(09-03-2017, 08:18 PM)JaguarsWoman Wrote:

(09-03-2017, 06:16 PM)jessepeck1213 Wrote: I disagree. Langford has averaged a half a yard less per carry than Yeldon over their 2 years in the league. And he has done it behind a far better offensive line in Chicago.
Yeldon in a also a decent receiver out of the backfield. He's far superior to Langford in terms of pass protection, which is his biggest asset to us right now. And on top of that he's 2 years younger and has more upside. Also knows all of our protections and the offense. I'll stop there, but you get the point by now. That would be a pretty asinine decision.

You don't have a point. Jeremy Langford was good enough as a rookie to convince Ryan Pace the Bears don't need Matt Forte anymore. He was a surprise cut because of his abilities to play the position. If you just want a pass blocker, maybe you need to read up on Doug Marrone's intent to make us a run-first team. Also, the per-carry statistics mean nothing. All the age difference means is Langford has more experience than Yeldon, which is a good thing. What makes you think Yeldon has more upside than Langford?

You don't know much football do you? nowhere did I say that I only want pass protecting running backs on our team. That just happens to be yeldons role here. You wouldn't want 3 scat backs, or 3 power backs as your only running backs either. Obviously we want to be a run first team. But that doesn't mean we are going to avoid having 3rd and longs and obvious passing situations, which is where yeldons value and role is on this team. Langford isn't beating out fournette for touches, so what does he bring to the team. If someone suggested we cut ivory and pick him up it'd be a better argument. Don't tell me I don't have a point when you clearly lack knowledge on situational football.