Jay Glazer - Favre will retire....*Merged*

[BehindEnemyLinez]

Let me ask this question right now, to all concerned..........There is a minute fifty seconds left in the game, your at your own 25 yard line and down by 4. The crowd is hostile, their blowing your eardrums out. Your left tackle has been put out of the game and one of your starting w.r's has a bad wheel. WHO do you want leading your team on that drive, Favre.........or Aikman???Im taking Favre every time, and twice ON SUNDAY!...LOL

Gimme Troy because I KNOW he won't throw it to the wrong color jerseys!

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

........................Agreed 100%. I just see Favre as MUCH MORE of a playmaker than Troy was.

LMAO You are funny... read the flow of this thread and then read your above response....

 

[Avenging Hayseed]

O.K, I surrender, I give....... But let me ask you all THIS.........How many WOW plays do you remember Aikman making?? Now ask yourself how many WOW plays do you remember Favre making?? THAT, right there, is the difference IMO.

 

[Avenging Hayseed]

Besides,..........I KNOW im RIGHT anyway!.....ROTFLMBO!

 

[Avenging Hayseed]

Oh, wait wait wait,...............And YET, most Cowboy fans, if not ALL, including myself, are in love with Romo's play. Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, whats this about preferring Aikmans style of play over Romo's, er I mean, Favres!!! GOTCHA!:

 

[rcaldw]

Ive got to be the biggest Cowboys fan on the planet..."If you only knew"...LOL Anyway, even after saying that, I would still take Favre over Aikman 10 out of 10 times. With a coach that had a strong hand like Holmgren was, Favre was damn near unstoppable. Never had the talent Troy had around him either. Hey, Troy was a GREAT QB, but imo he was a system guy. He needed the guys around him. When everything was right in the world, no injuries to self or teamates, Aikman was like a machine, he simply didnt make any mistakes. BUT...............When a key position was out injured, Troy was nowhere near as good. Now Brett on the otherhand, he just had that way about him, that IT factor. He could will a team to victory when he had to, in fact he did it MANY many times. THAT was the difference between Favre and Aikman.

And you would lose 10 out of 10 times with the game on the line. Favre had his shots at Aikman in the biggest games, and you can't alway say it was the talent. The 1995 Packers could have easily given that Cowboys team a run for their money. That 95 Cowboys team was up and down all year and even struggled a bit against the Steelers in the Super Bowl. They lost twice to the Commanders that year.

Yet, in the biggest game of the year Aikman played great and Favre played pretty good. Holmgren met Aikman in the locker room afterward to shake his hand.

You are like most, you vastly underestimate what we had in Troy Aikman.

 

[rcaldw]

O.K, I surrender, I give....... But let me ask you all THIS.........How many WOW plays do you remember Aikman making?? Now ask yourself how many WOW plays do you remember Favre making?? THAT, right there, is the difference IMO.

Depends on what you call a wow play. If you mean hitting 15-25 yard routes with the consistent accuracy that most QB's can only do at 5 and 10 yards then you saw a whole career of wow plays. How about on your own end of the field in the NFC Championship game, with a 4 point lead and 4 minutes or so to play, hitting Alvin Harper on a perfectly thrown post route that basically wins the game. (He later threw the game clinching TD to KMart.)

How about a 94 yard TD pass to Alvin Harper in the playoffs against the Packers on a perfectly thrown deep post?

How about 4 TD's in a Super Bowl and MVP honors? Michael Irvin said he has never seen a QB throw the ball the way that Aikman did that day.

What made Aikman GREAT is that he made what was GREAT look EASY.

 

[Little Jr]

And you would lose 10 out of 10 times with the game on the line. Favre had his shots at Aikman in the biggest games, and you can't alway say it was the talent. The 1995 Packers could have easily given that Cowboys team a run for their money. That 95 Cowboys team was up and down all year and even struggled a bit against the Steelers in the Super Bowl. They lost twice to the Commanders that year.

Yet, in the biggest game of the year Aikman played great and Favre played pretty good. Holmgren met Aikman in the locker room afterward to shake his hand.

You are like most, you vastly underestimate what we had in Troy Aikman.

2 words. Emmitt Smith. Farvre never had a running game like Troy. We won games without Troy. We didnt win games without Smith.

I know I'm probally the only Cowboy fan that wasnt Aikman fan and still not. I just never saw what anyone ever saw in him.

 

[rcaldw]

2 words. Emmitt Smith. Farvre never had a running game like Troy. We won games without Troy. We didnt win games without Smith.

I know I'm probally the only Cowboy fan that wasnt Aikman fan and still not. I just never saw what anyone ever saw in him.

And as an Emmitt fan you bought the "can't win without Emmitt" line, hook, line and sinker.

Let me ask you this. And before I do this, let me just say that I would take Emmitt Smith above any RB in the 90's. Barry Sanders was a better pure runner, but Emmitt Smith was the better overall football player. Period. So what I'm going to say isn't a slam on Emmitt.

But.

In 1990 the Cowboys got on a roll and were 1 win away from a playoff spot. Aikman had "gotten it" and was playing really well as was the whole team. They had a game in Philly, then a game in Atlanta.

Very early in the Philly game, I think Cowboys 2nd possession, Aikman went down. They still had Emmitt. What happened? They lost.

Next week in Atlanta, without Aikman (separated shoulder), they still had Emmittt. What happened? They lost.

The whole "can't win a game without Emmitt" came out of 2 games in one season. 1993. The first two games Emmitt held out and the Cowboys lost them both. But just like in 1990 when the Cowboys only had Babe Laufenburg backing up Aikman, in 1993 the Cowboys started a raw rookie named Derrick Lassic in Emmitt's place. Both losses, btw, were very close, and that was with a horrible attitude on the team due to the players feeling that Jerry Jones was putting money ahead of their interest in repeating.

After seeing what happened in 1990 Dallas never made the same mistake at backup QB. Aikman's backups were always capable. Steve Beureline, Bernie Kosar, Wade Wilson, Jason Garrett, Rodney Peete. 4 of those guys were starters at some point during their careers.

The Cowboys backed up Smith with Curvin Richards, Derrick Lassic, and the like. Other than very late in Smith's career with the Cowboys had that Seattle back as a backup (Chris Warren), you can't name one backup at RB that was a bonafide starter for anyone else.

That is one reason why there was a bigger dropoff, production wise, when Smith would go out than Aikman. They had the QB position better manned at backup.

I don't have time or space to list here the games where Emmitt left early, or played sparingly due to injury when the Cowboys did just fine with Aikman at the helm. They won PLAYOFF games with a limited Emmitt Smith. (See the 1994 win against Green Bay when Blair Thomas played most of the game)

When Emmitt came back in 1993, at Phoenix, the Cowboys were already ahead (with Lassic in the game) when Smith made his first appearance.

You over simplify the whole "they won without Troy but not without Emmitt" thing. Just like most Smith fans do.

And I would also challenge you with this. Aikman left in 2000. Everyone was crying for him to leave by that point. The team would be better off right? Emmitt Smith was still there. How did we do?

2001 - 5-11 with Emmitt without Aikman
2002 - 5-11 with Emmitt without Aikman

2003 - The year that Emmitt Smith was released by Bill Parcells and the Dallas Cowboys, JUST ONE YEAR AFTER A 5-11, they finished 10-6.

That is right, their record improved the year after Smith left.

I believe that the Cowboys needed all three of the triplets to do what they did. I also believe that the Dallas Cowboys without Troy Aikman would have never won 3 Super Bowls, and I am not alone, and it isn't just a FAN'S perspective.

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/2004playoffsQB.html

 

[Avenging Hayseed]

Greatest Cowboys QB of all time was Roger. Not Aikman. By a good margin too IMO........

 

[BeWare94]

Not sure if this should be in the NFL Zone or not. Move if that is the case.

Just heard Glazer on Fox radio saying Favre has decided to retire and an announcement will be coming soon.

He never did get that win in Big D!!!

Good riddance and thank GOD that Texas Stadium remains his albatross.

 

[rcaldw]

Greatest Cowboys QB of all time was Roger. Not Aikman. By a good margin too IMO........

You can say that, but it doesn't make it so. And Roger was my favorite player before Aikman was.

Aikman had a better playoff record.
Aikman had more Super Bowl wins.
Aikman had better career stats, and he wasn't a stats guy.

Roger was a winner, Aikman was a winner. They won in different ways. To say one was better than the other by A GOOD MARGIN, just isn't true. You can say it, but it won't make it so.

 

[Bizwah]

Greatest Cowboys QB of all time was Roger. Not Aikman. By a good margin too IMO........

I disagree.

I don't know if Aikman was better....but I'd say no to Roger being ahead by a good margin.

Roger himself admitted Aikman was much better than he...although, that's exactly what I would expect him to say.

 

[BeWare94]

You are like most, you vastly underestimate what we had in Troy Aikman.

Very good point.

It's funny you mention the '95 Championship game. Aikman played great and Favre played pretty good. However, didn't Favre pi$$ that game away late with an interception on an errant throw?

 

[Avenging Hayseed]

I disagree.

I don't know if Aikman was better....but I'd say no to Roger being ahead by a good margin.

Roger himself admitted Aikman was much better than he...although, that's exactly what I would expect him to say.

............I kind of look at Roger as I do Favre. He could do MORE..........with LESS. THAT is what I liked about Roger, and Favre.

 

[Concord]

You are like most, you vastly underestimate what we had in Troy Aikman.

Never fails to amaze me.

 

[Taz]

Oh come on, that was funny. :laugh2:



Well I'm sure after they finally saw a little something out of Aaron Rodgers (against us no less) they will not all commit mass suicide, by cheese.

alot of QBs have came out of GB to be starters that never got a chance behind brett some maybe even better than him.. whoever drafts Qbs tere needs to be hired by anyone looking for a QB.

 

[Little Jr]

And as an Emmitt fan you bought the "can't win without Emmitt" line, hook, line and sinker.

Let me ask you this. And before I do this, let me just say that I would take Emmitt Smith above any RB in the 90's. Barry Sanders was a better pure runner, but Emmitt Smith was the better overall football player. Period. So what I'm going to say isn't a slam on Emmitt.

But.

In 1990 the Cowboys got on a roll and were 1 win away from a playoff spot. Aikman had "gotten it" and was playing really well as was the whole team. They had a game in Philly, then a game in Atlanta.

Very early in the Philly game, I think Cowboys 2nd possession, Aikman went down. They still had Emmitt. What happened? They lost.

Next week in Atlanta, without Aikman (separated shoulder), they still had Emmittt. What happened? They lost.

The whole "can't win a game without Emmitt" came out of 2 games in one season. 1993. The first two games Emmitt held out and the Cowboys lost them both. But just like in 1990 when the Cowboys only had Babe Laufenburg backing up Aikman, in 1993 the Cowboys started a raw rookie named Derrick Lassic in Emmitt's place. Both losses, btw, were very close, and that was with a horrible attitude on the team due to the players feeling that Jerry Jones was putting money ahead of their interest in repeating.

After seeing what happened in 1990 Dallas never made the same mistake at backup QB. Aikman's backups were always capable. Steve Beureline, Bernie Kosar, Wade Wilson, Jason Garrett, Rodney Peete. 4 of those guys were starters at some point during their careers.

The Cowboys backed up Smith with Curvin Richards, Derrick Lassic, and the like. Other than very late in Smith's career with the Cowboys had that Seattle back as a backup (Chris Warren), you can't name one backup at RB that was a bonafide starter for anyone else.

That is one reason why there was a bigger dropoff, production wise, when Smith would go out than Aikman. They had the QB position better manned at backup.

I don't have time or space to list here the games where Emmitt left early, or played sparingly due to injury when the Cowboys did just fine with Aikman at the helm. They won PLAYOFF games with a limited Emmitt Smith. (See the 1994 win against Green Bay when Blair Thomas played most of the game)

When Emmitt came back in 1993, at Phoenix, the Cowboys were already ahead (with Lassic in the game) when Smith made his first appearance.

You over simplify the whole "they won without Troy but not without Emmitt" thing. Just like most Smith fans do.

And I would also challenge you with this. Aikman left in 2000. Everyone was crying for him to leave by that point. The team would be better off right? Emmitt Smith was still there. How did we do?

2001 - 5-11 with Emmitt without Aikman
2002 - 5-11 with Emmitt without Aikman

2003 - The year that Emmitt Smith was released by Bill Parcells and the Dallas Cowboys, JUST ONE YEAR AFTER A 5-11, they finished 10-6.

That is right, their record improved the year after Smith left.

I believe that the Cowboys needed all three of the triplets to do what they did. I also believe that the Dallas Cowboys without Troy Aikman would have never won 3 Super Bowls, and I am not alone, and it isn't just a FAN'S perspective.

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/2004playoffsQB.html

I had forgot about the 2 games in 93 so no, thats not where I got that from. As far as the 90. Go to 91 and see what Beureline did. I never really feared when Aikman went out. ES was a different story.

Dont give me stats from 2001, 02 and 03. LOL!!!!! ES was at the end of his career. That was funny though.

Look. You can beat me over my head on this subject and you will never convience me that he was anything better than a good QB. At best. I realize I'm in the very small minority on this subject.

 

[rcaldw]

I had forgot about the 2 games in 93 so no, thats not where I got that from. As far as the 90. Go to 91 and see what Beureline did. I never really feared when Aikman went out. ES was a different story.

Dont give me stats from 2001, 02 and 03. LOL!!!!! ES was at the end of his career. That was funny though.

Look. You can beat me over my head on this subject and you will never convience me that he was anything better than a good QB. At best. I realize I'm in the very small minority on this subject.

I'm thankful it is a very small minority

 

[rcaldw]

............I kind of look at Roger as I do Favre. He could do MORE..........with LESS. THAT is what I liked about Roger, and Favre.

Roger, more with less?

1971 Super Bowl Season - Doomsday Defense (Bob Lilly and company), Duane Thomas, Calvin Hill, Bob Hayes, Lance Alworth, Mike Ditka. Yea, cupboard was bare.

1977 Super Bowl Season - Doomsday II (Havery Martin, Randy White, Too Tall Jones and company), Tony Dorsett, Drew Pearson, Tony Hill, Billy Joe Dupree, your #3 receiver was Butch Johnson (remember that Super Bowl TD catch), Robert Newhouse.

Roger had plenty of help, and had the best team in the NFC 4 times and came away with 2 Super Bowl wins.

Troy had the best team in the NFC 3 times and came away with 3 Super Bowl wins.