Romo vs Staubach and Aikman

[erod]

Romo has turned himself into a franchise QB, and while he was the joke of the NFL for his crunch time blunders for a few years, he has earned everyone's respect now.

However, I'm almost 60 years old. I watched Meredyth, Morton, Staubach, White, and Aikman.

• Romo doesn't have the natural talent or arm to match anyone on that list
• Romo doesn't have the accuracy of White or Aikman
• Romo, nor any other player on that list, can match the toughness of Meredyth
• Meredyth, Morton, and White all won with less that SB talent, and none had the meltdowns that Romo was guilty of in his early years
• As the team has grown stronger on the offensive side of the ball, Romo has improved....that would be true of any QB, including those on this list
• Aikman was a surgeon with Irvin and Novachek. Without them or even decent successors and a weak OL, he was crap; he got killed trying to hold the ball till the last second for guys to get open.
• Dez Bryant is entering his 7th season; Witten is entering his 14th season--Tony Romo is entering his 14 season in the NFL; he has led the team to 6 playoff games and a 2-4 record, while playing with two of the best weapons the NFL has had to offer over the past 6 seasons.

I love Tony Romo, but he is not the QB Staubach or Aikman was. It's laughable to even suggest it.
Why don't you guys who want to argue that Romo is better than those guys try asking anyone in the sports media or the NFL to rank the best Dallas Cowboys QBs of all time and see what you get. Those guys do answer emails.

The bold are ridiculous. Romo is widely considered one of the most accurate QBs in the game today.

You never saw Danny White melt down? Oh my gawd. Or Morton? Craig Morton was pedestrian at best. Meredith was a fantastic player just like Romo in a different way.

Troy Aikman was needed desperately from 1995 on. He was woefully average, and how they won that 95 Super Bowl with his dreadful performance that day (thanks Neil O'Donnell) is a mystery for the ages.

The Cowboys still had a good roster from 1996-99, FAR BETTER THAN WHAT ROMO HAS HAD, but Aikman wasn't up to the task.

 

[erod]

You are on crack. Ben and Brees are both better than Romo. Give me a break.

Brees isn't today. Ben never was. The Steelers have had tremendous teams around him, and he's certainly a good QB.

 

[Doomsday101]

always hated these comparisons because all is not equal. Roger became a starter on a team who had been in championship games and a SB before he took over. Troy things were rough at the start but with some very good drafts and a deal with Minn for Walker the talent added to that team was great. We can look at the individual players but without looking at the overall picture I don't think you get a true reading of team accomplishment. As an individual player Romo has been great but it will take more than Romo to win a championship just as it was for Roger and Troy

 

[erod]

Wade went from something like 25 sacks to 42 sacks in his first year with the Cowboys defense. Wade is one of the best DC's in football. He took average talent and made it a solid D. It did, however, taper off some. Some of that , however, had to do with the offense becoming one dimensional and pass happy as Garrett got his hands on it. Oline crumbled as well. When you can control the ball with a run game and score points consistently it puts a lot of pressure on the other offense. This certainly helps the D.

Garrett didn't get pass happy. The Cowboys simply couldn't run. One good year from Barber, and then the push from the o-line vanished. 3rd-and-1 became impossible to convert.

 

[Chuck 54]

The bold are ridiculous. Romo is widely considered one of the most accurate QBs in the game today.

You never saw Danny White melt down? Oh my gawd. Or Morton? Craig Morton was pedestrian at best. Meredith was a fantastic player just like Romo in a different way.

Troy Aikman was needed desperately from 1995 on. He was woefully average, and how they won that 95 Super Bowl with his dreadful performance that day (thanks Neil O'Donnell) is a mystery for the ages.

The Cowboys still had a good roster from 1996-99, FAR BETTER THAN WHAT ROMO HAS HAD, but Aikman wasn't up to the task.

Ridiculous ranting from a Romo lover and apologist, clearly.
Romo is known for passes that sail high, especially in the first half of games. Defenses used to publicly talk about playing soft because they knew he'd eventually choke and give them the ball. We see a wonderful, gutty player today, but Romo was an up and down joke in the NFL during his prime seasons because he couldn't win at crunch time in big games. How soon people forget---luckily, he's corrected that propensity.

 

[erod]

Ridiculous ranting from a Romo lover and apologist, clearly.
Romo is known for passes that sail high, especially in the first half of games. Defenses used to publicly talk about playing soft because they knew he'd eventually choke and give them the ball. We see a wonderful, gutty player today, but Romo was an up and down joke in the NFL during his prime seasons because he couldn't win at crunch time in big games. How soon people forget---luckily, he's corrected that propensity.

Yeah, how soon you forget.

Aikman spent many 4th quarters up 24-10 and handing it to Emmitt.

Romo spends his 4th quarters down 34-31 with everything on his shoulders.

 

[Miller]

Tony Romo is the highest rated 4th-quarter quarterback in NFL history. He has more than thrived in those situations. Staubach and Aikman were fortunate enough to have teams that didn't put them in those situations very often.

He has thrived in 4th quarter games in the regular season where they were behind and he got to throw 30 times in the 2nd half. He hasn't thrived in one and done games where the season is on the line. Plain and simple. The other guys lived for it and upped their games. Again, its not demeaning Romo and his ability but it is demeaning the watered down league that is pass happy. I also would bet that many of those comeback games...and I can name 4 off the top of my head from the last 5 years...were due to Romo throwing 2-3 picks to start the game and then furiously throwing a ton to comeback late in the game. He is a great QB for this time and day....a stat filled league for QBs. He's done nothing so far in big games to prove he had what Aikman and Staubach had in big games in much tougher eras.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think fans forget what it looked like for Aikman with Clay Shiver at Center. Again, people think you don't appreciate or respect Troy when pointing out the "not so good" times.

Jerry used Jimmy to restore the Dallas Cowboys to relevance. And Jerry broke Romo's back to push it to the top in terms of value.

I guess you can argue Jerry compensated everyone for their contributions. But this has LONG stopped being about excellence on the field.

I love what Troy did for the Dallas Cowboys. But I truly believe he would have fared worse than Romo when you consider the front office, coaches and players Romo has had to deal with. And this is not to say Romo is perfect. But Troy craved structure, accountability and discipline. And that is how it SHOULD be. But that is not what this has been for a long time. And you do not even have to read between the lines when you read what Troy thinks about the culture in Dallas. Which is WHY I think Troy has so much respect for Romo.

I agree with all of this. Tony is not a bad QB or even a good QB. He is a great QB IMO. I don't believe he is better then either Roger or Troy but that doesn't mean he is not great. Troy needed structure and that's why, IMO, Switzer didn't work. Switzer was not all about that, even at OU, he wasn't that kind of HC. Having said all this, the Cowboys were not spit and polish all the time in the 90s. Off the field, they had more then there share of problems. Still in all, I do agree with this assessment. However, I think that kinda goes both ways. Not in the structure, which IMO, was a bi-product of how the offense was built in the 90s. I don't believe, as I have said earlier, that Tony could have played in the Offense we had then. He just doesn't have the physical tools to run that Offense IMO. He has other skills that make him successful but those do not suit that Offense. Doesn't mean he couldn't have been successful, just not in that Offense. I do believe that when Troy came out of UCLA, he had the kind of talent to work in any offensive scheme. He really was a generational talent. It's a shame that we didn't see that. I'm not complaining because the timing offense won us three championships but it also limited Troy IMO. He didn't use a lot of the skills he possessed when he was young. It is what it is.

As a Cowboy fan, I am blessed to have been able to enjoy several great QBs. Some teams are not so lucky.

 

[Miller]

Yeah, how soon you forget.

Aikman spent many 4th quarters up 24-10 and handing it to Emmitt.

Romo spends his 4th quarters down 34-31 with everything on his shoulders.

And alot of those deficits are because mistakes he made to put them there. The guy has matured and upped his game big time but you forget the seasons of manic Tony and the disasterous 1st halfs followed by comebacks. Romo is a great QB. But you can't plug him into the 90s...in fact I think he would be a lot worse...and he isn't Aikman or Staubach.

 

[erod]

And alot of those deficits are because mistakes he made to put them there. The guy has matured and upped his game big time but you forget the seasons of manic Tony and the disasterous 1st halfs followed by comebacks.

How did Aikman do when he didn't have the best team in football behind him? Dreadful.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yeah, how soon you forget.

Aikman spent many 4th quarters up 24-10 and handing it to Emmitt.

Romo spends his 4th quarters down 34-31 with everything on his shoulders.

That may be true but, a lot of that rests with Tony. He has the ability to change any play. Tony, IMO, has elected to go to the pass much more often then the run over his career. Balance is what made the 90s Offense so successful and some might even say that it was weighted much more heavily to the run. That was at Troy's expense from a statistical stand point. That's really not been Tony or this Offense for the better part of Tony's career. I suspect that if Tony had demanded more balance in the Offense, he would have gotten it. That's not how he wanted it IMO. There is a good argument to be made there.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

How did Aikman do when he didn't have the best team in football behind him? Dreadful.

You can say that about any QB.

 

[mahoneybill]

When the team around Troy deteriorated I believe all of those guys would have been able to better keep us afloat than Aikman. He really was the benefit of being in the perfect situation. HOF RB, best o-line of that time, top defense, HOF WR, excellent head coach, and no Free agency. Those teams were able to win games with Troy out hurt. hell they won playoff game with Troy out. Meanwhile we are out here struggling to go 1-11 without our head honcho. Romo would have done everything Troy did for those 90 teams and probably more.

Also forgotten by many is Jimmy J drafted Steve Walsh, and favored him over Troy

Credit to poster Bhendri5 for the following commentary in a prior thread

If you pick up the book Boys will be Boys, you will read all the history about Walsh, Aikman, and how Jimmy was down on Aikman and he wanted Walsh, and also how Jimmy finally picked Emmitt, after the other guys he wanted were drafted by teams that picked before us, and how he thought Emmitt was too slow.

That book is really good, and I wish all Cowboys fans would read it, so one they can stop making up their own theories of what really happen, two, so they can find out how Jimmy could have derailed the 90s team before they even got started.

Jimmy was a good coach/motivator really is what he was, and a good designator, and talent evaluator.

What makes most great coaches, is the staff that is around them, as we have seen first hand, without that staff the dynasty is no longer, Jimmy without his staff in miami, did nothing, when he claimed that in 5yrs he would have miami in the superbowl.

 

[erod]

That may be true but, a lot of that rests with Tony. He has the ability to change any play. Tony, IMO, has elected to go to the pass much more often then the run over his career. Balance is what made the 90s Offense so successful and some might even say that it was weighted much more heavily to the run. That was at Troy's expense from a statistical stand point. That's really not been Tony or this Offense for the better part of Tony's career. I suspect that if Tony had demanded more balance in the Offense, he would have gotten it. That's not how he wanted it IMO. There is a good argument to be made there.

Now we're getting somewhere. I thought Tony should have stayed in, or checked to, runs more often early in games. He doesn't need to read everything all the time. He tried to be too perfect at times. There's nothing wrong with 2 yards in the second quarter.

I think he learned this in 2014. I think Garrett has been trying to put together this run game for a while now and insisted that Tony be patient with it.

Now, the offense is finely tuned much like what Aikman and Staubach enjoyed. We'll see if Romo can stay healthy and drive this Ferrari.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I'm done having this elementary level discussion with you. Good day Gimme.

Not so quick bloke! Does mean I get my fondue set back? And what about that Cowboys can opener with Bill Bates' rallying cry "Kick Butt"?
As far as an elementary level discussion, you are the one who placed a QB (two career playoff wins as a QB) ahead of Aikman (3 Super Bowl rings) and Staubach (2 Super Bowl victories and Super Bowl MVP).

Shame, shame, everybody knows your name.

 

[jnday]

What evidence do you have to support this?

You have no proof whatsoever that Tony is a better QB and Troy knows its the "damn truth".

And to assume Tony woulda automatically won multiple rings with those teams is also asinine. There takes more to being a great QB than Gaudy stats. Do you honestly think he would've been able to take control of a lockeroom back then that consisted of players like, Charles Haley, Michael Irvin, Ken Norton Jr., etc. Do you think Jimmy wouldve let him continue his gunslinger mentality, and free reign to change plays at the line consistently?

Troy was beating All-Time great teams in the playoffs to get his rings. Tony had the 2nd best team in the league twice and hasnt even reached a NFC Championship game.

Well said.

 

[bayeslife]

"Joe Flacco of the 90's?"


Really?

Yep. Unspectacular stats but good enough to win Superbowls with a great team around him.

If Romo wins a Superbowl we can peg him as having done more with less than Aikman did with his career.

 

[KJJ]

I don't think he does. Who did he coach up or bring in to help the situation? What did he change that made the difference in those 12-4 seasons? What exactly did he do?

Switzer kept the team focused and motivated after the breakup of Jimmy and Jerry rocked the team. The organization was shell shocked after Jimmy's departure. The team could have very easily became complacent after back to back SB wins and not supported or bought into Switzer. One of Switzer's strengths was being able to motivate, even Aikman who was at odds with him said he was a great motivator. The smart thing about Switzer was he didn't change anything why make changes to a team coming off back to back SB wins?

He didn't need to make any changes just keep the bus rolling. He knew he was handed a great team and didn't want to do anything that would effect the chemistry. It's obvious you didn't like the guy but he led the team to 3 straight winning seasons including back to back conference title games and a SB win over the hated Steelers which solidified the Cowboys as the undisputed team of the 90s. What has Garrett done to make you think Switzer wasn't a better coach than him???

He was handed a team with a franchise QB, the top pass rusher in the league, a future HOF TE and one of the most talented young receivers in the game and could do no better than 8-8 three straight seasons. He loses his QB and goes from a 12-4 team to a 4-12 team while several other teams lost their QB last season and still made the playoffs including Denver who went on to win the SB. Explain to me what Garrett has done to be considered a better coach than Barry Switzer?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yep. Unspectacular stats but good enough to win Superbowls with a great team around him.

If Romo wins a Superbowl we can peg him as having done more with less than Aikman did with his career.

I don't get this view point. If Tony wins a Super Bowl, we don't know what kind of talent that team might have around him. We don't know how good the compatition will be, we don't know how big a role Tony might have in that Season. I don't think you can say anything like this until it actually happens and I think Tony has to win multiple Super Bowls before you can even begin to have this kind of discussion.

 

[csirl]

Aikman could move in college, and a couple years in the NFL. But back injuries made him immobile most of his pro career.

People forget that before transferring to UCLA, Aikman won a National Championship as an option QB. I dont mean read option like today. I mean wishbone pure running option where the QB is just another ball carrier. He could run if he wanted to. The fact he didn't is down to pure toughness - no QB could take the hits Aikman took. Broken collarbone didn't keep Aikman out for weeks - returned after 2 weeks during which he had surgery. Then discovered at the end of the season that the two sides of the break were rubbing bone on bone all year to the extent it shaved bone off!!!