zn wrote:

How much of it was him?

We KNOW it wasn;t all him.

But there’s different views on how much was him.

Gurley says when he weighed in at the Rams’ Organized Team Activities, he discovered that he had lost about 10 to 15 pounds.

If you’re working out at an optimum level, how do you “discover” in June you lost 10-15 pounds?

If you’re working out the way you should be, wouldn’t you know?

Blue and Gold wrote:

With Quinn at OLB, there will be times you have to use him in coverage. That’s the whole point of a 3-4 as opposed to a 4-3. Since the way Wade runs it, it’s a one-gap 3-4 and they have said DOnald will always be the 3-tech, so that will not change, the point of a 3-4 is the element of surprise of where your 4 or 5 rushers will come from. If you use Quinn as a rusher all the time, then why not play him in a down position and play a 3-4?

Now, in sub packages (nickel and dime) he will have his hand in the grass, as will Barwin and the 2 DTs, so that does not change

But in the 3-4 if Barwin always covers and Quinn always rushes, then why sign Barwin? He’s essentially a guy who can rush and cover, like he did for wade and in Philly.

If we understand Wade’s theory that the 3-4 is better than the 4-3 (base defense versus base offense) then Quinn has to drop sometimes, otherwise there is no reason to run a 3-4.

And remember by rush, I mean, when they are playing the base defense and opposing team throws…if Barwin rarely rushes then that right tackle will never really get challenged.

Point is, Quinn will have to drop SOME… will it be 10%? 15%? more? a bit less? That is the right question.

Looking at Wade’s Denver D here is one play where Ware has the RB in man coverage

then there is three stills. he has the TE in a bump, then settles in zone coverage.

So Ware had to play SOME coverage, not a lot, but the scheme calls for it sometimes and Quinn will have to be able to do it or he’ll be a 3rd down rusher and someone else will have to play WILL in base.

This dirty little secret is the real reason why repeal is so hard for Republicans

Greg Sargent

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/07/07/this-dirty-little-secret-is-the-real-reason-why-repeal-is-so-hard-for-republicans/?utm_term=.e3428c4234a9

The Affordable Care Act has widely been held aloft as one of the leading drivers of the deepening polarization of American political life — it has been bitterly fought over for years and has loomed as a great embodiment of all that ideologically divides the two parties. Yet in a strange twist, the GOP debate over repeal has actually revealed that there is a surprising amount of hidden consensus on health care.

In a nutshell, what the debate has really shown is that the passage and implementation of the ACA has given rise to a latent majority in Congress — or at least one in the Senate — that has more or less made peace with the ACA’s spending and regulatory architecture and its fundamental ideological goals, either for political or principled reasons, or for some combination of the two. The debate has forced this basic reality out into the open. And this, I think, is one key reason it is proving so hard for the GOP to repeal it.

The Post’s David Weigel has an extraordinary report on a town-hall meeting held by GOP Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas that neatly illustrates the point. Moran is a GOP loyalist who previously headed the GOP Senate campaign arm and sits firmly in the mainstream of today’s GOP. Yet even he is having trouble supporting the GOP bill. At the town-hall meeting, there was no sign of his previous calls for repeal:

He did not describe the task facing Republicans as repeal; it was “repair, replace, whatever language people are using.”

Pressed by activists and voters, Moran said that he did not want to cut back Medicaid. “I have concern about people with disabilities, the frail and elderly,” Moran said. “I also know that if we want health care in rural places and across Kansas, Medicare and Medicaid need to compensate for the services they provide.”

After the town hall meeting, Moran told reporters the version of the GOP’s bill that he opposed put too much of Medicaid at risk.

“Medicaid, except for the extension part of Medicaid, is not really a part of fixing the Affordable Care Act,” he said. “So we’ve coupled two things, both of which are very difficult. Kansas is a place that’s treated Medicaid payments very conservative. If there are people receiving those payments who don’t deserve them, deal with that issue.”

Moran appears to mean that the GOP bill would not only phase out the ACA’s Medicaid expansion; it would also cut Medicaid funding far beyond the expansion (to the tune of $776 billion over 10 years, leaving 15 million fewer covered by the program). Moran is saying this would hurt untold numbers of people, including the disabled and sick, and suggesting that such deep Medicaid cuts would threaten to close rural hospitals. He is suggesting that, while able-bodied adults might allegedly be scamming their way onto the Medicaid expansion, this issue should not be taken to justify the deeper cuts to Medicaid. And this, as Weigel notes, unfolded in one of “the reddest parts of a deep red state.”

The bottom line is that Republicans who currently oppose the Senate bill object to it because it would roll back federal spending in a way that would hurt millions and millions of people. This includes Moran and moderates such as Dean Heller of Nevada, Susan Collins of Maine, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, and Rob Portman of Ohio, all of whom have made variations of this argument. Some, such as Collins and Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, have even objected on the grounds that this would finance a massive tax cut for the wealthy, and that this is indefensible.

All of this is dramatically at odds with the ludicrous spin coming from GOP leaders such as John Cornyn of Texas and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, who argue that the millions left uncovered under the GOP bill will be choosing that plight, because they will have been liberated from the hated ACA mandate. To summarize, Republicans are arguing both that (1) millions won’t actually be hurt by these Medicaid cuts, either because they aren’t really cuts, or because everyone will have “access” to health care later; and that (2) if many millions of people go without coverage who would otherwise have been covered, they did so by choice.

It is true that scrapping the mandate would be a partial cause of the rise in the uninsured. But how many of the 15 million fewer covered by Medicaid would be choosing that outcome, as opposed to not being able to afford coverage on their own? The point here is that, while it is of course possible to make a principled argument against the mandate, Republicans are doing something else entirely: They are hiding behind their arguments against the mandate to evade acknowledging the true human toll their proposed Medicaid cuts would inflict. What this really means is that they are basically fine with rolling back the ACA’s massive coverage expansion to facilitate a massive tax cut for the rich, but just won’t say so out loud.

But all indications are that moderate Republican senators — and even senators such as Moran — are not fine with this outcome. And this also applies to the ACA’s provisions barring discrimination against people with preexisting conditions. As Philip Klein points out, Republicans are badly hung up on this — they are struggling to find some other way of realizing that goal while also repealing the mandate, which means they still want government to act to accomplish the same thing.

Now, these objecting senators may still end up supporting a revised GOP bill in the end, due to party pressures and other factors. But if they do, they will only justify it by pretending that a few additional last-minute dollars (in relative terms) added to the bill would put a meaningful dent in the enormous coverage loss the bill would produce, which that money would not actually do. This would mean their current objections were insincere. But right now, if we take those objections at face value, we have learned that they — and a majority of the Senate, when taken along with all Democrats — just aren’t willing to be associated with rolling back the large coverage expansion that the ACA has achieved.

…

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is now saying that if the GOP bill fails, Republicans will have to act to shore up the insurance markets. But as Juliet Eilperin and Amy Goldstein point out:

His suggestion that he and his colleagues might instead try to bolster the insurance exchanges created under the ACA is at odds with Republican talking points that they are beyond repair … Until now, both congressional Republicans and the Trump administration have contended that the “collapse” of the ACA marketplaces is a main reason to erase much of the 2010 law.

Exactly! McConnell’s concession blows up one of the biggest and most mendacious stories President Trump and Republicans have been telling about Obamacare for months.

…

Axios reports that Chris Warshaw of MIT looked at polling of all major legislation since 1990 and found:

The Republican health care effort is the most unpopular legislation in three decades — less popular than the Affordable Care Act when it was passed, the widely hated Troubled Asset Relief Program bank bailout bill in 2008, and even President Bill Clinton’s failed health reform effort in the 1990s.

It turns out cutting hundreds of billions in health spending on poor people to finance a huge tax cut for the rich is deeply unpopular, and not even Trump’s mighty Twitter feed can change it.

…

Paul Krugman runs through multiple lies and deceptions that Republicans are telling about their health-care bill, including this one:

Senior Republicans like Paul Ryan dismiss declines in the number of people with coverage as no big deal, because they would represent voluntary choices not to buy insurance. How is this supposed to apply to the 15 million people the C.B.O. predicts would lose Medicaid? Wouldn’t many people drop coverage, not as an exercise in personal freedom, but in response to what the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates would be an average 74 percent increase in after-tax premiums?

Republicans like to say the coverage loss would be the result of people’s choices once the hated mandate is scrapped. But if this is about the mandate, why the huge cuts in taxes for the rich and Medicaid?

NFC West Q&A: Can Todd Gurley still become an elite running back?

Alden Gonzalez

http://www.espn.com/blog/los-angeles-rams/post/_/id/34195/nfc-west-qa-do-you-believe-todd-gurley-can-be-an-elite-running-back

Todd Gurley went from Offensive Rookie of the Year in 2015 to one of the least productive runners of the 2016 season, compiling 885 rushing yards on 278 attempts.

One thing Gurley lacks is supporting cast. The Los Angeles Rams, who ranked last in yards in each of the past two seasons, have way too much work to do on offense. There are reasons to believe that Gurley will be better moving forward, though. Sean McVay, a prodigy when it comes to the way offenses function, should dream up creative ways of opening up running lanes for Gurley. Left tackle Andrew Whitworth will no doubt improve an offense line that was one of the NFL’s worst units last season.

Heading into his second year, Jared Goff still has a lot to prove, and that receiving corps still leaves something to be desired. Because of those two question marks, defenses will continue to stack the box and focus primarily on stopping Gurley, confident the Rams passing attack won’t hurt them all that much.

Do you believe Gurley can still be an elite running back?

Josh Weinfuss, Arizona Cardinals reporter: In a nutshell, yes. He’s a talent, and in the NFL, talent will shine when paired with the right pieces. Beyond that, Gurley’s talent didn’t just disappear last season. He averaged 2.7 yards per carry before contact in 2015 compared to 1.59 last season — a sign he wasn’t getting enough space to move before the defense converged. Some of the blame has to fall on the offensive line, which was improved this offseason through the signing of veteran tackle Whitworth. Whitworth may be 35, but his presence on the line should bolster its physicality and productivity, giving Gurley room and allowing him to run more freely. Gurley has the potential to be one of the best running backs in the NFL, with the talent to rival the likes of David Johnson and Ezekiel Elliott. Another factor that could fuel his resurgence involves the expected improvement of Goff. If Goff can grow like most players do between their rookie and second seasons, then an improved passing game will open up the ground game for Gurley, allowing him to return to the elite running back conversation.

Nick Wagoner, San Francisco 49ers reporter: This doesn’t seem like a simple yes or no question anymore. Gurley had an impressive stretch of brilliance as a rookie, largely buoyed by his big-play ability. Nobody topped his 14 20-plus-yard runs in 2015. Despite those numbers, Gurley was hindered by a questionable offensive line and questionable passing game, and his production dipped in the final stretch of the season. Last year, Gurley couldn’t recapture the magic he displayed during the first half of his rookie campaign. Once again, some of the blame has to fall on a poor supporting cast and an unimaginative offense, but Gurley also didn’t resemble his 2015 self on the rare occasion when holes were open. He broke 47 tackles as a rookie, good for seventh-best in the league, according to Pro Football Focus. Last year, that number dropped to 41, even though Gurley had 71 more touches. As a result, he ripped off only two 20-plus-yard runs and averaged just 3.18 yards per carry. Yes, teams were focused on stopping Gurley, and yes, he didn’t have much help, but the truly elite running backs find ways to get yards. Gurley should be better in McVay’s offense, but the new head coach’s emphasis on passing leads me to believe that Gurley will be less of a focal point for the Rams in 2017. Though McVay’s presence might help Gurley put up better numbers, it might also prevent him from becoming the elite back many thought he’d be after his rookie season.

Sheil Kapadia, Seattle Seahawks reporter: I’m not sure about elite, but Gurley can still be a quality back in the NFL. The numbers suggest that blocking was a huge issue for Gurley and the Rams last season. Gurley averaged 1.59 yards before contact, which ranked 41st out of 42 players last season. In 2015, that number was 2.70, good for 10th among running backs. The Rams need to devise some way of threatening defenses with their passing game at least occasionally in order for Gurley to return to his 2015 form.

Four things we learned from ‘All or Nothing’ with LA Rams

FOX Sports West

http://www.foxsports.com/west/gallery/los-angeles-rams-all-or-nothing-jared-goff-aaron-donald-070617

All or Nothing: A Season with the Los Angeles Rams brings the football fan behind-the-scenes of an organization that dealt with more commotion than the average team. A fired coach, a cross-country move, trying to keep their No. 1 overall draft from being a bust, and a historic season which ended in an abysmal 4-12 record sums up 2016 for the Rams. But, the show somehow manages to make the disappointing return season watchable and, frankly, led me to believe that that this team was in fact better than their record shows. Besides the personality-lacking Jeff Fisher and his staff, All or Nothing’s second season gave extraordinary insight into a team that isn’t good, and made them good. There were no shortage of storylines throughout the show, but its eight-episode cap forced the show to limit itself, not allowing for full reaction of processing of things that happened. Being with a team, though, in all its entirety allows for an attachment to not just a player or coach, but to an organization. No abrupt cuts, vying to make the team, or the expected drama of the competition of camp, just 53 grown men trying to make their team better. The Rams, fortunately, has a roster filled with these types of men, and in All or Nothing, we learned a lot about them.

4 Gregg Williams is still insane, but it’s charming

If the New Orleans Saints ‘Bountygate’ wasn’t enough of an indication that former Rams defensive coordinator Gregg Williams had a screw loose, All of Nothing reminds us that that screw may have just gotten looser. At first, he seems to be a normal coach: passionate about his job, loves to yell profanity, and watches an endless amount of film. Look and listen closer, and hear that screw shaking. Gregg Williams sleeps in his office multiple days a week on an inflatable mattress with no sheet or blanket, just one pillow. When describing players, Williams uses a language that makes him sound like a weapon salesmen. In characterizing linebacker Mark Barron, he calls him a perfect ‘find ball, see ball, get ball’ player and praises him for the amount of ‘hammer awards’ he’s won. These are given to the player that, as Williams puts it, ‘makes a really good contact legal hit,’ and that fact seems to get him a little too excited as he proceeds to tell Barron to ‘not allow anyone to cross their goal line,’ and to ‘make sure of it.’ Under all this craziness is just a 58-year-old man, so it’s almost endearing.

3 The Rams’ defense is absolutely the real deal

Honestly, all you need to do is take a look at Aaron Donald and that will tell you everything you need to know. ‘You better not help him,’ Donald says to a Seahawks lineman, ‘be a man.’ It’s apparent from the start that Donald wants to set the tone and the other 10 quickly follow. Even in their weekday preparation, the Rams defense flew around walk-through practices, feed off the energy of their teammates, and know and embrace the fact that they are the strength of the team. At halftime and after games, it is the defense that rallies the team together, reminds the team of their goal, and keeps the team grounded in success. ‘Go back to work’ seems to be the defense’s message to the team at-large: They are aware of the Rams situation and reputation, and are on an at-all-costs mission to save it. From Alec Ogletree to Trumaine Johnson, the Rams defense has an array of talent and athleticism that will thrive and be fun to watch in Wade Phillips’ new system.

2 The Los Angeles Rams genuinely care for each other

Sure the NFL is, at its core, a business that pays its employees for a service. Some players and fans get caught up in the ‘workplace regulations’ of the league, its numbers, and money, and alas, it’s easy to forget that this is a team game that the players play to do one thing: win. Add the glamour of being back in Los Angeles, and it seems almost impossible for them not to fall into a big market trap. But on this team, there are plenty of leaders, and full of players that can understand how a team can and should work. After losing three straight games with morale running low, running back Benny Cunningham, a relatively unknown name and now an ex-Ram, gathered the offense mid-practice and gave a heartfelt and soul driven speech. ‘If you’re not doing everything you can bro, to help us win bro, you’re cheating us,’ says Cunningham as he is surrounded by his offense, ‘This is how I feed my family, and we lose the rest of these games, I won’t have a job.’ The raw emotion of Cunningham’s speech is felt through the offense, and you can feel that the Rams want to respond. A simple thing, yes, but coming from a player that rarely sees the field, the threatening of a man’s livelihood appeals to the offense as a whole. It is no secret that the Rams were below average in their return home to LA, but the coaches or players never lost hope. Each loss strengthened the roles of the relationships between coaches and players, and ‘We can still turn this thing around’ became their proverb.

1 Jared Goff is passionate and REALLY wants to play

There is finally no secret or running competition for the Rams starting quarterback position. Jared Goff, regardless of some of the comments McVay has made about the job, is the guy for the Rams come season. And, boy, is he ready to get on the field. Early into All or Nothing, when Case Keenum was the entrenched starter, Goff was asked about how he feels about the starting job. He tries to give an answer that’s equally honest and proper, but the fire was clearly in his eye. ‘I think as a rookie, the more you can,’ queue the long dramatic pause, ‘kind of learn and sit back and watch and be ready for the right time.’ The extended pause says it all. No Goff doesn’t want to sit back, no Goff doesn’t want to watch and simply be ready, Goff wants the reins to the Rams, and a chance to prove his first-pick worth. ‘Anxiety is over, I’m good now, I’m confident, and ready to go. Ready to play, get back to playing football and back to my job,’ Goff tells the media with a smirk after he is named the starter in Week 11. Goff knows and has known all along that the Rams will be his team soon come, and he’s handled his ascension nicely. Hear his voice crack and hear him talk football with the coaching staff, especially the offensive genius that is Sean McVay, and Goff’s fire is apparent: The kid wants to play and play now.