Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rambos
Packers............. Pats....... 9ers.......
uhm Wes Welker, Jordy nelson, Randall Cobb, Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez, Greg Jennings and Michael Crabtree aren't pro bowl caliber? I take it you don't watch other Nfl teams much?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rambos
55 Million bucks to get a big time WR, could go to resigning.... guys like William Hayes. SJ, DA, Dunbar should get a new deal. Sign a legit Safety.... I can think of a few ways to spend that kind of cash.
It's 10 million a year. No way we can resign SJ, Amendola, Hayes and sign a good safety for anything close to that(Dunbar isn't a free agent so I don't see what he has to do with anything).
It's weird how so many people want us to resign Danny but aren't interested in Wallace.
Also Dunbar, Hayes and Jackson should be resigned but if it's sign Wallace or get those three back I'd take Wallace over all of them.
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rambos
55 Million bucks to get a big time WR, could go to resigning.... guys like William Hayes. SJ, DA, Dunbar should get a new deal. Sign a legit Safety.... I can think of a few ways to spend that kind of cash.
ORRRRRR, you could sign Wallace, re-sign Hayes, SJ, DA, (and why the hell would you give Dunbar a new deal? Let him keep playing, we'll re-sign him when its necessary). And go draft Chance Warmack, and Matt Elam in round 1, and Zach Ertz in round 2. There you go. You just improved your team by a huge margin, especially the offense.
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sosa39rams
Oh you mean the Packers that have 4 WR's that could get into the pro-bowl (Cobb has 960 yards, James Jones has 722, Jordy Nelson is a #1 but has missed several games and still have 650, and Jennings is a pro-bowl WR too and missed virtually all year)? The Pats who have Welker (1,260 receiving yards and 5 TD's), and even Crabtree may break 1,000 yards this year (868 yards, 7 TD's).
I tell you what I'm just giving you a hard time dude.... But don't be surprised when i bring this post back up after the pro bowl players are announced.
Re: The Official "Mike Wallace" Thread
Quote:
uhm Wes Welker, Jordy nelson, Randall Cobb, Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez, Greg Jennings and Michael Crabtree aren't pro bowl caliber? I take it you don't watch other Nfl teams much?
You named two TEs...
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rambos
I tell you what I'm just giving you a hard time dude.... But don't be surprised when i bring this post back up after the pro bowl players are announced.
I said pro-bowl caliber.. I couldn't care less about the actual pro-bowl itself. David Akers leads all kickers in voting, go look at his stats. Jeff Saturday is the #1 C, and he just got benched for the season last week. The pro-bowl is a complete joke and they should absolutely cancel it. The last guy that I seen actually play at the pro bowl was Sean Taylor (God rest his soul).
I'm just showing you that these teams that are superbowl contenders have SERIOUS receiving threats. We dont, therefore we are not/wont be a superbowl contender until we fix that issue, and why not start with one of the youngest, fastest, and best WR's in the NFL?
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sosa39rams
I said pro-bowl caliber.. I couldn't care less about the actual pro-bowl itself. David Akers leads all kickers in voting, go look at his stats. Jeff Saturday is the #1 C, and he just got benched for the season last week. The pro-bowl is a complete joke and they should absolutely cancel it. The last guy that I seen actually play at the pro bowl was Sean Taylor (God rest his soul).
I'm just showing you that these teams that are superbowl contenders have SERIOUS receiving threats. We dont, therefore we are not/wont be a superbowl contender until we fix that issue, and why not start with one of the youngest, fastest, and best WR's in the NFL?
Fair enough... got to watch the whiners hags games can't do this again... like I said just giving you a hard time.
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mcpeepants232003
The Bucs 2nd half defense today doesn't somehow erase the fact they've been the worst defense in the entire league this year.
Also why do people constantly act like Givens somehow erases our need for more playmakers? Great offenses do not have just 2 good playmakers(and one when Amendola is healthy).
I call Bull****
If you don't have a true elite receiver there is nothing better than having 3,4 or even 5 guys capable of making plays in the passing game.
All of us who support signing Wallace recognize Givens talent. It's not him we want to replace it's Gibson and Pettis. Givens having a good rookie year doesn't erase the fact the rest of our receiving corps is very mediocre.
Amendola and Givens is a nice start but what happens next year when Danny gets hurt again? Then we're forced to watch Gibson and Pettis play huge roles again. Having Wallace would benefit our offense tremendously.
Lastly this isn't a one or the other type of option. yes our line needs improved but we can upgrade our line and our receiving corps at the same time.
I call Bull****
Tampa went on a 4 game winning streak when Freeman took care of the ball in that span he had 10 TD's and 1 INT. So, yes turnovers have played a significant role and do you believe the Rams would have won today without the turnovers and 4th down stops?
Yes Bradford can use as many playmakers as you can get. But what I am saying is that we have developing talent and Givens has shown potential to be an elite talent. Quik needs time. Gibson and Pettos have meet expectations in their roles. Not sure what most call Elite wide reciever but a guy who catches 16 out of 17 thrown balls in a game deserve a little more respect that is shown to him on this forum. If the price is right sure I will take Wallace but we all now it will be very expensive and that is why I believe the Rams have choosen the right path in developing these young talented players.
Also, Fisher and the Titians played our Rams in the Superbowl do not recall any ELITE wide outs on that team?
The Official "Mike Wallace" Thread
Allow givens and Quick one more year in the system. I Think a TE like Delanie Walker could do wonders on this team.
Re: The Official "Mike Wallace" Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bruce4life
Allow givens and Quick one more year in the system. I Think a TE like Delanie Walker could do wonders on this team.
I love Walker, though I think there is a 0% chance he is gone next year. Way to important to the ***** offense.
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CRAZYHORNS
I call Bull****
Tampa went on a 4 game winning streak when Freeman took care of the ball in that span he had 10 TD's and 1 INT. So, yes turnovers have played a significant role and do you believe the Rams would have won today without the turnovers and 4th down stops?
Yes Bradford can use as many playmakers as you can get. But what I am saying is that we have developing talent and Givens has shown potential to be an elite talent. Quik needs time. Gibson and Pettos have meet expectations in their roles. Not sure what most call Elite wide reciever but a guy who catches 16 out of 17 thrown balls in a game deserve a little more respect that is shown to him on this forum. If the price is right sure I will take Wallace but we all now it will be very expensive and that is why I believe the Rams have choosen the right path in developing these young talented players.
Also, Fisher and the Titians played our Rams in the Superbowl do not recall any ELITE wide outs on that team?
you call BS on a team who gives up 25 ppg and over 310 yards passing per game struggles mightily because of it's defense? You have clearly misunderstood what I've wrote. Where did I lay the blame solely on their defense?
Btw the Bucs went on a 4 game winning streak because they played poor competition. Obviously Freeman's turnovers contributed to their losses but I never said they didn't.
Is this some kind of misdirection because literally none of this has anything to do with Jackson? He isn't responsible for any of that. In fact he's been responsible for much of the success they've had.
As for our receiving corps, Pettis certainly has not lived up to expectations. Maybe you are fine with a 3rd round pick being on pace for 265 yards but I don't think anyone else is. Also I don't see how anyone can say Givens has the potential to be an elite level receiver. The league is littered with guys who have put up 600 yards their rookie seasons and then never become an elite receiver. He's definitely got some potential. This doesn't even matter as all of these guys would ideally return alongside Wallace. If they are as good as you think they can compete with him. I have a feeling he'll clearly beat out all of them, though.
Also lol at going back 13 years to bring up an example of a team that lost a Super Bowl to aid your argument. This is not the 90's and nearly every elite level team has at least one top receiver and those who don't have a clear #1 have a group of talented playmakers.
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mcpeepants232003
you call BS on a team who gives up 25 ppg and over 310 yards passing per game struggles mightily because of it's defense? You have clearly misunderstood what I've wrote. Where did I lay the blame solely on their defense?
Btw the Bucs went on a 4 game winning streak because they played poor competition. Obviously Freeman's turnovers contributed to their losses but I never said they didn't.
Is this some kind of misdirection because literally none of this has anything to do with Jackson? He isn't responsible for any of that. In fact he's been responsible for much of the success they've had.
As for our receiving corps, Pettis certainly has not lived up to expectations. Maybe you are fine with a 3rd round pick being on pace for 265 yards but I don't think anyone else is. Also I don't see how anyone can say Givens has the potential to be an elite level receiver. The league is littered with guys who have put up 600 yards their rookie seasons and then never become an elite receiver. He's definitely got some potential. This doesn't even matter as all of these guys would ideally return alongside Wallace. If they are as good as you think they can compete with him. I have a feeling he'll clearly beat out all of them, though.
Also lol at going back 13 years to bring up an example of a team that lost a Super Bowl to aid your argument. This is not the 90's and nearly every elite level team has at least one top receiver and those who don't have a clear #1 have a group of talented playmakers.
Regarding Pettis I am fine with his production with the limited time he gets he has performed well. As far as Givens I get your point but Potential is what it is no guarantee. Just like Wallace may have the potential to upgrade this offense?
As far as Tampa's D-- stats do not always capture the true story. As a Ram fan we should know this. Turnovers and lack of productin on the other side of the ball can put a Defense in a significant hole.
I choose the Titians as an example because I felt it was the most relevant since Fisher is our coach. But it you want some more current examples I have no problems coming up with some.
***** (last year)
Ravens (for many years and some do not feel they currently have an Elite WR)
Patriots (1st couple of superbowls, many did not consider Branch an Elite WR)
Vikings
Bears (pre Marshall signing)
Titians (CJ was the majority of their O production)
Do you need more examples or will that suffice?
Re: The Official "Mike Wallace" Thread
idk how you guys can keep calling Mike Wallace a "pro-bowl" caliber WR and talk him up so much
Your #1 WR should be your go-to guy; the guy that will come up big for you in Huge division and playoff deciding games
Look at AJ Green his QB did not have a great game did make the greatest of throws yet he put up over 100 yards and was the reason his team clinched a playoff spot...Look at Dez Bryant he is going out there and making plays to get his team in the playoffs every week u better believe he will show up next week...Anquan Boldin might not have the stats to be a #1 but he is look at his production lately (except for the gooseegg vs. denver) the playoffs are on the line and he came up with those receptions vs. the giants those TD grabs vs. the skins and he played well vs. division rival steelers
Big game for Mike Wallace and his team...HUGE division game that has major playoff implications and what does he do? close to nothing ...Wallace is not a #1 he does not come up big in big game situations this is numbers in Big Division games this year:
@ CIN 8rec 52 yards noTDs
V BAL 4rec 24 yrds noTDs 1FMBL
@ CLE 1rec 9yrds noTDs
@ BAL 5rec 44yrds noTDs
V CIN 1rec 13yrds noTDs
Totals 19rec 142yrds 0TD 1FMBL
Now ask yourself is that what a #1 WR with a huge contract produces in BIG division games?
Also what has he ever done in the playoffs? In the superbowl Big Ben kept throwing to Wallace the guy probably had like 20 targets and he caught a TD but did not make a huge impact in the game he dropped the final 4th down pass thats not a number 1
Re: The Official "Mike Wallace" Thread
^ oh god here comes the small sample size guy. Forget the fact Wallace put up back to back 1200 yard seasons let me isolate a few performances and base his entire career on that. Wallace has had plenty of huge games against big time opponents.
So are you saying last year and 2010 Wallace was an elite receiver?
Bal 8 catches 107 yards
NE 7 for 70
Bal 4 for 58 1 TD
Ne 8 for 136 2TDs
Cin 5 for 110 1 TD
Cle 3 for 105 1 TD
NYJ 7 for 102
Your argument doesn't hold weight because he's came up big in multiple big time games against elite level opponents. Isolating 5 games and 3 of which he had very mediocre QB play and then saying oh he doesn't produce in big spots(Even though he's down so more often than not) is just ridiculous.
Not that any of this matters. People are continually picking apart Wallace every move and every play yet then saying oh but I'm fine sticking with players who haven't even produced half what he has. Basically it's ok for our receivers to suck because they are cheap. Sorry but talent comes with a price tag. Many of you may be fine hoping that Givens turns out to be a Wallace type talent, or that Amendola can play more than 8 games or that Gibson or Pettis show something besides mediocrity. I'd rather spend the money and get someone, who yes has flaws, but is still far more talented than anyone on our team.
Re: Mike Wallace Benched?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CRAZYHORNS
Regarding Pettis I am fine with his production with the limited time he gets he has performed well. As far as Givens I get your point but Potential is what it is no guarantee. Just like Wallace may have the potential to upgrade this offense?
As far as Tampa's D-- stats do not always capture the true story. As a Ram fan we should know this. Turnovers and lack of productin on the other side of the ball can put a Defense in a significant hole.
I choose the Titians as an example because I felt it was the most relevant since Fisher is our coach. But it you want some more current examples I have no problems coming up with some.
***** (last year)
Ravens (for many years and some do not feel they currently have an Elite WR)
Patriots (1st couple of superbowls, many did not consider Branch an Elite WR)
Vikings
Bears (pre Marshall signing)
Titians (CJ was the majority of their O production)
Do you need more examples or will that suffice?
Ravens- Boldin and Torrey Smith are far more talented than any receivers we've had in years. Also the Ravens had Derrick Mason, you know the guy with 8 1,000 yard seasons.
People keep saying these teams don't have top receivers, yet they have guys like Branch, Troy Smith, Boldin, Mason, Kenny Britt, all guys who are better than any receiver we have and these teams are the exception.
I can't believe that people are even trying this argument. The benefit of an elite level receiver is unquestioned. Yet with some of the posters on this board you'd think this is some hot button topic.
Great offensive teams have great playmakers and we do not, it's that simple. Keep trying to find as many fringe good teams as you can and then trying to say they are great but it's extremely obvious how valuable top receivers are. There's a reason Wide receiver's go top 3-5 and running backs rarely ever do. I think I'll take NFL personnel view on top wide receivers over those of a few on this board.
Re: The Official "Mike Wallace" Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mcpeepants232003
^ oh god here comes the small sample size guy. Forget the fact Wallace put up back to back 1200 yard seasons let me isolate a few performances and base his entire career on that. Wallace has had plenty of huge games against big time opponents.
So are you saying last year and 2010 Wallace was an elite receiver?
Bal 8 catches 107 yards
NE 7 for 70
Bal 4 for 58 1 TD
Ne 8 for 136 2TDs
Cin 5 for 110 1 TD
Cle 3 for 105 1 TD
NYJ 7 for 102
Your argument doesn't hold weight because he's came up big in multiple big time games against elite level opponents. Isolating 5 games and 3 of which he had very mediocre QB play and then saying oh he doesn't produce in big spots(Even though he's down so more often than not) is just ridiculous.
Not that any of this matters. People are continually picking apart Wallace every move and every play yet then saying oh but I'm fine sticking with players who haven't even produced half what he has. Basically it's ok for our receivers to suck because they are cheap. Sorry but talent comes with a price tag. Many of you may be fine hoping that Givens turns out to be a Wallace type talent, or that Amendola can play more than 8 games or that Gibson or Pettis show something besides mediocrity. I'd rather spend the money and get someone, who yes has flaws, but is still far more talented than anyone on our team.
lol small sample size guy
First, Let me say we need to improve our receiving core; however I dont want Mike Wallace because he will be an overpriced diva
And its not 2010 its 2012 (about to be 2013) What has Wallace done this season?
Every time mike wallace does good its said good QB play every time he does bad its because bad QB play...I dont think Wallace's poor play should solely be based on QB play
Example: We saw Josh Freeman last week he wasn't at his best and he was getting pressured by our D line (Brockers is looking great btw) but Vincent Jackson found holes and made plays he proves week in week out he is a #1
Matt Stafford has looked down right badd at times however Megatron is just producing regardless of how bad stafford looks at times...Also any time stafford goes down u think Megatron cares he still produces with shaun hill (mediocre QB)
Even Larry Fitz he has had the worst QB play this season but he is going to put up numbers close to Wallace and that is a great feat we saw how bad lindly is and we destroyed kolb early in the season
If your a bona-fide #1 receiver that demands that much money you should put up big games when your team needs it to make the playoffs...Wallace want a contract like big time WR
Sorry he just didn't get it done when his team needed him to this season...We defiantly need to improve the receivers but Wallace is not our answer
If you bring up his 2010 season you should also bring up the drops in the SB and his performance in those playoffs
