With all the receiver signings in FA, what about Mike Wallace?

[BigNastyDefense]

With all the receiver signings in FA, what about Mike Wallace? (http://blackngoldreport.blogspot.com/2012/03/with-receiver-signings-in-fa-what-about.html)

There has been a lot of movement with contracts for wide receivers the past couple of days since the league year opened.


Desean Jackson, Eagles: 5-years, $48.5M
Pierre Garcon, Redskins: 5 years, $42.5M
Josh Morgan, Redskins: 2-years, $12M approx.
Vincent Jackson, Buccaneers: 5-years, $56M ($26M guaranteed)
Calvin Johnson, Lions: 8-years, $130.5M ($53M guaranteed)


That is a lot of money for players that don't touch the football every single play. Calvin Johnson received franchise quarterback money, but in my opinion, he has earned it with his play and professionalism.

So this is going to set the market for biggest Steelers' Restricted Free Agent, Mike Wallace.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Click the link for the rest of the blog article.

[O'Malley]

None took a first round draft pick away from said team!!!! After all is said and done he is just a receiver.. Not the most important position on the team... With or without him the Steelers will be fine.. You can always find another guy to fill in.

[BigNastyDefense]

Exactly! The Steelers can resign Cotchery to be the #3 receiver and Emmanuel Sanders becomes the #2 receiver (as long as he can stay healthy) and has the speed to be a deep threat. We can also take another receiver in the mid-to-late rounds since we have such a good track record with late round receivers as of late (Wallace 3rd round, Sanders 3rd round, Brown 6th round).

In the end, I don't think Wallace gets a tender and we get him back for at least one season with exclusive negotiation rights for the rest of this season. And if another team does decide to make him an offer and we allow him to walk, we get an extra first rounder. Like I said in my blog, it's a win-win situation for the Steelers.

[ShutDown24]

Mike Wallace is a restricted free agent. I don't understand why so many people think he is going somewhere.

[GoSlash27]

Why are people consistently bringing up this boogeyman?

[Chidi29]

Mike Wallace is a restricted free agent. I don't understand why so many people think he is going somewhere.

Because it's the offseason and people are bored.

[BigNastyDefense]

Why are people consistently bringing up this boogeyman?

It's the offseason and the Steelers don't go making Redskinesque free agent signings....so instead of talking about how we are going to sign so-and-so it's instead what are the chances of losing so-and-so.

Did any of you actually click the link to the blog? I explain in it that I think the fact that nobody has tendered Wallace yet in three days is good news for the Steelers. However, if someone does and he leaves, Pittsburgh gets a first rounder if they don't match the tender. It's a win-win situation.

[polamalubeast]

I would like than Wallace signs a long term contract with the Steelers.

The steelers are going to be okay even if he loses Wallace, but I wish the Steelers keep Wallace.

[suitanim]

Cutting through the clutter, one could make a case for Wallace signed long-term for about 6 million a season. I don't like it, but it could be worse.

[stillers4me]

Listening to Serius radio this morning, and they said that someone will likey make a move a few days before the draft, hoping the Steelrs sign one or two FA's before then and then squeeze a deal we can't match.

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

Listening to Serius radio this morning, and they said that someone will likey make a move a few days before the draft, hoping the Steelrs sign one or two FA's before then and then squeeze a deal we can't match.

I am OK with that. I think Wallace is going to command a $10-12million a year contract and the Steelers likely will not pay that. So if we get a 1st round pick for him, that is much better than just watching him leave in 2013 to the highest bidder.

[polamalubeast]

I read an article that said that not a single team called Wallace's agent.

[O'Malley]

I read an article that said that not a single team called Wallace's agent.

They all saw him drop the most important pass of his young career in Denver?

[polamalubeast]

They all saw him drop the most important pass of his young career in Denver?

A team must never evaluated a player on one play!

[X-Terminator]

Anyone ever consider that maybe teams don't want to help the Steelers by giving them another first-round pick given their success over the past dozen years, or bail them out of their salary cap troubles? Not only that, a team would have to give up a first-round pick AND blow a hole in their salary cap by signing him to a mega-deal with a huge cap hit for next season just so the Steelers couldn't match it. I'd be shocked if a team took that chance.

[BigNastyDefense]

Listening to Serius radio this morning, and they said that someone will likey make a move a few days before the draft, hoping the Steelrs sign one or two FA's before then and then squeeze a deal we can't match.

That's impossible, Wallace is only a FA for two weeks. If nobody tenders him a contract before then, he comes back to the Steelers on the one-year tender he received from the Steelers. Otherwise, teams would wait until after the draft to sign Wallace and give up the draft pick in 2013, keeping their pick this season.

[steelreserve]

Maybe a little off topic, but - $9M a year for Pierre Garcon? Holy shit!

[polamalubeast]

Anyone ever consider that maybe teams don't want to help the Steelers by giving them another first-round pick given their success over the past dozen years, or bail them out of their salary cap troubles? Not only that, a team would have to give up a first-round pick AND blow a hole in their salary cap by signing him to a mega-deal with a huge cap hit for next season just so the Steelers couldn't match it. I'd be shocked if a team took that chance.

I think that Chidi29 was right!

And I think the last time that a WR was traded against a first round pick it was Randy Moss in 2005.Otherwise, I admit that I was very nervous in the last month because of rumors about Wallace.

[Count Steeler]

I still don't think we are in the clear as far as cap space is concerned. If we had the cap space, Wallace would probably be offered 5-6 million. If he demands 10-12 million, then see ya later.

[polamalubeast]

The value of wallace is between 10 to 12 million.

And the steelers are now 8 million under the cap and will have 2 million more available if he releases Jonathan Scott.

[Psycho Ward 86]

lol oh my god panic harder guys. hardly anybody seems to realize how rare it is for a quality restricted free agent to get snagged away from his home team

[Steeldude]

I'm hoping a team takes him. At least they will get a 1st round pick instead of nothing in 2013. I seriously doubt the Steelers will be able to sign him when he becomes a UFA.

[GBMelBlount]

Cutting through the clutter, one could make a case for Wallace signed long-term for about 6 million a season. I don't like it, but it could be worse.


Polamalubeast

The value of wallace is between 10 to 12 million.



OK....so what IS Wallace's value?


This is what I have been wondering.

[BigNastyDefense]

OK....so what IS Wallace's value?


This is what I have been wondering.

I would put his value above what Desean Jackson got but less than what Vincent Jackson received. It's hard to say though with absolutely nobody showing him any interest as an RFA, not even a phone call to his agent from what I have read. He can't even come to the Steelers and say "this is what so-and-so offered me, work me a contract based around those numbers and we have a deal."

Also, Wallace wants to get paid if not this season, next. But he MIGHT be willing to take a bit of a discount to stay with the Steelers where he can make money, get big stats, and potentially win championships instead of signing somewhere that has a ton of cap room because they suck and not sniff the playoffs for the rest of his career.

I think the Steelers are willing to give him a reasonable offer, but they aren't going to offer him more than what they feel he is worth.

[polamalubeast]

OK....so what IS Wallace's value?


This is what I have been wondering.

Looking at the contracts of other WR, it is certain that Wallace worth at least 10 million per year.

The Steelers can put the TAG in 2013, but the Steelers have said that signed wallace was a big priority.

also the Steelers can signed Wallace....no problem.... .The cap hit of DeSean Jackson is 3 million this year!

[Chidi29]

Looking at the contracts of other WR, it is certain that Wallace worth at least 10 million per year.

The Steelers can put the TAG in 2013, but the Steelers have said that signed wallace was a big priority.

also the Steelers can signed Wallace....no problem.... .The cap hit of DeSean Jackson is 3 million this year!

Three million? I read that it's 11.

[polamalubeast]

Three million? I read that it's 11.

The cap hit that I speak.

And I talked about DeSean Jackson, not Vincent Jackson

[Chidi29]

The cap hit that I speak.

And I talked about DeSean Jackson, not Vincent Jackson

Yeah, I'm talking about the same thing. And same person.

[polamalubeast]

Yeah, I'm talking about the same thing. And same person.

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2012/03/looking-at-the-desean-jackson-pierre-garcon-contract-numbers/

[Chidi29]

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2012/03/looking-at-the-desean-jackson-pierre-garcon-contract-numbers/

Hmmm...Andrew Brandt says 11.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Catching-Contracts.html

Jackson was scheduled to make $9.5 million playing under the Tag in 2012. Jackson will now make -- from bonuses and salary -- $11 million in 2012, a relatively modest increase of $1.5 million. In 2013, Jackson will make $7 million in bonus and salaries, $4 million of which is fully guaranteed, the rest guaranteed only for injury (if he is unable to play in 2013 due to injury). And in 2014, Jackson will make $10.5 million, only $250,000 of which is guaranteed.

[polamalubeast]

who is right?!

[86WARD]

Mike Wallace is a restricted free agent. I don't understand why so many people think he is going somewhere.

It's not going to be hard for the 49ers to come in and take Wallace away from Pittsburgh. Not difficult at all. First of all the 30th pick in the draft is nothing compared to Mike Wallace. That's a no-brainer. Wallace's contract should be in the neighborhood of DeSean Jackson and Vincent Jackson plus some. A first year roster bonus of $10M takes him away easily. VERY easily.

[Psycho Ward 86]

It's not going to be hard for the 49ers to come in and take Wallace away from Pittsburgh. Not difficult at all. First of all the 30th pick in the draft is nothing compared to Mike Wallace. That's a no-brainer. Wallace's contract should be in the neighborhood of DeSean Jackson and Vincent Jackson plus some. A first year roster bonus of $10M takes him away easily. VERY easily.

do you realize how rare it is for even premium RFA's to get stolen by teams? Chidi had some nice stuff on it in another thread. Apparently on this board he's as good as gone lol.
I want Wallace back, but i cant disagree at all really at Steeldude's logic.

[Chidi29]

do you realize how rare it is for even premium RFA's to get stolen by teams? Chidi had some nice stuff on it in another thread. Apparently on this board he's as good as gone lol.
I want Wallace back, but i cant disagree at all really at Steeldude's logic.

No RFA has left since 2006 regardless of level of tender.

No RFA that has been tendered at the first round level like Wallace has gone somewhere else in ten years.

That's all that really needs to be known. Very, very likely Wallace stays.

[SteelerFanInStl]

I've been reading the local Rams board the last few days and there's a lot of fans that would gladly give up the #6 pick this year to get Wallace. As a Steelers fan I'd take that. It's certainly better than getting nothing out of him next year. With the big $$ being handed out to these WRs now, I just don't see the Steelers paying Wallace that type of money. I'd love to see us keep him but the realist in me doesn't see it happening.

[Psycho Ward 86]

people still worried about losing wallace after they signed moss? they're after manningham and brandon lloyd as well: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8279f947/article/niners-release-spencer-bring-in-wrs-manningham-lloyd?module=HP11_headline_stack

[X-Terminator]

It's not going to be hard for the 49ers to come in and take Wallace away from Pittsburgh. Not difficult at all. First of all the 30th pick in the draft is nothing compared to Mike Wallace. That's a no-brainer. Wallace's contract should be in the neighborhood of DeSean Jackson and Vincent Jackson plus some. A first year roster bonus of $10M takes him away easily. VERY easily.

And again, WHO is going to pay that? That roster bonus counts against their salary cap and doesn't include base salary for the season. Do you really believe that a team is going to blow a hole in their salary cap like that AND give up a first-round pick? Why would ANY team do that when they can sign a top WR and not give up a thing?

[NCSteeler]

Hmmm...Andrew Brandt says 11.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Catching-Contracts.html

Jackson was scheduled to make $9.5 million playing under the Tag in 2012. Jackson will now make -- from bonuses and salary -- $11 million in 2012, a relatively modest increase of $1.5 million. In 2013, Jackson will make $7 million in bonus and salaries, $4 million of which is fully guaranteed, the rest guaranteed only for injury (if he is unable to play in 2013 due to injury). And in 2014, Jackson will make $10.5 million, only $250,000 of which is guaranteed.

I don't think bonuses play into the cap hit

[NCSteeler]

I personally wouldn't want them to sign Wallace at 10 mil a year, unless it was based on a lot of performance escalators. I value him about 5-7 mil. In most sets he's one of 3 other guys at his position on the field. If you give Wallace 10 mil , your pretty much giving up on signing the other 2 WRs.

Also more important than will someone steal him, is will he sign the tender?

[X-Terminator]

I don't think bonuses play into the cap hit

If roster bonuses did not play into the cap hit, then why all of this talk about a team offering Wallace a big roster bonus to take him away because of the Steelers' cap situation not allowing them to match? The Steelers wouldn't have any problem re-signing him if that were the case.

[Chidi29]

I don't think bonuses play into the cap hit

Yeah, I'm pretty sure they do. It's money owed to the player.

I know for a fact signing bonuses count against the cap. Roster and workout bonuses should be treated as the same.

[NCSteeler]

How would they figure your cap for the players that have achievement bonuses? I see a lot of contract with large sums tied to playing time, probowl election, things like that would be hard to predict prior to the season to figure what a players cap number should be.

[NCSteeler]

http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp




How does the NFL Salary Cap treat cash incentives?

Answer: All incentives are included in team salary if they are "likely to be earned" (LTBE). LTBE incentives are performance levels that the player or team has reached in the previous year.

For example, if a quarterback threw twenty touchdowns last year and his incentive clause for this year is set at fifteen touchdowns, then this incentive is “likely to be earned.” Also, incentives that are in the sole control of the player, like non-guaranteed reporting bonuses and off-season workout and weight bonuses, are considered LTBE.

An impartial arbitrator will hear disputes between the owners and the players concerning what should be considered LTBE (especially for rookies or veterans who did not play in the prior year). Conversely, if a player did not reach the performance incentive in the previous year, the incentive is deemed "not likely to be earned" (NLTBE) and is not included in team salary.

To determine whether a clause is LTBE or NLTBE for Salary Cap purposes (i.e., not whether the player actually earned the incentive), it is necessary to look at the performance of the team in the prior season, not the current season.

For example, assume Player X receives an incentive bonus if he participates in 50% of the team’s offensive plays this season. Assume further that last season the team had 1,000 offensive plays. Therefore, as soon as Player X plays in 500 plays in the current season (or 50% of last year’s 1,000 plays), the incentive will be considered earned for Salary Cap purposes.

The same incentive is considered "not earned" if the same player in the current year only participated in one of the team’s first 502 offensive plays. In this situation, it would be impossible for the player to achieve the 50% incentive based on last year’s performance of 1,000 plays. It is important to remember that looking to last year’s performance level is only for Salary Cap purposes and will not affect the player's right to receive a bonus for his performance in the current year.

What I'm not clear on is if the incentive is NLTBE and the player makes it, how do you count it. He makes it sound as if NLTBE money is never counted against the cap.

[suitanim]

Look back. Roethlisberger had all kinds of NLTBE money earned in his first year (Maddox was the starter, he was supposed to sit and learn). There's probably some discussion somewhere about it's cap ramifications...

[Chidi29]

http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp





What I'm not clear on is if the incentive is NLTBE and the player makes it, how do you count it. He makes it sound as if NLTBE money is never counted against the cap.

I've been awake all night so I'm hoping I'm coherent enough to answer the question...and be right about it.

I remember reading an article about this a few years ago and ironically, just found a similar one the other day. This is what I think happens (and I didn't really read the AsktheCommish passage, I've been to the site before and read that part, but like I said, no sleep).

I think it used to be that LTBE and NLTBE all counted for that years cap. So if a player had to do "X" in the 2009 season, it was counted against the 2009 cap.

But teams, and I specifically remember reading the Browns were the ones who did this the most, exploited a loophole.

What they would do is create outlandish NLTBE incentives. Something to the effect of a punter leading the team in rushing (maybe not that crazy but you get my point. Something that would never be done). Let's say for example's sake, the incentive was for the punter to lead the team in rushing in 2009. If he did, he gets paid an extra $1 million. That $1 million gets charged for the 2009 cap.

2009 goes by and surprise, he doesn't lead the team in rushing.

The loophole comes into play here. What would happen is that since the incentive is not reached, it would be carried over as credit for the next season. So the Browns get an extra $1 million in cap space for 2010. Teams went pretty crazy and started to give themselves a lot of extra room to play with.

I think it was changed to where LTBE incentives count against THIS year's cap whereas NLTBE are counted for next year's cap to get rid of the loophole.

Link to article I referenced at the beginning: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=1748069

[Chidi29]

And why are we talking about NLTBE? How is this relevant to Jackson?

[86WARD]

Just because it hasn't "happened" since 2006 and that it is "rare," doesn't mean it can't happen. A team that is a receiver away from a Super Bowl run would be more than happy to pay that money up front to steal him away from Pittsburgh.

The Niners still don't have a true #1 receiver, so why wouldn't they be interested? Because they signed Moss? Because they are interested in Brandon Lloyd? Brandon Lloyd...lol.

I'm saying it's not going to be difficult for a team to swoop in, once the dust settles, and take him off the Steelers hands if they want. Probably won't happen for a week or so because of the time teams have to wait after the offer is signed.

[steelreserve]

The loophole comes into play here. What would happen is that since the incentive is not reached, it would be carried over as credit for the next season. So the Browns get an extra $1 million in cap space for 2010. Teams went pretty crazy and started to give themselves a lot of extra room to play with.

I think it was changed to where LTBE incentives count against THIS year's cap whereas NLTBE are counted for next year's cap to get rid of the loophole.

I'm pretty sure it was always that way, but the problem was that teams were abusing the system by writing bogus incentives (e.g. the punter leading the team in rushing) and calling them LTBE. That way, if they had extra cap space and knew they were going to have a crappy year, they could carry over the extra cap space until next year. So some teams were hoarding cap space until they got good.

The way they fixed it was by setting up rules to classify LTBE and NLTBE so you couldn't cheat the system. If a player reached the benchmark for the incentive the previous year, it counts as LTBE. If he didn't, it counts as NLTBE.

Again, I think that's what they did. The cap rules change so often that they're constantly a moving target.

[suitanim]

Getting back to GBM's question, if you ask me, a 7 year deal for $42 million is what I'd pay Wallace. I think the Steelers could actually pay that, and they'd honor that without having to manipulate the cap down the road, and, most importantly, Wallace knows he's going to play probably his whole career on a team that will be consistently competing for Super Bowl trophies.

is that gonna happen? Probably not. He's going to want huge money. But if nobody is calling him right now, when he IS a free agent, I'd take the current deal off the table, and offer him my deal, and let him take it or leave it. Then play it by ear. The important thing is, he's missed the stupid part of free agency where idiots just spend money like a drunken Al Davis. If we wind up signing him with a small one-year deal, we just set ourselves up for this same showdown all over again next year.

[86WARD]

RFA's usually don't come into play at this point in Free Agency. That's why he's not getting any "offers" at this point.

[polamalubeast]

Getting back to GBM's question, if you ask me, a 7 year deal for $42 million is what I'd pay Wallace. I think the Steelers could actually pay that, and they'd honor that without having to manipulate the cap down the road, and, most importantly, Wallace knows he's going to play probably his whole career on a team that will be consistently competing for Super Bowl trophies.

is that gonna happen? Probably not. He's going to want huge money. But if nobody is calling him right now, when he IS a free agent, I'd take the current deal off the table, and offer him my deal, and let him take it or leave it. Then play it by ear. The important thing is, he's missed the stupid part of free agency where idiots just spend money like a drunken Al Davis. If we wind up signing him with a small one-year deal, we just set ourselves up for this same showdown all over again next year.

Offer 10-11 million per year to Wallace is not stupid.... This is the value of Wallace right now.

[suitanim]

OK, maybe I don't have all the facts, but isn't our one year offer like really low? Like under 3 million? And isn't the stipulation that if he doesn't sign that, a team can make him a higher offer, which would then revert back to us having the right to match it?

So if 3 million is really low, and the Steelers don't have the cap room for a lot more, where is the motivation for him to stay a Steeler? Or are we being cautious with the small offer and just waiting to see what other teams are trolling the waters with? Because I was pretty sure the main reason why teams would NOT offer a very big deal in this case is that it would not only cost them a big chunk of salary, but also their first round pick. If that's the case, then we can assume that few or maybe even no teams are going to be dangling much, at any point, so why not pull our offer now and try to lock him into something more generous, but not insane?

And, in response to the last, the Steelers are not going to pay Wallace 11 million a year. They aren't going to tie up a full 1/12th of their cap room on one WR. Not the Steelers. That's insane by their standards.

[polamalubeast]

OK, maybe I don't have all the facts, but isn't our one year offer like really low? Like under 3 million? And isn't the stipulation that if he doesn't sign that, a team can make him a higher offer, which would then revert back to us having the right to match it?

So if 3 million is really low, and the Steelers don't have the cap room for a lot more, where is the motivation for him to stay a Steeler? Or are we being cautious with the small offer and just waiting to see what other teams are trolling the waters with? Because I was pretty sure the main reason why teams would NOT offer a very big deal in this case is that it would not only cost them a big chunk of salary, but also their first round pick. If that's the case, then we can assume that few or maybe even no teams are going to be dangling much, at any point, so why not pull our offer now and try to lock him into something more generous, but not insane?

And, in response to the last, the Steelers are not going to pay Wallace 11 million a year. They aren't going to tie up a full 1/12th of their cap room on one WR. Not the Steelers. That's insane by their standards.


They have given 10 million per year to Lamarr Woodley.

When they signed Roethlisberger in March 2008 he was one of the only players in NFL history to have a 100 million contract.

The steelers are not different from other very good team.This is important to keep their best players and the Steelers know it.

[suitanim]

Actually, I forgot about Woodley.

Maybe they will pay that much for Wallace.

[BigNastyDefense]

The way incentives work in a contract is like this:

The team has two choices, they can pay those incentives in the current season's cap but they have to leave room for all those incentives to be paid if reached, or they can have it written into the contract that any incentives reached get paid out the next season under that year's salary cap.

That's how it was explained on ESPN the other day.

[GBMelBlount]

Actually, I forgot about Woodley.

Maybe they will pay that much for Wallace.

That could be an argument why they CAN'T pay him 10 million a year.

I would imagine we have some pretty big bucks tied up in Woodley, Harrison, Timmons, Polamalu & Ben already...and imagine what we will need to do to keep Brown in the future.

I would imagine the steelers might try to go 7-8 million and hope he will take a hometown discount.

[86WARD]

He ain't taking a home town discount...what's he 26 now? That's not an age you take a "hometown discount."

[X-Terminator]

Seriously, I wish something would happen one way or the other, so we can stop talking about this. No offense...

[fansince'76]

Seriously, I wish something would happen one way or the other, so we can stop talking about this. No offense...

:amen:

Hurry up, draft!

[Iron Steeler]

Seriously, I wish something would happen one way or the other, so we can stop talking about this. No offense... Ya man I agree...I guys this is not the end of the world!Remember when Burress left and we weren't supposed to survive that?Rembember when shipping Holmes out for a 4th was moronic by the steelers?We are actually at an advantage in this WR situation. If Wallace leaves we get a 1st round pick.Think about it this way Wallace was a 3rd round pick . And if another team gets him they give us their 1st....so lemme ask you this would you be happy if the steelers traded a 3rd for a 1st staight up?

[Iron Steeler]

if try to imagine we never had Wallace this would seem awesome to all of us. Imagine teams were willing to exchange their 1st round pick for our 3rd round . It's an awesome return on investment

[polamalubeast]

It is certain that this is not the end of the world if the Steelers lose Wallace, but I want than Wallace stay with the Steelers!

But I have one question....This is when the last time than the Steelers had two first round pick in the same year?

[Iron Steeler]

It is certain that this is not the end of the world if the Steelers lose Wallace, but I want than Wallace stay with the Steelers! But I have one question....This is when the last time than the Steelers had two first round pick in the same year? I can't remember ... 2 first rounders could be dangerous. Good thread starter!

[vader29]

But I have one question....This is when the last time than the Steelers had two first round pick in the same year?

Last time they had 2 picks in the first round was 1989, Tim Worley was the 7th overall pick and Tom Ricketts was the 24th overall pick.

http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2011/4/27/2133927/the-1989-nfl-draft-the-year-the-steelers-had-two-first-round

[86WARD]

That worked out well...ugh...

[suitanim]

Yeah.....um.....maybe we just stick with one pick.

[86WARD]

How about just keep Wallace and just pick the pick like they usually do?

[Psycho Ward 86]

Just because it hasn't "happened" since 2006 and that it is "rare," doesn't mean it can't happen. A team that is a receiver away from a Super Bowl run would be more than happy to pay that money up front to steal him away from Pittsburgh.

The Niners still don't have a true #1 receiver, so why wouldn't they be interested? Because they signed Moss? Because they are interested in Brandon Lloyd? Brandon Lloyd...lol.

I'm saying it's not going to be difficult for a team to swoop in, once the dust settles, and take him off the Steelers hands if they want. Probably won't happen for a week or so because of the time teams have to wait after the offer is signed.

you have got to be the only guy on this board who thinks brandon lloyd is a huge joke. Really? Other than megatron and Fitz, it's tough to argue against him having the best football acumen in regards to consistently making off balance body control catches. The patriots got a huge huge bargain out of lloyd, 4 million a year for an All-pro receiver who still plays like one. If the 49ers ended up with him, their "alleged " race to go after Wallace would be over immediately.

[86WARD]

Maybe you are thinking of another Brandon Lloyd. The Brandon Lloyd I'm talking about plays in the NFL. The only success he's ever had has been with Josh McDaniels. The ONLY success. Look at last season...after McDaniels left Denver, he returned to the garbage he was from 2003-2010. He gets traded to St. Louis...starts to do well again...oh by the way, who was in St. Louis? McDaniels. There's a reason he signed with the Patriots. There's a reason he expressed interest in the Patriots all through out the off season...his success is tied directly to McDaniels.

So there is an alleged race to go after Wallace? That sucks.

[GBMelBlount]

if try to imagine we never had Wallace this would seem awesome to all of us.

Imagine teams were willing to exchange their 1st round pick for our 3rd round .

It's an awesome return on investment

There is more to it than that now Iron.

I really don't think we can look at it as simply trading third round for a first anymore.

He is already a pro bowl receiver very early in his nfl career with lots of upside.

[Psycho Ward 86]

Maybe you are thinking of another Brandon Lloyd. The Brandon Lloyd I'm talking about plays in the NFL. The only success he's ever had has been with Josh McDaniels. The ONLY success. Look at last season...after McDaniels left Denver, he returned to the garbage he was from 2003-2010. He gets traded to St. Louis...starts to do well again...oh by the way, who was in St. Louis? McDaniels. There's a reason he signed with the Patriots. There's a reason he expressed interest in the Patriots all through out the off season...his success is tied directly to McDaniels.

So there is an alleged race to go after Wallace? That sucks.

according to what? Your stats? He was insane in college and making the same dynamic plays with the 49ers as he has been these past two seasons. Ask a 49ers board how much they were gushing about him early in his career. Character problems and a stretch of injuries hampered him for a long stretch after that. i see you've calmed your sky-is-falling attitude about Wallace though lol, nice to see that you're starting to realize that the 49ers and patriots take lloyd and manningham as serious starters. just kidding, what have they ever done :rolleyes:

[86WARD]

Lloyd's not that good dude. You're clueless is you think so. He makes a good catch every once in a while but he's not as good as you believe him to be. lol. BTW - those comments about their respective teams finding their "#1 guy", paying "#1 money at $4M/year..." sarcasm. Neither is a number one...lol. They just aren't...their play says so. Theor stats say so, their pay checks say so. You're a funny one. But you keep thinking that...you take Manningham and Lloyd. I'll stick with Johnson, Welker, Nicks, Fitzgerald, White, Marshall, Wallace, Jackson, Bowe...you know...those guys who are true #1 receivers.

I'm sorry...where was my "sky is falling" attitude? Because I used the 49ers in my example of how easy it would be for a team to take Wallace from the Steelers if they wanted to? It was an example, a scenario, a possibility...still is. No where did I say I thought it would happen. No where did I say it would happen...lol. Your reading comprehension is really lacking lately. Wow...