Stanley out, Amendola in

by Ryan Van Bibber on Sep 22, 2009 4:58 PM CDT in 2009 St. Louis Rams regular season

The St. Louis Rams made a move today to address their kick return problems, signing WR/KR Danny Amendola from the Philadelphia practice squad. To make room for the move they released last year's kick returner Derek Stanley.

This strikes me as a bit of a curious, albeit low level, move. Stanley, who returned kicks for the Rams most of last year, before injury derailed his season, averaged 24.8 yards per return. This year, Stanley had yet to return a kick for a team averaging 16.2 yards on 6 kick returns. Four players have returned kicks for the Rams, including blocking TE Billy Bajema.

Stanley had been returning punts, averaging 12.3 yards per return this season.

Amendola will return kicks and punts. He's a Texas Tech guy who came to the league as an undrafted free agent in 2008.

Tweet Comment 31 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Not sure what to make of this

but i remember Amendola from the HBO show ‘Hard Knocks’ last year when they covered the Cowboys. I don’t think this is to big of a deal, but at least it looked like he has some potential based on what they showed of him.

by cardsfansouth on Sep 22, 2009 5:30 PM CDT reply actions

Can Ruvell Martin and Danny Amendola play this week?

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 22, 2009 7:04 PM CDT reply actions

I'd think Martin would be closer

but then again, Amendola was in the Philly system and while Shurmur and he weren’t there together very long, you have to imagine the system in Philly isn’t that different (terminology, etc.) that he might be able to pick up our system a little faster than Martin.

With that said, I’m much more excited about Ruvell Martin. Amendola is nothing more than a small version of Dane Looker while Martin has the size and ability to be an actual part of the wr corps.

"F@*& Lidge and the horse he rode in on!"

-Cards Fan in Chitown, via text message shortly after the VEB Get Together Day.

by Tackle Box on Sep 22, 2009 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions

i was

impressed with him in Hard Knocks. He almost made a team that was pretty deep at WR. Cut from Welker cloth, given a chance who could be a decent possesion-type guy.

by mooseknuckles41 on Sep 22, 2009 7:42 PM CDT reply actions

Says something about the return game

We go away from Stanley to Avery, who loses the gig in a single play. Then Stanley proves so cost defective, that we end up signing someone off the wire to come in and hand him an immediate starting job.
I hope it works out, but this is a damning indictment of the return game. If we don’t go DE in the draft, we have to get a WR returner, no?

Your uncle molests collies.

by 3k on Sep 22, 2009 8:27 PM CDT reply actions

would be nice to trade and get 2 first rounders

though we’ll probably have a high second rnd pick too. but i’d like to get DE/DL or WR at the top…I’m torn. Depends on who’s out there in free agency. You’d think you get a solid return type guy in the 2nd rnd…not a stud #1 WR we need, but a speedy specialist

Turf Show Times

by Ryan Van Bibber on Sep 22, 2009 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions

Who do you trade to get two 1st's?

I don’t know if we get two 1st round picks for anyone except SJax, and I don’t know if that’s worth it.

Your uncle molests collies.

by 3k on Sep 22, 2009 9:40 PM CDT up reply actions

I dont think thats worth it

partly because I love SJax but partly because there is no competent replacement. Marshall Faulk was traded to the Rams for a 2nd and 5th rd pick because the Colts already prepared to pick his replacement in James. Trade Jackson and now you need to use the pick on his replacement (or the 2nd rd pick which is sure to be fairly high).

Billy needs to give the Raiders a call though…I’m sure they’ll fall for something!

Free Brandon Wood!

by gorams77 on Sep 22, 2009 10:04 PM CDT up reply actions

I've thought that trading SJax might be best for the team right now.

If we trade him now he’ll have pretty high value. By the time we finally get a team around him, he’ll be getting to 30 and beyond and slowing down. So if we trade him now, we can build the team faster and get a younger centerpiece. Also, if we could get a decent running back in the deal it would be easier. Maybe Javon Ringer, or one of the Saints three RB’s could help. Then we could find a complement to one of those guys and have 2 first round picks and probably an additional 3rd, 4th, or 5th rounder. Although I doubt the Saints would want a back like Jackson, who is a good receiving back, but could be used for more.

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 22, 2009 10:20 PM CDT up reply actions

I wouldn't be surprised if they went for the big splash QB pick in the first.

Whether or not it’s wise, it’ll appease a lot of people after going OT this year. Then again, they went with need over hype this past draft, so I could be wrong.

"F@*& Lidge and the horse he rode in on!"

-Cards Fan in Chitown, via text message shortly after the VEB Get Together Day.

by Tackle Box on Sep 22, 2009 9:24 PM CDT up reply actions

I wouldn't say a QB would be picked for the sake of "appeasing" people...

because it is a legitimate need…along with WR and DE as the most pressing. But then again DT, TE, and arguably OLB would more then likely be needs too. Not all can be adressed through the draft but probably 2 of them (maybe 3?) because odds are, unfortunetly, that we will have some high picks again. So the others will need to be adressed through FA (and I haven’t researched a list of who will be available).

The hope also being that there should be more cap space (uncapped year?) to go after solid FA’s because bad contracts will be falling off and I believe cutting Bulger opens up more space for next year too (as opposed to this year). So a QB is not a long shot……at least I hope.

Free Brandon Wood!

by gorams77 on Sep 22, 2009 9:54 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't think it's a long shot

but why go after a QB in the first? Why not 2nd or 3rd? Especially in this system, you don’t need a world beater. Build a depth chart around the QB with talented receivers and a bloodthirsty defense that provides field position to gloss over your QBs deficiencies.

Your uncle molests collies.

by 3k on Sep 22, 2009 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions

LeFevour could be around in the 2nd or 3rd round

Also, would all bad contracts be falling off after this season? I’m not sure how that works.

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 22, 2009 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions

The draft is shaping up to be QB heavy

and IF we have a high pick, then I don’t see an issue with using a high 2nd rd pick. But IMO, the drop off from 1st rd/high 2nd rd to 3rd rd talent is too large and too long to wait if you are looking at a potential NFL starter fairly quickly in their career.

I know there are examples of much lower rd QB’s becoming stars, but it generally took them several years behind starters (Brady was behind Bledsoe for 4 years) or in different leagues (obvious Warner reference) before they became those stars.

Now, a lot can change before draft day and its too early to tell who will declare aside from the seniors…so that will clearly influence as well…

Free Brandon Wood!

by gorams77 on Sep 22, 2009 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Damn - I knew I should have checked it before going off memory...

Brady was only behind Bledsoe for a year and a half. Oh well – screw Brady anyway.

Free Brandon Wood!

by gorams77 on Sep 22, 2009 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions

Part of me believes Spags will go DL with the first pick

and then QB later. Like I said, the fact they went with OL over the sexy pick of Curry possibly shows a commitment to building from the lines out to the skill positions (something Martz, Zygmunt and Linehan had no concept of).

However, and I hope this isn’t the case, but by picking a QB in the first they create a buzz around the team. I hope they aren’t fooled by that stuff and I really don’t think they are. I was just throwing it out there.

"F@*& Lidge and the horse he rode in on!"

-Cards Fan in Chitown, via text message shortly after the VEB Get Together Day.

by Tackle Box on Sep 22, 2009 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions

forget about this DE/DL picks this year, you did that to me with C Long

now we gona get the best player in the draft, this year that was Curry, next year i dont know yet but no mater what we have to take the best player on the bord, you cant lose and we cant aford to lose again, do you want me to start naming players that were supose to fill the teams need? J. Kennedy, and R Picket bouth number one picks cause we needed DT/DL oh but guess what neather are on the team Next what did we do drafted number one A Kerriker another wasted number one pic last year we got your boy C Long , another wasted number one pic, he is average at his possition
and this year oh we needed to fill O Pace spot , Another number one waisted on J Sminth another average player and waisted number one pick ,THEN YOU WONDER WHY THE RAMS SUCK ,thats what happens when your number one picks dont pan out
you suck for a long long time cause you got a team full of just average players

by james535 on Sep 22, 2009 9:07 PM CDT reply actions

exactly what I'm thinking

we always draft our biggest need, but the biggest need could be had in the middle of the first round or later. So why don’t we take the best available, or trade down and get more picks out of the deal. We should have traded down this year and not drafted tackle, and then got Beatty later.

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 22, 2009 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions

so dont even start VanRam we get the best player on the born period

by james535 on Sep 22, 2009 9:09 PM CDT reply actions

i want to ask you and be honest with your answer Vanram

if we took D Mcfaden last years draft could we not have replaced C Longs position with another average DE pick up in free agency,and have S.J. and D.Mc. in out backfield right now? if this year we took A. Curry with our first pick and J.L in the second round could we not have got another average OL/RT/LT ,to play in J.Smiths position? and have two stud LBs on our team ???? tell me what you think

by james535 on Sep 22, 2009 9:19 PM CDT reply actions

If we had known Long was just going to be average we wouldn't have picked him

We don’t need 2 backs according to Jackson but I do agree best player available is the way to go.

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 22, 2009 10:26 PM CDT up reply actions

ARE YOU KIDDING

Run DMC would have been your pick there? TERRIBLE!!!!
He wasn’t even the best RB on his college team.
I do agree with you on the theory that you take the best player available when you have that much gaurenteed money committed, and you have that many holes on the team. You have to start building the foundation with talent.
I like the page out of Belichiks book. Trade down for as many picks as possible in the 2nd round. This next draft both SF and Seattle have 2 1st rounders. You can bet SF will take a QB somewhere in there. I am hoping that Javon Sneed is available in the 2nd. I think we trade down in the 1st if we have a top 5 pick. You know people are going to be desperate for Bradford. I really want either Brandon Spikes, who can play either the SAM or the MIKE. He is the best LB in college right now. If not him, then WR Dez Bryant. Hands down the best WR in College, hands down….oh yeah he can return the ball too. he took one to the house the other day. Imagine our Offense with him, Avery, and Robinson. That’s an offense to be reckoned with. I do think we need to look at DE within the first 3 rounds.

by CaliRamMan on Sep 22, 2009 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions

Why don't we need to look DE?

If you haven’t noticed, we have no DL.

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 22, 2009 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Read

the last line again. I have been agreeing with the DE for quite some time.
And its not that we dont have a DL, its that we have no pass rush.

by CaliRamMan on Sep 23, 2009 1:46 AM CDT up reply actions

oops my bad

i was tired and the word do is usually followed by not.

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 23, 2009 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions

you should make up your mind you flip flop like Jhon Kerry

you just stated before you agree we should draft the best player on the bord with our pick ,now you say why not go after DE cause thats what we need lol
you guys just dont learn from your mistakes,its realy very simple if you take the best player on the bord you realy cant lose,and we cant aford to lose any more chanses with our number one pick ,when you go after a need to fill you dont end up taking the best player available

by james535 on Sep 23, 2009 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions

I didn't say go after DE no matter what

I thought he was saying that we should not go after DEs but I misread. I still think we should go after the best player and if that happens to be a DE then we should take him.

Incognito needs to go, Shurmur needs to go, Avery's fumble-itis needs to go.

by Carneros on Sep 23, 2009 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions

Just to interject

It’s a matter of both. You can’t just draft the “best” on your board, or you end up like Detroit drafting WR after WR after WR. Or you end up trending like Pittsburgh with Willie Parker and Rashad Mendenhall, but not enough run blocking to make use of that talent.
It’s a fence straddle that’s more nuanced than either extreme.

Your uncle molests collies.

by 3k on Sep 23, 2009 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions