December 29, 20169 yr comment_161130 Do you sit him this week to prevent wear and tear? Or do you let him try for the Bears rookie record? Report
December 29, 20169 yr comment_161131 Do you sit him this week to prevent wear and tear? Or do you let him try for the Bears rookie record? Let him play and get the record. Report
December 29, 20169 yr comment_161134 Get him the record by a yard, then sit him. This game is meaningless, and should be used like a second week preseason game. Report
December 29, 20169 yr comment_161135 Get him the record by a yard, then sit him. This game is meaningless, and should be used like a second week preseason game. Fox won't do that, however, and someone important is bound to get hurt (i.e. Urlacher in a previous year-ending meaningless game against the Queens). Peace Report
December 29, 20169 yr comment_161139 Fox won't do that, however, and someone important is bound to get hurt (i.e. Urlacher in a previous year-ending meaningless game against the Queens). Peace I disagree with that somewhat because it seemed like Langford was getting a few more looks in the last game, 7 carries being the most he's had since week 2. I think they will likely do the same this week and if Howard gets the record why not give Langford more reps? We need to know more about Langford going into the offseason. Report
December 29, 20169 yr comment_161142 I disagree with that somewhat because it seemed like Langford was getting a few more looks in the last game, 7 carries being the most he's had since week 2. I think they will likely do the same this week and if Howard gets the record why not give Langford more reps? We need to know more about Langford going into the offseason. I noticed that, too, and wondered why they were doing it all the sudden. I figured they'd load up on Howard, get the record, then give more carries to backups, as sort of a try-out for the 2017 team. Could just be Fox spreading it out over the last two games, which I'm completely OK with happening. Report
December 30, 20169 yr comment_161151 I disagree with that somewhat because it seemed like Langford was getting a few more looks in the last game, 7 carries being the most he's had since week 2. I think they will likely do the same this week and if Howard gets the record why not give Langford more reps? We need to know more about Langford going into the offseason. Wasn't there a mention of some leg injury (although slight) a few weeks back? Perhaps they're trying to be a bit more conservative. I also could of swore he left last weeks game prematurely. Concussion protocol(?) but still managed to play it out . Report
December 30, 20169 yr comment_161153 I think you play him as normal until halftime, then figure out resting him in the 2nd half. If we were worried about injuries in meaningless games, all of our starters for 2017 would've been resting for 6 weeks now. Report
December 30, 20169 yr comment_161156 I think you play him as normal until halftime, then figure out resting him in the 2nd half. If we were worried about injuries in meaningless games, all of our starters for 2017 would've been resting for 6 weeks now. Barring the dreaded Sophomore slump phenomena, I think we all agree that Howard will be the starter at RB next year. (Of course we also all thought Langford would be this time last year). Anyhow, that being the case, if he does in fact have a lingering injury there is no reason to play him regardless of a rookie record. Why aggravate any potential injury now if you can avoid it? Playing him minimally as you suggest may work out, but if he ends up getting injured, regardless of pre-existence or not, it'll be a bad choice. I'll leave it to the coaches and Howard to decide on what's best. As far as the rest of the 'starters' go, most of them are already on IR; Long, Miller, Trevathan to name a few, so they don't know what they have and almost have to play them. Report
December 31, 20169 yr comment_161159 Barring the dreaded Sophomore slump phenomena, I think we all agree that Howard will be the starter at RB next year. (Of course we also all thought Langford would be this time last year). Anyhow, that being the case, if he does in fact have a lingering injury there is no reason to play him regardless of a rookie record. Why aggravate any potential injury now if you can avoid it? Playing him minimally as you suggest may work out, but if he ends up getting injured, regardless of pre-existence or not, it'll be a bad choice. I'll leave it to the coaches and Howard to decide on what's best. As far as the rest of the 'starters' go, most of them are already on IR; Long, Miller, Trevathan to name a few, so they don't know what they have and almost have to play them. If he is actually injured where there is potential for a bigger injury, then you absolutely sit him. I just don't think it is anything major where it would get worse. Report
December 31, 20169 yr comment_161160 If he is actually injured where there is potential for a bigger injury, then you absolutely sit him. I just don't think it is anything major where it would get worse. He's find and should play like a normal game. If you havent noticed they have not been giving him a huge load anyways. 18-17-18 in his last three games. Just play him and let him get something he can be proud of later in his career. Report
January 1, 20179 yr comment_161184 Ok questioin I have is how close is he to the record. I think he needs just 61 yards. Minn will be going all out to shut him down early and force Barkley to throw (as would any of us). Report
January 1, 20179 yr comment_161187 I think he needs just 61 yards. Minn will be going all out to shut him down early and force Barkley to throw (as would any of us). Ok with that I would be ok with letting him play the 1st half and see if he can get it. Report
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.