Boston.com Patriots All-Decade Team

Share this page

patsfanroach

patsfanroach

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,902
Reaction score
203
Points
63
Age
52
Location
Auburn, Maine
I can not find this anywhere...I did search it but I am a noob when it comes to searches here. So mods if it it is repetitive please feel free to merge.


So this is actually voted by writers for the Patriot Hall Of Fame.
Here it is:

OFFENSE
OT Nick Kaczur
OT Matt Light
G Joe Andruzzi
G Logan Mankins
C Dan Koppen
TE Daniel Graham
WR Troy Brown
WR Randy Moss
WR Wes Welker
QB Tom Brady
RB Corey Dillon

DEFENSE
DE Richard Seymour
DE Ty Warren
NT Vince Wilfork
OLB Willie McGinest
OLB Mike Vrabel
ILB Tedy Bruschi
ILB Roman Phifer
CB Ty Law
CB Asante Samuel
S Rodney Harrison
S Lawyer Milloy

SPECIAL TEAMS
K Adam Vinatieri
P Josh Miller
Ret Kevin Faulk
SpT Larry Izzo


Not too many problems with me here...
 
Tough list to argue with. A second RB (Faulk) and a nickle would have been nice.
 
AllWorldTE said:
Tough list to argue with. A second RB (Faulk) and a nickle would have been nice.
Click to expand...

They have faulk as a returner. Man its tough to say dillion for RB of the decade, he only played here two years.
 
midgar8784 said:
They have faulk as a returner. Man its tough to say dillion for RB of the decade, he only played here two years.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I missed that. He was a decent return man but not the best the team had. That was a way of getting him on the team I guess.
 
The problem with faulk is that his highest rushing season was like 600 yards. I think the team is pretty well put together.

Really not a Kaczur fan but I guess there was no one better.
 
I would like to have seen Ted Johnson instead of Roman Phifer...but Roman was a stud here too. Dillion is tough but he probably is one of the top RBs we have seen here...I Mean who else? Butts? Maroney? I am just glad that Faulk is on there.
 
Brady's Bunch said:
The problem with faulk is that his highest rushing season was like 600 yards. I think the team is pretty well put together.

Really not a Kaczur fan but I guess there was no one better.
Click to expand...

That's the thing with a guy like Faulk, he's not an every-down back and never runs up the stats... but how many of his yards came on key situations where it's third and long and you gotta move the chains.
It's what makes him valuable, he's so clutch and runs and receives well. But never leads statistically.
 
patsfanroach said:
I would like to have seen Ted Johnson instead of Roman Phifer...but Roman was a stud here too. Dillion is tough but he probably is one of the top RBs we have seen here...I Mean who else? Butts? Maroney? I am just glad that Faulk is on there.
Click to expand...
johnson was washed up by the time this decade happened
 
patsfanroach said:
I would like to have seen Ted Johnson instead of Roman Phifer...but Roman was a stud here too. Dillion is tough but he probably is one of the top RBs we have seen here...I Mean who else? Butts? Maroney? I am just glad that Faulk is on there.
Click to expand...
Johnson was on the 1990s all decade team and deserved it. Phifer was on the field a lot more than Johnson in the 2000s, and he was an outstanding player. Johnson played mainly in short yardage situations during the 00s. Phifer was on the field for every down.

For one, maybe two, seasons Dillon was the best running back that the Patriots ever had. He was the most important player on the 2004 team, and they owe that third championship to him. They wouldn't have won it without him. He didn't have longevity with the team, but if you could have one Patriot running back in his prime, who would you take? I'd take Dillon over any of them. The guy was a beast.
 
I would have gone with Antowaine Smith at running back. Decent numbers, and from what I have heard, a solid citizen. And two rings.
 
TipRoast said:
I would have gone with Antowaine Smith at running back. Decent numbers, and from what I have heard, a solid citizen. And two rings.
Click to expand...
I liked Smith, but IMO there is no comparison as to who was the better player.

Both played 3 seasons for the Pats.

Games:
Dillon -43
Smith - 45

Carries:
Dillon - 753
Smith - 721

Rushing Yards:
Dillon - 3180
Smith - 2781

Average:
Dillon -4.2
Smith -3.9

Rushing Touchdowns:
Dillon - 39
Smith - 21

I think that Smith was a nice player who played hard. But Dillon was the best running back in Patriot history.....for a couple of seasons. In the end, he just got old. But you can't overlook what he did in that 2004 season.

Dillon had:
15 games
345 carries
1635 yards
4.7 average
13 TDs

In the playoffs that 2004 season, he had:
Vs Colts - 23 carries, 144 yards, 5 receptions, 17 yards
Vs Pitt - 24 carries, 73 yards, 1 TD, 1 receptions, 5 yards
Vs Phil - 18 carries, 75 yards, 1 TD, 3 receptions, 31 yards

So all told......including playoffs.....Dillon had 1927 rushing yards in 18 games, an average of 107 yards per game.

They should have his picture etched on the SB39 Lombardi Trophy, because he is the one player who is singularly most responsible for it.

If there were a running back who did a great job over a period of 6 or 7 years, I might give the nod to him over Dillon, but Smith and Dillon played the same amount of time for the Pats, and Dillon made a much bigger impact. Kevin Faulk is the only long timer, and he's a great 3rd down back, but he just doesn't have the numbers as a ball carrier.
 
BluVayner said:
I liked Smith, but IMO there is no comparison as to who was the better player.

Both played 3 seasons for the Pats.

Games:
Dillon -43
Smith - 45

Carries:
Dillon - 753
Smith - 721

Rushing Yards:
Dillon - 3180
Smith - 2781

Average:
Dillon -4.2
Smith -3.9

Rushing Touchdowns:
Dillon - 39
Smith - 21

I think that Smith was a nice player who played hard. But Dillon was the best running back in Patriot history.....for a couple of seasons. In the end, he just got old. But you can't overlook what he did in that 2004 season.

Dillon had:
15 games
345 carries
1635 yards
4.7 average
13 TDs

In the playoffs that 2004 season, he had:
Vs Colts - 23 carries, 144 yards, 5 receptions, 17 yards
Vs Pitt - 24 carries, 73 yards, 1 TD, 1 receptions, 5 yards
Vs Phil - 18 carries, 75 yards, 1 TD, 3 receptions, 31 yards

So all told......including playoffs.....Dillon had 1927 rushing yards in 18 games, an average of 107 yards per game.

They should have his picture etched on the SB39 Lombardi Trophy, because he is the one player who is singularly most responsible for it.

If there were a running back who did a great job over a period of 6 or 7 years, I might give the nod to him over Dillon, but Smith and Dillon played the same amount of time for the Pats, and Dillon made a much bigger impact. Kevin Faulk is the only long timer, and he's a great 3rd down back, but he just doesn't have the numbers as a ball carrier.
Click to expand...




I think a few players might have something to say about that. I mean he was pretty good in the superbowl but 74 yards is not exactly putting teh team on his shoulders. Harrison to me had a bigger impact.
 
midgar8784 said:
I think a few players might have something to say about that. I mean he was pretty good in the superbowl but 74 yards is not exactly putting teh team on his shoulders. Harrison to me had a bigger impact.
Click to expand...

Branch and others had a big impact on that game also, but every team that they faced had to focus their defense on stopping Dillon.

I'm really basing that statement on his impact for the entire season, and not simply the Super Bowl game itself. Without Dillon that year, they wouldn't have won it. He set the tone for that offense.
 
BluVayner said:
Branch and others had a big impact on that game also, but every team that they faced had to focus their defense on stopping Dillon.

I'm really basing that statement on his impact for the entire season, and not simply the Super Bowl game itself. Without Dillon that year, they wouldn't have won it. He set the tone for that offense.
Click to expand...

I am not sure thats true. They won it the year before without him, he helped a lot but I think the front 7 that year had the biggest impact on why the pats won it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top