Quote
zn
First I don't accept that any and all injuries are results of "wear and tear." Injuries can happen at any time to anyone, because they are direct results of on the field actions causing a particular trauma. There are players with extensive playing time who don't get injured, and there are players with very little playing time who do get injured. In fact I doubt SJ's quad had anything to do with "wear and tear." Either way there's no evidence that it did.
Gurley's thing was not an injury. That's why it wasn't reported as one. (Unless you're claiming they failed to report an injury.)
So in Gurley's case, since we know it's not an injury, what is it? Maybe the wearing down of a surgical knee? But that's a vague and general thing to say, because many different things can happen that would meet the empty generalization "worn down surgical knee" (just as saying you had a meal could mean you ate any of a long possible list of things). There are names and specific details describing the various things that can happen to a beat up surgical knee (Martz once sat Faulk for a couple of weeks, for example, because he had a bone bruise on his surgical knee). In Gurley's case we just don't know what it is. Though it doesn't just reduce to simply "knee tired now." Something physical was taking place when he got pain and inflammation (both times). It's just that neither of us know what it is (which means, among other things, that there's no realistic basis to write off Gurley's knee issues and act like nothing happened.)
Can it come back? They're acting like it could, since they talk about reducing his touches. In fact they would be crazy to act like it COULDN'T come back---they HAVE TO act like it could. Will it? Depends on what it is, so we just don't know. It might, it might not, it might happen in November, or like 2018 it could happen twice (as McVay and Gurley both said it did).
Does that mean, to quip back at the quipsters, that he's walking with a cane? No, guys with worse knee issues played in the league for a while before they called it quits (I already mentioned Faulk and Holt).
Well nobody said 'all injuries are because of wear and tear'. Just as nobody should say wear and tear plays no part in some injuries. Yes, if the injury is a result of contact, anybody with any amount of career playing time can be injured and it has nothing to do with wear and tear. But once injured, your body has experienced a great deal of wear and tear. It's quite possible, actually probable with some injuries that it could happen again or at the very least become aggravated. So if you 'aggravate' an old injury (through non contact sans trauma) should it be reported as an injury? Or is it just an old injury acting up? As far as the Rams not reporting an injury to Gurley, he did play the next week. So asking "it wasn't an injury (based off the Rams not reporting it), so what was it?" could be considered a bit obtuse. Do they have to report aggravations? Or if it's aggravated but feeling better by the time the reports for the next Sunday are due (Wednesday IIRC) do they have to report it? This mystery many keep perpetrating about "what aren't the Rams telling us" may turn out to be tinfoil hat stuff. The Rams have said 'Todd's knee was acting up....just normal wear and tear....but he'll be the focal point of our offense going forward. We just have to do a better job on monitoring his touches and keeping him fresh." But based on this because of that as a result of that other thing, folks are going to turn over every rock in hopes of finding something that probably isn't there.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2019 11:52AM by PARAM.
