Got to give the nod to

[ABQCOWBOY]

If you only saw Johnny U play near the end of his career then you missed it when he was at his best. In the late 50s and early 60s, the guy was without a doubt the best QB in the league by a huge margin and that was with guys like Tittle, Layne, Jurgensen, Van Brocklin, and Starr playing at the same time.

Unitas and Jim Brown dominated the game as the top players by far.

Otto Graham was the Wilt Chamberlain of the NFL. He was so far beyond every other player it wasn't even fair. Had he played longer he would probably still hold some records. As it is he is STILL ranked #8 all-time in passer ratings and he played in an era when passing wasn't very easy to do. The ball was less aerodynamic, the rules favored the defense, and you were a valid target until a little AFTER the whistle blew. With all the modern passing QBs playing in a game that puts all the advantages on the passing game, he is still ranked in the top-10. That is incredible!

I rank the top-5 QBs as: #1 Graham, #2 Unitas, #3 Staubach, #4 Sammy Baugh, #5 Montana.

If it was a big issue, I could switch Baugh and Montana as it is difficult to compare the eras they played in but I give the nod to Baugh since he was also an all-pro DB and punter and still holds punting records that will likely never be broken. But I would rank Montana as the best QB SINCE Roger Staubach and that's saying something.

Yes, I think 67 was about the last year he was good but I do recall him playing for Baltimore into the early 70s. Unitas in San Diego was horrible. Some players just don't belong in another uniform, ever. Johnny Unitas was like that for me. Hated to see that.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yes, I think 67 was about the last year he was good but I do recall him playing for Baltimore into the early 70s. Unitas in San Diego was horrible. Some players just don't belong in another uniform, ever. Johnny Unitas was like that for me. Hated to see that.

Unitas hung on too long, by the time he got to SD his elbow injury was pretty much beyond repair. Same with Nameth who was a shadow of himself by the time he went to the Rams from NY Jets. He had suffered way too many knee injuries

 

[Stautner]

Some stats to compare:

Aikman: TD% - 3.5%, INT% - 2.99
Staubach: TD% - 5.17%, INT% - 3.68

Yes it is true Staubach threw INTs at a higher rate than Aikman but he also threw TDs at a much higher rate than Troy.

When Staubach retired he was 2nd only to Ken Anderson for the lowest career INT%. He was also #2 in QB Rating (behind only Otto Graham). He still has a higher passer rating than Aikman even though Troy played in a more pass-friendly era and is 17th all-time but everyone ahead of him (with the exception of Graham) played in the 90s or later.

Aikman is ranked 27th, just behind Danny White and below guys who played way before him like Len Dawson, Sonny Jurgensen, Neil Lomax, and Ken Anderson (as well as Graham, Staubach, and White).

http://www.profootballhof.com/history/stats/top20/passer_ratings.jsp

As great as Troy was he is not in the same league with Staubach who I rank 3rd behind Graham and Unitas.

I rank Aikman as the most accurate passer I have ever seen (and that means of all-time) and a great QB but Staubach was a truly elite QB, one of the greatest ever. Aikman was better than his numbers suggest but then so was Staubach.

Look at the TD to INT ratio.

Aikman threw almost as many INTS as TD's (141 to 165) whereas Staubach threw 153 TD's and only 109 INT's.

And despite all the talk about Troy's accuracy - which admittedly was remarkable on short to mid range passes - Staubach threw a MUCH better deep ball.

But none of that truly defines Staubach.

I think Troy was a great leader who could demand perfection and get his teammates to play up to their potential. The difference with Staubach is that he INSPIRED his teammates to play BEYOND their potential and achieve things even they didn't know they could.

The feeling the team, players, media - everybody - got watching Staubach was that he could do anything on the field and he would ALWAYS find a way to win.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The feeling the team, players, media - everybody - got watching Staubach was that he could do anything on the field and he would ALWAYS find a way to win.

He could. Simply reference the 2011 Super Bowl if you need proof of it.

 

[DallasEast]

I haven't read the whole thread yet, so forgive me if I'm repeating something already said. I would like to point out that while Staubach and Aikman are being compared, it is also worth mentioning that Staubach played 14-game seasons during the regular season the majority of his career while Aikman did not. Just food for thought.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Things Aikman had that Staubach didn't.

• One of the best offensive lines in history.
• HoF wide receiver
• A runningback that ended up being the all-time rushing leader and will be a first ballot HoFer.
• Johnny Paycheck as a tightend.

Having those tools to work with are like having a jackhammer while trying to break up concrete vs using a clawed hammer.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Staubach was a better player, I'm just saying don't dismiss what Aikman had vs Staubach. Aikman clearly had a better offensive line, better running back, and better receivers. To top it off, he had them all at the same time!!!

 

[Doomsday101]

Things Aikman had that Staubach didn't.

• One of the best offensive lines in history.
• HoF wide receiver
• A runningback that ended up being the all-time rushing leader and will be a first ballot HoFer.
• Johnny Paycheck as a tightend.

Having those tools to work with are like having a jackhammer while trying to break up concrete vs using a clawed hammer.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Staubach was a better player, I'm just saying don't dismiss what Aikman had vs Staubach. Aikman clearly had a better offensive line, better running back, and better receivers. To top it off, he had them all at the same time!!!

Roger had some pretty great talent as well with an OL of
Ralph Neely
John Niland
John Fitzgerald
Blaine Nye
Rayfield Wright
WR that consisted of Bob Hayes and Lance Alworth and later Drew Pearson and Tony Hill. I think Irvin was the best WR but other than Irvin I think Roger had more weapons than Troy did. Running back Smith takes it over TD and Thomas and Calvin Hill but none of these guys lacked very good talent

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Things Aikman had that Staubach didn't.

• One of the best offensive lines in history.
• HoF wide receiver
• A runningback that ended up being the all-time rushing leader and will be a first ballot HoFer.
• Johnny Paycheck as a tightend.

Having those tools to work with are like having a jackhammer while trying to break up concrete vs using a clawed hammer.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Staubach was a better player, I'm just saying don't dismiss what Aikman had vs Staubach. Aikman clearly had a better offensive line, better running back, and better receivers. To top it off, he had them all at the same time!!!

I dunno, I don't think Emmit was "clearly" better than Dorsett or that Irvin and Harper were much, if any, better than Pearson and Hill. And guys like Dupree were outstanding also.

So Aikman might have had a little better cast, but not by all that much. Some might say the older guys were every bit as good.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Roger had some pretty great talent as well with an OL of
Ralph Neely
John Niland
John Fitzgerald
Blaine Nye
Rayfield Wright
WR that consisted of Bob Hayes and Lance Alworth and later Drew Pearson and Tony Hill. I think Irvin was the best WR but other than Irvin I think Roger had more weapons than Troy did. Running back Smith takes it over TD and Thomas and Calvin Hill but none of these guys lacked very good talent

If I were breaking the offense down, I would do it like this.

OL - Aikman
Running Backs - Aikman
TE - Aikman
WRs - Roger

 

[Doomsday101]

If I were breaking the offense down, I would do it like this.

OL - Aikman
Running Backs - Aikman
TE - Aikman
WRs - Roger

I think the OL play was pretty even between the 2
RB - Troy
TE - Slight edge Troy (but Dupree was no slouch)
WR - Roger

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think the OL play was pretty even between the 2
RB - Troy
TE - Slight edge Troy (but Dupree was no slouch)
WR - Roger

I would not call those lines even. I believe that the Cowboys lines of the seventies was a very good line but, I look at the Eras in question and ask myself one thing. Could either of those lines be dominated by anybody they played against? I never saw Troy's line dominated. I saw them dominate everybody they played against. I did see Roger's line outplayed by teams. To me, that is the difference.

 

[Doomsday101]

I would not call those lines even. I believe that the Cowboys lines of the seventies was a very good line but, I look at the Eras in question and ask myself one thing. Could either of those lines be dominated by anybody they played against? I never saw Troy's line dominated. I saw them dominate everybody they played against. I did see Roger's line outplayed by teams. To me, that is the difference.

Even the 90's line would have ups and downs Troy did not get concussion by accident. As for the 70's line they may not have been as physical but they sure knew how to pull out and lead screen plays which the line in the 90's was not very good at.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Even the 90's line would have ups and downs Troy did not get concussion by accident. As for the 70's line they may not have been as physical but they sure knew how to pull out and lead screen plays which the line in the 90's was not very good at.

Troy got concussions early in his career and later. Durning the time the Cowboys were really good in the 90s, the concussions were not nearly as big a deal as they were later in his career. I do agree with you though about the 70s lines ability to block in space. They were better at that but then the 90s lines were not built for that. They were built to mash you in the running game. To me, the 90s lines were better but there is no question, the 70s lines were also very good.

 

[joseephuss]

Roger had some pretty great talent as well with an OL of
Ralph Neely
John Niland
John Fitzgerald
Blaine Nye
Rayfield Wright
WR that consisted of Bob Hayes and Lance Alworth and later Drew Pearson and Tony Hill. I think Irvin was the best WR but other than Irvin I think Roger had more weapons than Troy did. Running back Smith takes it over TD and Thomas and Calvin Hill but none of these guys lacked very good talent

I agree that both played along side talent. Neither era was lacking in that regards.

Aikman got to grow along with Michael Irvin. There was something about that bond that they developed from young players and through their prime. It is something that Roger didn't get to develop as much with his receivers. He did get to throw to some good ones. Both Bob Hayes and Lance Alworth were past their prime and on the down side when Staubach took over fully for Craig Morton. Tony Hill did nothing his rookie year and then had good success under Roger's last two seasons. The closest thing to Irvin for Staubach was Drew Pearson. He was Rogers biggest weapon and he was a good one. I rank him a notch below Irvin, but that is not bad at all. I think Aikman just got an extra benefit with getting to grow with Irvin. I think the 70s Cowboys had better depth at receiver than the team of the 90s.

Tony Dorsett and Staubach played only 3 years together.

To say that Roger had to orchestrate comebacks because he threw interceptions is way out there. It is pretty much a made up statement with no real basis.

Roger won two Superbowls with two extremely different teams. Look at the line ups and you will see only a few players that started for both teams. Troy played with essentially the same team during his Superbowl wins. Free agency started pulling players away, but a majority of players were there through all 3 SB wins.

I can get behind both guys because I think both are great QBs. I just think Staubach was better. He was a cut above.

1989-2000
Completion Percentage
61.5% Troy
57.3% NFL average
8.7% difference

Yards per Attempt
7.0 Troy
6.8 NFL avg.
2.9% difference

Yards per completion
11.4 Troy
11.9 NFL avg.
-4.2% difference

TD%
3.5% Troy
3.9% NFL avg.
-10.3% difference

INT%
3.0% Troy
3.4% NFL avg.
13.3% difference

QB Rating
81.6 Troy
77.3 NFL avg.
5.6% difference



1969-1979
Completion Percentage
57.0% Roger
52.2% NFL average
9.2% difference

Yards per Attempt
7.7 Roger
6.7 NFL avg.
14.9% difference

Yards per completion
13.5 Roger
12.8 NFL avg.
5.5% difference

TD%
5.2% Roger
4.2% NFL avg.
23.8% difference

INT%
3.7% Roger
5.2% NFL avg.
40.5% diffference

QB Rating
83.4 Roger
65.7 NFL avg.
26.9% difference

 

[Doomsday101]

Troy got concussions early in his career and later. Durning the time the Cowboys were really good in the 90s, the concussions were not nearly as big a deal as they were later in his career. I do agree with you though about the 70s lines ability to block in space. They were better at that but then the 90s lines were not built for that. They were built to mash you in the running game. To me, the 90s lines were better but there is no question, the 70s lines were also very good.

I agree. As I said I don't think the 70's line was as physical as that of the 90's. Landry wanted guy who could pull, trap and get out and lead screens. I think both units were very good at what they did which is why both had success.

 

[Doomsday101]

I agree that both played along side talent. Neither era was lacking in that regards.

Aikman got to grow along with Michael Irvin. There was something about that bond that they developed from young players and through their prime. It is something that Roger didn't get to develop as much with his receivers. He did get to throw to some good ones. Both Bob Hayes and Lance Alworth were past their prime and on the down side when Staubach took over fully for Craig Morton. Tony Hill did nothing his rookie year and then had good success under Roger's last two seasons. The closest thing to Irvin for Staubach was Drew Pearson. He was Rogers biggest weapon and he was a good one. I rank him a notch below Irvin, but that is not bad at all. I think Aikman just got an extra benefit with getting to grow with Irvin. I think the 70s Cowboys had better depth at receiver than the team of the 90s.

Tony Dorsett and Staubach played only 3 years together.

To say that Roger had to orchestrate comebacks because he threw interceptions is way out there. It is pretty much a made up statement with no real basis.

Roger won two Superbowls with two extremely different teams. Look at the line ups and you will see only a few players that started for both teams. Troy played with essentially the same team during his Superbowl wins. Free agency started pulling players away, but a majority of players were there through all 3 SB wins.

I can get behind both guys because I think both are great QBs. I just think Staubach was better. He was a cut above.

1989-2000
Completion Percentage
61.5% Troy
57.3% NFL average
8.7% difference

Yards per Attempt
7.0 Troy
6.8 NFL avg.
2.9% difference

Yards per completion
11.4 Troy
11.9 NFL avg.
-4.2% difference

TD%
3.5% Troy
3.9% NFL avg.
-10.3% difference

INT%
3.0% Troy
3.4% NFL avg.
13.3% difference

QB Rating
81.6 Troy
77.3 NFL avg.
5.6% difference



1969-1979
Completion Percentage
57.0% Roger
52.2% NFL average
9.2% difference

Yards per Attempt
7.7 Roger
6.7 NFL avg.
14.9% difference

Yards per completion
13.5 Roger
12.8 NFL avg.
5.5% difference

TD%
5.2% Roger
4.2% NFL avg.
23.8% difference

INT%
3.7% Roger
5.2% NFL avg.
40.5% diffference

QB Rating
83.4 Roger
65.7 NFL avg.
26.9% difference

I loved both team (70's and 90's) and the numbers to a certain extent really don't mean much after all the rules have continued to change in order to increase scoring in the NFL. When Roger played you could damn near rape a WR before an interference call was made, now days the flag gets tossed pretty quickly and there have been other rule changes which have helped to create more offense. For me the bottom line is both eras produced winning teams and championships

 

[joseephuss]

I loved both team (70's and 90's) and the numbers to a certain extent really don't mean much after all the rules have continued to change in order to increase scoring in the NFL. When Roger played you could damn near rape a WR before an interference call was made, now days the flag gets tossed pretty quickly and there have been other rule changes which have helped to create more offense. For me the bottom line is both eras produced winning teams and championships

That's just it. Roger played in an era when the offenses didn't have quite the advantages they do now and still produced. If he played under the modern rules his numbers would have been even better. I don't know if it is the bottom line, but it is the most important part that both are winners.

 

[Doomsday101]

That's just it. Roger played in an era when the offenses didn't have quite the advantages they do now and still produced. If he played under the modern rules his numbers would have been even better. I don't know if it is the bottom line, but it is the most important part that both are winners.

True but I think both Roger and Troy were excellent players and great leaders. Who was better? I really can't say I'm just glad we had 2 guys like Roger and Troy who have made this franchise pretty special over the history of this organization.

 

[joseephuss]

True but I think both Roger and Troy were excellent players and great leaders. Who was better? I really can't say I'm just glad we had 2 guys like Roger and Troy who have made this franchise pretty special over the history of this organization.

Few franchises have been lucky to have one truly great QB. Fewer to have two great ones like Dallas has had. Then throw in two good QBs like Don Meredith and Danny White. Hopefully Romo at least joins the Meredith/White level.

 

[Doomsday101]

Few franchises have been lucky to have one truly great QB. Fewer to have two great ones like Dallas has had. Then throw in two good QBs like Don Meredith and Danny White. Hopefully Romo at least joins the Meredith/White level.

No doubt about it. This franchise has seen its share of great players and great success and hopefully the team is getting back to a point where we will once again see championships and like you I hope it is Romo who will lead this team back to the top. Myself I think he is the one.