The Todd Gurley Thread - Currently FA

[PR0v3]

i have no idea what people are seeing out there. gurley looks fine to me.

the only thing holding him back is mcvay trying to work out how to counter the 6-1 front teams are throwing at them every game. last week they started running straight at them which worked fine. yesterday i think he finally found the answer, gerald everett. he torched the seahawks with everett, and higbee, so they backed off it and then the rams did as they pleased for the rest of the game.

if he can get teams to back off earlier in the games gurley will have the space to run through actual holes.

This is what i see, too. Gurley looks the same to me, and the fact that real NFL defenses are prioritizing shutting down the run game reaffirms my belief.

What I see is worse o-line play, a worse offense in general, and less utilization as a result, but Gurley looks like the same guy. I think this might be a Jeff Fisher 2.0 buy window as I have confidence in McVay to adjust.

[FantasyFreak]

i have no idea what people are seeing out there. gurley looks fine to me.

the only thing holding him back is mcvay trying to work out how to counter the 6-1 front teams are throwing at them every game. last week they started running straight at them which worked fine. yesterday i think he finally found the answer, gerald everett. he torched the seahawks with everett, and higbee, so they backed off it and then the rams did as they pleased for the rest of the game.

if he can get teams to back off earlier in the games gurley will have the space to run through actual holes.

This is what i see, too. Gurley looks the same to me, and the fact that real NFL defenses are prioritizing shutting down the run game reaffirms my belief.

What I see is worse o-line play, a worse offense in general, and less utilization as a result, but Gurley looks like the same guy. I think this might be a Jeff Fisher 2.0 buy window as I have confidence in McVay to adjust.

Combined with the fact they lost 2 interior lineman (Saffold) specially who have not been replaced on a talent/cohesiveness level and that is a big time shift. People are saying the Rams/Mcvay aren't adjusting, but he clearly is. He's putting way more on Goff, with a much worse OL. He put them in position to win vs the Hawks. Kupp and Everett had egregious drops (one resulting in an INT) and he still managed to put them into position to win. They paid Goff a boatload, and are now asking him to do more. He set them up for a win Thursday, and the kicker failed. Mcvay threw his chips in on Goff. He is the guy, not Gurley. Gurley is a part of the offense now, and Goff is the focal point. It's going to have some growing pains, and it remains to be seen whether it will work. Regardless, that is clearly the plan moving forward.

[Orenthal Shames]

This was part of his initial quote: "At no point in time did his trade value reflect that he would be the overall QB3/QB4 for the past 6 years."

To me, he's talking about Brady when he was in his early 30s if we're going back 6 years. So if we're saying 6 years ago people were sleeping on Brady because they thought he was old, but proved them wrong because he continued to be the QB3/4, what's he suggesting about Gurley now? A rational person would interpret that as people are sleeping on Gurley now and that he'll continue being a high end RB for the next several years. Even though he had already admitted that Gurley has knee issues. So what are we saying here? Is Gurley a good RB to have right now? Sure. Is he going to play at a high level for numerous more years like Brady when people began doubting Brady 6 years ago? Highly doubt it. That's all I've been trying to say this whole time in response to Welker's comment. If I'm misinterpreting his comment about Brady being devalued 6 years ago and still being a stud, and comparing that to Gurley's current situation, then that's my bad. But that's how it was written and that's why I think it's a terrible comparison. If we're comparing Brady of the last couple of years to Gurley this year and next, then sure, I get what you're saying at least. That's not how it was worded though.

Also, I don't remember how QBs were valued 10 years ago, but I'm guessing most of them didn't play at a high level once they hit their mid 30s like some of the recent QBs are.

LOL I can't tell if you're being serious here? There's no need to speculate about what age Brady he was talking about. He literally said he was talking about 36 year old Brady explicitly in the sentence before the one quoted. You literally had to delete that part to go back and copy that quote you pasted.

Regardless, I am no Gurley fan but I think his point is fair. Like Brady then people are treating Gurley like he's basically a redraft option who is only usable for teams that are competing right now, and it's perfectly possible and even reasonable to think that Gurley isn't going to just retire in a few months.

He's not going to be Gurley 1.0 but it's certainly reasonable to speculate that he could continue banging on as a mid-RB2 for the next 5 years while everyone treats his trade value like he's only going to be able to play for another few months the whole time.

Or better. He's been a high end RB2 already this year and potentially a low end RB1 by week's end.

[Goddard]

This was part of his initial quote: "At no point in time did his trade value reflect that he would be the overall QB3/QB4 for the past 6 years."

To me, he's talking about Brady when he was in his early 30s if we're going back 6 years. So if we're saying 6 years ago people were sleeping on Brady because they thought he was old, but proved them wrong because he continued to be the QB3/4, what's he suggesting about Gurley now? A rational person would interpret that as people are sleeping on Gurley now and that he'll continue being a high end RB for the next several years. Even though he had already admitted that Gurley has knee issues. So what are we saying here? Is Gurley a good RB to have right now? Sure. Is he going to play at a high level for numerous more years like Brady when people began doubting Brady 6 years ago? Highly doubt it. That's all I've been trying to say this whole time in response to Welker's comment. If I'm misinterpreting his comment about Brady being devalued 6 years ago and still being a stud, and comparing that to Gurley's current situation, then that's my bad. But that's how it was written and that's why I think it's a terrible comparison. If we're comparing Brady of the last couple of years to Gurley this year and next, then sure, I get what you're saying at least. That's not how it was worded though.

Also, I don't remember how QBs were valued 10 years ago, but I'm guessing most of them didn't play at a high level once they hit their mid 30s like some of the recent QBs are.

LOL I can't tell if you're being serious here? There's no need to speculate about what age Brady he was talking about. He literally said he was talking about 36 year old Brady explicitly in the sentence before the one quoted. You literally had to delete that part to go back and copy that quote you pasted.

Regardless, I am no Gurley fan but I think his point is fair. Like Brady then people are treating Gurley like he's basically a redraft option who is only usable for teams that are competing right now, and it's perfectly possible and even reasonable to think that Gurley isn't going to just retire in a few months.

He's not going to be Gurley 1.0 but it's certainly reasonable to speculate that he could continue banging on as a mid-RB2 for the next 5 years while everyone treats his trade value like he's only going to be able to play for another few months the whole time.

You're right, this was already established in a previous post. I guess I thought to myself that there's no way someone can be comparing Gurley's situation right now to Brady's at age 31. Comparing him to Brady at age 36 would have made more sense for his argument. Also, I don't remember anyone treating Brady like he was washed up 10 years ago and not wanting to buy (at least not in my leagues). He was still very elite, shown no signs of decline, and one of the best QBs in the league. The argument with Gurley is, he's showing decline and probably won't be elite anymore, or at least not for very long (and most of you have already agreed to that). I never said Gurley's washed up and he's done or that you need to sell him because he'll be riding the bench from here on out. I never even argued that he can't be a RB2 for a few more years. But that's still not that same as an elite Brady at age 31.

My initial comment was that this might be a good time to sell. Someone could see his stats from the last two weeks and the fact that he got 90+% of the carries and reps for RBs and might actually want to buy him (since apparently people weren't able to sell him for peanuts prior to that). This caused some outrage from the Gurley owners to lash out and explain to me that it's not a good time to sell and that they've tried, but no one's interested...even though there had been threads in the team advice column where people were selling him for two 1sts even prior to Thursdays game. Then I get another angry responder comparing Gurley's current situation to Brady at 31 and how supposedly no one was buying Brady then because he was too old (again, maybe in his league?). Regardless, I think it's still a bad comparison and I won't waver from that opinion. And obviously those of you coming to his defense won't either.

I hope for Gurley's sake that he can dominate again because I actually like him and think he could have been one of the best RB of all-time, but I'm not sure that's going to happen now...still doesn't mean he can't be good, just not great.

[CGW]

So after this coming matchup with San Fran, he goes up against Atlanta and then Cinci. It will be nice to see how he does against these cupcake defenses.

So far, he looks as expected to me. I would like to see a few more long runs, but it seems like teams are willing to put the game in Goffs hands and try to force him into making decisions.

[Vcize]

This was part of his initial quote: "At no point in time did his trade value reflect that he would be the overall QB3/QB4 for the past 6 years."

To me, he's talking about Brady when he was in his early 30s if we're going back 6 years. So if we're saying 6 years ago people were sleeping on Brady because they thought he was old, but proved them wrong because he continued to be the QB3/4, what's he suggesting about Gurley now? A rational person would interpret that as people are sleeping on Gurley now and that he'll continue being a high end RB for the next several years. Even though he had already admitted that Gurley has knee issues. So what are we saying here? Is Gurley a good RB to have right now? Sure. Is he going to play at a high level for numerous more years like Brady when people began doubting Brady 6 years ago? Highly doubt it. That's all I've been trying to say this whole time in response to Welker's comment. If I'm misinterpreting his comment about Brady being devalued 6 years ago and still being a stud, and comparing that to Gurley's current situation, then that's my bad. But that's how it was written and that's why I think it's a terrible comparison. If we're comparing Brady of the last couple of years to Gurley this year and next, then sure, I get what you're saying at least. That's not how it was worded though.

Also, I don't remember how QBs were valued 10 years ago, but I'm guessing most of them didn't play at a high level once they hit their mid 30s like some of the recent QBs are.

LOL I can't tell if you're being serious here? There's no need to speculate about what age Brady he was talking about. He literally said he was talking about 36 year old Brady explicitly in the sentence before the one quoted. You literally had to delete that part to go back and copy that quote you pasted.

Regardless, I am no Gurley fan but I think his point is fair. Like Brady then people are treating Gurley like he's basically a redraft option who is only usable for teams that are competing right now, and it's perfectly possible and even reasonable to think that Gurley isn't going to just retire in a few months.

He's not going to be Gurley 1.0 but it's certainly reasonable to speculate that he could continue banging on as a mid-RB2 for the next 5 years while everyone treats his trade value like he's only going to be able to play for another few months the whole time.

You're right, this was already established in a previous post. I guess I thought to myself that there's no way someone can be comparing Gurley's situation right now to Brady's at age 31. Comparing him to Brady at age 36 would have made more sense for his argument. Also, I don't remember anyone treating Brady like he was washed up 10 years ago and not wanting to buy (at least not in my leagues). He was still very elite, shown no signs of decline, and one of the best QBs in the league. The argument with Gurley is, he's showing decline and probably won't be elite anymore, or at least not for very long (and most of you have already agreed to that). I never said Gurley's washed up and he's done or that you need to sell him because he'll be riding the bench from here on out. I never even argued that he can't be a RB2 for a few more years. But that's still not that same as an elite Brady at age 31.

Dude. You still have it backwards. LOL is this schtick?

Others: This is kind of like Brady at age 36
Goddard: This is nothing like 31 year old Brady! Here is how age 31 Brady is different.
Others: He was talking about age 36 Brady
Goddard: Uh no, if I delete this part of the quote where he says age 36 Brady then I think I can infer he was talking about age 31 Brady.
Others: Dude he was talking about age 36 Brady, he literally said it explicitly and you deleted that part.
Goddard: Oh you're right! Sorry I see now he was talking about age 31 Brady, silly me making a bunch of arguments about age 36 Brady. Let me explain how this is different than age 31 Brady.
Others:

Anyway I agree that if you can sell for a good haul right now it would be a good move. Problem is like the guy mentioned in bringing up 36 year old Brady, no one is really giving a haul for him right now because trade partners are basically treating him like a half season fill in for contenders and little else.

DLF trade finder shows recent trades:

Gurley for 2020 1st
Gurley for 2020 1st/3rd
Gurley/2nd for Sutton/2021 1st

His trade value is basically the same as Shady McCoy's was about a year ago when people were swapping a 1st for him as a 1-year rental only useful for contenders.

[Goddard]

Dude. You still have it backwards. LOL is this schtick?

Others: This is kind of like Brady at age 36
Goddard: This is nothing like 31 year old Brady! Here is how age 31 Brady is different.
Others: He was talking about age 36 Brady
Goddard: Uh no, if I delete this part of the quote where he says age 36 Brady then I think I can infer he was talking about age 31 Brady.
Others: Dude he was talking about age 36 Brady, he literally said it explicitly and you deleted that part.
Goddard: Oh you're right! Sorry I see now he was talking about age 31 Brady, silly me making a bunch of arguments about age 36 Brady. Let me explain how this is different than age 31 Brady.
Others:

Well, clearly I'm bad at reading and numbers lol.

[Goddard]

I don't even know where the confusion began, because initially I was stating that Gurley now and Brady at 36 still isn't a great comparison. Then I think one of Hoos' comments confused me and made me think he was talking about Brady at 31 instead of 36, but I see where I made that mistake now. Oh well...

[Goddard]

Dude. You still have it backwards. LOL is this schtick?

Others: This is kind of like Brady at age 36
Goddard: This is nothing like 31 year old Brady! Here is how age 31 Brady is different.
Others: He was talking about age 36 Brady
Goddard: Uh no, if I delete this part of the quote where he says age 36 Brady then I think I can infer he was talking about age 31 Brady.
Others: Dude he was talking about age 36 Brady, he literally said it explicitly and you deleted that part.
Goddard: Oh you're right! Sorry I see now he was talking about age 31 Brady, silly me making a bunch of arguments about age 36 Brady. Let me explain how this is different than age 31 Brady.
Others:

Well, clearly I'm bad at reading and numbers lol.

To be fair, the bolded part isn't true. I initially had it right and was arguing against Brady at 36. The disconnect happened after that.

[Jigga94]

I'm still concerned that Gurley didn't make the travel to Hawaii in the preseason

[khaos337]

I'm still concerned that Gurley didn't make the travel to Hawaii in the preseason

[djeternal2]

I'm still concerned that Gurley didn't make the travel to Hawaii in the preseason

The sarcasm is strong with this one.

[Jigga94]

I'm still concerned that Gurley didn't make the travel to Hawaii in the preseason

The sarcasm is strong with this one.

1 out of 2 got it... Can't win em all

[Phaded]

Real possibility that Gurley doesn't play this week with a "quad" injury. Hope y'all ready for 70 passes by Goff.

[hoos89]

Real possibility that Gurley doesn't play this week with a "quad" injury. Hope y'all ready for 70 passes by Goff.

How many targets can Kupp get in a game? 25? 30?

E: I see you already made this joke in the Kupp thread.