This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Do you understand that leading is not the same as statistics? If so, then you do get it.ETA: No one takes away credit from Dillon's career year. He gets credit for that in his statistics. Are you suggesting that he was a leader among his teammates, as distinguished from his statistical performance?
There is only so much leading a RB can do. Especially one that doesnt play very much. Bettis' "leadership" in 2005 is LARGELY overstated. The NFL is a NOW business. His teammates give him respect because he has been through the trenches before, but they arent taking their lead from someone who only carries the ball 5-10 times a game.
I suppose everyone's definition of "leadership" is different. Dillon was one of the key contributor's to the Pats 04 SB run. That in itself IMO is reflective of being a leader. He contributed on the field to taking a good team the distance by proving it on the field. Was he THE REASON why the offense was so good? Obvioulsy not as Brady runs the show on offense. Was he the venerable team leader? Again no as players like Troy Brown and Tedy Bruschi could have battled for that title. But does that mean Dillon was not a leader on and off the field? Again probably not.Looking at Bettis in the Steelers' title season, he was not a regular by then and pretty much was a short yardage guy only. IMO, his on the field play was nothing to write home about. Could the Steelers have fared just as well WITHOUT Bettis that year (on the field only)? Probably. Was Bettis a good clubhouse guy and motivator? Absolutely. But put Bettis and his 368 rushing yards on the 04 Pats and put Dillon and his 1600 yards on the 04 or 05 Steelers and the Steelers would have ROMPED both years. And the Pats would have probably struggled to win much of anything in the 04 postseason.
I am with you DY. In re-reading my post it was a little harsh, but it was not meant at you. It was more agreeing, yet pointing out the flaw in most people's minds about leadership. This is my own issue in that so many people downgrade Manning and Marino because they hadn't won the big one yet; even though they won a ton of games. It is just so silly that people think now that Manning was part of a team that won it that his legacy is any better? This year if Manning's defense played as bad as Miami's always did there was no chance Manning gets a ring. So how is it that he gets credit now? He should have gotten credit before, but as I said, people have trouble seeing things that have not happened yet.My point wasn ot so much that Dillon was or was not a good leader, but either way no one would care on a team that could barely win 3 of 10 games. So Bettis apparently gets credit for "leading" his team to winning seasons and a SB title while Dillon gets nothing for enduring years in obscurity in Cincy.By comparison, IMO Dillon's years 8,9, and 10 in NE trump Bettis' 8, 9, and 10 in PITillon: 3180/431/39Bettis: 3079/202/21I don't get why Bettis gets credit for being a great leader in a Super Bowl championship season while Dillon apparently doesn't even get an honorable mention in a year when he had a career year.
There is a difference, but I would argue that the backup RB can only be so much of a leader. You lead by example, you lead by coaching and teaching, you lead by making the tough decisions...playing well statistically is part of leading though.I guess LT wasn't a good leader and that is why SD lost, Brady that choker came up very small in the playoffs so obviously yelling at his teammates makes him a bad leader. Obviously, Grossman was a great leader taking his team the the SB
Any reason "not even close"
