Danny Amendola admits to offseason groin surgery

Jeff Howe‏@jeffphowe
Danny Amendola admits to @kguregian to having offseason groin surgery

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/...ola_admits_to_having_off_season_groin_surgery

So much for the idea that he was ever healthy last year. He claims to be fine now, but he said that last year too. These are difficult injuries and I wish him the best. He joins the list of players we are counting on who are recovering from off season surgery, including Dobson, Gronk, Easley, Wilfork, and God knows who else.

What's the recovery time frame on that? I thought it odd that he would lose so much of his explosiveness so suddenly at age 28.

JackBauer said:

What's the recovery time frame on that? I thought it odd that he would lose so much of his explosiveness so suddenly at age 28.

Click to expand...

He's had a lot of injuries and groin issues when he was with the Rams. Watching him now, he looks slow. If he can't create separation with his size, he won't be able to get on the field.

And?

Does this surprise anyone at all? At what point do the Patriots organization admit their mistake in rush signing Amendola by releasing him? He hasn't worked out, I don't see how this is going to change any time soon. He may fully recover, but for what? To last only 3 weeks before a new injury pops up? It's unfortunate but you can't pay him the money they are paying him for these results season after season.

Don't do it Brady6. You're doing so well.

What did they remove during the surgery? His talent?

If Amendola is not fully recovered, he should not be active.

I really don't understand why we signed him. I thought it was clear as day in 2012 that Edelman would replace Welker's production with ease, and posted such before Welker went to Denver, and I'm by no means a professional NFL talent evaluator.

What an absolute waste of money.

And we couldn't resign Blount or Woodhead lol.

JackBauer said:

What's the recovery time frame on that? I thought it odd that he would lose so much of his explosiveness so suddenly at age 28.

Click to expand...

Not a lot of data on WRs who have had it. I found data for a handful of players who returned to action in 10-16 weeks. But that is a lousy stat (Gronk has "returned to action"). There is insufficient data on the positions they returned to play or their level of play after return.
http://www.aspetar.com/journal/viewarticle.aspx?id=156

PATS16N0 said:

I really don't understand why we signed him. I thought it was clear as day in 2012 that Edelman would replace Welker's production with ease, and posted such before Welker went to Denver, and I'm by no means a professional NFL talent evaluator.

What an absolute waste of money.

Click to expand...

Management did not share your insight. Even after Edelman had over 100 catches, they didn;'t believe it.

PATS16N0 said:

And we couldn't resign Blount or Woodhead lol.

Click to expand...

PATS16N0 said:

I thought it was clear as day in 2012 that Edelman would replace Welker's production with ease

Click to expand...

The 2012 season when Edelman had 235 yards receiving?

PATS16N0 said:

I really don't understand why we signed him. I thought it was clear as day in 2012 that Edelman would replace Welker's production with ease, and posted such before Welker went to Denver, and I'm by no means a professional NFL talent evaluator.

What an absolute waste of money.

Click to expand...

With regard to Blount and Woodhead. I have followed the Patriots since their formation in 1959. Thru the years, good teams
became bad teams as players left and were replaced with inferior players. Who replaced Woodhead, Blount, Mankins,
Fletcher, Kelly, and Spikes. Except for Mankins, big bucks were not saved.

PATS16N0 said:

And we couldn't resign Blount or Woodhead lol.

Click to expand...

JackBauer said:

The 2012 season when Edelman had 235 yards receiving?

Click to expand...

He got injured. I thought it was pretty obvious after the Jets game that he was our man even though I believed that even before. He looked good in 2011 too, despite his limited use. Even if you didn't think he was going to match Welker's production, I don't see how anyone could believe he would be a big enough drop off to justify paying Amendola the kind of money he's getting.

PATS16N0 said:

He got injured. I thought it was pretty obvious after the Jets game that he was our man even though I believed that even before. He looked good in 2011 too, despite his limited use. Even if you didn't think he was going to match Welker's production, I don't see how anyone could believe he would be a big enough drop off to justify paying Amendola the kind of money he's getting.

Click to expand...

I thought Amendola was a gamble...and it doesn't appear to have paid off.

I don't think Edelman had proven enough, at that point, to be anointed Welker's successor. I assume BB was hedging by signing Amendola, and assumed the two of them could replace Welker's production. That's happened (not saying his decision was a good one), but unfortunately it's been 90 percent Edelman, 10 percent (if that) Amendola.

Of course, I don't think there's any way to argue that BB got that decision right. Even if they let Welker go, clearly Amendola wasn't the guy to bring in.

JackBauer said:

The 2012 season when Edelman had 235 yards receiving?

Click to expand...

What about over 100 catches in 2013. They still were not convinced. This teams record getting good wide receivers is awful.

PATS16N0 said:

I really don't understand why we signed him. I thought it was clear as day in 2012 that Edelman would replace Welker's production with ease, and posted such before Welker went to Denver, and I'm by no means a professional NFL talent evaluator.

What an absolute waste of money.

And we couldn't resign Blount or Woodhead lol.

Click to expand...

I would say that you should be an NFL talent evaluator, if you can truly consistently foresee the future so well.

Prior to 2013 Edelman had missed 25% of his career games, and over four years had averaged 179 yards and one touchdown per season. If you honestly foresaw a 100-reception, 1000-yard 16-game season, then bravo. Amendola was a gamble based on his history as well though, and thus far that gamble hasn't worked out.

Woodhead was permitted to walk because the Patriots felt Vereen was ready to take over his role. In 2013 Vereen was injured in the first game and went on in-season IR, upsetting that plan. That was exacerbated by the incarceration of AH; the loss of those two players had a major negative effect on the passing game. If Woodhead went on IR after the third game of 2013 rather than the third game of 2014, with a total of 72 yards from scrimmage, would you honestly still feel the same way?

Blount took the Patriots offer to Pittsburgh and the Steelers beat it. Making offers that players can't refuse and other teams won't match is what has put teams like Oakland and Washington in trouble over past years; should the Pats emulate their business model? Other than one big game (which was mostly one long run) this year, Blount has 11 carries for 39 yards - and that's before considering how his numbers would likely dip running behind the New England offensive line.

I don't want to see this thread devolve into a re-hashing of old trades, so let me see if I can bring back the focus.

We all saw that Amendola was a different player once he came back from the Buffalo injury. He struggled to get open, and he became little more than an afterthought by the end of the season.

What I think is more worrying for us is that rest was supposed to solve this problem. Instead, he had to have offseason surgery. He's clearly either not back from the surgery, or just not back. Either is a problem, but the latter is a huge issue moving forward. If he just needs time, we can hope for the recovery to quicken its pace. If this is going to be an all-season, or all-career, thing for him, though, that's a whole other kettle of fish.

JackBauer said:

I thought Amendola was a gamble...and it doesn't appear to have paid off.

I don't think Edelman had proven enough, at that point, to be anointed Welker's successor. I assume BB was hedging by signing Amendola, and assumed the two of them could replace Welker's production. That's happened (not saying his decision was a good one), but unfortunately it's been 90 percent Edelman, 10 percent (if that) Amendola.

Of course, I don't think there's any way to argue that BB got that decision right. Even if they let Welker go, clearly Amendola wasn't the guy to bring in.

Click to expand...

I backed the signing of Amendola when it happened, you're right there WERE legitimate questions about Edelman. I thought bringing him was good insurance and it was beneficial that he worked with McDaniels before. Now, I didn't agree with the contract they gave him at the time and I still don't, Amendola has done nothing in the NFL worth that contract to begin with especially considering his injury history. Was there competition for Amendola? Why did the Pat's immediately sign him when Welker signed with the Broncos?