What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*Official* - Jeremy Langford (1 Viewer)

dipandglide said:
Hmm. DLF's May ADP has CJA #68, Gio #70, and Langford #77. What site are you getting your ADP from? MFL?

I agree with you. That said, Gio has a proven track record and is talented....they aren't gonna keep him off the field if he's healthy. You can't say the same thing about Langford. Sure the options are limited in CHI, but his leash isn't very long if he's not performing. If he keeps avg 3.6 YPC Fox will make that backfield a three headed mess. 
Click to expand...
Yeah, I am going based off actual paid ADP leagues, I find the data from screw around mock drafts to be less reliable.

While I am not as down on Langford as you seem to be I will admit that all this hot-hand talk, and talk of Howard being some sort of change-of-pace passing down back is very confusing. Seems to me that CHI would utilize their talent best by using Howard in the Hill role and Langford in the Gio role. I guess you never know with coaches though and Fox has certainly had fantasy owners frustrated in the past.

 
tangfoot said:
You're also looking at redraft ADP and DLF is dynasty ADP.  Very different animals.
Click to expand...
That's a great point. Although, in this case they are all young backs. I guess Gio might be slightly higher because he is at the end of his deal and part of a rbbc so there is a chance someone pays him to be their lead back in the near future?

 
ESPN Bears reporter Jeff Dickerson expects Jeremy Langford to be the team's "featured rusher" this season.
Dickerson concedes coach John Fox prefers an "RB-by-committee approach," but anticipates Langford leading that RBBC, which may include Ka'Deem Carey and rookie Jordan Howard. Dickerson's statistical expectations for Langford remain measured, writing that "eclipsing 1,000 all-purpose yards isn't out of the question." Currently going in the fifth and sixth rounds in re-draft leagues, Langford would be a disappointment if he totaled only 1,000 yards.

 
 
Source: ESPN.com 
Jun 1 - 4:38 PM

 
Bears are looking for Jeremy Langford to improve on third downs.
Matt Forte was one of the best receiving backs in football during his time with Chicago. That leaves Langford, who is slated to be the workhorse this year, with big shoes to fill on third down. "The first thing is get into my routes better and be able to separate from linebackers a lot better," said Langford. "The most important part is catching the ball—catching the ball in traffic and catching the 50-50 catches." Langford has also put an emphasis on gaining more yards after contact by widening his feet to improve his balance. Langford totaled 279 receiving yards on 22 catches as a rookie last year.

 
 
Source: Chicago Tribune 
Jun 5 - 10:49 AM
Click to expand...

 
in 3 current FFPC drafts, Langford has gone:

71

74

84

personally, not interested in him , Fox is wishy washy with RB's, the "guy" there  might end up being Howard

 
Ojaays said:
personally, not interested in him , Fox is wishy washy with RB's, the "guy" there  might end up being Howard
Click to expand...
This doesn't necessarily bode well for Langford either (a 2nd year player himself)... but if Fox follows his M.O., Howard will be an afterthought in favor of any veteran for several years (see Deangelo, Stewart, Hillman, Ball). I'm actually sort of surprised Fox didn't throw himself on a sword to keep Forte. That's what I'd expect from him.

 
BigJim® said:
This doesn't necessarily bode well for Langford either (a 2nd year player himself)... but if Fox follows his M.O., Howard will be an afterthought in favor of any veteran for several years (see Deangelo, Stewart, Hillman, Ball). I'm actually sort of surprised Fox didn't throw himself on a sword to keep Forte. That's what I'd expect from him.
Click to expand...
Didn't he deviate from that trend at the end of the Denver days?  Not sure.

 
Shutout said:
Didn't he deviate from that trend at the end of the Denver days?  Not sure.
Click to expand...
Not really. FBG did a good historical article on Fox use of rookie RBs, but basically he did the same things at Denver. For example, a lot was made of the fact the Broncos traded up to take Hillman in the 3rd (out of Fox's alma mater SD St, no less), but they made him 2nd string behind McGahee only used infrequently as COP. Even when McGahee went down, they went to Moreno as starter rather than increasing use of Hillman. The next year they took Monte Ball in the 2nd, and while Ball he was more involved (120 carries, 559 yards) Moreno still got the lion's share with 241 carries. I'm not suggesting McGahee/Moreno were garbage by any means, but Fox's legacy seems safe to me after Denver. Even when using high picks on RBs he puts them squarely behind vets. Worse, he drafts the next shiny thing before the old shiny thing even loses the new car smell. 

I like Howard, but I'm not clear how anyone can value a RB Fox drafts in the 5th round based on the track record. Maybe things will work different now that he has no vet, who knows. I won't exactly be shocked if a vet RB does eventually sign with the Bears and everyone can just tear up whatever lotto tickets they thought they were holding (including my Langford ticket).

 
FBG email says:   Langford is going to have to do better than that if he wants a three-down role with the Bears this season. With Matt Forte (Jets) moving on in free agency, the Bears are looking to Langford as their lead back. However, we should see all-purpose back Ka'Deem Carey mixed in (especially since he's a good receiver) and rookie Jordan Howard may be the best pure runner on the team's roster. It's looking like a three-headed RBBC for the Bears this year, so fantasy owners should consider Langford a RB3 in 2016.
Click to expand...
langford finished RB26 in my std scoring league last year, he only started 3 games.... he's an RB3 if you are in a 4 team league, yikes, this kind of FBG take reminds me of the c-mike hysteria

 
iamkoza said:
langford finished RB26 in my std scoring league last year, he only started 3 games.... he's an RB3 if you are in a 4 team league, yikes, this kind of FBG take reminds me of the c-mike hysteria
Click to expand...
I just don't think Langford is very good, honestly. 

 
I traded away Langford this off season in two leagues, so I'm not a big fan. That being said, right now he has to be considered an easy RB2. 

 
I know he's a rookie, but Howard is the guy I want in that backfield. Unless he starts out hot, I think Langford will see the bench sooner rather than later. There doesn't seem to be much margin for error for Langford before Fox goes with Carey or Howard.

 
zamboni said:
I know he's a rookie, but Howard is the guy I want in that backfield. Unless he starts out hot, I think Langford will see the bench sooner rather than later. There doesn't seem to be much margin for error for Langford before Fox goes with Carey or Howard.
Click to expand...
Fox is not a 1 running back kinda of guy. I believe this will be a split back field from game 1 and will continue that way barring injury. 

 
JonBruin said:
Fox is not a 1 running back kinda of guy. I believe this will be a split back field from game 1 and will continue that way barring injury. 
Click to expand...
Thats odd because i remember him almost always going with the vet over the younger player in carolina in the stephen davis foster deangelo stewart years

 
i think people are putting way too much faith in a 5th round rookie.  the only way he sees significant action is if langford gets hurt.  im not saying langford is the be all end all... but he is the clear lead here until further notice...

 
iamkoza said:
i think people are putting way too much faith in a 5th round rookie.  the only way he sees significant action is if langford gets hurt.  im not saying langford is the be all end all... but he is the clear lead here until further notice...
Click to expand...
It's June, s a majority of readers on this board are likely dynasty folks.

Even if "further notice" isn't until week 10, or even 2017, it still puts a crimp on Langford's present value.

 
bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Thats odd because i remember him almost always going with the vet over the younger player in carolina in the stephen davis foster deangelo stewart years
Click to expand...
Are you talking about '05 when Foster had 15 more carries than Davis, '09 when Stewart had 5 more carries than Williams, or '12 when McGahee had 28 more carries than Moreno? Go back and take a closer look at the teams Fox head coached. Fox's "lead back" never has more than 50-56% of the carries. Even when the second back was Knoshow Moreno, Fox would consistantly split carries. 

 
iamkoza said:
i think people are putting way too much faith in a 5th round rookie.  the only way he sees significant action is if langford gets hurt.  im not saying langford is the be all end all... but he is the clear lead here until further notice...
Click to expand...
This time last year many people were sure that Andre Ellington was the guy to own in AZ, but size matters in the NFL.  I personally don't know if I'd put much faith in a 6' / 208 lb, 2nd year RB, drafted in the 4th rd either.  Langford just isn't built to holdup in the NFL as a RB, while Jordan Howard is.  I highly doubt either is a clear lead dog or long term solution but I think we can be fairly certain that the big guy is going to get his chances inside the 10 right out of the gates and will get more touches as temps drop later in the season.  

Full disclosure; I do not own Langford anywhere, not targeting him at all, and am buying Howard everywhere within reason to stash for later in the year.   If I owned Langford, I would be looking to unload at the first reasonable opportunity.

 
JonBruin said:
Are you talking about '05 when Foster had 15 more carries than Davis, '09 when Stewart had 5 more carries than Williams, or '12 when McGahee had 28 more carries than Moreno? Go back and take a closer look at the teams Fox head coached. Fox's "lead back" never has more than 50-56% of the carries. Even when the second back was Knoshow Moreno, Fox would consistantly split carries. 
Click to expand...
The torch does gets passed. And. I dont have the injuries memorized. But in 2006. Foster had 227 to deangelos 121. And in 2007 foster had 247 to deangelos 144. In 2008 deangelo had 273 and stewart had 185.

Looks to me like he favors the vets over the younger guy in general. And he has a pecking order established. 

 
bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The torch does gets passed. And. I dont have the injuries memorized. But in 2006. Foster had 227 to deangelos 121. And in 2007 foster had 247 to deangelos 144. In 2008 deangelo had 273 and stewart had 185.

Looks to me like he favors the vets over the younger guy in general. And he has a pecking order established. 
Click to expand...
Part of Fox's tendencies have to do with pass protection. DeAngelo Williams was not good at this early on in his career and I think that limited Fox's confidence in using him more.

The other part is I think Fox just prefers a bigger RB.

Rational coaching Fox would have used WIlliams a lot more and not drafted Johnathan Stewart.

You see the pattern repeat itself somewhat in Denver as well.

John Fox coaching history. Fox is a defensive minded coach, so he doesn't really influence the the offensive side until he becomes a HC in Carolina. He is from the Bill Parcells coaching tree. 

His first primary RB was Lamar Smith who was a featured RB for Miami before signing with the Panthers as a free agent. He is one of the rare RB whos best productivity starts at the age of 30. He had Dee Brown who also had 100 carries in COP role. Nick Goings was a FB/HB tweener who got used when other players were hurt. They also had Hoover who was a more traditional FB with some receiving skills.

2003 they went the free agent route again signing Stephen Davis from Washington at 29 years old. 2nd round pick Foster got 100 carries in COP role.

2004 Davis and Foster get injured and Nick Goings gets 217 carries.

2005 is a fairly even split between Davis and Foster. Davis starts the first 11 games but he isn't very effective and they use Foster more at the end of the season.

2006 Foster gets 227 carries with rookie Williams getting 121.

2007 Foster gets 247 carries (at 3.5ypc) while Williams gets 144 (at 5ypc).

2008 the Panthers do not keep Foster who moves on to SF before exiting the league. The Panthers draft Stewart in the 1st round.  Williams gets 273 carries at 5.5 ypc Stewart gets 184.

2009 Stewart gets 221 to Williams 216.

2010 Stewart gets 178 Goodson 103 Williams 87. Williams only played in 6 games and Stewart in 14 games.

2011 with Denver they bring in 30 year old Willis McGahee who gets 249 carries. Moreno was injured or he may have been used more.

2012 McGahee 167 (10 games) Moreno 139 (8 games) Hillman 84.

2013 Moreno 241 rookie Montee Ball 120 Hillman 55

2014 Cj Anderson 179 Hillman 106 Ball 55.

2015 with the Bears Matt Forte was the main RB until he got injured. Then it was a RBBC after he came back, likely because Langford played well enough that they wanted to see more of him, especially after they were out of the playoff hunt.

So there is some preference for veterans and I think also a preference for a bigger RB. You see this pattern with Fox repeatedly. I think Fox wasted a good part of DeAngelo Williams career in part because of not seeing a smaller RB as the guy he wants to lean on.

Howard fits the mold of a Fox RB more than Langford does. I see Langford being the COP to Howard if things go how Fox wants them to. 

 
Im pretty sure Sabertooth is onto something..

Im also pretty sure Fox would be a real bonehead if he wasnt at least open to the idea of putting the best back on the field in any given situation..  On a personal note, I believe that back could be Langford.  I think this would explain why there wasnt a back drafted earlier (or a solid trade).

If your interest involves actual yds/attempts?  Its probably a good idea to factor into account schedules..

Hopefully the gurus have or will speak up, but I think the winner (drafts/owns DaBears RB1) isnt gonna be terribly profitable..  (Im still hopeful)

 
The 2009 data doesn't tell the entire story, DeAngelo was the clear RB1 for them, he just happened to miss the last 4 games, and Stewart got monster workloads, and won several fantasy leagues, which skewed the final numbers a bit.

 
The Chicago Tribune's Rich Campbell reports the Bears plan to use a "committee approach" at running back.
"It promises to be hell for fantasy football owners," Campbell wrote, "but Fox wants to limit backs' workload and play the so-called hot hand." Jeremy Langford projects to be the starter after Matt Forte bolted in free agency, but it has become abundantly clear he will cede work to both Ka'Deem Carey and fifth-round rookie Jordan Howard. Veteran Jacquizz Rodgers could be involved as well. Langford's ADP is sinking like a stone, but his RB23 price is still tough to swallow.

 
 
Source: Chicago Tribune 
Jul 18 - 9:37 AM
Click to expand...

 
If you have time, listen to this pod that is dedicated to projecting Jeremy Langford.

Shockingly, Rotoviz has him as a mid-level #1 RB but has a discount ranking of him as a #2 RB.

They begin by bringing in a Bear beat writer and they say the rookie RB is suited for goal line work so I felt they would have shifted projections downward but they make many valid points to show Langford's upside.

I am deep at RB and had been contemplating trading him away but I think I will hold and wait because I think he is going to have a bigger share of the workload than many are projecting and that he is going to have some big games as he did last year due to his big-play potential.  

This is a good listen for any Langford owner or if someone is thinking about getting him as a bargain in a draft or trade.

http://rotoviz.com/2016/07/jeremy-langfords-surprising-upside-patrick-finley-chicago-sun-times-bears-2016-preview-rotoviz-radio/


Jeremy Langford’s Surprising Upside – Patrick Finley (Chicago Sun-Times): Bears 2016 Preview, RotoViz Radio



July 31, 2016 |  By RotoViz Radio

 
Ilov80s said:
Hasn't weight gain at RB been seen usually as a negative?
Click to expand...
I have heard that it is but you have to make it clear how much weight gain leads to stress, strains, and slower speed.

Langford put on 7 lbs of muscle.

Last year as a rookie, he was about 7 or 8 lbs too light IMHO for a feature back load so I don't think the weight gain is negative.

If he gained a ton of weight or if he already was at a playing weight that was fine for the role he is expected to fill, then I think it would be a negative sign but he put on a reasonable amount of weight that fits the role he is expected to fill.  

I see his weight gain as positive.

 
Lamar Miller put on some weight prior to last season. He played well. Still didn't get the ball enough.

The head coach may have wanted him to do this. I think a lot of players get stronger after a year in the NFL conditioning system. That doesn't always mean heavier, but muscle weighs more than fat.

I honestly don't think it matters that much and every player is different. There does seem to be a prototypical 220 pounds that is considered an ideal for an NFL RB. It has been that way for decades. You have successful RB from all kinds of different weights though.

Being too tall is kind of a disadvantage for a RB. A lot of what football is about is leverage, the low man wins, so being tall as a RB makes it harder to get below the other guys pads and win after contact.

 
Biabreakable said:
muscle weighs more than fat.
Click to expand...
Just want to point out that a pound of feathers weighs the same as a pound of lead but to your point.

1 lb. of muscle is 1/3 the density of 1 lb. of fat so it was a lean muscle weight gain which should not hinder his speed or his elusiveness.

Langford was listed at 6'0 and 211 lbs.  His ESPN page still hasn't been updated to reflect the weight gain so I think this is new information.

 
Yes a pound weighs a pound, but I am sure you understand what I meant.

Does Muscle Really Weigh More Than Fat?

because a pound of fat takes up about four times the space of muscle tissue
Click to expand...
My main experience with this was in the Army, where soldiers routinely weigh more than the requirements for their height, and then they have to be measured.

Gaining muscle that is more dense causes the body to weigh more, even though the person may be in excellent physical condition. A person trying to lose weight through exercise feels like they are failing to do so, because their weight doesn't go down from the extra work they put in. In fact some times their weight goes up from the exercise as they gain more muscle mass.

 
One would think that 7 pounds of muscle mass would do more to benefit a RB than hinder him, especially one in the less than 220 range.

 
The bigger problem is CHI's o-line being awful.  I don't care if Langford is a 3-down back, if it's 3-and-out.

 
The entire Chicago Bear team looked terrible.  The offensive line sucks.  They gave up 7 sacks and they couldn't open up any holes in the running game.

RUSHING STATISTICS
Player    Att    Yds    Yds/Att    Long    TD
Jordan Howard    5    12    2.4    5    0
Jeremy Langford    4    7    1.8    4    0
Ka'Deem Carey    3    8    2.7    6    0
Connor Shaw    2    14    7.0    7    0
Jacquizz Rodgers    2    5    2.5    3
Senorise Perry    1    2    2.0    2    0
 

Foxie had better light a fire under that team because this might be his last coaching stop if that team doesn't improve and it starts on the O-line because that is a terrible group.  It may be the worst offensive line in the NFL right now and that is saying a lot.

 
Ghost Rider said:
Keep in mind, too, they were going against the best defense in the league the other night. 
Click to expand...
That's an overreaction too.  Your talking about last year's defense which was not on the field.  How many players from last year's defense were on the field that night?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

starks
Aggressive trading up or trading after picks?
Replies
9
Views
593
Jppaul
J
E
Why isn’t best ball and DFS discussed more on the Footballguys forums?
Replies
36
Views
1K
BassNBrew
BassNBrew
ignatiusjreilly
Draft Day "Regerts", 2025 edition
Replies
29
Views
1K
VikingFrog
V

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top