If Aikman were the QB

[atlantacowboy]

I did but I was younger. Everybody's got their own opinion. Only people I have a problem with are the ones who say aikman was a winner and romo was a loser. Common sense lacks there.

You don't make Romo look any better by trying to cheapen and disparage what Aikman accomplished.

 

[JDSmith]

You don't make Romo look any better by trying to cheapen and disparage what Aikman accomplished.

I would take Romo over Aikman. I watched Troy play his entire career. It doesn't cheapen Aikman's accomplishments to say he had a better team around him. It's a fact. That doesn't mean Troy didn't win or that he didn't play great, he did both. I simply think that Romo was a better QB.

 

[StarBoyz83]

You don't make Romo look any better by trying to cheapen and disparage what Aikman accomplished.

Facts are facts sir. Not trying to cheapen what aikman did. Loved aikman

 

[BIGDen]

I watched every game of romo and troys career, and tony was hand down more talented. Even Troy has said so(which I’ll admit doesn’t mean much because he maybe just was being polite) Maybe it’s unpopular opinion. Tony would have won all those say Super Bowls as Troy, it’s a team sport.

I totally agree. I watched pretty much every game each of them played. Romo suffered behind crap OLs and had garbage defenses much of his career and still kept Dallas competitive every year he was healthy. Troy wouldn’t have made a fraction of the miraculous plays Tony made for us all those years behind terrible OLs. Troy also had some great defenses (including the number 1 defense in ‘92) that didn’t blow leads like Tony’s frequently did. As good as Aikman was, he threw for 20 TDs like once in his entire career. He was strong and accurate, but needed protection. Romo often found a way to make a play while running for his life. When Tony finally had a great OL, he was statistically the best QB in football (‘14). TEAMS win SBs. Troy was a very good QB who was also very fortunate to be on a great team with great coaching. Tony didn’t have that luck but is still in the top 5 of all-time passer ratings. Romo was the most underrated QB I’ve ever seen. Rings require team efforts to win and, often, some calls and bounces - ask Marino (who was one of the greatest to ever play).

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Mobility? W/ Aikmann and Marino? I'd prolly give Marino a slight edge, but neither was mobile. Yes, I'm aware that Troy had more rushing yardage, but Marino simply didn't run, rather scrambling to pass.

Yes, with Aikman. When Aikman was young, he could move. The Aikman we saw later in his career and the Aikman that came out of UCLA were not the same. I saw Dan Marino play, while at Pitt, as well. He was always a great passer but he was never very mobile.

 

[skinsscalper]

One thing about the NFL with the cap, all teams are equal. Unlike baseball my Reds will never be able to compete with the Yankees and Boston etc. We make a star player and then cant keep him by being in a small market team. Baseball should have a cap to equal out the playing field all around.

Correct. The Cowboys had the money and resources to outspend, literally, any team in the league. So did the 49ers, Giants, Commanders, etc. They were large market teams with large market budgets. At the time that the salary cap was being conceived and implemented, Jerry Jones was coming up with a new way to generate revenue for his franchise every 15 minutes (while simultaneously suing the league for trying to stop him). There was no way that the Seahawks or the Saints of the world would have EVER been able to keep pace, financially. It's Jerry's forward thinking (in terms of revenue generation) and balls (he had a big brass set of them when taking on the league) that the old codger is in the HOF. It has NOTHING to do with his success (or lack thereof) on the field.

There's a reason that teams like the Packers and Steelers (teams who were previously powerhouses in the league) suddenly became competitive again in the mid 90s (after decades of futility). Salary cap!

Make no mistake, 90% of the reason that the league even has a salary can be traced straight back to Jerry Jones and Eddie Debartalo (sp?). Hell, the entire AFC couldn't buy a Super Bowl trophy (literally). The Oakland Raiders were the last team from the AFC to win a Lombardi (in 1984) before the Broncos finally broke through (14 Super Bowls later) after the salary cap leveled the playing field.

As to the Romo/ Aikman debate. It's hard to compare the two but in a game where the QB gets too much credit for team accomplishments and too much blame for the entire franchises failures I always go back to the make up of the entire team. How many of Troy's teammates are in the Hall of Fame? How about Tony? From this particular perspective, the overall odds are stacked HEAVILY in Troy's favor.

There's also another thing to consider. Romo is the only player in Cowboys history that made EVERYONE in the organization (from the front office to the 3rd string OT) look better than they actually were. Troy never did that. He rarely had to. When he did have to, he looked as pedestrian as any QB to ever play. Anyone remember Spurgeon Wynn? He had a higher QB rating than Troy Aikman when it was Troy's time to "carry the team". Let that sink in.....................Spurgeon Wynn.

Don't get me wrong, I love both guys, but Aikman doesn't sniff a championship in Green Bay (who would have had the #1 overall pick had they not won a meaningless game the previous season).

One thing that you can't take away from Aikman: That dude was tough as nails. I've never seen a QB stare down the rush, know he was going to get plastered, deliver the pass with laser-guided accuracy, take it right on the chin, and get up to do it again. His backdrop was also the quickest and most efficient I've ever seen. Go back and watch that guy's footwork from the glory days. It's a clinic on footwork efficiency from the quarterback position. Every coach on the planet that teaches his kids to play from under center should have his film queued up for football 101 from day one. That dude in his prime was a thing of beauty from EVERY aspect of the position.

 

[skinsscalper]

Reggie White and Jerome Brown brought the heat that day for sure for the egirls 11 sack day.

I remember that game vivdily. It's the only time EVER, as a fan, that I had wished that "his corner would have thrown in the towel". I seriously didn't think that he'd make it through the game. I honestly pondered whether or not that game would end his season. That dude was tough as ****!

 

[skinsscalper]

But Irvin always got open. He was a very good route runner. Other teams accused him of pushing off because he was always open.

Haha. To be fair, he was always open because he DID push off. He'd tell you the same thing.

 

[skinsscalper]

Romo would have gotten destroyed in Atlanta. Would have been out by the end of the 1st quarter.

Maybe but he would have made the adjustment at the line (even if his coaches were too stupid to do so) before he took it on the chin 6 times.

Like I said, Romo made EVERYONE look better than they actually were (especially his coaches).

 

[Big_D]

Maybe but he would have made the adjustment at the line (even if his coaches were too stupid to do so) before he took it on the chin 6 times.

Like I said, Romo made EVERYONE look better than they actually were (especially his coaches).

Romo definitely made Garrett look better than he actually was.

 

[Aviano90]

Maybe but he would have made the adjustment at the line (even if his coaches were too stupid to do so) before he took it on the chin 6 times.

Like I said, Romo made EVERYONE look better than they actually were (especially his coaches).

I've heard this about Romo being able to make adjustments when the pressure is coming. I've always wondered why he didn't make those adjustments against Minnesota in 2009 when he was getting killed and turning the ball over 3 times? In that game, we just blame the offensive line and claim Romo never had a chance. And I agree with that. I just wonder if he had this great ability to made the line adjustments why he didn't do it that game.

Or another example is in 2014 when Washington was bringing all kinds of pressure in the first game we played them. Romo ultimately got hurt that game and missed the next week. The offense really struggled that game and Washington's pressure was a riddle Romo or the coaches couldn't solve.

Maybe Romo solves the Falcons, maybe he doesn't. It's not a foregone conclusion one way or another. I mean, I have heard thousands of times that Romo had to run for his life in his career. Why didn't he just make line adjustments?

As for Romo making players and coaches better...isn't that what great players are supposed to do? That's nothing special. It comes with the territory and can be said about most of the great players in the league. If they didn't make others look better they wouldn't be considered great players.

 

[the_h0wey]

I did but I was younger. Everybody's got their own opinion. Only people I have a problem with are the ones who say aikman was a winner and romo was a loser. Common sense lacks there.

I haven't said anything about Tony at all. If you really believe that Romo was better than Aikman, and you have actually seen Aikman play, then you just don't understand Football.

 

[skinsscalper]

Or another example is in 2014 when Washington was bringing all kinds of pressure in the first game we played them. Romo ultimately got hurt that game and missed the next week. The offense really struggled that game and Washington's pressure was a riddle Romo or the coaches couldn't solve.

You mean that season that he was robbed of the MVP? That season? You seem to be implying that Romo should have been perfect or never had an off game to be considered one of the leagues elite at the position. Beyond stupid.

As for Romo making players and coaches better...isn't that what great players are supposed to do? That's nothing special. It comes with the territory and can be said about most of the great players in the league. If they didn't make others look better they wouldn't be considered great players.

You're right, being a great player isn't anything special.

That's the dumbest ******* thing I've ever read on this board (and that's saying something).

 

[Aviano90]

You mean that season that he was robbed of the MVP? That season? You seem to be implying that Romo should have been perfect or never had an off game to be considered one of the leagues elite at the position. Beyond stupid.


You're right, being a great player isn't anything special.

That's the dumbest ******* thing I've ever read on this board (and that's saying something).

Maybe I should have been clearer. I guess it is all in the interpretation. Being great is *special*. The fact that great players make other players and coaches looks better is kind of a Captain Obvious statement, right?

But so happy I could anchor my way down to the stupidest thing you've read. LOL

 

[Big_D]

Jimmy was great.. Emmitt Smith was great, probably the greatest Oline in the history of football. The D was stout,, that list goes on and on. Not knocking Aikman, but surrounding talent is certainly helpful and a huge part of a teams success. You can't just swap out Romo for Aikman and think he's going on a 3 Super Bowl run with Jason Garrett, a bottom of the pack run game and a sub par D. I think Aikman was great, but those intangibles he had that were very important are all gone.

 

[Aviano90]

Jimmy was great.. Emmitt Smith was great, probably the greatest Oline in the history of football. The D was stout,, that list goes on and on. Not knocking Aikman, but surrounding talent is certainly helpful and a huge part of a teams success. You can't just swap out Romo for Aikman and think he's going on a 3 Super Bowl run with Jason Garrett, a bottom of the pack run game and a sub par D. I think Aikman was great, but those intangibles he had that were very important are all gone.

This is the key right here. That fire and demand for perfection is something that has been lacking on this team for a very long time. Romo may be more talented, but that team needed Troy the leader to become the team it was. That was Troy's greatest asset, IMO and was crucial to the team's success.

 

[skinsscalper]

Maybe I should have been clearer. I guess it is all in the interpretation. Being great is *special*. The fact that great players make other players and coaches looks better is kind of a Captain Obvious statement, right?

You completely missed the point. Name me another player in the ENTIRE HISTORY of this team that elevated EVERYONE around him more than Romo. Crayton and Robinson alone cashed some seriously large checks directly due to Romo. They moved on to be exactly the scrubs that they would have been without him. Even Terrell Owens (in his entire HOF career) had only one season (in SF with HOF QB Steve Young) in his career better than his 2007 season with Romo in terms of TD production.

But carry on, you seem to be on a roll.

 

[Big_D]

This is the key right here. That fire and demand for perfection is something that has been lacking on this team for a very long time. Romo may be more talented, but that team needed Troy the leader to become the team it was. That was Troy's greatest asset, IMO and was crucial to the team's success.

No doubt he had great leadership it was certainly crucial and the team responded, but that also started at the coaching level. That entire team had the confidence and the talent we simply do not see here. I loved seeing Aikman break the huddle and walk to the line. Specially in those huge situations. He was a clutch QB. I just can't knock Romo for not having any of those things. He got a raw deal from the inexperienced coach to the foolish owner who thought he was coach, and still does?!

 

[DFWJC]

As my buddy use to say, he was like a doctor when in the big games.

Aikman could be surgical.
It really IS a team game though. And he became pretty average when he wasn't surrounded by stars.

Once the roster was back to somewhat normal and the run game was not completely dominant, his big game and playoff performances were NOT good.

In fact the last 3 seasons he went to the playoffs he played poorly in every single game.
In those 4 games he had
2 TDs and
8 interceptions.
QB rating averaged about 50...or miserable.

Those were playoff teams, so not fully crap teams. Just not all-world teams like in the early 90s.

The point is not to bash Aikman--I am a fan--but to remind people of the obvious...that it flat out takes an all-around team to succeed .

 

[Aviano90]

You completely missed the point. Name me another player in the ENTIRE HISTORY of this team that elevated EVERYONE around him more than Romo. Crayton and Robinson alone cashed some seriously large checks directly due to Romo. They moved on to be exactly the scrubs that they would have been without him. Even Terrell Owens (in his entire HOF career) had only one season (in SF with HOF QB Steve Young) in his career better than his 2007 season with Romo in terms of TD production.

But carry on, you seem to be on a roll.

I didn't miss your point. Just because I don't agree entirely with your point, doens't mean I didn't get it. That may be a foreign concept on message boards, but so be it.

I don't disagree that Romo elevated other players performance, but many people talk about it as if it's a bad thing for the others. For example, it is often used as a knock against Jason Garrett. For the record, I can't stand Jason Garrett, but Romo making him look better than he is, is not a knock against Garrett. That's what great players do...they make their coaches look better.

Let me give you another example, the offensive line and Murray made Romo look better in 2014. Does the fact that Romo finally got an offensive line and a running game (best in franchise history) and had his best season somehow diminish what he did? I don't think so. I just wonder why people think it is a knock against Garrett that Romo made him look better.