BA The reason I wouldn't give the edge in this to the bengals is because the second round pick wasn't even ours it was your phins. The phins took T Wade Smith with the pick we traded them and with the pick we got in return we got Corey Dillon. Basicly we traded wade smith from last years draft for corey dillon this season. I'd say we win because we gave up nothing, but if anything this is a win-win for both sides because IF Rudi Johnson comes back and runs the way he did last year then Cincy will not miss Dillon either.
I would not say he is 2nd best back in AFC east, probably 4th or 5th, behind ricky williams,curtis martin, travis henry, and (this one will draw fire) willis mcgahee.
I also think Ricky is better than dillon but don't agree with travis henry or McGahee. Once Willis has seen the field we can talk about him and henry is equal as a runner but doesn't hold on to the ball for anything. Wasn't you bearsfan that was arguing the importance of a back that doesn't fumble?
Dillon is one of the best backs in the game. He's never been in a good situation and has thved in spite of how bad Cincinnati has played. He's 29 which means he's getting towards the end of his 1500 yards & 10 TD years. He's better than every back in the East except for Martin and Martin is 31 I believe and is on his way out. Don't forget, Dillon did hold the single game rushing record for a short period of time.
dillon has never hit 1500 yds in a season, not once, he hit 10 tds only twice. he is a bit over-rated which is sad because he is not rated by most a premier back just as a good, back and he isnt even that, He does hold on to the ball a lot better than henry, however henry is younger, faster and has averaged about 10 tds a season as well as 1300 yds. He is a better pass catcher than dillon. Dillon has been a better blocker, but is a cancer in the locker room. I think when you add it all up henry is the better back. I would not want henry to my back, but i would not want dillon either. I like mcgahee cuz he is from U of M and am a bit biased maybe he isn't better . . . but i think he is.
Pure talent, I disagree. I would take Dillon in his prime over Henry. Situational, it might be different. Henry did score more TD's, but then again, Cincinnati didn't know what the End Zone was for a decade. And that's not so much Dillon's fault.
Also I can't remeber a QB before Kitna in Cincy that did anything to speak of. At least henry has had the threat of a passing game to help him in his short career. I don't think henry and dillon are that far apart but I just would rather a guy that won't lose a game for you before a guy who has more fumbles in his 3 years than in dillons 7.
Nice grey topic where everyone is right and everyone is wrong... gotta love it! I think Dillon will do well in New England, but only time will tell.
