When McVay/Snead talk, you listen... but do you trust them?
PostPosted:5 years 5 days ago
/zn/ wrote:I don't see those implications in his statement.
That’s nice. Guess I should say, “that’s just you.”
Rams Discussion Forum and News Gathering Resource for All LA Rams Fans.
https://ramsfansunited.com/
/zn/ wrote:I don't see those implications in his statement.
AvengerRam wrote:That’s nice. Guess I should say, “that’s just you.”
zn wrote:I agree with you that that game had more to do with the OL (plus the Patz gameplan) and Goff being out of sync (because of the OL and the Patz D).
PARAM wrote:Like I said, nobody is directly blaming the loss on Gurley as in "Gurley lost that game". But when is Jared Goff his most effective for 60 minutes? When he has a running game, like most quarterbacks. After the Cowboys game NOBODY was asking 'what's wrong with Gurley'. Where were those questions then?
Was it the same after the Saints game? Absolutely not. Why? Because it was almost a loss and Gurley had 10 yards on 4 attempts and 1 catch for 3 yards. And it was the same after the Superbowl. Because we lost, put up just 3 points AND Gurley had 35 yards on 10 carries and 1 reception for -1 yard bringing his total for those two games to 45 yards on 14 carries and 2 receptions for 2 yards.
It's either because of his production or his lack of carries/receptions or both. We can say 'nobody blamed the loss on Gurley' directly and that's true but common sense says if Gurley, the focal point of our offense is unproductive, it puts a heavy strain on the rest of the offense. So a 3 point output combined with an ineffective Gurley and you don't need somebody to say "Gurley's ineffectiveness was a huge reason for the loss". They're already leaning heavily in that direction.
My point was CJ was equally ineffective (23 for 66 yds; 3 rec for 17 yds) so it had to be something else. The OL. The playcalling. The offensive flow or lack there of. But the story is, "McVay said nothing was wrong with Gurley but he didn't use him much against the Saints and he was relatively ineffective when used" and that was the same after the Superbowl. It doesn't take a logarithm or the dissection of every word written to arrive at the conclusion the concensus opinion was 'Gurley's play' was a large reason for the SB loss.
There was/is a problem with Gurley and it negatively affected the Rams ability to win the Superbowl.
/zn/ wrote:Short of it is --the way I read it, nothing in that statement indicates RH thinks Gurley lost the Patz game. (He does say he thinks TG didn't play well in that game, but that's it.) And besides, even if he did say TG lost the Patz game (which IMO he didn't say), him saying that would not amount to much--it would just be "okay RH that's dumb and wrong."
So fwiw we just disagree on that.
AvengerRam wrote:What Hammond did do was report McVay's update with one breath, then imply that McVay might be covering up the truth
The thing is, from a competitive standpoint, the Rams probably don’t want to say how they will use Gurley in 2019. And they probably shouldn’t say it.
He was obviously banged up at the end of the year.
it was a weird deal where he’s so tough. He’s pushing through different things.
I think what you really saw was a warrior pushing through the Philadelphia [Eagles] game, and then that led to missing a couple of games.
He’s feeling good. He’s in a good place. I just think the natural ebbs and flows when you play 19 games, and I know he missed a couple with the amount of work that he got, it just worked out that way at the end of the year.
think we’ve just got to do a good job of monitoring how he’s feeling throughout the season.
/zn/ wrote:"Covering up the truth." To me that's an exaggeration. I think you have a tendency toward the darker, more conspiratorial reading of motives. It has shown up before.
If you look at the entire comment, and not just taking one bit out of context, Hammond is reflecting on something a lot of people have said--
There's a huge difference between not being open and "covering up the truth."
That doesn't mean there IS no issue. Clearly there is one, or he would not talk about monitoring him better in 2019.
Rich Hammond
Verified account
@Rich_Hammond
7m7 minutes ago
"No arthritis here!"