TwoDeep3
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 14,506
- Reaction score
- 17,339
The first two and almost a half a games this season Romo has been questionable. His mechanics have been off, or he's been out of shape because the back has kept him from getting his legs into shape.
Whatever the reason, Romo hasn't been himself.
But look at what we have here.
DeMarco Murray has 385 yards rushing.
Now follow my train of thought. This team is 2-1 in that time, and down 21 points before Romo got his groove back - mostly got it back. I am more encouraged aft6er the second half and a bit that he may come through this.
Now the what if game.
If Dallas did not have a deadly accurate QB like Aikman back in the day with the triplets, would the first 2.5 games this year been what we would have seen instead of beating the snot out of other teams?
So many want to suggest Aikman was simply a bus driver. Mostly fans of other teams that had to watch perhaps the greatest professional football team ever. And I base that subjective comment on the fact I think the 92 and 93 team would have beaten any team EVER in the history of this league - up to and including those that came after until today.
Montana and his 9ers - dead. Brady and his Patriots - dead. Rogers and his Packers - dead. Bradshaw and his Stealers - dead. Eli and his Giants - dead, dead, a thousand times dead.
My point is this. With Romo ailing, and we see a stout running attack and a less so passing game, would this have been what we would have seen in the 92 and 93 seasons with a lesser passer?
And if so, doesn't this suggest Aikman was much more than what some say?
I know this is really far afield. And this doesn't take away one iota from Romo. I think the argument that we don't truly appreciate Romo was illustrated when he found his rhythm in the Rams game.
But it also is illustrative of what a team with a very good to great running game and quarterback look like if one component is missing or misfiring.
Whatever the reason, Romo hasn't been himself.
But look at what we have here.
DeMarco Murray has 385 yards rushing.
Now follow my train of thought. This team is 2-1 in that time, and down 21 points before Romo got his groove back - mostly got it back. I am more encouraged aft6er the second half and a bit that he may come through this.
Now the what if game.
If Dallas did not have a deadly accurate QB like Aikman back in the day with the triplets, would the first 2.5 games this year been what we would have seen instead of beating the snot out of other teams?
So many want to suggest Aikman was simply a bus driver. Mostly fans of other teams that had to watch perhaps the greatest professional football team ever. And I base that subjective comment on the fact I think the 92 and 93 team would have beaten any team EVER in the history of this league - up to and including those that came after until today.
Montana and his 9ers - dead. Brady and his Patriots - dead. Rogers and his Packers - dead. Bradshaw and his Stealers - dead. Eli and his Giants - dead, dead, a thousand times dead.
My point is this. With Romo ailing, and we see a stout running attack and a less so passing game, would this have been what we would have seen in the 92 and 93 seasons with a lesser passer?
And if so, doesn't this suggest Aikman was much more than what some say?
I know this is really far afield. And this doesn't take away one iota from Romo. I think the argument that we don't truly appreciate Romo was illustrated when he found his rhythm in the Rams game.
But it also is illustrative of what a team with a very good to great running game and quarterback look like if one component is missing or misfiring.
