Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 166
Like Tree78Likes

Thread: The Official "Mike Wallace" Thread

  1. #76
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,999
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: Mike Wallace

    Who wrote this his agent? Is this PR that he sent to all the teams last summer.

    He's Jerry Rice or Randy Moss? OK... If he is he's not coming cheap.

    Without healthy Roethlisberger 8 19 370 2
    Again big drop off with out Big Ben scary....
    Last edited by Rambos; -12-10-2012 at 02:11 AM.


  2. #77
    jmk321's Avatar
    jmk321 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    albany
    Posts
    591
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Mike Wallace

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    Who wrote this his agent? Is this PR that he sent to all the teams last summer.

    He's Jerry Rice or Randy Moss? OK... If he is he's not coming cheap.



    Again big drop off with out Big Ben scary....
    Larry Fitzgerald only has 650 yards and 4 TD's this year. Do you think he suddenly became an average receiver or that maybe the pathetic quarterbacks on the Cardinals have something to do with this drop off? Quarterbacks are very important to any receiver's productivity and it is in no way a knock on the receiver to point out how effective they are with a good NFL QB compared to a backup.

    If the Rams had Alex Smith as their long term QB solution then saying a drop off without Roethlisberger is scary would make sense but they actually have a good QB in Bradford who Schottenheimer said recently threw the best deep ball out of anyone hes ever coached. Only putting up 15 against the 27th ranked Bills defense and not scoring a single offensive point until time was expiring in the 4th against the ***** is not acceptable offensive production and I don't feel at all comfortable about moving forward relying on this current group of receivers. I don't want the Rams to shell out big money for a player unless he is truly a game changing number 1 receiver and it appears Mike Wallace is that guy who can help turn around this offense like Vincent Jackson did in Tampa Bay.

    And the guy who wrote this is someone who objectively and rationally looked at the numbers and saw that Mike Wallace had production in his first 3 seasons that only great players had matched in the past. Mike Wallace is worth the money and the fact that signing the incredibly inconsistent Dwayne Bowe or moving forward with the current group of unproductive receivers were being debated as better options really baffles me.

  3. #78
    jmk321's Avatar
    jmk321 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    albany
    Posts
    591
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Mike Wallace blames losing focus for low production

    So a top receiver gets pouty when hes not thrown the ball... In other news, it appears that it may snow in the northeast during December.
    AvengerRam, Nick and Tampa_Ram like this.

  4. #79
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,999
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: Mike Wallace

    And the guy who wrote this is someone who objectively.... and that is?

  5. #80
    citr92 is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,196
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Mike Wallace

    if the rams magically got fitzgerald...oooooooooooooh gaaaaaaaaaawd

  6. #81
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,999
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: Mike Wallace blames losing focus for low production

    Quote Originally Posted by jmk321 View Post
    So a top receiver gets pouty when hes not thrown the ball... In other news, it appears that it may snow in the northeast during December.
    I think you missed the point he says he's not focused because he's not getting the ball. I did not say that, He says his production is down and drops are up down because he's not getting the ball I did not say that.

  7. #82
    RuffRams's Avatar
    RuffRams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Earth
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,189
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Mike Wallace Benched?

    However in this instance givens has already proved he can play in the nfl not mike wallace level but at a good level for a rookie.

    I wil never understand some peoples infatuation with diva WRs that want to get overpaid not get what they deserve.
    Rambos likes this.


  8. #83
    mcpeepants232003's Avatar
    mcpeepants232003 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Mike Wallace Benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by RamOG View Post
    However in this instance givens has already proved he can play in the nfl not mike wallace level but at a good level for a rookie.

    I wil never understand some peoples infatuation with diva WRs that want to get overpaid not get what they deserve.
    because those divs personality receivers are consistently among the biggest playmakers in all of sports? Sorry but Wallace has not shown himself to be a huge diva and it's silly to say that based on 3 or 4 good games Givens can now easily turn into Wallace.

    Of course even if we sign Givens and resign Amendola then who is our #3? Who is our #2 when Amendola misses half the year, again like every year?

    You're basically choosing less talented receivers who are always injured over Wallace because they aren't as big divas.
    sosa39rams likes this.

  9. #84
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,445
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: Mike Wallace Benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by mcpeepants232003 View Post
    because those divs personality receivers are consistently among the biggest playmakers in all of sports? Sorry but Wallace has not shown himself to be a huge diva and it's silly to say that based on 3 or 4 good games Givens can now easily turn into Wallace.

    Of course even if we sign Givens and resign Amendola then who is our #3? Who is our #2 when Amendola misses half the year, again like every year?

    You're basically choosing less talented receivers who are always injured over Wallace because they aren't as big divas.
    Cant blame the guy. The Rams teams of past have taken his mind over. He's got a loser mentality. He like others here believe just because a guy has shown good he must always be good. I guess some people have never heard of people not progressing or even regressing, kind of like what happened last year with our own QB!!!???!?!?

    I remember after Sam's rookie year everyone (including me) thought he'd be a top 5 in the NFL very very soon. I thought FOR SURE he'd be a Manning/Brady kind of guy by now. And guess what? He isn't, even after his record breaking rookie year.

    Or even better what about Mike Williams (TB - WR) last year. He had an amazing rookie year and was totally shut out last year. The Bucs were in the EXACT same dilemma as us. They had a talented rookie in Williams (we do too in Givens) and thought that they were fine at the position. Fast forward a year later and they realize when he starts to attract #1 CB's and double coverage he's a no-one. So they go out and get one of the "OVERPAID STUPID DIVA WR's" (Vincent Jackson) and look where they are now... In a playoff hunt, with a rookie coach, and one of the best offenses in the league.....

    GO GET WALLACE.
    Last edited by sosa39rams; -12-10-2012 at 05:38 PM.


    THE DREAM TEAM

  10. #85
    mcpeepants232003's Avatar
    mcpeepants232003 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Mike Wallace Benched?

    I just don't get at what point people decided having one good WR is enough. The best offenses in the league have multiple weapons at the WR/TE positions. Right now we have 2 and one who is constantly injured. We need to add more weapons. This is obvious literally every single game.

  11. #86
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,340
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Mike Wallace Benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    It was 27-3 with 2:35 left in the 3rd before Wallace made a play. Looks like the game was over when he became the beast. He padded his numbers late was a non factor in the game.
    I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. First you criticize him for not being more productive, then when he is productive, you criticize him for just padding his stats in a decided game, a characterization that is simply flat out bogus.

    This was a ten-point game at halftime, hardly over. So what happened for the score to get that lopsided in the second half? San Diego got the ball first after halftime and scored a touchdown on a 9:30 minute drive to make it 20-3, then on the very first offensive play for Pittsburgh of the second half, Big Ben's sideways pass is ruled a fumble recovery for a TD by San Diego to make it 27-3.

    On the next drive, rather than giving up in a game that was apparently seemingly over, Wallace beats Jammer (who got away with holding him at the line) for a forty yard touchdown. You criticize Wallace for not doing anything until late in the third, but conveniently make no mention of the near 10-minute drive San Diego opened with.

    On the very next Steelers' offensive drive, Big Ben is intercepted on his first pass attempt, and San Diego scores once more to make it 34-10. Again, rather than throwing the towel in on a seemingly winless game, Wallace catches four passes on the next drive, including a tough touchdown grab in between two defenders in the endzone.

    It's pretty obvious that, for whatever reason, you don't like Mike Wallace. That's fine, you don't have to like him. There are free agent receivers whom others would consider upgrades that I personally don't care for. But the guy showed up and made plays for his team, outperforming two receivers you've already praised for having good games. So at least be fair and give the guy some credit when he does this, especially when you've been critical of him for NOT doing it.

  12. #87
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,999
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: Mike Wallace Benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    Cant blame the guy. The Rams teams of past have taken his mind over. He's got a loser mentality. He like others here believe just because a guy has shown good he must always be good. I guess some people have never heard of people not progressing or even regressing, kind of like what happened last year with our own QB!!!???!?!?

    I remember after Sam's rookie year everyone (including me) thought he'd be a top 5 in the NFL very very soon. I thought FOR SURE he'd be a Manning/Brady kind of guy by now. And guess what? He isn't, even after his record breaking rookie year.

    Or even better what about Mike Williams (TB - WR) last year. He had an amazing rookie year and was totally shut out last year. The Bucs were in the EXACT same dilemma as us. They had a talented rookie in Williams (we do too in Givens) and thought that they were fine at the position. Fast forward a year later and they realize when he starts to attract #1 CB's and double coverage he's a no-one. So they go out and get one of the "OVERPAID STUPID DIVA WR's" (Vincent Jackson) and look where they are now... In a playoff hunt, with a rookie coach, and one of the best offenses in the league.....

    GO GET WALLACE.
    A few things.

    Did we not come off a bad year? Did we not draft Givens? Are we not in the playoff hunt?

    You make it sound as if we are still losing and they have wrapped up a title because they got Vincent Jackson, and for the record Jackson is a far better receiver the Wallace.

    For the record I think Wallace is a good receiver, just don't think that highly of him as some on this board. We shall see what the Rams do and what he ends up getting paid. Much conversation about a guy that most likely with sign with his team.



    To your point that he may or may not be regression... the guy is in a contract year, he needs to be lights out if he want top dollars, That said if the market drops on him heck I may change my mind if the price is right.

    Next topic
    Last edited by Rambos; -12-10-2012 at 07:38 PM.
    RuffRams likes this.

  13. #88
    RuffRams's Avatar
    RuffRams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Earth
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,189
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Mike Wallace Benched?

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    Cant blame the guy. The Rams teams of past have taken his mind over. He's got a loser mentality. He like others here believe just because a guy has shown good he must always be good. I guess some people have never heard of people not progressing or even regressing, kind of like what happened last year with our own QB!!!???!?!?

    I remember after Sam's rookie year everyone (including me) thought he'd be a top 5 in the NFL very very soon. I thought FOR SURE he'd be a Manning/Brady kind of guy by now. And guess what? He isn't, even after his record breaking rookie year.

    Or even better what about Mike Williams (TB - WR) last year. He had an amazing rookie year and was totally shut out last year. The Bucs were in the EXACT same dilemma as us. They had a talented rookie in Williams (we do too in Givens) and thought that they were fine at the position. Fast forward a year later and they realize when he starts to attract #1 CB's and double coverage he's a no-one. So they go out and get one of the "OVERPAID STUPID DIVA WR's" (Vincent Jackson) and look where they are now... In a playoff hunt, with a rookie coach, and one of the best offenses in the league.....

    GO GET WALLACE.
    I was for getting Vjax last offseason, infact if I still could I still would. Also, I am for going after dwayne bowe and any other reciever other than wallace that can help make our team better, you don't seem to grasp that point. Edit: Infact, I was even for going after mike wallace with a 2nd round pick last year.You should probably try to understand what the other side of the argument is before going..."zomg..bucs needed a wr..they got one in vjax...and look at them now..they have a worse record than us!!..zomg that's why we gotta get wallace."

    The immaturity and lack of intelligence in your above post is enough for me to stop arguing about this. Anyway, I'm 99.99% sure we won't be signing Mike Wallace. So, ill stop arguing and let you guys dream till September.

    So you feel like you got away by calling me a loser? Damn, that hurts the heart...so, damn, much!!
    Last edited by RuffRams; -12-10-2012 at 07:20 PM.


  14. #89
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,340
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Mike Wallace blames losing focus for low production

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    I think you missed the point
    No, I think he got the point - you're starting a new thread criticizing a top wide receiver for complaining about not getting the ball enough as if that's big news. It's not, and we don't need a new thread for you to do something you're already doing in an earlier one.

    I've retitled the Mike Wallace Benched? thread into the Official "Mike Wallace" Thread, and will merge any new topics into this one. So far, that's included the Mike Wallace blames losing focus for low production and the long article posted under the name Mike Wallace.

    Both are unnecessary when there's already a thread established to discuss the player, especially when free agency isn't even close to starting.
    Last edited by Nick; -12-10-2012 at 07:28 PM.

  15. #90
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,999
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: Mike Wallace blames losing focus for low production

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    No, I think he got the point - you're starting a new thread criticizing a top wide receiver for complaining about not getting the ball enough as if that's big news. It's not, and we don't need a new thread for you to do something you're already doing in an earlier one.

    I've retitled the Mike Wallace Benched? thread into the Official "Mike Wallace" Thread, and will merge any new topics into this one. So far, that's included the Mike Wallace blames losing focus for low production and the long article posted under the name Mike Wallace.

    Both are unnecessary when there's already a thread established to discuss the player, especially when free agency isn't even close to starting.
    Sounds good...
    Nick likes this.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 18
    Last Post: -04-13-2012, 03:24 PM
  2. A Mike Wallace tidbit
    By Nick in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: -03-23-2012, 07:44 PM
  3. Mike Wallace , WR RFA -- Pittsburgh Steelers
    By richtree in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: -02-24-2012, 11:36 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •