Gurley's injury was worse than let on? (1 Viewer)

Beast

Former Camp Beast
Joined
Nov 6, 2001
Messages
13,890
Reaction score
3,550
Location
Parts Unknown
Offline
I think this is something we all suspected, but the fact that he was never listed as anything less than 100% for the playoffs should cause concern within the league.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...eys-knee-was-more-hurt-than-initially-thought

You can't just list a player as 100%, force other teams to gameplan for him and then under-utilize him citing how the knee felt that day.

The Practice Report provides clubs and fans with an accurate description of a player’s injury status and how much he participated in practice during the week. If any player has a significant or noteworthy injury, it must be listed on the practice report, even if he fully participates in practice and the team expects that he will play in the team’s next game. This is especially important for key players whose injuries may be covered extensively by the media.

https://operations.nfl.com/updates/football-ops/2017-nfl-injury-report-policy/

Gurley wasn't listed on the NFC Championship injury or game status reports and should have been. And it's clear based on his usage he wasn't 100% in the Super Bowl, but he wasn't listed there either.

If a player was listed on the club’s Practice Report during the week, but is not listed on the club’s Game Status Report, it means that the club is certain the player will play. If the player is then deactivated for the game, the club will be required to provide an explanation. If the explanation is inadequate or unpersuasive, a compliance investigation or enforcement proceeding may be initiated.

Based on the above, this could possibly be a loophole in the policy (i.e. not listing a player and not deactivating them, but simply using them less), but there's just too much smoke to this. You don't just sit a potential MVP candidate in the 2 biggest games of the year. The Rams should have to answer for this.
 
I've been waiting for this to start getting said as soon as he was a non-factor in the NFC Championship.
 
This is how it works within the rules. He is a significant player so why wouldn't they list him as 100%?
 
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn’t “Coach Pete” mention sonething about this?
 
As much as I hate to say it, I don't see anything happening here. The whole point of the injury report was clearly violated (at least in my mind). At this point, I absolutely have no faith that the NFL will "fix" this. Pun intended!:hihi:
 
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn’t “Coach Pete” mention sonething about this?

Hey Fury! Yes he did. Said there were locker room problems with Gurley in the latter part of this season.

Edit: there is extremely strong Goodell precedent for severe penalties, up to loss of draft pics, when teams mislead dramatically about the health of key players. The NFCCG and SB are as big as games get.

We all saw, well a lot us, the amount that Anderson was played the last few games. Gurley is an MVP caliber player nearly every year he is healthy. Even the "Blessed" Rams couldn't get away with trying a hide major injury in those huge games. The NFL would have to take action on that serious rules infraction. I suspect Coach Pete is right about there being more than meets the eye to Gurley's lack of play time down the stretch.
 
Last edited:
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn’t “Coach Pete” mention sonething about this?

Fury - In that big poll of most popular Saints sources of info, Coach Pete was 2nd or 3rd. That means a lot of SR Who Dats really value his insights - even when wrong. I get a lot of positive messaging nearly every time I post something from Coach Pete.

Then there's a small percentage of SR Who Dats who either don't like Pete or don't believe in Pete who are extremely vocal about this. I'm not going to let a very small vocal percentage of Who Dats influence Pete's posts when so many really enjoy the posts. Some people online just get so upset. If it's not Coach Pete, it will be something else. And then there's those that simply don't buy-in. Those always have the option to not read anything related to Pete....... As I've said in many of my posts, if I didn't know Coach Pete so well for so long, I would seriously doubt a good deal of what he says. Heck, I was in his gym 5 days a week for the 1st 3-years training under him and I didn't believe a lot of what he was saying back then. I got tired of being wrong - lol
 
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn’t “Coach Pete” mention sonething about this?

This was Pete's take:

In the gym today, Coach Pete was talking about the SB. Someone asked why Gurley was not playing near as much in the playoffs and less usage down the stretch in the regular season. imho, there really isn't a better back in the league when he is healthy than Gurley. Maybe a few as good, but he's up at the top. All of us thought injury and hiding it from the NFL. We were wrong.

Coach Pete said that Gurley has attitude problems. He got his big paycheck and he has become an "All about me" player and he stopped putting in full effort late in the season.

Gurley was slammed in that thread. People calling him selfish, me first, etc. The dude was hurt.
 
NFL won't do anything. If the teams were reversed, you better believe sanctions would be on the way, with media force all behind it.
 
This was Pete's take:



Gurley was slammed in that thread. People calling him selfish, me first, etc. The dude was hurt.

Yeah, I have nothing personal against Coach Pete, but I’m really confused about Swimmer’s victory lap over this prediction. This “he was injured” thing is very much NOT what he said earlier.
 
Last edited:

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom