ShareThis Page

Broncos, Steelers trade barbs over center Wallace's hit

| Wednesday, Jan. 13, 2016, 5:06 p.m.

It is a well-known, if not entirely accurate axiom that an offensive lineman draws attention only when he misses a key block, commits an ill-timed penalty or finds some other way to mess up. Or, in the case of Steelers center Cody Wallace, when his name is mentioned in connection with the b-word.

In a 34-27 win over Denver on Dec. 20 at Heinz Field, Wallace nailed safety David Bruton Jr. with a diving, helmet-to-helmet hit that drew a 15-yard penalty for unnecessary roughness, a $23,152 fine and apologies from the perpetrator. Wallace later said he was trying to protect teammate Antonio Brown.

Some of the Broncos still are simmering. One of them, safety Darian Stewart, told reporters this week that Wallace is “going to be sore” after Sunday's AFC divisional playoff game in Denver and added, “I'm cutting him,” an apparent reference to taking out Wallace's knees.

After practice Wednesday, Wallace seemed more amused by the gaggle of reporters in front of his locker than concerned about the comments. Not amused was guard Ramon Foster, who answered back.

“You put that kind of stuff out there, that just gives you a bigger bull's eye,” Foster said. “Those guys, that's their problem. Hopefully the refs will be looking at that. The league needs to look at that because that's making a bounty. So, you want to talk about safety? Address that. Take a stand on that. They made a bounty on a guy who hadn't done anything to him.”

Bounty is a nasty four-letter word in NFL circles. If Stewart never actually uttered it, he did seem to imply potential mayhem.

“It's not going to be anything as far as cheap or anything,” Stewart said. “We're going to get them between the lines, between the plays, the whistle. So, I mean (Wallace) is going to be sore after the game. That's how I see it, man. He comes out on a screen (pass), he better not come at (me). I'm cutting him (at the knees). That's where I am with it.”

Wallace, drafted by the San Francisco 49ers in 2008 and with his sixth NFL team, chuckled over the media horde he attracted and took it all in stride.

“They wanted to stick up for their guy, like I was for AB,” he said. “That's good, and that's the sign of a good team.”

Asked if he liked being “Public Enemy No. 1,” Wallace, who has started every game this season in place of injured All-Pro center Maurkice Pouncey, laughed again and said, “No, I wouldn't say all that.”

“It's understandable,” he said. “I knew at the time when it happened I was in the wrong. The league handled it the way they wanted to, and I paid my fine. Just move on and see what happens.”

As for going at his knees, Wallace said, “That happens a lot, anyways.”

Offensive tackle Marcus Gilbert said, “You can talk all the talk, but once you're on the field, (Stewart) has to make plays. We'll see him. I'm not concerned. We're gonna stand up for our guy.”

Some Broncos apparently tried to downplay the controversy Wednesday. Cornerback Aqib Talib, who had said Wallace should have been suspended, said, “You expect a physical game. I don't think it will mean anything. And I know him a little bit. I got to know him (in Tampa Bay in 2012). He's a pretty good guy, if I remember.”

“We're just focused on playing our football. Really. All the other stuff, whatever is said, is just noise,” Denver nose tackle Sylvester Williams said.

Low-key off the field, Wallace presents a marked contrast on it. The hit was his third unnecessary roughness penalty this season. Flags aside, his aggressiveness “is kind of what's made me valuable here,” he said. “I've got to work hard to do what I can out there.”

“Cody's a hard, tough, physical player that loves to play the game of football,” Gilbert said. “He shows it out there on the field.”

Rob Rossi and Mark Kaboly contributed to this report. Bob Cohn is a staff writer for the Tribune-Review. Reach him at or via Twitter@BCohn_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.