He said without team wins, he wouldn't be in the HOF. How would anyone argue that?
"Ran off?" Lmao, if you or anyone actually believe this it may give a glimpse of an explanation of your hatred.
I am Confused . . . Are you Implying Aikman is "ONLY" in the Hall of Fame because of Team "Wins"
And That it is so Obvious that It Can't even be argued.
And WHY ARE WE ARGUING AIKMAN'S LEGACY . . .
There is no other QB of the 90's I wanted on My team
Farve was too Erratic
Young played in a Gimic offense
Marino was a stud but relied on himself too much
Moon and Cunningham were strong and Talented but Not as Clutch and determined to win like Aikman
Maybe I would take Elway and Kelly but being a Cowboy Fan . . . I always loved the Fire in Aikmans eye . . . I never seen that Killer look in any other Qbs eye . . . Maybe in the eyes of a defender like Singeltary.
In the Last Era of the True QB Generals . . . when Grit Toughness and Determination were nesecary attributes . . . Aikman stood out . . . Not BECAUSE OF "WINS" . . . Because he was a Boss
Do you think he couldn't have put up Gaudy Numbers then you are fooling Yourself . . . He Consciously chose not to in Order to Win . . .
When Aikman was born they broke the mould
I can't even believe I am Arguing the Legacy of a QB god . . . with people who Claim Dak is the legend . . . Boogles the Mind
But Whose the Fool?. . . The Fool or the one who argues with them