Discussion

Seahawks' WRs still relevant with Wallace

Updated: September 25, 2009, 3:02 PM ET
By Eric Karabell

Fantasy football owners seem to be panicking a bit as they expect the Seattle Seahawks to be without starting quarterback Matt Hasselbeck this week, which means Seneca Wallace has to play. The Seahawks hardly have a cake matchup in the Chicago Bears. What does that mean for T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Nate Burleson and John Carlson? The Bears don't scare me the way they used to, but still, has Wallace given fantasy owners that soft, fuzzy feeling when he's been in there? On the surface it seems fantasy owners view Wallace the way they do Brady Quinn -- wow, that didn't take long, eh? -- but are they wrong?

I was a bit surprised when I researched what Wallace has done filling in for Hasselbeck in the past. He hasn't been that bad at all. Wallace is an athlete who seems to have been asked to manage games more than win them, but he's been productive more often than not. Wallace has been able to avoid turnovers while still making his receiving options relevant. The book on Wallace has been about his running ability, and the team has used him at wide receiver at times to show that strength of his, but last season he threw 11 touchdowns against only three interceptions, and four times in eight starts he reached 200 passing yards. He had a three-touchdown game against the New England Patriots in which Deion Branch scored twice. Carlson was actually more productive with Wallace at quarterback than Hasselbeck. This team didn't have someone of Houshmandzadeh's ability level at wide receiver last year, but now they do. I'm not recommending Wallace as a top-25 quarterback play this week against the Bears, despite the fact they don't have the defense many think they do, but I'm not scared to activate his weapons.

ESPN TOP HEADLINES

MOST SENT STORIES ON ESPN.COM