We should have our new post about the HOF announcements soon–but in the mean time, there’s additional Hall of Fame talk going on elsewhere…
To start, Corey Dillon was recently interviewed for a story by Paul Dehner Jr. of The Athletic for a story–and Dillon decided to take the opportunity to make it known that he’s not happy about the fact that he’s not getting more consideration for the Hall of Fame.
“You know the f—ery that’s going on,” he said. “We can shoot this straight. That’s the only way I like it.”
The crux of his argument? Dillon is one of 10 running backs in the Super Bowl era whose career featured 10,000+ total yards, 4.3 yards per carry, and 70 yards rushing per game. Eight are in (or will arguably be first-ballot for, in Adrian Peterson, according to Dehner) the Pro Football Hall of Fame; the others are Dillon and Fred Taylor.
I’ve never really given a lot of thought to Dillon’s HOF credentials–and I would argue that Fred Taylor is another player that is nice, but not over the threshold for me.
What do you guys think–does Dillon have an argument? Will he eventually get some more consideration? Let us know in the comments!
Loading ...
Absolutely …
Unfortunately, he played in an era with many productive running backs. Bettis got voted in but Dillon, George, Alexander, Barber, Lewis, Holmes, Taylor even Watters are still looking from the outside.
Dillon helped win a championship in NE but Brady mostly gets the credit. Losing years with the Bengals hurts his candidacy but it really shouldnt. Imagine if the Bengals were winning games instead? Dillon would probably have another 2000 yards added to his totals easily …
He was not much as a receiving threat like others but a great blocker who helped on pass protection. At one time, he held the rookie rushing yardage record for one game as well as the rushing yardage record for a game. Impressive for any resume. I would vote him in over Taylor or Lewis but felt Alexander, Holmes and Barber might be ahead of him. He is similar to George, as his teams focal point.
He has a case but it will be awhile before he may get elected …
I’m spoken on Dillon many times. I have big support for Dillon starring for a bad team and than finishing off with a huge year at age 30 and finished strong with the Patriots. He did what was required of him well as the Pats Offense improved. I don’t think the Pats win back to back Super Bowls without him adding the balance to their Team. As it was they only
He absolutely has the resume playing 10 years with over 11,000 yards rushing and a high level of TD’s at 82. He was all Cincy had for several years. He was money in 2004 and showed why he was a great player. I love the punishing way he played the game. He wore down Defenses. I would put him right there with Tiki Barber and possibly Shaun Alexander IMO ability dropped like a rock as so many do once they approach 30 years old. He never was fast but lost his elusiveness. He may suffer for staying in college and coming up short of a 10 year career. Of course I think of Jake Scott who didn’t join the NFL until 25 years old. :)
I think his challenge (same goes for most late 90s/early 2000s) RBs is that there is a peer group of them with similar cases and not much that separates them- Dillon, George, Alexander, Barber, Lewis, Holmes, Taylor. After James and Tomlinson (2000s all decade team), who has the next best deserving as case from that era, as one could be made for each, likely voters will have hard time separating individuals from the group. Last year voters advanced Taylor (and Watters) into semi-finalists, which would seem to bode well for their future potential election. Not sure the others have much of a chance.
DIllon has a case but I don’t think it is a strong or compelling one, as never first team all pro, never led league in rushing, and 20th in career rushing is really not historical accomplishment. Had perhaps 2 or 3 great seasons but also just as many poor seasons. Again, not so sure that resume puts him above the aforementioned RB peers-and voters are not going to elect a bunch of those. Looks like Taylor will get in eventually and then voters will turn attention to AP and Gore who will be then eligible.
And if interested, a group of fans, researchers and Hall followers are discussing this topic tonight (Mon July 10th, 10p EDT ) on live YouTube podcast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzhlGwLdeKE
If you missed last nights live podcast on debating 2000s RBs for PFHOF consideration, you can access recorded version at that link.
Hint: of the ten RBs we considered (from 2000s already eligible), the consensus #1 was Ricky Watters
When it comes to RB I think everyone will agree to disagree. George, Lewis and Holmes are a definite No for me. It shouldn’t be about how big a name you make for yourself. And if I played favorites Holmes would have been in long ago. Barber, Alexander and Dillon are yes. I largely support Dillon because everyone knew he was getting the ball in Cincy and he delivered and he did a lot of it own his own . Taylor and Watters I lean no.