Romo versus Aikman leadership thread

[LarryCanadian]

The comparissons were going to be inevitable, but I think they are quite unfair.

Major points being:

1. They have different personalities, and it is tough to change one's "personality". Troy is serious, Romo is more happy-go-lucky.

2. Aikman was the top pick in the draft, Romo was undrafted free-agent.

3. Aikman started IMMEDIATELY - given the reigns of command on a TOTALLY rebuilding team and franchise (new owner, coach etc), Romo sat and watched and replaced BUS DRIVERS on a team that had won 3 superbowls the previous decade, and had a "don't eat the cheese" coach that wanted him to keep it real (which proved correct approach).

As much as I love Emmitt, and understanding the expectations of a Dallas Cowboy starting quarterback (I wonder how Emmitt felt about old Quincy Carter, hehe), it is a just a tad unfair to expect Romo to have the same leadership path that Aikman had.

Not to mention last year, Owens, PacMan, Tank, were leaders in their own disfunctional way, whereas guys you'd have hoped would help Romo like Ellis and Roy Williams the safety, didn't really have those skills either.

No excuses now though. It is ROMO friendly, and Witten and company are there for Romo, and he is learning (saying right things now). Was a bit of a learning curve, but again, consider his personality and where he came from and how hard it would be for anyone to jump into a job and take over a company when you were the same level as an undrafted free-agent.

Time is now for Romo though, and it will be fun to watch.

LarryCanadian

 

[lurkercowboy]

Another key difference is that Aikman came up with a core group of other young players, like Irvin, Moose, and Emmitt. He didn't have a veteran superstar like TO as a rival for the leadership of the team.

Another thing is that team was bad and had a lot of player turnover during Aikman's first couple of years as the starter.

 

[zrinkill]

Woody said neither Troy or Emmitt were vocal leaders.

So I really do not know why they expect Romo to be.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Each comes from such a unique situation I'm not sure it's fair to compare them.

 

[RoadRunner]

All we can do is see how Tony handles this season, and how ever many seasons are left after that in his career.

 

[THUMPER]

In a way it is the reverse of Meredith and Staubach but I think the biggest difference is that those earlier Cowboys teams had a great HC and staff as well as a bunch of veteran leaders on both sides of the ball.

Meredith was the fun-loving, good-ole-boy and Staubach was all business. Meredith also came in behind a veteran in Eddie LeBaron so he didn't start right off the bat like Aikman did but Staubach was more like Romo in that he came in after sitting a few years.

Those late 60s-early 70s teams had a lot of veteran leadership in guys like Lee Roy Jordan, Bob Lilly, Mel Renfro, Dan Reeves, Chuck Howley, Rayfield Wright, etc. They also had Tom Landry and a front office that worked together and was consistent for the entire time (i.e. no changes at the top).

One other difference for Staubach was that he came in when the Cowboys were one of the best and deepest teams in the league. Aikman and Romo came in under very different circumstances and expectations.

Romo's personality reminds me of Meredith but his playing style is very much like Staubach's, particularly early in Roger's career.

My point is that neither personality or playing style is the "right" one, each player has to be who they are, and that Romo shouldn't change who he is and become more like Aikman was. Tony does have to realize that some of the things he likes to do just don't fit being the QB of the Dallas Cowboys, and I think he has done that this year.

Personally, I believe that Romo will hold every Cowboys passing record by the time he is done and will be included in conversations on which QB was the "best". He still has to win a couple of championships in order to be considered a "great" QB but he is already well on his way to claiming to be the "best" QB we've ever had.

Championships, and even playoff games, are won by teams not by QBs. No matter how many playoff games we won under Staubach, we lost a lot as well and usually he played pretty badly in those losses. Romo has yet to play that badly in a playoff game but the team has not played well enough to pick up the slack when he doesn't have a great game like they did for Roger.

Aikman usually had great games in the playoffs but that is what makes him a "great" QB. When Romo has some of those types of games in the playoffs then he can start to be considered "great" as well but for now he is just one of the "best" we've ever had.