The case for keeping Mike Wallace

[mansquatch]

Jim you are hitting on where I see the Mike Wallace situation. My opinion is that people are objecting to him because of his cap hit relative to his performance. If he restructures we essentially have to assume the Vikings consider the new deal fair given they also have to sign it.

[fiestavike]

Jim you are hitting on where I see the Mike Wallace situation. My opinion is that people are objecting to him because of his cap hit relative to his performance. If he restructures we essentially have to assume the Vikings consider the new deal fair given they also have to sign it.

I saw his lack of effort as unworthy of an NFL player. I would have rather seen Thielen, Johnson or Patterson getting those reps.

[dead_poet]

I saw his lack of effort as unworthy of an NFL player. I would have rather seen Thielen, Johnson or Patterson getting those reps.

What are your examples of his lack of effort? I don't recall any and Zimmer has repeatedly praised his practice habits.

[mansquatch]

You do not get the sense from the coaching staff that Wallace was considered a culprit in the passing game. Compared to the treatment of say CP84, we also do not get the sense that there were other issues brewing. Of course we never heard anything about Charles Johnson and he rode the bench most of the season. Maybe they just felt Diggs was better?

The only for sure thing on Wallace is that his production does not square with his contract. Of course is that his fault or was it the OL or the QB or some combination? We'll never know.

For me the bottom line on all the WR is I really do not feel the talent in this position group is the main issue facing the offense. I think the OL woes and some of TB issues are the bigger problems.

It is worth noting the Turner has a history of never saying anything bad about players in public. It became something of a running joke when he was in San Diego, so the not hearing anything bad thing may not carry much weight.

Oh to be a fly on the wall in Rick Spielman's Office...

[Cliff]

You do not get the sense from the coaching staff that Wallace was considered a culprit in the passing game. Compared to the treatment of say CP84, we also do not get the sense that there were other issues brewing. Of course we never heard anything about Charles Johnson and he rode the bench most of the season. Maybe they just felt Diggs was better?

Johnson had a rib injury which led to Diggs starting. Diggs never gave the starting spot back.

[autobon7]

You do not get the sense from the coaching staff that Wallace was considered a culprit in the passing game. Compared to the treatment of say CP84, we also do not get the sense that there were other issues brewing. Of course we never heard anything about Charles Johnson and he rode the bench most of the season. Maybe they just felt Diggs was better?

The only for sure thing on Wallace is that his production does not square with his contract. Of course is that his fault or was it the OL or the QB or some combination? We'll never know.

For me the bottom line on all the WR is I really do not feel the talent in this position group is the main issue facing the offense. I think the OL woes and some of TB issues are the bigger problems.

It is worth noting the Turner has a history of never saying anything bad about players in public. It became something of a running joke when he was in San Diego, so the not hearing anything bad thing may not carry much weight.

Oh to be a fly on the wall in Rick Spielman's Office...

I agree 100% with squatch....especially the part about the WR talent. I believe with a solid OL and better QB play (and better play calling) this unit is solid. Would love to see Wallace back but only at a reduced price. Not sure I see that happening tho.

[mansquatch]

Johnson had a rib injury which led to Diggs starting. Diggs never gave the starting spot back.

I understand what happened, with regards to Diggs taking the job, but then why did Johnson no supplant say Jarius Wright at #3?

It isn't a big issue, just pointing out that the lack of comment by the coaching staff isn't in of itself confirmation that the staff thinks highly (or lowly) of a particular player.

[losperros]

I agree 100% with squatch....especially the part about the WR talent. I believe with a solid OL and better QB play (and better play calling) this unit is solid. Would love to see Wallace back but only at a reduced price. Not sure I see that happening tho.

I agree with both of you. The biggest problems with the passing game were poor pass blocking, Bridgewater needing to improve areas of his game, and questionable play design and play calling. The WRs were not the issue.

As for Wallace, I still question whether or not he would want to come back. He'll have to take a pay cut and the team doesn't really execute the passing attack style that works for his skills. Seems as if he might figure he could do better elsewhere.

[mondry]

You do not get the sense from the coaching staff that Wallace was considered a culprit in the passing game. Compared to the treatment of say CP84, we also do not get the sense that there were other issues brewing. Of course we never heard anything about Charles Johnson and he rode the bench most of the season. Maybe they just felt Diggs was better?

Wallace did his job, he got open numerous times for "guaranteed" touchdowns if Teddy throws him a decent ball. He pulled coverages his way all year and Rudolph and Diggs took advantage of it when they could.

Diggs was clearly better than Johnson, like WAY better, I'm surprised that is a question.

The only for sure thing on Wallace is that his production does not square with his contract. Of course is that his fault or was it the OL or the QB or some combination? We'll never know.

Agreed about the contract, but I have absolutely zero concern that he won't be restructured if we decide to make him an offer / try to keep him.

I think we DO know and it's pretty obvious. If the O-line was better, if Teddy got him the ball when he was WIDE OPEN and if perhaps the play calling favored a more pass heavy approach or even just a less predictable approach Wallace would have certainly produced more.

For me the bottom line on all the WR is I really do not feel the talent in this position group is the main issue facing the offense. I think the OL woes and some of TB issues are the bigger problems.

If we lose Wallace there is most certainly a talent problem. Diggs had a great rookie year and I think the sky is the limit for him but with no Wallace can he beat double coverage if he's the only real threat out there? CJ and Patterson can't really be relied on in a starting role and theilan isn't scaring anyone. Wright is a solid #3 / slot guy but you can't expect him to carry the load either.

If you just meant for last year then we agree again, the O-line play and play calling / game plans were by far the biggest problems last year.

[dead_poet]

I understand what happened, with regards to Diggs taking the job, but then why did Johnson no supplant say Jarius Wright at #3? .

They play different positions

[mondry]

They play different positions

Not to mention Wright is better than Johnson.

[chicagopurple]

I totally agree with Modry.....there were SO many plays where Wallace was open down field and Teddy never could pull the trigger, either because he was running for his life thanks to Kalil and Company being incompetent, or Teddy threw the ball but showed NO downfield accuracy, OR Teddy wasted the play by taking the easy way out and throwing a meaningless 2 yr pass.

[Demi]

I totally agree with Modry.....there were SO many plays where Wallace was open down field and Teddy never could pull the trigger, either because he was running for his life thanks to Kalil and Company being incompetent, or Teddy threw the ball but showed NO downfield accuracy, OR Teddy wasted the play by taking the easy way out and throwing a meaningless 2 yr pass.

So let's draft a new Qb and start him and see how he does. How do you think that would work out? Maybe sign a free agent! Who's available?

I agree 100% with squatch....especially the part about the WR talent. I believe with a solid OL and better QB play (and better play calling) this unit is solid.

So with the Broncos offensive line, and Tom Brady, Mike Wallace is solid? Can we sign Tom Brady and trade for the Broncos offensive line? Come on. We the players we have. How likely do you really think it is that we upgrade Teddy? Look at the last 10 years. Chances we upgrade any offensive line position? We've been signing/drafting for years. We could draft a 1st round player to start at right guard, and it's possible they're worse than Harris.

The idea that Wallace would be a good starter if everyone around him is better? How about we just try to find a better receiver? It would be a lot easier than trying to upgrade the quarterback position. It would be easier than trying to upgrade our offensive line. The guy flamed out in Pittsburgh with a solid offensive line and a good QB, he wasn't good enough the Steelers were willing to pay to keep him around. He goes to Miami. They give him away the minute they can get anything for him. And then he struggles here, and the answer is "Upgrade everything around him and he'd be better"? How about just upgrade him?

[autobon7]

So let's draft a new Qb and start him and see how he does. How do you think that would work out? Maybe sign a free agent! Who's available?
So with the Broncos offensive line, and Tom Brady, Mike Wallace is solid? Can we sign Tom Brady and trade for the Broncos offensive line? Come on. We the players we have. How likely do you really think it is that we upgrade Teddy? Look at the last 10 years. Chances we upgrade any offensive line position? We've been signing/drafting for years. We could draft a 1st round player to start at right guard, and it's possible they're worse than Harris.

The idea that Wallace would be a good starter if everyone around him is better? How about we just try to find a better receiver? It would be a lot easier than trying to upgrade the quarterback position. It would be easier than trying to upgrade our offensive line. The guy flamed out in Pittsburgh with a solid offensive line and a good QB, he wasn't good enough the Steelers were willing to pay to keep him around. He goes to Miami. They give him away the minute they can get anything for him. And then he struggles here, and the answer is "Upgrade everything around him and he'd be better"? How about just upgrade him?

Upgrade to a better receiver only to be underused (like Wallace) because Teddy runs for his life???? No thanks. Headbang all you want but we would still be in the same position we are today. Bottom line is......the OL HAS to get better and Teddy must play better.

[chicagopurple]

exactly...no one on this entire website has been calling to replace Teddy. Whats needed is a REAL OL and for Teddy to mature and show improvement. His first year was a pleasant surprise. His second year was at best stagnation but in some way a bit of regression. Time to man up. The best thing to help him accomplish this would be a real OL, not new receivers.