Funny, I am more in tune with the I don't care how good his stats are they still don't trump a ring category. Although it does matter how the ring was won, if the QB in question just stood on the field all day and had no impact whatsoever then stats are the better indicator of his worth; however if he had to make plays, or better yet not screw up in crucial moments then his contribution counts heavily on the win. The stats on here and the way they are being perceived show me Romonis actually better than Aikman, I mean I've seen more than once on here that the RB was the focal point of Seattle's offense, well someone please tell me what the focus of Aikmans offense was and he still had Irvin. Wilson had receivers that I still don't know who they are, and maybe he did hand off the ball an awful lot, or play in a system that suited his strengths, uhhhhh wasn't that Aikmans mantra also. Wilson made plays when he needed and didn't make mistakes that would cost his team, he didn't audible out of runs because he knows he needed the run, our QB for all his greatness may be his own worst enemy when it comes to understanding how to win. We blame Garrett but how many times are we screaming run that it may be simply Romo audibling to pass, we don't know but we know he does it frequently because he admitted it. It would just be nice to allow another QB to have their wins and rings without comparing Romo to them, it really looks like a Mitch move honestly, if you can't beat them on the field beat them in the books.... Kind of sad that reality is coming down to the best Super Bowl MVP that never was.