A look at Steelers', Wallace's options as holdout continues

Quote :

There is such a wide variety of speculative opinion pieces out there from people with varying levels of credibility that it's impossible to have a hold on what will happen. The reality is right now that ANYTHING could happen.

The Steelers could resort to a sign-and-trade in the hopes of adding at least a 4th round pick.
Wallace could hold out "until he has to", i.e. to accrue the 6 games necessary to become an unrestricted free agent.
He could show up Monday and sign his first-round tender and put everything behind him.
He could show up at any time and work out a long-term contract that could range anywhere between $8 and $12 million a year.

What will happen next? Tune in next time.

I decided to elaborate on this in my newest article. I'll post the full thing here, but the link also includes helpful links, photo slideshows, etc. I must say this is the most objective and level-headed take on the situation I've seen yet.

A look at Steelers', Wallace's options as holdout continues

Quote :

Although seemingly every sports writer around has written an opinion piece on what will happen next with the Steelers’ Pro Bowl wide receiver Mike Wallace, the reality is that just about anything can happen. Perhaps not even Wallace knows what the next step taken will be.

Here are a few of the things that can happen:

He can decide to hold out just long enough to still qualify for free agency next season.
He can report, sign his tender, and play out the season.
He can report, sign his tender, and re-enter negotiations to reach a new contract that can range anywhere from $8 million per year to $12 million.
Or, the Steelers can sign-and-trade him if they feel he’s become more trouble than he’s worth.

To recap, Wallace, a 4th year receiver after being drafted in the 3rd round of the 2009 NFL draft, was given a first round level restricted free agent tender this offseason by the Steelers, which would pay him a bit over $2.7 million for the season. A first round tender necessitates that any team looking to sign Wallace to a contract must forfeit their own natural first round draft pick for the next draft to the Steelers.

Many speculated that a team looking to upgrade their receiving group, such as the New England Patriots* and San Francisco 49ers, would be willing to give up their pick for Wallace. Yet the signing period came and went, and Wallace sat as he watched other receivers like DeSean Jackson, Marques Colston, and Vincent Jackson cash in with lucrative new contracts.

ESPN’s Adam Schefter was the first to report that Wallace did not intend to sign his tender “until he has to”—and, of course, he has still not signed it. Fast forward to July, after the Steelers elected not to reduce Wallace’s tender offer, and suddenly it sounds like a new deal is imminent.

But a funny thing happened on the way to training camp. As many have written since Wednesday, the Steelers have a policy of not negotiating with veteran players that do not show up to camp. The day after Wallace elected not to show up for camp, which evidently was not entirely expected, team GM Kevin Colbert confirmed that negotiations were not only suspended, but that the team’s last, best offer was also off the table, leaving a “wait and see” approach if negotiations ever come about again.

Yesterday, of course, the Steelers agreed to a 5 year, $42.5 million contract extension with 3rd year WR Antonio Brown. Coupled with the out of character press conference to announce the deal (an event not afforded to other recent Steelers that signed big new contracts such as LaMarr Woodley and Troy Polamalu), it is easy to see why many view the move as a message to their Pro Bowl wideout. Namely, “you want to talk money? Sign your tender and get in camp”.

So what will happen next? And how much of what happens next can Mike Wallace control, after the Steelers just gave $42.5 million they could have given to him to his running mate? Can the Steelers still even afford Mike Wallace’s contract demands?

Hypothetically, it appears that they could. As far as the 2012 season goes, Brown’s new contract only adds an approximately $1.7 million dent to the team’s salary cap, an amount that can be accounted for by utilizing the team’s three $500,000 veteran cap credits, which the team has said that they plan to use. Colbert also said it’s not out of the question that they restructure another contract or two before the regular season begins, depending on what moves they make.

However, before any of that happens, Wallace must sign his tender and report to camp. But if he truly plans on not signing “until he has to” (which could mean holding out until the middle of November in order to accrue the 6 games necessary to reach unrestricted free agency in 2013), then there may be some credence to the recent trade speculation.

Both Ed Bouchette and Gerry Dulac of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette have discussed just that over the course of the past day and a half. Should the Steelers reach a point where they feel that they not only would be unable to sign Wallace but that he would be more of a distraction than an asset (as happened with Santonio Holmes in 2010), they may decide to allow Wallace to field offers from other teams.

At that point, the Steelers could carry out a sign-and-trade, whereby Wallace comes to terms on a new contract with another team, signs his tender, and then the Steelers trade him. Bouchette speculated that such a trade may cost no more than a 4th round pick at this point (the Steelers received a 5th round pick for Holmes).

That, however, is only one scenario. Wallace could eventually simply sign his tender, report to camp, and try to have the best season he can when he hits free agency next year. Or the Steelers could slap the franchise tag on him instead of allowing him to hit the open market.

Or, perhaps, the Steelers will decide to reopen negotiations once Wallace reports. A new deal is still not out of the question as far as the salary cap and Wallace’s demands go. According to Mark Kaboly and Alan Robinson from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, that “last, best offer” that the Steelers extended to Wallace was somewhere around 5 years, $50 million. But his demands are closer to Vincent Jackson’s new contract, which was 5 years, $55.55 million.

The (approximately $5 million) discrepancy does not seem to be an amount that would be insurmountable, and, perhaps if Wallace chose not the hold out, he would already have gotten that deal. Now with Brown’s new contract in the books, however, it is uncertain what impact that will have on Wallace’s demands or in the Steelers’ generosity.

Regardless of how likely or unlikely, it is possible that Wallace looks at Brown’s situation and decides to get what he can, perhaps somewhere even in the $8 million per year range. Or perhaps the Steelers and Wallace re-enter the negotiation arena, hit the stumbling block that they last reached at around 5 years, $50 million, and work to bridge the $5 million gap.

Nobody truly knows what will happen just yet. Only time will tell.

Dodens Grav wrote:

I must say this is the most objective and level-headed take on the situation I've seen yet.

............................

I can honestly say that's probably the best explanation of the situation I've seen. You've done a great job keeping up with all of this, Dodens ... especially when it comes to the cap and what they can afford. Other than maybe Dave Bryan, you've probably had the best insight into this drama.

Thanks Wallace. Too bad I didn't wait a little longer to see Ed Werder tweet about Colbert claiming he's not available for trade though. I did edit my article to include that.

Yeah, there's been tons of trade talk today, but I haven't bought into any of it. That interferes with my belief that a deal will still get done.

Oh, and check your PMs.

Dodens Grav wrote:

Thanks Wallace. Too bad I didn't wait a little longer to see Ed Werder tweet about Colbert claiming he's not available for trade though. I did edit my article to include that.

I don't believe they'd pull another Holmes type deal. Don't get me wrong in that case I was glad to see Holmes gone but we could have gotten more. It seems in Wallace's case we would maybe get even less for a much better receiver with better character(I think).

if Wallace is gone the Steelers move on, Wallace is just a little bump in the road no biggy.

effyou515 wrote:

if Wallace is gone the Steelers move on, Wallace is just a little bump in the road no biggy.

I agree, although that bump in the road may be cancer