#4 Just a Kyle kind of Langford


#3896

For me, it is a choice. Langford or Myers. I quietly hope they don’t play both.

I felt that Myers was pretty good in close yesterday, albeit with the blind kicks out of the contest still pretty prominent in his game.

I felt that Langford was excellent around the ground. And his work in close was against the stronger mids. I felt that Stringer got away from him a couple of times in particular.

I’d pick Langford, but it is a pretty close call.


#3897

I thought he played well in yesterday, linked up well around the ground. Took some nice marks up fwd, he will be a very good player.

But… he did absolutely nothing inside the contest, he is not an inside mid. They tried using him as tagger in the first half which also didn’t work.

The guy is a natural Half fwd but could certainly play on a wing. He still just looks lost to me inside the contest.

Hopefully this will change but at the moment as an inside mid even the smaller blokes are way ahead of him. MCG, Parish, Smith, Zerret and Tippa all showed that they can win there own footy inside the contest and then win clearances either by foot or hand. Langford gets no where near it inside.


#3898

Yep, agree
It will be those two probably fighting for the 22nd spot

Surely no way we can play both


#3899

Im worried for langfords future at the club if Myers is in the team ahead of him, from a development perspective, and from the perspective that hell probably bugger off somewhere else to seek more opportunities


#3900

I Think i may have asked the question. What Langford can offer around the ground vs what Myers can offer around tbe ball. Short term long term - Langford out of contract - but just turned 21 Myers getting to thst age. The club really needs to back Langford if they see him a 10 year player ’ if not would he stay


#3901

You are comparing him to the most talented blokes on our list. Meanwhile, walla has shown little to demonstrate he is more effective as an inside mid. Langford has dominated some VFL in that role and may take a while to achieve the same in the big league.


#3902

I agree.

And it points to a very good understanding of our game plan, allowing him to run to the right spots to get the ball.


#3903

I still reckon Langford will make it and be a very good player. No doubt though that this is a make or break year for him.


#3904

The club gave him #4. Surely that has to say something about what the club sees in him. We may not see the finished product, but that jumper shows a lot of confidence in the kid.


#3905

Langford and Parish were very good given the situation. They need to learn defence and accountability which is both of their weeknesses Rather see them get a touch up now than later.


#3906

Maybe too much. I’d like to see players earn the number, and that goes for Smith.


#3907

Reckon that Langford will be given the first shot at playing the big bodied midfield role. I expect the Club to back him for the first 4 or 5 rounds. After that it depends on how he has performed.

Essendon really need him to step up this season to fill a glaring weakness. IMO it’s more likely that Langford will not be the midfield answer, and he’ll be at VFL level after the early games.


#3908

Was it necessarily a decision made by the club though? Didn’t Jobe choose to hand it to him?


#3909

I agree that Langford played ok & didn’t do a lot wrong. Like Parish though his accountability is something that he needs work on.

I would like him to work harder and have more of an impact. More desperation.
But Langford is probably best 22 at this stage.


#3910

That’s the way it was reported. I think it has less to do with the coaches declaring him the heir to Jobe’s position and more to do with Jobe just generally liking and rating the kid.

Surely by the time you’ve truly earned the number of a champion, you’ve made whatever number you already had your own.


#3911

And like Nick O’Brien


#3912

All these stats are on american born players. Majority of them now come through college.


#3913

Another sterling contribution to the discussion.

“Nah it’s not”
“Nah but stats are wrong”
“you’re a ■■■■”


#3914

I think it’s a silly discussion, Jobe was unfit and (by his own admission) not working anywhere near hard enough for his first 3? years in # 4. He turned out fine IIRC


#3915

The big question on Langford for me is whether they will pick him over Myers. I just don’t see room for both in the side unless we are going to leave out Stewart and play Langford more predominantly as a forward.

If the do pick him ahead of Myers and he plays mid/fwd I’m confident, on the back of the intra club and his demonstrated ability to stay involved and get to the right spots, that he’ll average around 20 touches 3 tackles, a few clearances and near a goal a game. He’ll play second fiddle to hepp and rest forward a bit. He’ll probably have a handful of bigger games and the odd quiet one.

If he produces that how will people rate his season?