LJ;597763 wrote:The loss of Holmes really hurt this offense. He was a deep threat but was also money on short routes. He really opened things up.

LJ;597763 wrote:The loss of Holmes really hurt this offense. He was a deep threat but was also money on short routes. He really opened things up.

Tiger2003;597766 wrote:Wallace is a great deep threat....But Holmes was way better on the short routes.

gerb131;597717 wrote:Ya'll may beat us but your not going far in the playoffs. Your line is pathetic. I don't keep on Steeler football but I know your missing 1 tackle but is that all?

LJ;597781 wrote:But all you have to do with Wallace is drop a guy over the top. When you had Holmes, Miller and Ward on the field you had to account short for all 3 AND over the top for Holmes. He really opened things up.

rock_knutne;597782 wrote:LMFAO.......yeah and they won't have to play many games to get to the Super Bowl again with a bye and at least one home game. Get a clue!

Tiger2003;597784 wrote:Hmmmm what just happened?

Like I said Wallace is a great deep threat.

gerb131;597785 wrote:You think they are going to the Superbowl?

LJ;597788 wrote:I never discounted he was a deep threat, Holmes was a much more dangerous and CLUTCH overall WR. He opened up the offense way more than Wallace does.

Tiger2003;597789 wrote:Mike Wallace

41 Catches 868 Yards 8 TD.

rock_knutne;597792 wrote:I wouldn't count them out.

LJ;597799 wrote:ok? 21 YPC. He's a deep threat. Nothing else. I dunno wtf you are trying to prove? Holmes was a better overall WR and demanded more attention from defenses because he had short and deep threat potential and the potential. He could open up the seam for miller and ward, and also catch it short when they opened it for him, all while having a safety over the top. Wallace just takes out a corner and a safety over the top, whereas Holmes would have LB's bump over to the intermediate zone and open up the middle of the field. Holmes was much harder to scheme against.

Tiger2003;597812 wrote:I better quit arguing with a Mod....how many fucking times do I have to say Holmes was better at the short routes....but I really believe Wallace and Holmes are hand and hand on the long ball...Even when Holmes was on the same team Wallace led the league in YPC.

LJ;597821 wrote:So you agree that Holmes was a better overall WR who opened up the offense more because of his deep play ability as well as his clutch ability in the short and intermediate routes?

Tiger2003;597829 wrote:How many times do you want me to say Holmes was the better short route runner? But again this is only Wallace second year in the league....

I Wear Pants;597839 wrote:He can agree that Holmes was a better short route runner without agreeing completely that Holmes is the reason the offense isn't doing well. Injuries are a big part of it I think. But some of it is definetely the lack of another guy like Ward who just doesn't drop much.