draft. Baltimore could end up with serious egg on their face in that situation, giving away a first roun pick while burdening themselves with something they don't need (I'm not necessarily saying they don't need Wallace, but may need those resources elsewhere).I think that any offer tendered to Wallace will be designed in such a way that Pittsburgh can not match it.

I agree that something like that would be a possibility, and that would be why they would have to have some very good info as to how high the Steelers are prepared to go. Or you could throw in the Pats and have them pull a similar move, driving up the cost for pitt or coming away with a great deal on a top WR. I actually can see multiple low offers (pats,SF,Cin) with the hope of stealing Wallace away.

Im not sure what amount is "low" for you, but a "low" offer wont land anyone Wallace besides Pittsburgh.

 

[Cookiemonster]

If I'm Pitt, I like $7M off my cap and signing Fleener for $2M/yr. Brown, Sanders, Cotch, Miller and Fleener could work. As could Brown, Sanders, Miller, Fleener and Redmon. If I get Wallace for < $7M/yr, I'm cool with that too.

ETA - Barron would also be nice. Polo and Clark can't last much longer the way they play, assuming the team giving the 1st is in the 20-25 range.

 

[Kenny Powers]

If I'm Pitt, I like $7M off my cap and signing Fleener for $2M/yr. Brown, Sanders, Cotch, Miller and Fleener could work. As could Brown, Sanders, Miller, Fleener and Redmon. If I get Wallace for < $7M/yr, I'm cool with that too.ETA - Barron would also be nice. Polo and Clark can't last much longer the way they play, assuming the team giving the 1st is in the 20-25 range.

The last thing the Steelers need to do is take a TE in the 1st round

 

[Godsbrother]

If I'm Pitt, I like $7M off my cap and signing Fleener for $2M/yr. Brown, Sanders, Cotch, Miller and Fleener could work. As could Brown, Sanders, Miller, Fleener and Redmon. If I get Wallace for < $7M/yr, I'm cool with that too.ETA - Barron would also be nice. Polo and Clark can't last much longer the way they play, assuming the team giving the 1st is in the 20-25 range.

The last thing the Steelers need to do is take a TE in the 1st round

Heath is under utilized, Saunders will be missing the 4 weeks of the season and Johnson is a below-average receiving TE. They could use another quality TE but I agree there are far too many other pressing needs at other positions to worry about TE.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

If I'm Pitt, I like $7M off my cap and signing Fleener for $2M/yr. Brown, Sanders, Cotch, Miller and Fleener could work. As could Brown, Sanders, Miller, Fleener and Redmon. If I get Wallace for < $7M/yr, I'm cool with that too.

ETA - Barron would also be nice. Polo and Clark can't last much longer the way they play, assuming the team giving the 1st is in the 20-25 range.

The Steelers are not paying Wallace 7M.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

I think any deal that offers him more money than he is tendered for this year will lead him to sign on the dotted line. If the Steelers don't match, I think he is gone.

Maybe if it is a one year deal, but he isn't signing anything long term unless it is big.

 

[Touchdown There]

It's not "as if" he's elite, he is. To be transparant, I've liked PIT since Bradshaw, Swann, Lambert, so I'm not taking potshots at them.

I will respectfully agree to disagree. I'm a 30+ year Steelers fan, so I'm certainly not taking potshots at Wallace either....but he's not elite. Elite players don't disappear for half a season and only run a couple routes.

Wallace did not disappear, Big Ben could not hit him deep because of his ankle. Wallace is elite.

 

[Touchdown There]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

Really ?I think a couple of teams with mid to low draft picks and cap space will DEFINITELY make a big offer to Wallace.

The 49ers are expected to make him an offer of 9.5 million for 2012. Another team will trump that. If the Steelers could not afford the franchise tag, then they are not going to be able to match the offers coming in.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

I think any deal that offers him more money than he is tendered for this year will lead him to sign on the dotted line. If the Steelers don't match, I think he is gone.

He's not going to sign a low offer. He's better off signing the tender and being a UFA next season where he can sign a big offer.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I am shocked by how poorly people understand this situation. Another team has to make an offer to Wallace that he wants to sign. He isn't going to sign a deal unless it is big. It is hard to see anybody making an offer big enough and giving up their pick.

Really ?I think a couple of teams with mid to low draft picks and cap space will DEFINITELY make a big offer to Wallace.

The 49ers are expected to make him an offer of 9.5 million for 2012. Another team will trump that. If the Steelers could not afford the franchise tag, then they are not going to be able to match the offers coming in.

What you linked does not say that:

According to CSN Bay Area's Matt Maiocco, the 49ers have targeted restricted free agent Mike Wallace and unrestricted free agent Vincent Jackson "at a specific price."

The Niners "do not get into bidding wars for players, though," Maiocco cautions. Jackson is sure to incite a bidding war, and Wallace will cost $9.5 million in 2012 in addition to a lucrative long-term contract and the 49ers' first-round pick. At their respective prices, both big-play receivers are long shots for San Francisco. The Steelers website pointed out Tuesday that no RFA carrying a first-round tender has signed an offer sheet in the past 10 years.

It seems the analysis is quoting the farnachise tag figure for some reason, as a starting point. What you quote actually implies that the Niners will not get Wallace for what they are willing to pay (assumedly much less than $9.5 MM).

 

[Hoosier16]

And until you realize that removing Wallace from the equation doesn't preclude Pittsburgh from replacing him with another FA wideout. They are not being forced to chose between only "Wallace/Brown/Sanders" or "Brown/Sanders/Cotchery."

Of course not, but do you think they'll get someone in FA the quality of Wallace at a discounted price? Likely, the players of his quality are going to cause the same cap problems.

They dont need a WR of his quality to keep this a top 10 offense. They would need a dependable WR3.

Maybe I'm missing something. They were 12th in total yards (10th in passing) and 21st in points scored this past year. So you're saying they can lose their top RB and top WR, replace them with lessor talent, and somehow the offense will improve?

 

[treat88]

It's not "as if" he's elite, he is. To be transparant, I've liked PIT since Bradshaw, Swann, Lambert, so I'm not taking potshots at them.

I will respectfully agree to disagree. I'm a 30+ year Steelers fan, so I'm certainly not taking potshots at Wallace either....but he's not elite. Elite players don't disappear for half a season and only run a couple routes.

Wallace did not disappear, Big Ben could not hit him deep because of his ankle. Wallace is elite.

Been a fan from back in the day as well and I 100% agree with 5-ish. Wallace has a rare and unique talent, namely speed. Outside of that one variable, an admittedly important one, he's a very average receiving talent. He's got average hands, marginal RAC skills, doesn't fight for 50/50 balls, and is a mediocre route runner outside of a 9 route.That's not what I think of when I think of elite.

 

[Touchdown There]

It's not "as if" he's elite, he is. To be transparant, I've liked PIT since Bradshaw, Swann, Lambert, so I'm not taking potshots at them.

I will respectfully agree to disagree. I'm a 30+ year Steelers fan, so I'm certainly not taking potshots at Wallace either....but he's not elite. Elite players don't disappear for half a season and only run a couple routes.

Wallace did not disappear, Big Ben could not hit him deep because of his ankle. Wallace is elite.

Been a fan from back in the day as well and I 100% agree with 5-ish. Wallace has a rare and unique talent, namely speed. Outside of that one variable, an admittedly important one, he's a very average receiving talent. He's got average hands, marginal RAC skills, doesn't fight for 50/50 balls, and is a mediocre route runner outside of a 9 route.That's not what I think of when I think of elite.

Wallace would have had 1400+ yards this year if Big Ben did not get hurt. Elite. Simple as that.

 

[treat88]

It's not "as if" he's elite, he is. To be transparant, I've liked PIT since Bradshaw, Swann, Lambert, so I'm not taking potshots at them.

I will respectfully agree to disagree. I'm a 30+ year Steelers fan, so I'm certainly not taking potshots at Wallace either....but he's not elite. Elite players don't disappear for half a season and only run a couple routes.

Wallace did not disappear, Big Ben could not hit him deep because of his ankle. Wallace is elite.

Been a fan from back in the day as well and I 100% agree with 5-ish. Wallace has a rare and unique talent, namely speed. Outside of that one variable, an admittedly important one, he's a very average receiving talent. He's got average hands, marginal RAC skills, doesn't fight for 50/50 balls, and is a mediocre route runner outside of a 9 route.That's not what I think of when I think of elite.

Wallace would have had 1400+ yards this year if Big Ben did not get hurt. Elite. Simple as that.

Not really, but OK.