Originally Posted by CowboysFanSince88
Anyone who can't see Romo plays the QB position a lot better than Aikman doesn't have 20/20 vision. Now his overall career doesn't matchup to Aikman but he is clearly a better player.
When Romo first took over the team I used to fantasize about him playing at the Vet against the Eagles since he had skills when it came to getting away from defenders.
You're still avoiding my questions.
Romo is a better athlete than Aikman was and plays in a passing offense that utilizes his playmaking skills and ability to extend plays. Romo is a poor mans Brett Favre. He can make a spectacular play one minute and a boneheaded play the next. Aikman was a much more steady QB than either Favre or Romo which is why he has 3 rings. He brought his A game to big games. In 3 SB appearances Aikman only tossed one int compared to 5 TD passes. He wasn't exciting like Favre who's gunslinging style produced mega TD's and mega int's but you could count on him not to turn the ball over in critical situations and to be at his best when it mattered most.
You're in love with Romo's numbers and Houdini escapes. He's exciting but it's at a cost...TURNOVERS! If he never leads the Cowboys to the playoffs again you'll still think he was a better QB than Aikman. Topics like this separate the knowledgeable fans from those who aren't. You must have been born in 1988 because you clearly don't remember Aikman's career it's obvious by some of your comments. You first said he was terrible from 96 to 2000 when in fact he led the Cowboys to a playoff win in 96.
When I brought that to your attention you then said he was terrible from 97 to 2000. lol You went on to claim he was great his first 5 years when in fact he struggled his first 2 years because he was a young QB that had a bad team around him. His game improved as the Cowboys improved. The examples you've used with Tom Brady and why he keeps winning and Aikman didn't show you don't understand the game and have no clear recollection of his career or the 90's Cowboys.