Skills???

Talk about everything Essendon. Past, Present and Future if it's about the Bombers this is the place to be.
User avatar
Windy Hille
Regular Senior Player
Posts: 1022
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:49 pm

Re: Skills???

Post by Windy Hille » Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:29 pm

Windy_Hill wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 3:58 pm
I never actually said Clarke is C grade and Langford is B....you did. And yes, of course I scoffed at that. Run a survey dude and let’s see how many people actually agree with

1. Langford is a B grade AFL Mid
2. Langford is better than Clarke (either currently or at the same stage of their respective careers)
I’m asking you what you think. So where is your rating? It isn’t hard...you know your A, B, C’s yeah? What are you afraid of ??
As for the Jobe comparisons, you just made it worse for yourself.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Cracker!
Now you are saying because they have the same physical attributes and, ridiculously, the same number, then the comparison is valid.
Not forgetting...the same criticism, same positions, at the same age...
The fact that Jobe became a star does not then mean Langford will as well. You see, this is where you keep stumbling. Forget the comparison and evaluate Langford on his own performance. He simply has not improved over 5 years. Just because Jobe, of a similar build and number did evolve Into a star does not predict Langford’s future...yes, it could happen, but odds are it won’t.
What incomprehensible drivel. You’re talking in future, present and past tenses. The comparison is of the same time line at the same age. It isn’t about predicting the future, but stating where he is actually at in comparison to one of our star players this century. The future progress is up to Langers as to the heights he will achieve, but as for now, the 22 year old is doing fine. The comparison with Jobe in this time line proves it. I don’t expect you to understand any of this, because quite clearly, you have no idea. And it really doesn’t surprise me in the least.
My point, whic you so readily dismiss is that you conveniently use Watson as a barometer to validate Langford’s lack of progress.
It’s not a lack of progress, it’s progress.

Turn the light on. You might actually see something.
You have selected perhaps the one player in the last 15 years who has defied a poor start to his career to support your case yet ignore the dozens of players, similar players who failed.
I just checked Kyle’s stats against Nick Kommer. It appears Kyle is way ahead in all stat categories! He will be a star mate, just you watch!!
Do your survey buddy and when it comes back overwhelmingly confirming my opinion that Langford is NOT a B grade Mid then we’ll pick up the discussion then.
YES SIR!!

You get to work you lazy sod. You want a survey? You better get busy.

But before you start, what are your rankings of Kylos and Dylos?

Post Reply