Will the Steelers pay Mike Wallace his market price? Can they? Does Mike Wallace want to remain a Steeler and see his receptions spread around to Brown, Cotchery, Sanders, Saunders, Miller, and possibly Ward...only to have Ben frequently misfire or get sacked when Wallace gets open deep? What impact might the answers to these questions have on the team's release of Bruce Arians? (continued)
Perhaps it's my imagination, but I thought I saw frustration and discontent on Mike's countenance repeatedly this year (in camera close-ups) in response to 1) Ben misfiring when he was open, or 2) Ben scrambling for his life or laying on his back when Mike was open, or 3) Antonio Brown dancing in the end zone after grabbing pass after pass and finally scoring while Mike's receptions increasingly dwindled.
What could Brady do with Wallace's speed to go with his tight end tandem and Welker? What kind of numbers could Wallace produce with 1) Brees, Rogers, or a Manning throwing strikes, or 2) any capable QB throwing him passes who actually has time to throw the ball deep? What might teams like Atlanta, San Francisco, Cincinnati, Baltimore, or Houston be willing to pay for his services? I suspect these questions and more nibble at the minds of Wallace and his agent...and possibly they've occurred to Kevin Colbert and the Steelers brass.
What domino effect might losing Wallace have on the Bruce Arians' offense? Brown and Sanders are fast, but not blazing like Wallace. Wallace definitely stretches the field, a key for the Arians passing attack. Without the threat of his speed, the Arians offense, which was already anemic in the red zone, loses an important weapon between the twenties whose threat contributed substantially to the team's respectable offensive statistics.
So all considered...the question is this: If the front office thought it likely they couldn't resign Wallace, what effect might this belief have had re their decision to abandon Arians' offense?