Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ NFL NATION ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:28 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:45 pm
Posts: 173
All I gotta say is,.............this,.......and a game-changing pass rusher,..........

......would be the missing cogs in the "machine".

Go Seahawks!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:36 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7407
Location: CVN-68
Recommend you change the thread title to include "opinion" ... it's a little misleading.

Alas, not sure Wallace is our kind of WR.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:37 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:11 am
Posts: 2192
I think I'll stick with Rice, Tate, and Baldwin.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:49 pm 
*BRONZE SUPPORTER*
*BRONZE SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:40 am
Posts: 372
Location: Tacoma, WA
Not every thread needs to be made


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:49 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
Posts: 4667
Location: The 5-0
Wallace is a Steeler. Wallace is dirty.

In all seriousness, I think we're pretty good at the position. The way RW is throwing on the run, the WRs we have should be able to find open spots. Had Rice, Tate or Baldwin dropped a bunch of balls, I'd feel differently. They're actually quite solid and only going to get better as they work with RW. Plus, better line play will free up Money Miller. I think this is a 30 PPG offense with the personel we currently have.
Yes, It would be nice to have some deep heat, but not essential and I am hopeful the FO will find another WR in day 2 of the draft. We need a DT, DE and LB with our 1st, 2nd and 3rd, IMO. We have a bevy of late rd picks that we should package and trade for another 3 or 4. Use that pick on a project WR with some wheels.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:56 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:11 am
Posts: 2192
HawkWow wrote:
Wallace is a Steeler. Wallace is dirty.

In all seriousness, I think we're pretty good at the position. The way RW is throwing on the run, the WRs we have should be able to find open spots. Had Rice, Tate or Baldwin dropped a bunch of balls, I'd feel differently. They're actually quite solid and only going to get better as they work with RW. Plus, better line play will free up Money Miller. I think this is a 30 PPG offense with the personel we currently have.
Yes, It would be nice to have some deep heat, but not essential and I am hopeful the FO will find another WR in day 2 of the draft. We need a DT, DE and LB with our 1st, 2nd and 3rd, IMO. We have a bevy of late rd picks that we should package and trade for another 3 or 4. Use that pick on a project WR with some wheels.


^ THIS.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:04 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:43 pm
Posts: 1218
Location: Florence, Oregon
Looking at Pittsburgh's free agents... Wallace is probably going to be tagged, which means we'll need to give up a 1st round pick plus salary for Wallace. I see this problem being presented with Jennings also.

This is why I'm liking Brian Hartline to Seattle. With Jake Long, Reggie Bush and Randy Starks all scheduled to hit free agency; their's a good chance Brian Hartline won't be tagged. That means we won't have to give up a pick for him, he'll probably cost less than Wallace or Jennings, and I personally think he's a better receiver for Wilson to throw to than Wallace or Jennings anyways. Wilson likes to get a little air under the ball and Hartline is very very good at bringing in the jump balls downfield. Hartline's also a second-effort receiver that keeps working to get open through the end of a route while Wallace has been in the dog-house with Tomlin for taking plays off. Hartline's size and style of play also compliments our other receivers better than Wallace or Jennings do in my opinion. I think Wallace or Jennings would be a highly publicized high-profile signing if we signed them and I think either of them would improve our receiving corp, but I think Brian Hartline would be the best free agent receiver for us to sign.

As for our defensive line... I'd like to see us sign Glenn Dorsey and get him back to being a dominant DT in the 4-3 Defense like he was when he was at LSU. Their's a good chance he won't be tagged with Albert, Bowe and, I believe, Berry scheduled to hit free agency. Desmond Bryant out of Oakland is another disruptive penetrating DT I'm interested in and their's a good chance a team can outbid Oakland for Bryant without over-paying for Bryant and he's a young promising lineman. We might as well look at improving the interior pass rush with Jones and Branch hitting free agency. Randy Starks is off the books in my opinon. If he isn't tagged, he's going to draw some ridiculous offer from someone around the league.
Michael Johnson or Michael Bennett at the right price could be an interesting addition, but I think they're going to have some big dollars thrown at them too. An under-the-radar guy I like... Matt Roth.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:26 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10044
Wallace would be awesome here. Dude wants to get paid, but he doesn't bitch about targets. As PeHawk pointed out before Chris Hanson's lackeys hauled him off, Wallace knows how to play sandlot ball with a quarterback who scrambles to extend plays. Like ours. and he makes safeties cry.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:35 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 290
Like our guys, but if Sidney were to get injured our lack of depth would likely prove problematic.
Wallace has ability that nobody on our team posseses.

Pete has proven to highly value the WR position and I would be happy and not surprised if we gave Wallace a look see.
The draft is maybe more likely route, but I expect them to address the position.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:27 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:50 pm
Posts: 499
firebee wrote:
Looking at Pittsburgh's free agents... Wallace is probably going to be tagged, which means we'll need to give up a 1st round pick plus salary for Wallace. I see this problem being presented with Jennings also.

This is why I'm liking Brian Hartline to Seattle. With Jake Long, Reggie Bush and Randy Starks all scheduled to hit free agency; their's a good chance Brian Hartline won't be tagged. That means we won't have to give up a pick for him, he'll probably cost less than Wallace or Jennings, and I personally think he's a better receiver for Wilson to throw to than Wallace or Jennings anyways. Wilson likes to get a little air under the ball and Hartline is very very good at bringing in the jump balls downfield. Hartline's also a second-effort receiver that keeps working to get open through the end of a route while Wallace has been in the dog-house with Tomlin for taking plays off. Hartline's size and style of play also compliments our other receivers better than Wallace or Jennings do in my opinion. I think Wallace or Jennings would be a highly publicized high-profile signing if we signed them and I think either of them would improve our receiving corp, but I think Brian Hartline would be the best free agent receiver for us to sign.

As for our defensive line... I'd like to see us sign Glenn Dorsey and get him back to being a dominant DT in the 4-3 Defense like he was when he was at LSU. Their's a good chance he won't be tagged with Albert, Bowe and, I believe, Berry scheduled to hit free agency. Desmond Bryant out of Oakland is another disruptive penetrating DT I'm interested in and their's a good chance a team can outbid Oakland for Bryant without over-paying for Bryant and he's a young promising lineman. We might as well look at improving the interior pass rush with Jones and Branch hitting free agency. Randy Starks is off the books in my opinon. If he isn't tagged, he's going to draw some ridiculous offer from someone around the league.
Michael Johnson or Michael Bennett at the right price could be an interesting addition, but I think they're going to have some big dollars thrown at them too. An under-the-radar guy I like... Matt Roth.



He got tagged last year, so how much would that be for Pittsburgh to keep him if he was tagged 2x in a row?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:42 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:52 am
Posts: 229
pc Mo IS compete.
Compete at every position.
Say we do bring in Make Wallace, someone is and will get better.

I doubt PC ever says we are good enough at a particular position. He may say we need more help in one position or another, but that is not to say he is closing an eye to other positions if it means that it can make the club better if the chance ever arises.

If Mike Wallace falls into his lap, is he going to say.. No, were good enough.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:21 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:01 pm
Posts: 2359
Bobblehead wrote:
pc Mo IS compete.
Compete at every position.
Say we do bring in Make Wallace, someone is and will get better.

I doubt PC ever says we are good enough at a particular position. He may say we need more help in one position or another, but that is not to say he is closing an eye to other positions if it means that it can make the club better if the chance ever arises.

If Mike Wallace falls into his lap, is he going to say.. No, were good enough.

He would snap up Wallace in a heartbeat. Seeing what Wilson could do with Pro Bowl-level receivers last Sunday has to have Pete salivating.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:23 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
Posts: 1997
Location: Graham, WA
I like the Hartline idea he won't be a huge splash but might be too much for Miami to pay. They might also be in the martket for a more splashy WR like Wallace and then let Hartline walk, he seems like he could be a Welker or Stokely type that just gets open and would work well as a saftey net for RW. Bring him in on a 3 or 4 year deal that would allow us to cut him after 2. I believe Tate is a FA after this year and having a guy liek Hartline and a rookie from this draft we would be really flexible in not having to resign Tate.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:23 am 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 290
Wenhawk wrote:
I like the Hartline idea he won't be a huge splash but might be too much for Miami to pay. They might also be in the martket for a more splashy WR like Wallace and then let Hartline walk, he seems like he could be a Welker or Stokely type that just gets open and would work well as a saftey net for RW. Bring him in on a 3 or 4 year deal that would allow us to cut him after 2. I believe Tate is a FA after this year and having a guy liek Hartline and a rookie from this draft we would be really flexible in not having to resign Tate.


Not having to resign Tate?
Though Tate is inconsistent at times, he is our most dynamic receiver.
Sidney Rice barely edged him out in leading the team in yards, but if Tate can continue to improve and contribute on a consistent basis there is no doubt in my mind that he'd be the best receiver we have. At times, he is a special player.

I am more concerned (not the right word) about Sidney. He's certainly a solid player, but though he made it through the year alive is still a bit fragile.

Now, I like all of the guys we got, but I still see a need to add more good players with different skill sets.
I don't have a problem acquiring a player like Hartline, but I think if your going to dish out money in free agency Mike Wallace is the guy you target. I understand Wallace would be pricey, but Hartline will get paid a fair chunk as well.

I still think we spend money on the defensive line and look to upgrade are offense in the draft. If we do spend money in free agency, though, Mike Wallace is the guy!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:44 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:22 pm
Posts: 871
I think Wallace would be a good fit, but i don't think Pete and John we be willing to tie up that kind money in the WR position. We have to keep in mind Sidney is going to making 8.5 to 9 mil over the next three years. I hope they go Hopkins and if he develops like we hope you can ask Sidney to restructure or take hike. This way at least we have some flexibility when it comes time to resign some of our young talent. Hopkins>Wallace


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:27 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 902
Location: Everett, Wa
Any of your choices would work for me. I like em all. One thing i disagree with is getting rid of Tate. Tate has heart and heart helped us win games this past year and most likely next year some. Sid has alil heart in him to as u seen in Chicago.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:11 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 4257
I don't want any player with a record of giving up on his routes late. That's Wilson's bread and butter time. I'd rather see Hartline or Welker. If Welker isn't too much, he's the perfect fit for our team.

_________________
Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 8:29 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
anybody thinks Wallace wouldn't be an instant upgrade is not being realistic.. move Tate to slot , rice and wallace outside? that would be a winning formula on any team... and as already mentioned , that would add dept, you'd have balwdin as our 4th and so on.. the WR position needs to be upgraded, right behind DL and LB....

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:52 am 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:32 pm
Posts: 33
Location: Seattle, WA
Carmon1274 wrote:
firebee wrote:
Looking at Pittsburgh's free agents... Wallace is probably going to be tagged, which means we'll need to give up a 1st round pick plus salary for Wallace. I see this problem being presented with Jennings also.

This is why I'm liking Brian Hartline to Seattle. With Jake Long, Reggie Bush and Randy Starks all scheduled to hit free agency; their's a good chance Brian Hartline won't be tagged. That means we won't have to give up a pick for him, he'll probably cost less than Wallace or Jennings, and I personally think he's a better receiver for Wilson to throw to than Wallace or Jennings anyways. Wilson likes to get a little air under the ball and Hartline is very very good at bringing in the jump balls downfield. Hartline's also a second-effort receiver that keeps working to get open through the end of a route while Wallace has been in the dog-house with Tomlin for taking plays off. Hartline's size and style of play also compliments our other receivers better than Wallace or Jennings do in my opinion. I think Wallace or Jennings would be a highly publicized high-profile signing if we signed them and I think either of them would improve our receiving corp, but I think Brian Hartline would be the best free agent receiver for us to sign.

As for our defensive line... I'd like to see us sign Glenn Dorsey and get him back to being a dominant DT in the 4-3 Defense like he was when he was at LSU. Their's a good chance he won't be tagged with Albert, Bowe and, I believe, Berry scheduled to hit free agency. Desmond Bryant out of Oakland is another disruptive penetrating DT I'm interested in and their's a good chance a team can outbid Oakland for Bryant without over-paying for Bryant and he's a young promising lineman. We might as well look at improving the interior pass rush with Jones and Branch hitting free agency. Randy Starks is off the books in my opinon. If he isn't tagged, he's going to draw some ridiculous offer from someone around the league.
Michael Johnson or Michael Bennett at the right price could be an interesting addition, but I think they're going to have some big dollars thrown at them too. An under-the-radar guy I like... Matt Roth.



He got tagged last year, so how much would that be for Pittsburgh to keep him if he was tagged 2x in a row?


The problem the Steelers have right now is that with the 37 players currently signed to the Steelers roster, they are about 8 million over the 2013 cap. When you add RFA and ERFA, that climbs to about 16m over. If they sign all 7 draft picks, that brings them to 21m over the cap. The top 9 players on the Steelers roster are slotted right now to take up about 80% of their cap. Now, they will probably restructure Big Ben, Timmons and Woodley, which will bring it down. I would bet they cut Harrison, Colon and Keisel (and possibly Polamalu, if they don't restructure/slash his pay or try to trade him for picks, which is questionable with injury issues), but all of that still will likely only bring them a little under the cap. Tagging Wallace will cost them ~10m, so I have serious doubts they can even consider tagging him. Best they can do, IMO, is try to get him to sign an extension but with their money issues, I have questions about whether they will be able to offer him what he feels he is worth, particularly with the problems they had in negotiations last year.

As far as Wallace being dirty, I've never heard of anything serious that he has done. Whether he is a fit for Seattle, well, more talented men than me will make that decision. However, if you look at the type of QB Big Ben is and the way he moves around to extend plays, Wallace would have a lot of valuable experience coming to the Seahawks with Russell Wilson and his style of play.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:31 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:32 pm
Posts: 33
Location: Seattle, WA
joeshaney wrote:
I still think we spend money on the defensive line and look to upgrade are offense in the draft. If we do spend money in free agency, though, Mike Wallace is the guy!


The opposite is probably a better idea. Generally, the WR position is one of the hardest to adapt to the NFL and most WR take 2-3 years before they become significant contributors to their team. I think it is much more likely that the Seahawks find an immediate impact from the draft in the DLine and pick up an established WR in free agency. Whether Wallace is the right guy or not will be evaluated, but I would rather have a Bowe, Jennings, Wallace, Hartline that would be able to come in and be an immediate contributor. Wallace is most appealing because he is only 26, if he can be had at the right price, but I wouldn't get into a bidding war over him.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:01 pm 
*GOLD SUPPORTER*
*GOLD SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:10 am
Posts: 3295
Location: Sammamish, WA
Mike Wallace would be a great add. It would help Rice and rest of the WR corps, not to mention Zach Miller. Look what he did for the Steelers - Brown, Sanders, and Heath Miller. He would be a boon for the passing game.

Wallace was never in the Superbowl when the Steelers played the Seahawks but he could be in one as a Seahawk soon (if they sign him). I heard from many sources radio, tv that the Steelers are not planning on putting the franchise tag on Wallace.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 4:56 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am
Posts: 2742
I expect us to go after a WR in the draft. Signing an outside guy to be one of the most expensive players on your team when you have so many of your own guys to resign can really hurt a locker room.

_________________
Give me some damn skittles...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 9:36 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:32 pm
Posts: 33
Location: Seattle, WA
hawkfan68 wrote:
Mike Wallace would be a great add. It would help Rice and rest of the WR corps, not to mention Zach Miller. Look what he did for the Steelers - Brown, Sanders, and Heath Miller. He would be a boon for the passing game.

Wallace was never in the Superbowl when the Steelers played the Seahawks but he could be in one as a Seahawk soon (if they sign him). I heard from many sources radio, tv that the Steelers are not planning on putting the franchise tag on Wallace.


It's not so much that "they are not going to". I am sure if they could, they would love to. The problem is that in their current situation with the salary cap, they CAN"T tag him because it would count as $10m against the cap.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 12:19 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:16 pm
Posts: 1667
This is the one FA move I agree with. I want this to happen and I think everyone else would be okay with it. We need a speedster like him and Russell would treat him JUST right.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 11:19 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:52 am
Posts: 229
getnasty wrote:
I think Wallace would be a good fit, but i don't think Pete and John we be willing to tie up that kind money in the WR position. We have to keep in mind Sidney is going to making 8.5 to 9 mil over the next three years. I hope they go Hopkins and if he develops like we hope you can ask Sidney to restructure or take hike. This way at least we have some flexibility when it comes time to resign some of our young talent. Hopkins>Wallace



Easy fix..
Trade Rice
We free up 8.5 million.. apply it to Wallace or whoever is a downfield WR.

Trading Rice has other benefits.. we get draft choices or.. better yet.. maybe that DT.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:17 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
Posts: 2824
Location: Seattle
Rice would be more likely to be a cap casualty after a Mike Wallace signing than somebody else. Nothing of value is going to be sent to the Hawks if we sign Wallace and it becomes clear we essentially have to trade or release a WR due a lot of cash.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:26 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:32 pm
Posts: 33
Location: Seattle, WA
pinksheets wrote:
Rice would be more likely to be a cap casualty after a Mike Wallace signing than somebody else. Nothing of value is going to be sent to the Hawks if we sign Wallace and it becomes clear we essentially have to trade or release a WR due a lot of cash.


Rice could become a cap casualty eventually, but not this year. We have plenty of cap space right now.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Wallace to the Seahawks,......would be MASSIVE
 Post Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:38 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
Posts: 2824
Location: Seattle
benbu75 wrote:
pinksheets wrote:
Rice would be more likely to be a cap casualty after a Mike Wallace signing than somebody else. Nothing of value is going to be sent to the Hawks if we sign Wallace and it becomes clear we essentially have to trade or release a WR due a lot of cash.


Rice could become a cap casualty eventually, but not this year. We have plenty of cap space right now.

$18m, Wallace will likely command $9m or $10m of that. I don't think the FO wants to spend $20m or so on two WRs, have only $8m or so leftover to look at extending some of our guys, fill other holes, sign our rookies, or push back as cap space for next year.

If we sign Wallace, I think Rice is gone, or Miller, but it seems like Miller does a lot for them.

It's not a matter of running out of cap space, it's a matter of it being unlikely they think that it's the best way to use it.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ] 

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ NFL NATION ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bitter, HunnyBadger, JGfromtheNW, Rambitious, WilsonLegend and 19 guests

 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.