Is the latest Rams news about Matthew Stafford a mountain or a molehill?

The LA Rams know that the sport of professional football is a violent sport. Grown men collide on every play at full strength and speed. As a result, injuries happen. That is a well-established fact for a team with injuries to three offensive linemen, two defensive backs, two defensive linemen, and one tight end. One injury, an ACL tear to DB Derion Kendrick, has already ended his season before it ever started. Another injury, a lingering rehab from an ACL tear to TE Tyler Higbee, will delay his return to the team in time to compete in the opening several games.

So yes, the team is fully aware of the risk of injury to key players. The fans are too.

So it is not so far-fetched that reports about Matthew Stafford ending joint practice prematurely due to 'hamstring tightness,' did not sit well with fans, nor with the beat reporters who cover the Rams. It may be something that the team is trying to downplay for now, and it is certainly their right to do so. But hamstring tightness is a rather ambiguous term, ambiguous enough to mask greater concerns:

There is plenty to read between the lines here. 'Hamstring tightness,' is hardly a term that invokes visions of ambulance rides, emergency rooms, surgeries, or a host of other medical images that would spell disasters for Matthew Stafford and the team. And after the initial report was out, more downplaying the injury surfaced. Pulling Stafford from practice was not required. It was merely a 'precautionaly move.'

And yet, there is the skeptic in all of us. That part of our thinking mind that equates news reports to cricket chirps on a warm summer evening. The more frequent the reports, the hotter the news story. And for just a precautionary move, Matthew Stafford's hamstring tightness certainly got a lot of press, and quickly.

Is there more to this story? The only clarity that we get as a universal theme to all of the coverage so far is references to 'hamstring tightness,' and 'some tightness.' Are we simply so shell shaken with disappointing injury news so far that we (and by that, I mean me and certainly not you, an enlightened fan and reader) have allowed ourselves to jump at the slightest noises and references to injury?

Perhaps. But not without good reason.

We all remember the days of Todd Gurley and the persistent, but never officially confirmed, rumors that his knees were wearing out. At the time, there was never good information about his injuries. And of course, if you want something a bit more recent, there was the ankle injury to left tackle Alaric Jackson that was downplayed. It was initially a day-to-day injury. Now? It's been downgraded to a week-to-week injury.

So too, the foot/ankle injury to veteran RT Rob Havenstein was initially reported to have occurred by a teammate stepping on his foot. But he is also week-to-week now, and no positive updates have happened since.

As we had noted in our initial article about Matthew Stafford's injury:

'The problem is that Stafford's hamstring tightness can resolve itself in a few days, or if a strain, recovery can take as long as three to eight weeks. Based on the description of tightness versus strain, let's hope for a quick recovery timeframe.'

The problem is, if this is some version of downplaying a more serious matter, the team cannot wait to sustain the deception. With Jimmy Garoppolo suspended for two weeks, Dresser Winn a developmental QB at best, and valid concerns about whether Stetson Bennett will be ready to back up Stafford in Weeks 1 and 2, there is no advantage to not acting immediately. There are still some FA quarterback options, and the team must pull the trigger now if there is any question as to Stafford's availability for Week 1.

Is Matthew Stafford's injury a mountain or a molehill? You decide. We are simply informing readers of what the situation is, and where the paths of either scenario might lead. And while we could simply accept the belief that the team is downplaying this matter truthfully, there is a track record, even with injuries this year, that would suggest otherwise.

UPDATE: The day after

And then. there it was. The day after being pulled early from practice, the team held out Matthew Stafford, still under the category of 'precaution.'

But later in the afternoon, the Rams walked back the level of concern with this update from HC Sean McVay:

UPDATE: THE NEXT WEEK

And now, we have more information. Stafford is going to be held out of practice, again, for another week?

Compare this to our first reports of Matthew Stafford's hamstring tightness. At the time we noted that the term 'hamstring tightness' is far too ambiguous terminology, and could mean a few days to as much as eight weeks. The real-world impact so far? Stafford may be held out of practice this week That will pan out to be as many as 10 days for Stafford to miss practice. Will more absences be on the horizon? Who knows?

So you decide whether this is a matter of great importance, or a matter not worth your concern. At least having read this article, you can make an informed decision.

As always, thanks for readin