During his introductory news conference with the Baltimore Ravens on Tuesday, Mike Wallace said, "I need a good quarterback." To those with ears, it sounded like the receiver was taking a shot at his former quarterback, Teddy Bridgewater.
- Remaining free agents
- NFC free agency grades
- AFC free agency grades
- Free agency winners and losers
- Seven riskiest free-agent signings
- Robert Griffin III signs with Cleveland Browns
- Wesseling: Which franchises are on the rise?
- Collateral damage: Players hurt by free agency
- Collateral benefits: Players aided by free agency
Apparently, us hearing people were wrong.
"I loved my coaches and teammates in Minnesota. I would never say anything negative about Teddy -- that's my guy beyond football," Wallace wrote Wednesday. "I already talked to Teddy. We are A1."
Wallace continued heaping praise on the quarterback that the world believed he threw under the bus hours prior.
"I love Teddy like a brother and I will still hang out with him," Wallace texted. "Just because we (are) not on the same team doesn't mean the love isn't there. It's bigger than the game of football.
"He's a great young QB. I said that the whole time I was there. The way he handled (himself) on the field -- I have much respect for him and I know as the time goes on, they will unleash him and he will show why he was in the discussion to be the number 1 pick."
It was a surprise to hear Wallace seemingly bash his former teammate, after the receiver stood up for Bridgewater during their time together.
It's not a shock to anyone to say that Teddy needs to improve in several areas entering his third season, including his deep ball. It was the word choice Wallace employed on Tuesday that seemed overly critical.
"I don't have anything bad to say about Minnesota. I had a good time. Coach (Mike Zimmer) is a great coach and I would play for him any day," Wallace texted. "The reason I picked Baltimore is because I think they give me the best chance to get back making the plays that I want to."
Those plays he wants to make are mostly vertical routes, on which Wallace made his money in Pittsburgh before two mediocre seasons in Miami and one in Minnesota -- where his quarterbacks were less-than-stellar deep ball artists.
To blame Wallace's lack of production last season merely on missed deep routes is oversimplification. The wideout simply wasn't adept at getting open consistently.
If Wallace falls flat in Baltimore with Joe Flacco, no one will be blaming the quarterback.