Quote
waterfield
That's been my concern as well. With only a few exceptions here most saw it as an injury that occurred near the end of the season and certainly didn't improve afterwards in the playoffs. The Dallas game may have been the exception except for the fact that most if not all of his long runs were through enormous holes. Be interesting to see this play out.
#1, whatever it is, it's a condition--not an injury per se. In fact one reason the Rams don't talk about it is because under the rules, since strictly speaking it's not an injury, they don't have to.
#2. It happened in week 1 too. So this is an up and down, sometimes good sometimes not condition that flares up. (Which btw is why arthritis is plausible.) The Rams discussed the fact that it happened in game 1 too when they sat him in December:
Quote
. [
www.espn.com]
Gurley's knee also was an issue after a season-opening victory over the Oakland Raiders, when Gurley rushed for 108 yards and caught three passes for 39 yards and a touchdown.
"It was a similar situation," McVay said.Gurley said Thursday that he, "Felt like s---" after the Monday night game in Week 1.
"It was bad," Gurley said. "I was contemplating on giving the Rams back their money and everything. It was bad. It was real bad."
Before the season, the Rams awarded Gurley, the defending NFL Offensive Player of the Year, a four-year extension worth $60 million, with $45 million guaranteed, to make him the highest-paid running back in NFL history.
Despite the pain, Gurley felt in the aftermath of the opener, he said that his knee felt better two days later.
He says he was better 2 days after the game 1 flare-up but actually he had a subpar game in week 2 against Arizona's defense, which was ranked 32nd v. the run (in that game TG averaged 2.2 a carry). After that he was back in gear in the following weeks , until the 2-game sit-out in December.