forums

Darrell Langham

Nothing about this make sense to me. Due to the fact that he's a senior who's had an underwhelming career at WR, we should try him out at TE? Really? And the only justification is, "he's tall". LMFAO.

Mallory and Jordan obviously didn't arrive in the spring. Meaning, they are going to need as many reps as possible in fall camp in order to be game ready by game 1. Moving Langham to TE would take reps away from them, and for what, an experiment at best? Not. Worth. It.
 
Advertisement
reg said:
Nothing about this make sense to me. Due to the fact that he's a senior who's had an underwhelming career at WR, we should try him out at TE? Really? And the only justification is, "he's tall". LMFAO.

Mallory and Jordan obviously didn't arrive in the spring. Meaning, they are going to need as many reps as possible in fall camp in order to be game ready by game 1. Moving Langham to TE would take reps away from them, and for what, an experiment at best? Not. Worth. It.
Click to expand...

No, not just tall, but big enough, faster than any TE we have on the roster currently and when the two studs arrive, probably the best route runner, and good hands. At worse he would probably be the 2nd best TE on the roster right behind Jordan. I think he fits there better than at wr where we're just Loaded. It's worth a shot. What are we losing?
 
He would only be bigger than Mallory listed weight wise who everyone is saying needs a year in the weight room before he ever attempts to line up and block on the end. This is completely mind blowing that people see a bigger bodied WR that is still probably under 220 when we strap up in Sept. and think putting him on the end and asking him to block and move DE's off the line and seal corners is going to be some magic pill. Our own OL is having trouble doing this but Langham is the magic pill we have been looking for at TE because he's "big".

Make it stop.
 
Milkcane said:
No, not just tall, but big enough, faster than any TE we have on the roster currently and when the two studs arrive, probably the best route runner, and good hands. At worse he would probably be the 2nd best TE on the roster right behind Jordan. I think he fits there better than at wr where we're just Loaded. It's worth a shot. What are we losing?
Click to expand...
Being big and playing big are two separate things. The knock on Langham, including this spring, is he plays like he is 5'10". This is not me saying this, it's Richt, Dugans, and Brown. But yet you want to move him to TE?

He made a great play against FSU and I will forever be grateful. That's all I am expecting out of him at Miami. It's hard to imagine him seeing the field with Cager now being at 100% and Hightower emerging as a serious beast. Hightower showed the coaches more in 1 spring than Langham has showed in 3 years as it relates to "playing big".
 
reg said:
Being big and playing big are two separate things. The knock on Langham, including this spring, is he plays like he is 5'10". This is not me saying this, it's Richt, Dugans, and Brown. But yet you want to move him to TE?

He made a great play against FSU and I will forever be grateful. That's all I am expecting out of him at Miami. It's hard to imagine him seeing the field with Cager now being at 100% and Hightower emerging as a serious beast. Hightower showed the coaches more in 1 spring than Langham has showed in 3 years as it relates to "playing big".
Click to expand...

Right, he has no shot at playing at wr. I'd much rather play the young fast guys.
They wanted Langham to use his size on the corners since he couldn't create separation on them. He wouldn't have that problem going up against much slower lb's. The space he could create against them will make it much easier for him to make plays at TE than at wr. jmo
 
Advertisement
Eric Ebron was 6'5 225 at UNC. Darrell Langham listed at 6'4 220 on official roster. Not much of a difference if you ask me. Ebron was decent. Im not saying it has to happen. All I'm asking if he is buried on the depth chart at WR and our TE's have looked like crap (cant block or catch) I don't think its unreasonable to give him a look. Maybe you catch lightning in a bottle, maybe you don't.
 
Milkcane said:
Right, he has no shot at playing at wr. I'd much rather play the young fast guys.
They wanted Langham to use his size on the corners since he couldn't create separation on them. He wouldn't have that problem going up against much slower lb's. The space he could create against them will make it much easier for him to make plays at TE than at wr. jmo
Click to expand...
There lies the problem. A lot of teams, like us, are now starting to use a safety or even a thicker/taller corner to cover the TE's, instead of slow LB's. ****, even some LB's are now as fast as DB's. He would essentially face the same problems that he was facing as a WR.
 
Langham is probably bigger than 6'4" 220. Richt or someone on the staff recently mentioned he was 240. And he may be taller than 6'4", too.

But the issue with TEs is not having enough of them and not having enough experience.

These issues are easy to solve - it's just a matter of recruiting and getting the proper numbers.

I don't recall us ever having a TE issue during the Butch years.

And for as horrible as most areas were during the Golden Errora, he was actually decent at finding some under-the-radar TEs, like Njoku and Herndon - both of whom were quite good at Miami.
 
Kwfstorm32 said:
Eric Ebron was 6'5 225 at UNC. Darrell Langham listed at 6'4 220 on official roster. Not much of a difference if you ask me. Ebron was decent. Im not saying it has to happen. All I'm asking if he is buried on the depth chart at WR and our TE's have looked like crap (cant block or catch) I don't think its unreasonable to give him a look. Maybe you catch lightning in a bottle, maybe you don't.
Click to expand...
Real talk... He should've been moved to TE last season. Dude has the hands and the size to play that position. Plus with his size he's not scared of going across the middle. **** he's the main reason we went 10-0 last season.
 
Advertisement
Langham could resurrect his career as a TE. He has a Mercedes Lewis type build while at UCLA. Marcedes struggled when he got to the NFL, though, b/c he wasn't the prototypical TE....so he got exposed, but once he bulked up, he became a nice red-zone threat (still never lived up to the hype.) He wasn't a particularly good blocker at UCLA either, but he was a red zone nightmare against LBs b/c he was either taller than them or just too fast. Marcedes was 6'6 though (more less, 6'5).
 
Shaudluc said:
We gotta start redshirting these tall WRs andbturning some of them in to Tight ends Cager should have been one as well as langham
Click to expand...
Langham yes. Cager no.

Langham has the frame. He just need about 20 lbs more of muscle with some pitbull attitude and he could develop himself into a legit NFL TE prospect.

Cager has the height, but not the frame to play TE. He should remain a WR and just play big.
 
Long Beach Poly was loaded at that time.

I think we finished a firm #2 for Darnell Wright, the big DT from that team - one of the top in the country in that class - maybe the top.

Butch always had us in the running for huge-time DTs.

Rellyrell said:
Langham could resurrect his career as a TE. He has a Mercedes Lewis type build while at UCLA. Marcedes struggled when he got to the NFL, though, b/c he wasn't the prototypical TE....so he got exposed, but once he bulked up, he became a nice red-zone threat (still never lived up to the hype.) He wasn't a particularly good blocker at UCLA either, but he was a red zone nightmare against LBs b/c he was either taller than them or just too fast. Marcedes was 6'6 though (more less, 6'5).
Click to expand...
 
Advertisement
reg said:
There lies the problem. A lot of teams, like us, are now starting to use a safety or even a thicker/taller corner to cover the TE's, instead of slow LB's. ****, even some LB's are now as fast as DB's. He would essentially face the same problems that he was facing as a WR.
Click to expand...

They won't have enough capable cover guys to check us. They will have to try to check him with a lb, **** most of the ss we play probably won't even be able to guard him.
 
Not this **** again. Hero Langham isn’t a TE. You know what his role is? Put him on the sidelines until the final 5 minutes. Then, let him go be a hero.
 
Advertisement
If a guy is NEVER going to play in line TE (and Langham will NEVER play in line here), then why do you dopes get so worked up over calling him a TE?

If all he’d do is split out (and that’s all Langham would do even if you start calling him a TE), then he can do that without being labeled a TE. And if all he’s going to do is split out, then why not use a better WR in that same role?
 
Dugans: Langham is not making that jump to the next level at WR. We should move him to your room.

Hartley:
2016-10-10-1476061732-7504623-tumblr_lp0sv0N6dj1qkfq8lo1_400-thumb.gif
 
Milkcane said:
They won't have enough capable cover guys to check us. They will have to try to check him with a lb, **** most of the ss we play probably won't even be able to guard him.
Click to expand...
Dude you are trying way to hard to defend an idea that is not going to happen, nor should it. Some position changes make sense:
Finley to Striker....love it.
Choc to FB.....I can dig it.
Deejay to RB.....brilliant.
Langham to TE....
ms-GeQI71.gif
 
You guys know how Travis Homer plays bigger/more powerful than his size? Langham is the opposite. Don't see him as a TE, sorry.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top