Romo pretty easy. Witten is a TE. No one can claim he is a HoFer and Romo isn't....because they had the same "playoff record" that is held against Romo.
Ware is 2nd on my list because a pass rusher is a big deal.
Zeke could get there but he's not there yet.
Dez is almost a commercial for Romo's greatness. Dez has never looked great with any other QB.
Allen was a 90s great. His 00s Pro Bowls were "reputation Pro Bowls". Everyone knew he was living on his rep at the time.
Troy Aikman, according to this board he couldn't hold Romo's jock....
You can make the case that Romo was better.
Both played for teams that Jerry built once Jimmy's teams got old. Romo produced better results.
Aikman went 34-33 (.492) for 5 years after their last SB. I'm even giving Aikman a little boost from getting to play with the SB team as they got older....which is better than Romo ever had.
The Cowboys went 74-86 (.462) in the 10 years before Romo got there. That's all Jerry's teams. That's what you get with Jerry as GM. After Romo took over they went 78-49 (.614) when he starts and 10-23 (.303) when he missed a game. That's pretty dramatic. Romo is the only reason they were worth watching at all.
A QB is supposed to last longer than a RB. But Aikman frankly was never that great without Emmitt in his prime. In fact, Aikman never won a game that Emmitt didn't play in. Even in their peak years 92-95 Aikman couldn't win if Emmitt didn't play. (But they
did win games that Aikman missed) And of course once Emmitt started getting older, Aikman couldn't elevate the team with his play. Those last 5 years were pretty weak.
So I would take Romo over Aikman. Give Romo that 90s team and of course they still win 3 rings. But put Aikman on the 00s Cowboys and I don't see how he could have carried them like Romo did.