Babe Laufenberg: Amendola's Made The Team

[AsthmaField]

The things that I've heard coaches and scouts say that he was better at include quickness, beating press coverage, and finishing plays. A few have said that Welker had better hands, but that doesn't seem to be a problem for Danny either.

Most layman I've read note the 'intangibles' and 'instincts'....but from what little I've seen, I'd say Amendola is no slouch in those departments either. He might not be in Welker's class, but that certainly doesn't mean that he doesn't have enough to supplant one of the WR's currently ahead of him on the depth chart.

He seems to have the intangibles and instincts to survive in the NFL, if not thrive... and he plays with just as much heart as Wes.

The TT coach has specifically talked about Danny's toughness (the "I wouldn't want to be in a paper bag with him" talk).

I think Theo nailed it when he said that people seem to be comparing Welker circa 2007 with Amendola 2007, instead of 2004 and 2007 (which would be more fair and accurate).

We'll see soon enough, I suppose. I pulling for the guy.

 

[AsthmaField]

Welker was a much better player at Tech than Danny. It's not even close.

Hey Tomson-Which coaches and scouts said those things?

The head coach said that Danny was faster but Welker was quicker.

 

[sago1]

Why is everybody getting so excited about any of our WRs outside of TO?

Crayton has good hands but in my mind (and others) lacks the speed/frame to ever become a legit #2WR.
Hurd is another Crayton; he's got good hands/great work ethic but he lacks the speed & the frame (but has added more muscle to his 205# frame) to become a possession WR in the Keyshawn mode. He's only 23 compared with Crayton's 30 & will likely take Crayton's job in 2 years or so. Hurd has a great & will lay his body out on every play to make the catch.

Austin has the size/speed to become a legit #2 WR; but he's had problems catching the ball last year. This year he shown lot of improvement in his pass catching & if it continues he could be a big help in stretching the field opposite TO.

Stanbach essentially was red shirted last year due to his injuries, but apparently he's worked very hard in the offseason to transition from a QB to WR. He has the size/speed & good hands necessary to become a legit #1WR. Read in one of the media reports yesterday that the Cowboys already consider Stanbach as the most talented/promising of the group & also the most dangerous after he catches the ball. Stanbach is looking really good in crossing patterns so the Cowboys probably will utilize him quite a bit there, but he does have difficulty in downfield patterns tracking the ball. The media has reported that Garrett is really pushing the development of Stanbach as quickly as possible. He can be productive this year & we'll certainly show some real flashes of what he can do, but his breakthrough probably won't come until 09.

Amendola is 5'10" and while his timed 40 speed has been reported as high as 4.63 but others say in pads he's actually around 4.57 or even lower. He's got great hands, runs good routes & reads defenses well. As an undrafted rookie WR, he's going to have to show a lot to make the team but then so did Hurd & Austin & a kid named Tony Romo. Besides whatever talent he has, he could have help or be hindered by the fact that Jason Garrett's favorite player while he was with the Dolphins was Dolphin WR Wes Welker. If Amendola continues to consistently show good hands, route running & can contribute on STs through rest of TC & the preseason games, Garrett will find a niche for him. As someone has already pointed out, Amendola's faster then Crayton (and Hurd?) which could make him valuable in the slot and on 3rd downs. An additional factor might also be how soon he can contribute to our offense & his upside.

 

[Echo9]

Ok, here's what I think.

TO, Crayton, and Hurd are locks. Austin will make the team due to his STs play (decent gunner). Do we keep six? If not, do you keep Amendola over Stanback?

I think we keep six, but one of them might not be Stanback. With the new guy with crazy measurables (edit: Lowber), we only want to try to develop one utterly unpolished WR with upside. At the same time, J. Ireland absolutely LOVED Stanback. He was his 'pet cat' (to further beat a cliché into the ground).

So my almost completely baseless and unlikely prediction is that we trade Stanback to Miami for a pick.

That's only way I see Stanback not on the team, btw.

 

[theogt]

Welker was a much better player at Tech than Danny. It's not even close.

Hey Tomson-Which coaches and scouts said those things?

Well, statistically, Amendola had a better final season.

 

[RxMan]

I attended Texas Tech some time ago and now currently live in Lubbock and for Tech football. The only reason people say Amendola is no Welker is because of what Welker did last year for the Patriots and maybe because of his year before with the Dolphins. I watched both of them live and would say they are very similar. When Welker came out I knew he made plays for Tech, but I wasn't sure he could do it on the next level. When the Chargers cut him I wasn't surprised. No one at Tech expected Welker to do the things he has done as a pro.
Amendola wasn't as much a go to guy as Welker his senior year because of a guy named Michael Crabtree.
Here is what I think is similar. Both can get separation and both know how to sit down in a soft spot in a defense. This is how the Tech offense works. The receivers adjust routes based on what the defense gives. Both made numerous clutch catches and rarely dropped the ball. Intangibles...who knows.

 

[5Countem5]

The head coach said that Danny was faster but Welker was quicker.

What head coach- Wade or Leach?

 

[tomson75]

Welker was a much better player at Tech than Danny. It's not even close.

Hey Tomson-Which coaches and scouts said those things?

Well, Mike Leach, for one IIRC.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Look at videos of Welker in college and look at his stats. Amendola is definitely faster and just as quick.

Youtube scouting at his finest. Im sure that riveting coverage by nfldraftguys was pivotal in your evaluation as well.

Welker ran a 4.65 40. Amendola ran a 4.68. Welker ran a 4.01 shuttle to Amendola's 4.25.

But hey that youtube coverage sure is great. Guess its the same place you got Schmitt's 4.5 40.

 

[theogt]

Youtube scouting at his finest. Im sure that riveting coverage by nfldraftguys was pivotal in your evaluation as well.

Welker ran a 4.65 40. Amendola ran a 4.68. Welker ran a 4.01 shuttle to Amendola's 4.25.

But hey that youtube coverage sure is great. Guess its the same place you got Schmitt's 4.5 40.

What's the difference between watching video on youtube and watching on TV? Do they run faster on TV?

3-Cone:
Amendola - 6.81
Welker - 7.01

Gosh, which one measures quickness again? Oh yeah, the one you conveniently left out.

 

[theogt]

On the Texas Tech track:

40-Yard Dash:
Welker - 4.65
Amendola - 4.58

 

[Echo9]

What's the difference between watching video on youtube and watching on TV? Do they run faster on TV?

3-Cone:
Amendola - 6.81
Welker - 7.01

Gosh, which one measures quickness again? Oh yeah, the one you conveniently left out.

Amendola could be Welker. He could be Richmond Flowers. Time will tell.

 

[tomson75]

Youtube scouting at his finest. Im sure that riveting coverage by nfldraftguys was pivotal in your evaluation as well.

Welker ran a 4.65 40. Amendola ran a 4.68. Welker ran a 4.01 shuttle to Amendola's 4.25.

But hey that youtube coverage sure is great. Guess its the same place you got Schmitt's 4.5 40.

What's the difference between watching video on youtube and watching on TV? Do they run faster on TV?

3-Cone:
Amendola - 6.81
Welker - 7.01

Gosh, which one measures quickness again? Oh yeah, the one you conveniently left out.

Ouch.

No offense Fuzzy, but when the guy that coached each player openly gives his analysis of each receiver's ability....I'm taking it over your numbers.

....and if his speed was an issue, I'd think the coaches and media would have had some measure of that after just a few practices...instead of consistently applauding the guy's performance.

 

[PosterChild]

Amendola could be Welker. He could be Richmond Flowers. Time will tell.

He sings too?

 

[5Countem5]

The only reason people say Amendola is no Welker is because of what Welker did last year for the Patriots and maybe because of his year before with the Dolphins.

I guess we are all idiots and compare the NFL Welker to the TT Danny and have no ability to separate the two. Whatever man, that's like me saying everyone who thinks Danny is as good as Welker is looking through black and red glasses.


LOL

 

[theogt]

Amendola could be Welker. He could be Richmond Flowers. Time will tell.

I'm not saying he's going to be as productive as Welker. But the whole "Welker was a beast compared to Amendola in college" is just baloney.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

He sings too?

:laugh2: :laugh2:

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What's the difference between watching video on youtube and watching on TV? Do they run faster on TV?

3-Cone:
Amendola - 6.81
Welker - 7.01

Gosh, which one measures quickness again? Oh yeah, the one you conveniently left out.

Well last time i checked watching 6 highlight plays doesn't constitute scouting but hey thats just me.

Oh and Amendola is not 'definitely' faster. Also his balance and lateral agility is deficient which is why you can stonewall him on the jam. Give him a good pop and he cant recover.

 

[theogt]

Well last time i checked watching 6 highlight plays doesn't constitute scouting but hey thats just me.

Oh and Amendola is not 'definitely' faster. Also his balance and lateral agility is deficient which is why you can stonewall him on the jam. Give him a good pop and he cant recover.

It doesn't take hours and hours of watching a person to see how quick or fast a player is.

You can stonewall any small receiver like Welker or Amendola.

 

[5Countem5]

I'm not saying he's going to be as productive as Welker. But the whole "Welker was a beast compared to Amendola in college" is just baloney.

You are so wrong. Welker was a beast compared to Amendola.