The case for keeping Mike Wallace

[dead_poet]

I must admit, I'm coming around on the idea. This article outlines some of the reasons for doing so (at a smaller contract):

http://vikn.gs/1o097Bi

[autobon7]

At a lower cost I'm all for it......

[losperros]

I have absolutely no problem with Wallace coming back with a new contract.

Wallace is a talented WR and needs to be utilized properly, as do the other WRs. The Vikings shouldn't one-note Wallace and bring him back as their "deep threat" when their entire WR corps can get deep. Using some variety would help the passing attack overall.

[Demi]

Mike Wallace still has the talent to be the Vikings’ deep threat.

And the Moss factor? Teams don't have to respect it with this QB. He can't, and usually won't, try to get the ball down field. Wallace is a one trick pony, and his handler can't do that trick. It shouldn't be that hard to upgrade. And find someone who can do more than Wallace, for less.

[Mothman]

I don't know how I feel about this. He doesn't seem like a particularly good fit for the offense as it was last season but I agree with the author of the article that the WR corps is thinner than some think (especially if Patterson's not really getting consideration as a WR). I don't see Diggs as a player well on his way to becoming a legitimate #1 receiver (at least not yet) either, even though he had a good rookie season.

If they're going to get rid of Wallace, it should probably be to bring in a receiver who fits better with Bridgewater's skill set. I doubt Jeffery will even hit the market but of he does, I don't think he's that receiver either because the best aspect of his game is his ability get open downfield.

[losperros]

I don't know how I feel about this. He doesn't seem like a particularly good fit for the offense as it was last season but I agree with the author of the article that the WR corps is thinner than some think (especially if Patterson's not really getting consideration as a WR). I don't see Diggs as a player well on his way to becoming a legitimate #1 receiver (at least not yet) either, even though he had a good rookie season.

If they're going to get rid of Wallace, it should probably be to bring in a receiver who fits better with Bridgewater's skill set. I doubt Jeffery will even hit the market but of he does, I don't think he's that receiver either because the best aspect of his game is his ability get open downfield.

I don't think the Vikings need a #1 WR if the other WRs are good (I think they are) and there is variety in the offensive attack. For example, if Wallace is one-noted into being the sole deep threat, that will be a ridiculous offensive move by the Vikings. Lack of creativity on offense hurt the skill players last season, in my view, as did a below mediocre offensive line.

OTOH, if Bridgewater really can't complete any downfield passes to save his life, then the Vikings have a problem that maybe no WR can fix, let alone Wallace.

[Mothman]

I don't think the Vikings need a #1 WR if the other WRs are good (I think they are) and there is variety in the offensive attack. For example, if Wallace is one-noted into being the sole deep threat, that will be a ridiculous offensive move by the Vikings. Lack of creativity on offense hurt the skill players last season, in my view, as did a below mediocre offensive line.

OTOH, if Bridgewater really can't complete any downfield passes to save his life, then the Vikings have a problem that maybe no WR can fix, let alone Wallace.

I agree. At the very least, if they can't improve their downfield passing game, a big-bodied possession receiver might be more beneficial than a WR like Wallace.

[The Breeze]

I'm all for the possession WR....don't care if he's all that big. Even a guy like Welker would be a boon.
I have a hard time trying to grok why Wallace would play here for less money?

[chicagopurple]

the thing is, we dont know if we really have a QB capable of making use of a deep downfield receiver, or an OL capable of protecting a QB in order to have a deep passing game. IF Wallace did take a big pay-cut then its not too tough of a decision but I doubt he would accept that. Why would he? To spend another year on a team that may not be able to showcase his skills? This year is a blackmark on Wallace's resume and its not entirely his fault, but the Offense as a whole. Maybe Wallace is losing his skills, but I don't think thats the case. Our team just wasnt able to utilize him. We NEED an OL, adn we may or may not need a QB. These are the questions that must be resolved.

[losperros]

I agree. At the very least, if they can't improve their downfield passing game, a big-bodied possession receiver might be more beneficial than a WR like Wallace.

Good point. A possession WR might be the best bet.

I know I'm repeating myself over and over but I'm surprised that Norv and the Vikings didn't come up with a better catch and run passing game last season.

[shannontw]

I would bring him back at a cheap price, if a deal cant be worked out. Release him and use that money to fix Oline.

[dead_poet]

I would bring him back at a cheap price, if a deal cant be worked out. Release him and use that money to fix Oline.

In theory the Vikings could both renegotiate his contract and still use some of that savings to upgrade the offensive line. Meaning it doesn't have to be a deep (unrealistic from Wallace's perspective) cut. Their cap situation is such that it isn't necessarily an either-or proposition.

[mondry]

I'd take him back for 5 to 6 million a year, 3 year deal, no guaranteed money left on the 3rd year. No real reason not to do that and you don't want to have to take a WR in the draft to make up for it. I could see them giving him 7 mil since they seem to like him and would be willing to reward / overpay him to make sure he sticks around.

Honestly the biggest reason not to bring Wallace back though wasn't even talked about. He'll be 30 by the time the next season starts and I'm not a big fan of paying speedster's at that age. First thing you tend to lose is elite speed and I'm not sure he has much else he can rely on to make up for losing a step but that likely wouldn't happen till a little more down the road.

[halfgiz]

I think that our receiving corps is not all that bad. Patterson showed promise 2 seasons ago now he is a returner.
Johnson was our go to guy 2 seasons ago and now he is not even a starter. When he did get put in he made a couple clutch catches . Thielen also is not a bad receiver. Just need to see how he recovers from his injury.

Wallace was open quite a few times this year only to get overthrown or ignored .
If Wallace comes back at a reduce rate it will be up to him.
He's 30 so maybe he will go for the money. Which I wouldn't blame him.
I think we need to have one dominant receiver . We done really well in the draft last year!

I feel there multiple reasons why we had such a bad passing game this year. Hopefully with new coaches some of the problems will get rectified.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Forget Wallace. Didnt do a good good job for us last year, as a vet. Cut Wallace (if we are going WR way) and not the OL way, Have Diggs and Wright on the outside (with CP giving them a breather) Get that 6'4'' dude Williams that would be a miracle for Teddy. Rotate the RBs in all 3-4. And get that OLINE as solid as its ever been. Oh, please, let Kyle start catching the ball, not block. And for the love of god. bye Norv.