- Joined
- Oct 10, 2006
- Messages
- 76,883
- Reaction score
- 66,866
Like others have said, I don't believe that Belichick has ever been shy from sitting someone if there's better talent waiting to see the field, despite what they're getting paid.
I am assuming that the coaches (mainly singular as in "coach") feels that Amendola is still the best option to do what is asked of him, partly due to the lack of better options behind him, and partly due to the fact that they likely still feel that he can produce.
The key is exactly what @mgteich has stated now several times in that our WR3-4's have never produced much. With Edelman and LaFell (not to mention Gronkowski and even Vereen), a guy like Danny Amendola isn't going to receive many reps, and one would have to assume that the coaching staff knew that way back in the offseason; yet they still kept him for reasons that we do not currently know.
Look at guys who have played the WR3 role recently:
WR3 production
--2013 Dobson 37 catches (which is high due to the loss of both TEs + poor options/injuries)
--2012 Edelman 21 catches
--2011 Chad Johnson 15 catches
--2010 Brandon Tate 24 catches
--2009 Prior to the drafting of the 2 TEs it jumps back up to 37 with Edelman, which is where it was last year as well, but most years it isn't going to be as high as the mid-late 30s.
Your post highlights the weakness of recent WR3, not the usage plan. Even in the low-throw days of the pre-ManningRules! era, the WR3 was getting 2+ catches per game. Givens had 34 in 2003, for example. 2004 is tough to break down because of the missed games by Branch, but both Givens and Patten ended up in the 40's, so it's a matter of which you decide was the WR3, and then Troy had 39 in 2005
2006 was the year Branch walked out and threw everything into disarray. 2007 has Stallworth with 40+ catches and Gaffney (WR4 for much of the season) with 36. 2008 had Gaffney with 38.