Did Todd Gurley Get Worse, or Is It Just the Rams? The NFL Underground Mailbag

Welcome to the NFL Underground Mailbag. Ask Chris Harris your question about the NFL, general sports or cultural minutiae at HeyHarris@HarrisFootball.com. And if you're interested in fantasy football, check out the Harris Football Podcast at www.HarrisFootball.com.

Justin L.: I keep hearing, "The Rams weren't good, but Todd Gurley didn't look the same in 2016 as he did in '15." You watch all the game film. Do you concur?

I don't think I do. Film watching is subjective, so I'd never impugn every person who says Gurley played poorly last season, but I think it's mighty easy to consider the statistical results and retrofit a Hot Take: "Sure, you sheeple are blaming Gurley's numerical struggles on his terrible surrounding cast, but I'm here to tell you: HE'S JEREMY HILL!"

I regularly argue that every pro football play is so interconnected among the 11 offensive players that defining stats are difficult to find ("Was that a terrible run, or did the left tackle fall down?"). Another facet of that interconnectedness is it's mighty tough to know whether a very good running back is having bad results because he's bad or because his team is shit.

In the world at large we know what incompetence looks like, but can you quantitatively measure run-blocking incompetence? Like, OK, the Rams offensive line was bad last year, but was it so bad that if you'd taken Ezekiel Elliott and placed him in L.A., would he have sucked? And if you'd put Gurley behind the Cowboys line, would he have been as great as Zeke? There's no way to say, because there's no way to objectively measure how many yards a running back should have gained given the exact vagaries of that particular play: the blocking, the defensive formation, the defensive response, the condition of the turf, the state of the owner's toupee, etc.

Consider this: Gurley gained two yards or fewer 102 times in 2015 (when he played 13 games) and 132 times in 2016 (when he played the full 16). On a per-game basis, that's almost the same rate. He gained zero yards or fewer 45 times in '15 and 62 in '16; again, similar rates. The reason folks say he was great in '15 and a disaster in '16 is the change in big plays. He had only seven carries of 15 yards or more last year, compared to 16 the season before, for a difference of 379 yards. Give Gurley back those 379 yards in '16, and nobody would be complaining about him.

Now, big plays are also the responsibility of the running back, so that doesn't automatically let Gurley off the hook, but there's a reason Gurley himself said the Rams had a "middle-school offense" last year. They ran predictable formations and personnel groups, and Gurley faced just about as many stacked boxes when games were close as any back in the NFL. To my eyes, on his good runs he still looked excellent, with acceleration and long speed that belies his size. I know the specter of Trent Richardson looms, but it turns out that the T-Rich Balloon's problems were more personality and off-field (and culinary) than anything else. If the Rams get better around him, I still think Gurley will be great.

Grant R.: Which NFL team is the best match for which position in the 2017 draft?

I'll stay away from quarterbacks here, because I'm not breaking new ground by saying the Browns, the Jets, the Bears, and the 49ers (among others) need better signal callers. And there are some teams that basically need everything. And a whole bunch of teams would look better with Leonard Fournette. So I'll limit myself to a potentially emerging squad with an obvious hole that could improve the way they play: I hope the Titans take one of the elite wideouts.

I admit we all perennially underrate Rishard Matthews. He was good last year, and it wasn't fake—despite not being a great athlete, he made plays down the field and scored nine TDs. In the end, though, the Titans hit their ceiling at 9-7, blowing a Week 16 tilt in Jacksonville by being deeply predictable and having to rely on the likes of Harry Douglas when they fell behind. The way Mike Mularkey will be able to prove he's not just another ex-player knucklehead coach is if he can evolve past whatever "exotic smashmouth" is, and take advantage of Marcus Mariota. The more I watch Mariota's tape, the better I feel about him, but deeper shots don't tend to be a major part of the game plan until the scoreboard mandates them. Matthews stays. He's a good player. But I'd like him more as my No. 2, with someone like John Ross or Mike Williams on the other side.

Toby: I heard you say on your podcast that the Bruins can't win the Stanley Cup. Sacrilege! They're up 1-0! What kind of fan are you? If they get hot, they've got as good a chance as anyone.

They don't. I saw Vegas listing the beloved Bruins at 10-to-1 odds to take the Cup, and I nearly did a clam-chowdah spit take.

There are many delusional fan bases in sports. Georgia Bulldogs football fans can never understand why they aren't undefeated every year. Kentucky Wildcats basketball fans threaten to kill referees when they don't win. Every year New York Knicks fans look at their roster and say, "Oh, dude, how are we not winning 70 games with Joakim Noah and the ghost of Bernard King?" (Smash cut to Bernard King sitting somewhere eating a hamburger going, "Hey! I'm not dead!") Dallas Cowboys fans believe Jerry Jones isn't every piece of corporate malfeasance from the last 100 years made manifest.

In hockey? It's the Bruins. We look at 75-year-old Zdeno Chara and our goaltender whose sniffles forced him out of an Olympic semifinal, and we say, "CHAWK UP ANUTHA PARADE!" No.

Brian W.: Who's the QB prospect of the last decade you think would've had the most different career had he been drafted by a different team?

Can I say Tim Tebow? If Josh McDaniels hadn't gift-wrapped him as a first-rounder, he'd have disappeared into the Jaguars locker room as a UDFA and would've gotten his career as a Christian-themed podcast guest underway sooner.

But seriously, I think I'll say RGIII. Bobby Three Sticks was one hell of a raw athlete and that made him a superstar as a rookie, but coming out of Baylor he wasn't prepared to read defenses or throw deep accurately, and he landed with the NFL's most dysfunctional shitshow where nobody pulls in the same direction and everything turns into Dan Snyder–themed poo. Who's to say whether Griffin would've torn an ACL and come back too soon if he played elsewhere, and who's to say whether he'd ever have been a good pocket passer, but it's not hard to argue that Snyder enabled RGIII to act like a dunce in the media and undermine Mike Shanahan in ways other owners would not have.

Zach W.: Rank these billionaires from best to worst: Woody Johnson, Jerry Jones, President Donald J. Trump. (Of course "best" and "worst" are totally subjective and up to you.)

In order of intelligence: 1. Jerry; 2. Trumpy; 3. Woody

In order of cosmetic surgeries: 1. Jerry; 2. Trumpy; 3. Woody

In order of likelihood that they'll end the world: 1. Trumpy; 2. Trumpy; 3. Trumpy

Want to read more stories like this from VICE Sports? Subscribe to our daily newsletter.