Aside from the he said, she said issues, and speculating what Dillon will do next, I am taking the general tone of the board, to be split between: 1) It was time for him to go, Maroney has surpassed him, and 2) What do we do now, can Maroney start, how are we going to find a replacement in FA, draft,etc I am very much on the side of 1, and surprised there are so many people feeling like 2. To stay competitive for Championships, older players need to be replaced by younger ones, consistently. Great teams have a core of veteran players that they build around but what many seem to not have recognized is the core changes. As the 'original core' ages, the younger players that were built around it become the core. I think this is textbook genius management of building a team. We found Dillons replacement one (maybe 2) years before necessary. He spent that rookie year playing half the time, learning from the vet (there is no question that at the least Maroney learned the stiff arm from the best) and being prepared to take over. In this case it was only 1 year early because by year 2 the young player is better. Had Maroney looked in year 1 like JR Redmond looked in year 1, Dillon would be back. There has been a lot of complaining on this site when a 'former core guy' was allowed to walk and the replacement was not obvious. (McGinest, Vinatieri, Woody, Law, Milloy, Givens, Branch, etc) In some of those case it was at a point where the replacement not being obvious really was a gamble, in others, it was us not knowing what the organization knew (players like Wilson, Samuel, Koppen, Neal, etc stepping up). In still others it was a case where the decision needed to be made whether the replacement was there or not. When a player is declining AND YOU HAVE A GOOD TEAM THAT CAN OVERCOME A POTENTIAL DROPOFF IN ONE AREA, it makes perfect sense to let a player go 1 year too early rather than 1 year too late. I think the concept behind it is that one guy isn't going to make the difference between winning and losing this year, and by cutting the cord now, you are much further ahead 2 years from now, having found and played your replacement. I know its not a specific strategy, but in the big picture, you have a core of players, and each hasa shelf life. You surround them with players who are the future core as well as some who are stop gap. The sooner you eliminate the aging player from that core, the sooner the future core players become part of it. I think the LB situation fits this scenario. The core has aged. The first measure was stopgap, and that stopgap has evidenced the need to rebuild the core. I expect we will have quite a bit of roster turnover at the LB postion this season for that reason. I expect 3 Lbs (anywhere from starter to last guy on the bench) new to the roster this year. I do not expect a lot of resources to be spent on replacing Corey Dillon, because the answer is already known. Guess I am sort of venting and rambling, but my point is, how can anyone be concerned about Dillon leaving when his replacement is already here, and we have had quite a bit of success jettisoning guys even if the replacement wasnt here?