Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Dillon wants back in

Expand Messages
  • Frank
    I think we should consider it, and I think we will. As you suggest, he d be a special purpose back, the short yardage guy, but he certainly has more mature
    Message 1 of 5 , Nov 4, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      I think we should consider it, and I think we will. As you suggest,
      he'd be a special purpose back, the short yardage guy, but he
      certainly has more mature skills than Eckel. I think he left on good
      terms, so I believe he'd be welcomed back, if he accepts the limited role.

      fdb

      --- In patriotzip@yahoogroups.com, "George" <patswingr@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > ***** Personally, I'd welcome him with open arms as a short yardage,
      goal
      > line, minimum play backup. I'm sure he'd still have significant value in
      > such a role. I'd see him as the #3 RB, behind Faulk. However, that would
      > mean a relatively small contract. We haven't seen anything about his
      > feelings for what role he'd want to play. Certainly, he can't be in
      anything
      > close to "football shape". It would be at least 2-3 weeks before he
      could do
      > much more than run one play every 5 or 10 minutes. But, come Playoff
      time,
      > he could be worked up to become a valuable asset.
      >
      > George
      > "I don't have a whole lot of what-ifs. We won three Super Bowls," (Tom
      > Brady)
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: patriots-bounces@... [mailto:patriots-bounces@...] On
      > Behalf Of Rich Carreiro
      > Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 10:27 AM
      > To: patriots@...
      > Subject: Dillon wants back in
      >
      > So says Thomase:
      >
      >
      http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/sports/patriots/index.php/2007/11/03/agent
      > -dillon-wants-in/
      >
      > --
      > Rich Carreiro rlcarr@...
      >
      >
      > _______________________________________________
      > patriots mailing list
      > patriots@...
      > http://patriots.bosco.net/mailman/listinfo/patriots
      >
    • RandyZ. Pierce
      I with Reiss on this - I m not certain who he would replace. Eckle is a special team and Maroney, Faulk and Evans are primary contributors. Dillon didn t
      Message 2 of 5 , Nov 5, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        I with Reiss on this - I'm not certain who he would replace.  Eckle is a special team and Maroney, Faulk and Evans are primary contributors.  Dillon didn't have enough for me last year - started strong but faded so fast.  Another injury might change this but for now it is something I'd keep in reserve.
         
        Now if Addai were available - that man played phenomonally aned was the Player of the Game....
        for the losing team that is.
         
        Go Pats!
        Zip
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Frank
        Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 6:44 AM
        Subject: [patriotzip] Re: Dillon wants back in

        I think we should consider it, and I think we will. As you suggest,
        he'd be a special purpose back, the short yardage guy, but he
        certainly has more mature skills than Eckel. I think he left on good
        terms, so I believe he'd be welcomed back, if he accepts the limited role.

        fdb

        --- In patriotzip@yahoogro ups.com, "George" <patswingr@. ..> wrote:
        >
        >
        > ***** Personally, I'd welcome him with open arms as a short yardage,
        goal
        > line, minimum play backup. I'm sure he'd still have significant value in
        > such a role. I'd see him as the #3 RB, behind Faulk. However, that would
        > mean a relatively small contract. We haven't seen anything about his
        > feelings for what role he'd want to play. Certainly, he can't be in
        anything
        > close to "football shape". It would be at least 2-3 weeks before he
        could do
        > much more than run one play every 5 or 10 minutes. But, come Playoff
        time,
        > he could be worked up to become a valuable asset.
        >
        > George
        > "I don't have a whole lot of what-ifs. We won three Super Bowls," (Tom
        > Brady)
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: patriots-bounces@ ... [mailto:patriots- bounces@. ..] On
        > Behalf Of Rich Carreiro
        > Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 10:27 AM
        > To: patriots@...
        > Subject: Dillon wants back in
        >
        > So says Thomase:
        >
        >
        http://www.bostonhe rald.com/ blogs/sports/ patriots/ index.php/ 2007/11/03/ agent
        > -dillon-wants- in/
        >
        > --
        > Rich Carreiro rlcarr@...
        >
        >
        > ____________ _________ _________ _________ ________
        > patriots mailing list
        > patriots@...
        > http://patriots. bosco.net/ mailman/listinfo /patriots
        >

      • Don Diamant
        Well, I disagree with both Reiss and Steve. Dillion may have lost a step or two but he is a head banger still and good for up to 30 yard romps and tough
        Message 3 of 5 , Nov 5, 2007
        • 0 Attachment

          Well, I disagree with both Reiss and Steve.  Dillion may have lost a step or two but he is a head banger still and good for up to 30 yard romps and tough yardage situations.  With Sammy Morris out for the season Dillon would be an excellent second choice so long as he understands he’s the number two guy.  Dillon isn’t the feature back he once was but he still has enough left in the tank to make short yardage plays when we need them.  We have no running back currently that can so consistently make something out of nothing.  It would be a mistake not to give Dillon serious consideration.

           

          Don

        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.