Inside The Bills

Wallace: We didn’t match Bills intensity

Posted by Chris Brown on September 14, 2014 – 7:54 pm

On an emotional day for Bills fans, the players were every bit as fired up. Knowing football is an emotional game, Miami WR Mike Wallace felt he and his Dolphins teammates just couldn’t match the intensity of the Bills Sunday.

“We have to have more intensity,” said Wallace. “We didn’t have enough intensity out there. Those guys were fired up on every single play. Every single play. You heard them screaming and yelling. They were fired up and we were quiet. You’re not going to win like that. I understand if trash talking is not your thing, but when those guys are fired up like that, you have to show emotion back and take it to the same level as them.”

When asked why they came out so flat, Wallace couldn’t put his finger on it.

“They had a lot of intensity. We weren’t close to their intensity,” he said. “That’s why they won the football game. They did a good job of playing football, but their intensity was so much higher than ours that I think that’s why they won the game honestly. They were riled up. Telling each other, ‘Let’s go!’ Talking crazy to us. Some people feed off that. Even if it was a guy not making the play, but he’s fired up and he’s getting his teammate fired up. I think you might’ve had to be on the field. It was crazy.”


Tags: ,
Posted in Inside the Bills

WR Wallace to report to Steelers Sunday

Posted by Chris Brown on August 21, 2012 – 1:55 pm

Steelers RFA WR Mike Wallace will reportedly return to the team this coming weekend.

That according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, which says Wallace will report to the team after the Steelers return from their preseason game against the Bills Saturday evening at Ralph Wilson Stadium (7 pm kickoff).

Whether Wallace could quickly get up to speed and participate in the Steelers final preseason game a week from Thursday is completely up in the air.


Tags: ,
Posted in Inside the Bills

Fan Friday 3-23

Posted by Chris Brown on March 23, 2012 – 11:19 am

The NFL draft is just about a month away. Let’s get to your questions from AskChris@bills.nfl.net.

1 - Hey CB,

Thanks for all of your hard work reporting on the Bills–it’s really appreciated.  I was just wondering if you could layout the off season calendar from OTAs to Training camp and explain the new guidelines under the new CBA opposed to years past? 

Thanks,
Aaron
NYC
CB: You can find all the OTA and minicamp dates right here. As far as OTAs go players can only go against “air.” In other words no offense vs. defense, no kickoff team vs. kick return team. Team drills can only be run against air and there are no one-on-one drills allowed either. Also during the first phase of OTAs there are no helmets worn and obviously no pads or shells without any live contact.

In the second phase of OTAs helmets can be worn, but there is still no live contact and therefore no pads or shells. A maximum of 10 practice days can be scheduled over this three week period, with no more than three days over each of the first two weeks.

For the mandatory minicamp coaches can have two-a-days on two of the three total practice days, but there are still no contact drills or use of pads allowed.

So in summation contact drills, unit vs. unit drills and one-on-one drills are now prohibited.  

And per the CBA each team is required to film all of these OTAs and minicamp practices and hold onto them until a month into the regular season in case the league wants to review them to make sure the rules are being followed.

2 – Chris,

I could use some clarification on how the salary caps works under the new CBA.  My understanding is that the salary cap is the most that a team is allowed to spend on player contracts, and under the new CBA that was reached last year, every team has to spend up to 99% of the cap beginning in the 2012 season.  I also understand that teams that were under the cap last year have the ability to roll that money over to next season to spend extra money.

Any additional info on this topic would be greatly appreciated. 

-Brendan
Las Vegas

 

CB: The way it was outlined in the new CBA was confusing to a lot of people because the league talked about collective team spending and then in the next breath individual team spending. It kind of muddied the waters with respect to what each team has to commit to spending-wise. I’ll try to present it as simply as I can (no easy task).

League-wide there has to be commitment to cash spending of 99 percent of the cap in 2011 and 2012. That means all the teams collectively. If the league’s 32 teams fail to reach the 99 percent level then the league has to make up the difference.

In 2011 and 2012 there is no salary cap floor (minimum). That does not kick in until 2013. At that point each individual club is committed to cash spending of 89 percent of the cap from 2013-2016 and 2017-2020. 

For the 2013-2016 seasons, and again for the 2017-2020 seasons, the clubs collectively will commit to cash spending of at least 95 percent of the cap. Again if the 32 teams do not reach that figure the league makes up the difference.

So starting next offseason there is technically a salary cap floor for all NFL clubs (89% of cap), but as far as the higher percentage, that’s a figure the league’s teams have to reach collectively.

The most important thing to remember is it’s not cap space, it’s cash spent by the clubs. That adds up a lot quicker than cap space knowing contracts with respect to the cap can be spread out over the length of the deal. Hope that all makes sense.

 

3 - Chris,

These two months of speculation of the draft are like sitting in a closed room, watching the walls of its paint dry. I am impressed with your tenacity for finding new information and working your sources for the fans of the Bills. I wonder how many Bills fans are aware that we could have picked Ron Gronkowski in the second round of 2010, instead we picked DT Torell Troup. Belichick had the next pick and he rewarded his Pats with what turned out to be the best TE in the business. I’m sure Buddy hasn’t forgotten that snafu as another draft approaches.

There are some really good quality picks for TE in the early second round. Did you think Buddy will take a chance on one of them? And who do you think is the best pick between Dwayne Allen, Orson Charles or the Stanford TE? It’s high time the Bills paid respect to a such versatile position with a huge upside.

Go Bills!
Buffalo Bill

CB: First, I wouldn’t call taking Torell Troup a snafu. Yes, Gronkowski has panned out to be a tremendous talent, whose value has largely been maximized by a very good coach and outstanding quarterback. Troup has been mired by a persistent back problem his first two seasons, but with his back issues rectified I think he’ll prove to be a solid contributor. Only time will tell.

As for the TE position this year, Stanford’s Coby Fleener is the most complete. After clocking a 4.45 at his pro day he’s probably not going to be there in round two. That leaves Dwayne Allen from Clemson and Orson Charles from Georgia. Both are lacking a bit in size, and some NFL scouts consider them H-backs more than true tight ends.

I believe Allen’s hands are a little better than Charles’, but both are pretty good blockers. Allen looks a bit stronger physically than Charles. Both have good intangibles. I think it’s going to come down to whether a team wants a more versatile TE or not. If they want versatility I think Charles can line up in more places than Allen. Allen however, is stronger and a more natural pass catcher.

Both could come off the board in round 2.

 

4 - Chris,

Love the Bills’ coverage year round. There seems to be changes in the wind with the 10th pick. It appears they might lean towards Left Tackle. But at that spot, is that the best player available? Reiff and Martin both have concerns. I know they would like to add a tackle but both players have just as much risk as Ingram, Coples, and Upshaw. I would like to see them trade down or draft Floyd from ND. A sure handed big receiver with speed. Floyd would be a great addition across from Stevie and give Fitz targets. What’s your assessment on Floyd, LT.  Need vs value at pick 10?

CB: This is the great debate for the Bills heading into the draft. Reiff and Martin are widely viewed as players worthy of coming off the board between 10 and 15. Floyd has enhanced his overall stock with a solid Combine workout and squeaky clean senior year off the field.

Truthfully the debate isn’t need versus value. They need a starting left tackle and a number two wide receiver. The question is what is Buffalo’s draft grade on Martin, Reiff and Floyd? If the grades are close I think they pull the trigger at left tackle because they need a starter there. It’s harder and harder to find a capable starting left tackle with each passing round. This draft is deep at receiver and you can arguable get a quality player in round three, though he won’t have 4.47 speed that Floyd possesses.

What we also need to remember is if the grades on Martin, Reiff and Floyd are not close to that of the 10th pick Buffalo could trade down from there and re-group presumably armed with an additional pick.

 

5 - Hi Chris,

I know that Buddy and Chan want a deep threat that is open even when he isnt, and they dont see a pass rusher at 10, would it not make sense to go after Mike Wallace, if they gave him enough money in year 1 Pittsburg wouldn’t be able to sign him and they would have the scariest deep threat in the league, which should open things underneath for everyone else to shine even brighter
                                       
Thanks from North of the Border

CB:  I think the premise of your thought is a good one. You know what Mike Wallace is being a proven deep threat in the NFL. However, where things get sticky is in the money you would have to commit to Wallace. After committing number one receiver dollars to Stevie Johnson there’s no way they’d be able to do the same with Wallace, who will absolutely be looking for big, big money.

When you consider the fact that the Bills told Robert Meachem to take the four-year $25.9M deal from San Diego, it was an indication that $6.5M per season for their number two receiver is too steep a price as they see it. You’re not getting Mike Wallace for less than $6.5M per season so it makes giving up the 10th pick not worth it. I’m sure the Bills would love to have Wallace, but I don’t see Buffalo willing to accommodate Wallace’s contract demands after what went down with Meachem.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Inside the Bills

Steelers WR Wallace worth a 1st?

Posted by Chris Brown on February 21, 2012 – 10:55 am

Pittsburgh Steelers WR Mike Wallace will be tendered at the first-round level, meaning a team could sign him to an offer sheet and if the cap-strapped Steelers do not match the team signing Wallace would have to compensate Pittsburgh with a first-round pick? Is he worth it?

As outlined in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Steelers do not think he’s a $9-$10M a year receiver, not to mention their cap can’t take that kind of hit anyway. That being said I think for some teams one of the fastest receivers in the league will be worth the parting with a pick, especially teams with two in the first round (San Francisco, New England).

He’s a proven player and only has three seasons of NFL mileage on his legs, even if he slumped in the second half of the season. He’d be the perfect complement to Stevie Johnson in Buffalo, but I’d be shocked if the Bills would part with their first-round draft choice to sign him knowing there’s likely to be comparable (though not as youthful) receiver talent in the free agent market.

That’s undoubtedly what Pittsburgh is banking on as well. Knowing they can’t afford to put the franchise tag on Wallace being $10M over the cap, they’re hoping that with a bounty of receiving talent expected to hit the market not requiring first-round pick compensation, that they’ll be able to hold onto Wallace for at least another season and hopefully clear up their cap problems before next offseason and sign him to a long-term deal at that time.

It wouldn’t shock me though if some team took a swing at trying to sign Wallace. Say a team like New England that has two first-round picks and desperately needs a deep threat in the passing game. Their own pick is at the end of the first round, which makes it a better value for New England than most clubs for Wallace.


Tags: ,
Posted in Inside the Bills

WR Wallace to be franchised?

Posted by Chris Brown on February 14, 2012 – 10:14 am

In what is expected to be a bumper crop of wide receiver talent on the open market come March 13th, the Pittsburgh Steelers are determined not to add an emerging Pro Bowl wideout to join the group.

Steelers speed demon Mike Wallace is a restricted free agent, but Pittsburgh’s front office widely believes there would be offer sheets headed Wallace’s way by other NFL clubs were they only to tender him. According to the Pittsburgh-Tribune Review, the Steelers are trying to work out a multi-year deal. If that’s not successful in the coming weeks the franchise tag was not ruled out by GM Kevin Colbert.

One of the main reasons why is because even if the Steelers put a high tender on Wallace, it would only return compensation of a first-round pick were someone to sign him to a deal that Pittsburgh chose not to match. Under the old CBA the high tender was a first and a third-round pick. Some team might see Wallace as a commodity that’s worth parting with a first-round pick, hence the possibility of the franchise tag for him.

Wallace had 72 catches for 1,193 yards and eight touchdowns en route to an AFC Pro Bowl nod in 2011.


Tags: ,
Posted in Inside the Bills