Welcome back earth 
I completely agree. I even read someone call him a bit of a “melksham” , LOL.
Some of his traits are not unlike Jimmy, although Hirdy had an exception football brain for day 1. If Kyle can develop the tank, desire and football smarts of the great man, he fulfill the potential I believe he can. (Which is not becoming as good as Jimbob, but a great player for us nonetheless who will play 200 plus games).
this!!! I honestly don’t get blitz sometimes, its like they can’t be 100% happy and just need someone to whinge about. This kid can play, give him time. Focus on the positives, you negative ■■■■■■.
Pessimist blitz: he missed some goals and didn’t get 20 possessions, throw him on the scrap heap.
Optimist blitz: Lol at comparing him to a middling player, now let me compare him to one of the greatest players to ever pull on an Essendon jumper.
Langford in the space of 24 months has come from playing school footy with no real structure , probably in defence , TAC as a CHF from highlights, Nationals backline from memory , has gone from 76KGS to 90 odd , from training in the Midfield to starvation CNR and everyone has a concern. Don’t compare him to anyone under 6ft 1 particularly those in the midfield as they would have played midfield their whole life, meaning they have rolled from juniors, TAC into AFL. I think much of the concern is based around , knowing Langford has some special qualities , has obvious talent , works hard but non of us can readily classify him as this or that and that is half the frustration
Edited for Blitz panicker’s Langer Banner.
(Why is everything I read at the moment, converting to a banner prose inside my head.?? 
)
This thread has got me thinking, who was our last good small/medium player who wasn’t good by the end of their third year (barring injuries)? Not showed some glimpses, or had a good game, but good in the sense that you’d pick them every week even if they didn’t get any better. Jobe’s the obvious answer, but we drafted him 15 years ago.
Edit: Colyer. It’s probably Colyer.
What has Langford, at 6’ 3" and 90+kg have to do with small/medium players?
He is neither small nor medium.
So why is this tall player being modelled as a midfielder?
And please don’t say Pendlebury, Bontompelli or even Jobe because Langford moves in slow motion compared to them.
Ask the coaches. I’m done with talking about his place in the team on here.
But I will say that if the ‘logic’ used on judging The Langford around here had of been applied to Jobe, he would have been a fat, slow, delisted CHF. Players develop, and if some here can’t see the forest for the trees, so be it.
I reckon that is rubbish. Langford’s top end speed to my eye looks to be at least on par with most name and certainly better than jobes. The speed of his decision making is improving rapidly too
Freaking awesome hair.
Not one of ours but Josh Kennedy of the Swine would be one - you can see maybe what the Langford bandwagon is hoping for.
Langford seems fine to me, and it’s not like we have a dozen different big mid types that we’re trying to develop, so we might as well play him. It was genuinely a question about whether the thinking about how long it takes top talent to make an impact at AFL level still apply that same way today as it did 15 years ago. Maybe it’s just that, at Essendon, we’re going through a flood of precocious talent after a relatively dry spell so the contrast is higher.
Fwiw, I said small/medium to mean not key position, which would include guys like Cripps, Fyfe, Bontempelli, Macrae, etc.
I would have said Langford was equal, if not faster by foot than all three of those players.
Plenty of players aren’t established by the end of their third year. But many more who make it are.
For EFC Melks is probably the other recent one. I don’t think Myers or Demps were established after three years either. And of course guys like Walla, Hibberd, Bags, Howlett weren’t even on lists at age 21.
Kennedy didn’t really show much until the end if his third year which is when the swans targeted him.
Fwiw I think Langford is more polished than Kennedy
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. I thought the Langford doubters were just being funny but he’s legit being compared to Melksham in here. FMD this place sometimes.
I disagree on Melksham in that he was in the team week in, week out, and by 2012 producing more or less what he has produced in the years since, in fact his lack of improvement from his early years was the primary thing people criticised him about. Myers and Dempsey would fall under the injury caveat, I seem to recall Dempsey in particular spent his first few years constantly tearing his hamstrings.
The second part is some of what I was thinking about. Because such a high value is placed on professionalism these days, and the top talent get taught more about professionalism, often guys who might have been drafted in the past now have to prove they want it at state level first.
As I said in my reply to boot, perhaps I’m reading meaning into something that’s just what our list happens to look like right now.
