Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Give up our first for Mike Wallace

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Give up our first for Mike Wallace

    what are everyones thoughts? our first is last anyways, so no biggie. steelers cant keep wallace cause of cap issues. imagine wallace nicks and cruz???

  • #2
    Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

    Personally, I would rather use the 1st round on an OL.
    sigpic
    BLOOOOOCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

      The Giants won't be able to keep Wallace because of cap issues as well.

      Anyway, the team is set at WR - even with the probable departure of Manningham. Bigger problems elsewhere.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

        Without taking account for the cap I would do that without hesitation. Mike Wallace is a legit top 10 WR in the NFL. He can take the top off the coverage and would easily replace and surpass manningham.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

          We'll have some nice cap issues. I agree with a poster above (forgot the username) that I rather keep the first round pick for the OL.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

            Jeez, if there were no cap considerations, signing Carl Nicks would be a higher priority than signing Wallace. However, there is no way the Giants could afford to get Wallace under the cap. And if they had the room, it would be better to re-sign Manningham at a lower cost than Wallace, and I doubt Wallace would have much more impact on the offense than Manningham would.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

              [quote user="Zoboomafoo"] I doubt Wallace would have much more impact on the offense than Manningham would.[/quote]

              FAIL.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                Of course, I would definitely like Wallace on the team, but the cap issue would be difficult to deal with afterwards. I think that if we can think of paying a player on such a scale, then we could probably look into resigning Manningham, and improving Cruz's contract, as it would be great to keep the already established chemistry intact.

                I think Wallace would be amazing, but not when we could use 'franchise' kind of money, as we could just keep one of the top 5 receiver corps intact for that kind of cash.

                Sorry for being redundant, as I just woke up and my coffee has not fully taken effect yet.

                Go Blue!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                  Wallace is better than Manningham, but Wallace, Nicks, and Cruz aren't that much better than Manningham, Nicks, and Cruz. Maybe it's different in videogames.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                    [quote user="Zoboomafoo"]Wallace is better than Manningham, but Wallace, Nicks, and Cruz aren't that much better than Manningham, Nicks, and Cruz. Maybe it's different in videogames.[/quote]


                    Agreed here.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                      no thanks, i get that our 1st is more like a 2nd, but still no thanks

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                        [quote user="G-Man67"]no thanks, i get that our 1st is more like a 2nd, but still no thanks[/quote]

                        The good thing about being a super bowl winner, is that it makes us realize the importance of seeing things from the team perspective; where as other teams always seem to fool their fans all the time with big signings. Of course, by those others, I mean to mainly point at the Eagles, Cowboys and Jets.

                        There is no doubt about Wallace being a superior receiver in comparison to Manningham, but there is no way that Manningham can be called a liability. Manningham is no Shockey to be sure. I do think that he is replaceable, but I do think that regardless who replaces him, it will be difficult to think of loosing the developed chemistry. Plus, thinking of how Manningham's development has occurred, it is not difficult to see how he could keep improving as a route runner in the coming years.

                        I guess that it all depends to the kind of money that his agent will be demanding, and how much other teams offer. Otherwise, keeping him makes complete sense.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                          As bad as we ran the ball this year I'm stunned to think you guys think we need a WR!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                            Congrats! You just had a bad idea!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Give up our first for Mike Wallace

                              Forgetting about the little cap problem that exsists for a second, no. Why wouldn't thy just sign back Manningham? The 1st round pick is the last one? So it's useless? They drafted KP after they won their last Super Bowl.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X