Vikings Message Board.Com

The production wasn’t actually that bad.

He was outproduced by a third round rookie that didn't even start the first few weeks...

Jeez! did you watch any games this year? Between Norvs game plan, the crappy OL and Teddys questionable arm the team ran virtually NO deep routes. Wallace had no chance to prove his worth. I expect if he left and ended up on a team with a strong QB and a Mediocre OL Wallace would make us miss him.

He was outproduced by a third round rookie that didn't even start the first few weeks...

Diggs was a fifth round pick

chicagopurple wrote:Jeez! did you watch any games this year? Between Norvs game plan, the crappy OL and Teddys questionable arm the team ran virtually NO deep routes. Wallace had no chance to prove his worth. I expect if he left and ended up on a team with a strong QB and a Mediocre OL Wallace would make us miss him.

Like he did before he got here? When the team got rid of him as quick as they could. Or the team before that, who decided to let him go in free agency.

They ran deep routes, which weren't successful, in part because of the issues you brought up. You don't think Norv "7 step drop" Turner was running deep routes?! A complaint by people was how many long developing deep routes they were running. If the team has question marks on the Oline, and a QB with a questionable arm who doesn't like taking chances deep, you think it'd be a good idea to keep a guy around who's specializes in those routes?!

Demi wrote: Like he did before he got here? When the team got rid of him as quick as they could. Or the team before that, who decided to let him go in free agency.

They ran deep routes, which weren't successful, in part because of the issues you brought up. You don't think Norv "7 step drop" Turner was running deep routes?! A complaint by people was how many long developing deep routes they were running.

I know I complained a ton about it! Way too many deep routes this year given our personnel and problems. At one point we even lead the league in 7 step drops so really chicago purple, did you watch any of the games? lol. Deep routes aren't just 40 yard go routes screaming down the field, though we ran more than our fair share of those as well...

Isn't Rudolph our possession guy?

My guess is that the dynamics of our passing game will be different next season if only because Rudolph will not need to be staying in protection as much. (assuming the OL is improved, which I think it will be.)

What that means for a player like Wallace remains to be seen, but I think it is a consideration in assessing his fit.

Callinga deep route but the QB never pulling the trigger hardly counts....the problem there is Teddy needs to improve and we need a real OL. I am not saying that Wallace is great, but I dont think HE was the problem. If he was wiling to take a deep pay cut he would make sense, otherwise, I dont see how we can use him till we fix other glaring problems.

mansquatch wrote:Isn't Rudolph our possession guy?

They're allowed more than one.

As you know, a TE's role is also different from that of a receiver. having a "possession guy" at TE isn't like having Cris Carter or Anquan Boldin out wide.

why in the world would mike wallace even want to come back and play for this current joke of a passing game? do you really think he will take a 50 percent pay cut to spend another season looking totally invisible on the field? come on.

mosscarter wrote:why in the world would mike wallace even want to come back and play for this current joke of a passing game? do you really think he will take a 50 percent pay cut to spend another season looking totally invisible on the field? come on.

Take it for what it's worth but everything that's come out says he's happy with the team and the way things are going, his role, happy with Teddy, happy to be on a contender, etc.

I gotta admit...I have no clue about these damn receivers because I have no idea what the coaches are thinking. I'd be fine either way. There's so much uncertainty yet with guys like Johnson and Patterson, so I don't know. I just don't know.

The case for keeping Mike Wallace: there really isn't one - unless he takes a deep pay cut.

Yeah there is no way I would want him to stay; based off of last year.. he had the most drops I remember, on the team

The Breeze wrote: I have a hard time trying to grok why Wallace would play here for less money?

Because no team will pay his current contract if the Vikings cut him.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

720pete wrote: Because no team will pay his current contract if the Vikings cut him.

If he takes less money to play for the Vikings, they won't be paying him what his current contract stipulates either.