For what its worth I didn't hear the short career narrative anywhere when the second contract was signed. This is clearly a result of 20/20 hind sight. Everyone knew he had a knee injury in college. Conversely, everyone also witnessed a monster start to his career. I would bet that had the Rams attempted to trade him at the beginning of 2018 teams would have line up to deal and the critics would have been all over the Rams for trading a top 5 player (some called generational) in the league.
I believe the Rams felt by dealing with the extension early they were able to have Gurley for his logical useful life...around 28 years old. I also believe they were trying to send a message to the league that they would take care of their players and treat them fair in order to make it "the place to be for free-agents". The signing looked brilliant until the end of 2018 when the knee issue surfaced (or was at least rumored)... since then the wheels have fallen off.
At the time of the signing I was fully on-board... now of course like all Ram fans disappointed in the end result.It does seem at this time a better strategy to draft a RB and use the franchise tag at the end of their initial contract (two times if appropriate). This seems a bit unfair to the player but will mitigate the risk going forward. Additionally, some teams with good offensive lines seem to have success shopping in the RB bargain bin.
Bottom-line is it disappointing and the cap hit sucks. I find it hard to be critical of something I was supportive of a the time. The Rams have done their best to mitigate the damage and we will all move on.
