Can Amendola be relied upon to play the slot?

[Brady6]

You see it this way because you have an agenda. It's not a "boo Edelman, yay Amendola!" thing, and your insistence on making it into that, over and over again, just further proves that you're either incredibly dense or really disingenuous on this topic. Does it help to know that a lot of the people who you keep butting heads with were against the Amendola signing when it happened and still don't like it to this day? I wasn't one of them, but even I had an "I guess we'll wait and see; seems like an overpay but if he manages to stay healthy it could be a good deal" perspective.

Everyone on this board likes Edelman and wants to see him re-sign with the Patriots and have a great deal of success... for the right price. You need to get that through your head, because me and about thirty other posters are sick of repeating it over and over again for your benefit. If this keeps up, I'm just going to have to put you on ignore, and while you probably don't care, I'm sure that I'm far from the only one who's at that point.

I also like Kyle Arrington, for a lot of the same reasons why I like Edelman. He's a tough, homegrown, versatile player who worked his way up through the ranks, proved himself on ST, does whatever the team asks of him, and has the skills to be a strong contributor in a limited role. But last offseason the Patriots paid him way too much money. There's no doubt about it, and going forward, due to his contract he's going to hurt the team more than he'll help. If I was GM for the Pats, and the league offered me an amnesty on Arrington's contract, I would take it in a heartbeat, because no matter how much I like the guy, it comes down to production on the field and not feelings.

If Edelman's getting paid even as much as $5M per year by the Pats, I'm pretty sure that he'll end up in the same boat, so I really hope that that doesn't happen. There's a reason why nobody was willing to pay him even $1M last year, and one year where he gets 1,000 yards as the #1 option in an offense with no #2 option doesn't change his worth as dramatically as a few of you seem to think it should.

I would not say I have an agenda, I would say I do not get it. Why is the suggestion that Amendola is not great such a negative to everyone? What is wrong with him being an average slot receiver that is often injured and whom we overpaid for in a very week UFA market on the heels of Welker leaving us for our biggest in conference competitor? I just do not understand why everyone is so insistent on making excuses for what Amendola is, he was a 600 yard receiver in 2012 too in the same number of games, has it occurred to you that is just who he is and you should accept him for that and stop with the excuses and aggressive expectations?

Not everyone wants him to resign; as I said in a prior post, I do not want him to unless they move on from Amendola. This team needs to field receivers capable of getting respect 10+ yards up field, that is never going to happen when 2/3 are Edelman and Amendola. They both are optimal at the Y-WR so I say pick one get a decent inexpensive backup and then spend the money on players that fit the other spots optimally. I would go with Amendola because I do not think Edelman (even though I believe he is better) is worth paying $5+ million, you do not fix one mistake (Amendola) by making another mistake and that is what it would be if we paid that much for Edelman. The slot receiver should have never exceeded what we spent on Welker for the first 5 years he was here which was $3.62 million APY. They are good players but they are complementary pieces that can be controlled and game planned against by a defense.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I would not say I have an agenda, I would say I do not get it. Why is the suggestion that Amendola is not great such a negative to everyone? What is wrong with him being an average slot receiver that is often injured and whom we overpaid for in a very week UFA market on the heels of Welker leaving us for our biggest in conference competitor? I just do not understand why everyone is so insistent on making excuses for what Amendola is, he was a 600 yard receiver in 2012 too in the same number of games, has it occurred to you that is just who he is and you should accept him for that and stop with the excuses and aggressive expectations?

What aggressive expectations. Quote a single post where I've set expectations for him to be a way better receiver than that. I haven't, but go ahead and try to find posts from posters other than myself claiming that he's a top of the line WR. I'm sure there's a couple out there, because you can find isolated posts supporting literally any position on this board, no matter how implausible: after 2008, there was a huge Trade Brady thread where a bunch of posters here thought that the right move for the organization was to move on from him. A lot of people thought that.

Most of us, though, are operating pretty firmly in reality. I think Amendola is capable of being a 1,000-1,250 yard guy if he stays healthy, but I'm extremely skeptical that he can stay healthy, so it's kind of a wash. In other words, I have far more realistic expectations of his production than you do (negative does not = realistic).

Not everyone wants him to resign; as I said in a prior post, I do not want him to unless they move on from Amendola. This team needs to field receivers capable of getting respect 10+ yards up field, that is never going to happen when 2/3 are Edelman and Amendola. They both are optimal at the Y-WR so I say pick one get a decent inexpensive backup and then spend the money on players that fit the other spots optimally. I would go with Amendola because I do not think Edelman (even though I believe he is better) is worth paying $5+ million, you do not fix one mistake (Amendola) by making another mistake and that is what it would be if we paid that much for Edelman.

Is it really that hard to understand that pretty much everyone who's arguing against paying Edelman a bunch of money is making that argument for this exact same reason?

The slot receiver should have never exceeded what we spent on Welker for the first 5 years he was here which was $3.62 million APY. They are good players but they are complementary pieces that can be controlled and game planned against by a defense.

Definitely, I fundamentally agree. Welker is the ceiling of how good as a wide receiver can be without having any real size and without being any kind of a downfield threat.

 

[Brady6]

Is it really that hard to understand that pretty much everyone who's arguing against paying Edelman a bunch of money is making that argument for this exact same reason?







Definitely, I fundamentally agree. Welker is the ceiling of how good as a wide receiver can be without having any real size and without being any kind of a downfield threat.

That is what you are arguing and others. There are others who are suggesting that he is going to be the player he was in week one every week. That is a 160 receptions 1664 yard receivers. It would be a career year if Amendola achieved half of that.

There are also those who feel Amendola is worthy of his contract, I do not agree with that. He was part of a weak UFA class and he benefited. He is a $3.5 million a year receiver on a good day. Edelman is too.

 

[RayClay]

I hear you brother but it is not even as much about us making the plays further up field it is about at least having players running the routes that are threats. Teams do not respect Edelman or Amendola past 10 yards, so they just give play off them like teams play off Rajon Rondo and give him the jumper. They’ll give them the underneath passes and let it chew up the clock and then hold us to a field goal because in the red zone things get congested and the slot receivers are not good options.

At least if we had players who took the defense 15 yards up field when we need a third down we could toss it Edelman or Amendola (who ever the slot receiver is) and they would have some room to work with after the catch instead of there being defenders waiting for them.

We do, their names are Dobson and Gronk. They were injured. We had Hernandez, he's in isolation.

Sometimes you just have to deal with reality.

 

[Brady6]

We do, their names are Dobson and Gronk. They were injured.

That is not enough and Gronkowski does most of his work in the middle of the field. Basically it is four players into the middle and then the X-WR runs a 15 yard back shoulder route.

 

[Deus Irae]

OT, but far more interesting: I found a treasure trove this evening. I've found all the British Miss Marple series with Joan Hickson, and I've been watching them one after the other.



Now, back to the nonsense about Amendola.

 

[RayClay]

That is what you are arguing and others. There are others who are suggesting that he is going to be the player he was in week one every week. That is a 160 receptions 1664 yard receivers.

No one is suggesting that and you know it.

I'm suggesting that he would play better without missing four games and being less than 100%, with which any logical person would agree.

I am saying you can't know, that's all I've ever argued.

 

[Joker]

I've been playing Clue...just finished in fact...it WAS Amendola in the library with a wrench...

 

[RayClay]

That is not enough and Gronkowski does most of his work in the middle of the field. Basically it is four players into the middle and then the X-WR runs a 15 yard back shoulder route.

Well they're odds on to pick a TE in the draft and it's deep at wr and they like FA Sanders.

But you're right, it's not enough to play last season over with a healed groin for Amendola.

It will never be enough!

 

[RayClay]

I've been playing Clue...just finished in fact...it WAS Amendola in the library with a wrench...

He can't wield a wrench with that groin, try a revolver.

 

[Joker]

jeezus...let me finish will ya?????

Amendola in the library with a wrench(ed groin)...,THERE!!!

Tell me I'm not right...

 

[RayClay]

jeezus...let me finish will ya?????

Amendola in the library with a wrench(ed groin)...,THERE!!!

Tell me I'm not right...

You got greedy going for the two parter. I've been there.

 

[Joker]

You got greedy going for the two parter. I've been there.

but, as you know only too well...I was born bereft of a conscience...and therefore am very prone to the repetitive beating of the proverbial horse when challenged...like somebody else we know in this very thread.

 

[Huckleberry1]

It is amazing that so much time is spent on Amendola playing in NE next season when the only real question is whether or not Edelman will, Amendola is going to be starting for them next season.

 

[RayClay]

but, as you know only too well...I was born bereft of a conscience...and therefore am very prone to the repetitive beating of the proverbial horse when challenged...like somebody else we know in this very thread.

You got to get in quick or you'll get beat to the beating.

 

[RayClay]

It is amazing that so much time is spent on Amendola playing in NE next season when the only real question is whether or not Edelman will, Amendola is going to be starting for them next season.

They're going to pay him anyway, and they need a few receivers...

 

[supafly]

I hear you brother but it is not even as much about us making the plays further up field it is about at least having players running the routes that are threats. Teams do not respect Edelman or Amendola past 10 yards, so they just give play off them like teams play off Rajon Rondo and give him the jumper. They’ll give them the underneath passes and let it chew up the clock and then hold us to a field goal because in the red zone things get congested and the slot receivers are not good options.

At least if we had players who took the defense 15 yards up field when we need a third down we could toss it Edelman or Amendola (who ever the slot receiver is) and they would have some room to work with after the catch instead of there being defenders waiting for them.

I definitely agree with you about the weaknesses and what adding a receiver who could beat man coverage + possibly even attract the attention of a safety from time to time could do, even if they aren't getting targets.

It's just my opinion that there are still numerous benefits of using the short passing game. I think we'd all like to see some more balance, or at least more big play potential, but I just have a feeling that we continue to take advantage of the shorter field passing game on a pretty consistent basis.

 

[PatsChamp88]

Probably not, I don't even know who he is or where he came from.

 

[supafly]

And the balanced passing attack will be instant if Dobson, Gronk and maybe Thomkins +(new receiver, new TE?) are healthy. No matter how much they tried, there's only so much of a deep game you can work with the 2 slot guys and collie.

We do, their names are Dobson and Gronk. They were injured. We had Hernandez, he's in isolation.

Sometimes you just have to deal with reality.

I suppose it would depend on what your definition of continuing with the short passing game would be, but we've had these exact players (with the exception of Dobson) for the past few years and it didn't make any difference whatsoever. We still saw slot guys and short field guys racking up targets like no one's business.

We'd all like to see more big play potential and possibly more balance for plays outside of 10-15 yards, but the truth is that the majority (I'm guessing 2/3 just off the top of my head) of our plays are designed to take advantage of the shorter area of the field.

I don't believe that they'll be hanging Tom Brady back there for 5 and 7 step drops on the majority of occasions when he's on the back end of his last few years of his career, no. You may feel differently, however. That doesn't mean that I'm claiming that we'll never take shots, but it's kind of difficult to argue with the consistency and success of the shorter passing game. Obviously we'd like to have an improvement on the outside--but even then, many point to the aspect of it opening up the underneath routes in a more effective manner.

Again...my point is that we'll be sticking with the shorter passing game of less than 15 yards for the majority of the playcalling. I don't see who could even come close to debating that to be honest with you. Even if Aaron Dobson somehow becomes Randy Moss part 2, there's an excellent chance that 60-65% of our passing plays will be targeting the shorter area of the field.

Brady's completion percentage alone for plays below 15 yards is insanely higher, which is the same across the league and to be expected from common sense thinking; so unless you're prepared to have a 45-50% completion rate (at best, it's currently around 30% for the past few years), we're going to be continuing the shorter area attack on a pretty consistent basis.

 

[supafly]

They're going to pay him anyway, and they need a few receivers...

I'm hoping that Edelman will agree to something reasonable and fair, but if it's anything above 4m AAV or so, we may have seen the last of Julian Edelman (in my opinion anyway).