Romo vs Staubach and Aikman

[tyke1doe]

Put Tony on those early 90s teams and I'm sure everyone would be just as happy with the results. And Troy is in in my top 5 favorite players of all times.

You can't be sure because such a hypothetical exists outside the realm of proof.

You can't simply transport players to another era and think they would do the same thing. One, you can't prove it. Two, you don't know how much of being in the era that they're in contributed to them being great.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

So, 2?

That was just off the top of my head. I know there are others, but I don't really care to waste my time researching it. Feel free if you want to. I love Romo, just saying he has at times made things tougher for himself but at the same time has done a great job of bailing the team out alot. Don't make my comment more than it was.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

The Rams game it was a miscommunication with him and Dez. Dez was supposed to run a curl route, but Dez ran up field while Jenkins did the curl for him. The only other one on that list I can point out is the Vikings game in 2013, he threw an INT late in the 4th but we got the ball back and he drove it down the field for a Harris TD.

Didn't he have multiple interceptions in that game?

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

Yea, but how high would that number be if our defense could hold a lead? We've missed at least 3 last-second FGs that would have won games and added to the total as well.

I can buy that....I'd guess it at least cancels the other out.

 

[slick325]

I don't believe Rodgers and Brees are better than Staubach. Staubach led the Cowboys to four Super Bowls.

I wouldn't even say Brees is better than Aikman. Brees benefited from a pass-happy offense that hit on one magical season.

And, sorry, but Tony Romo winning a ring won't elevate him above Aikman and Staubach, not to me. The difference being is that at the height of both of those quarterbacks' careers, they were on the top and leading teams to the Super Bowl.

I have much respect for Romo, but if he should win a Super Bowl right now, the narrative has already been set for him that he needed all the parts to be better for him to accomplish Super Bowl legacy.

That's not what is said of Aikman or Staubach.

I can only respect your opinion on the matter tyke1doe. I merely mean that having more rings than either HOF QB won't keep Romo from possibly being labeled the best of the QB's should he win a ring.

I'm sure there are plenty of football fans and experts that would rate Rodgers, Brees, and Marino as better than Roger and Troy. Marino doesn't even have a ring but to say he isn't better than ones with rings is not a full assessment. I just want there to be a debate and the only way it happens is if the Cowboys win a SB with Romo at the helm.

 

[Angus]

Staubach and Romo are very similar. Aikman is a much different guy. Stats are meaningless because of eras and different styles of teams.

Remember, Staubach was in the Navy, so he was a 27 year-old rookie.

I would rank the Cowboys quarterbacks like this:

1. Roger Staubach
2. Tony Romo
3. Don Meredith
4. Troy Aikman
5. Danny White

Romo would be #1on that list if for most of his career he had had the same supporting cast Staubach had, IMO. He may still convince the skeptics, although it may be too late.

 

[Sarge]

Totally different eras with different rules and I always get a chuckle out of the 4th quarter comeback logic.

 

[Miller]

Romo would be #1on that list if for most of his career he had had the same supporting cast Staubach had, IMO. He may still convince the skeptics, although it may be too late.

Major preface....I'm a Romo fan. BUT I'm seeing this alot and this is simply not true. For one, it isn't like Tony has been talentless. He has had some incredibly talented teams and guess what, he didn't get it done...bobble in Seattle, last games for playoffs, etc. You can't just place someone in a position and say they would do as well. What made Aikman great is that he had one of the highest passing percentages in playoff history and he rarely threw interceptions. It was also a day and age where DBs could maul WRs and he could place the ball on a dime. Tony has had interception and control issue early in his career so you can't just say he'd fit in the 70s or 90s. Staubach was the first QB I saw for the Boys as a kid and he was just great, plain and simple. Romo has wonderful stats in a league where stats have been huge for QBs for a decade now. But that doesn't make him Staubach or Aikman. Different eras, different rules, different defenses and mentalities. Under your and others premises Aikman and Staubach would be EVEN better because the rules are better for offenses now.

 

[tyke1doe]

I can only respect your opinion on the matter tyke1doe. I merely mean that having more rings than either HOF QB won't keep Romo from possibly being labeled the best of the QB's should he win a ring.

I'm sure there are plenty of football fans and experts that would rate Rodgers, Brees, and Marino as better than Roger and Troy. Marino doesn't even have a ring but to say he isn't better than ones with rings is not a full assessment. I just want there to be a debate and the only way it happens is if the Cowboys win a SB with Romo at the helm.

Fair enough.

 

[joseephuss]

Tony Romo has played on teams with good defenses. Both Aikman and Staubach played on teams with great defenses. I like all three QBs. They each face different situations and different tasks were asked of them. I'm sure all three can/could adjust their games to meet the teams around them. It takes a team to win a Superbowl. A QB no matter how good is still only one part of said team.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

It's this time of year again. Tony will always be 3rd. Don't think he'll ever pass Roger or Troy.

 

[Jstopper]

When you have a scheme that's based on running the ball, those other QBs would be better. How many Super Bowls did all of those have compared to Aikman?

Here you go again with this Super Bowl argument. I'm not entertaning a conversation with you if your line of thinking is that linear.

 

[LocimusPrime]

Roger and Troy are Hofers and superbowl champions. Both are extremely effective leaders and will always be 1a and 1b.

Yes and curry isnt anywhere close to MJ. Smh

 

[Jstopper]

Aikman started winning SB's at the time you were born. lol All you have to document the careers of those QBs are highlights. Aikman beat Favre, Kelly and Young multiple times in the playoffs to win his 3 SB's. Aikman beat Favre 3 times in the playoffs including once in a conference title game. Most will rank Favre ahead of Aikman due to his NFL passing records and because he was a more exciting player but he was a mistake prone QB who made almost as many bad plays as great plays. Aikman beat Young in back to back conference title games and he beat Kelly in back to back SB's. As for Moon all he has over Aikman is better career stats. Aikman's playoff record was 7-1 vs Favre, Kelly and Young.

Team sport. The Broncos destroyed the Panthers in this last Superbowl. Peyton Manning drove that bus, and was a shell of the man we formerly knew which is why he retired right after the Bowl. Cam 2015 edition was light years better than Peyton 2015 edition. Peyton's team was better. And my family has every single Cowboys game recorded. I have seen all of Aikmans games, including playoff runs and superbowls.

 

[Jstopper]

Yes . . . go on.

That is getting to be the story of Romo's life: abysmal teams, injuries -- but great personal stats! Hooray for him. But for once (or rather for the third time) could he help win a playoff game?

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

 

[Sarge]

Lot more to being a QB and team leader than stats. .02

 

[Jstopper]

Major preface....I'm a Romo fan. BUT I'm seeing this alot and this is simply not true. For one, it isn't like Tony has been talentless. He has had some incredibly talented teams and guess what, he didn't get it done...bobble in Seattle, last games for playoffs, etc. You can't just place someone in a position and say they would do as well. What made Aikman great is that he had one of the highest passing percentages in playoff history and he rarely threw interceptions. It was also a day and age where DBs could maul WRs and he could place the ball on a dime. Tony has had interception and control issue early in his career so you can't just say he'd fit in the 70s or 90s. Staubach was the first QB I saw for the Boys as a kid and he was just great, plain and simple. Romo has wonderful stats in a league where stats have been huge for QBs for a decade now. But that doesn't make him Staubach or Aikman. Different eras, different rules, different defenses and mentalities. Under your and others premises Aikman and Staubach would be EVEN better because the rules are better for offenses now.

Tony has a better interception percentage than Troy.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Lot more to being a QB and team leader than stats. .02

That's it.

I know the term is over-used, but "Field General" applies to Roger and Troy.

Tony Romo is a heck of QB, but he's simply not quite in their class.

 

[KJJ]

Team sport. The Broncos destroyed the Panthers in this last Superbowl. Peyton Manning drove that bus, and was a shell of the man we formerly knew which is why he retired right after the Bowl. Cam 2015 edition was light years better than Peyton 2015 edition. Peyton's team was better. And my family has every single Cowboys game recorded. I have seen all of Aikmans games, including playoff runs and superbowls.

One season between a washed up Peyton Manning and the only great season Cam has had has no correlation with the discussion we're having...NONE! Watching past games isn't the same as living the moments. Did you also watch every game of Young, Kelly and Favre? Didn't think so! If you're going to judge players you need to watch their games but you were in diapers during the prime years of these QBs. While you were in a crib playing with a rattle on Sundays I was watching these QBs face each other in the postseason and Aikman was outplaying them. You're just one of those who's all about STATS you don't need to watch games all you need is the stat sheet.

Whoever had the better numbers that's your guy! I got news for you Aikman did a lot more than drive the bus. In the 92 NFC title game on the road in SF Aikman's slant to Harper with under 5 minutes to play sealed that win. Aikman was the MVP of SB XXVII tying a career high with 4 TD passes. Aikman outperformed Kelly, Favre and Young in the postseason with a 7-1 record. He out dueled 3 future HOF QBs in title games. You have Warren Moon ranked ahead of Aikman due to Moon's career stats. Moon never even played in a SB and has a playoff record of 3-7. You have no clue how to judge a QB you judge them based on their numbers.

 

[mattjames2010]

Tony Romo vs. Roger Staubach

Staubach took over for Morton in 1971 and served until retiring after the 1979 season.



Romo vs. Staubach: Key stats (rankings)
TD-INT ratioRatingYPAAYPA
Romo6th6th3rd6th
Staubach1st1st2nd1st
Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com



This era wasn't as strong for quarterbacks, but Staubach still crushed guys such as Tarkenton, Dawson and Ken Stabler. He stood out in a big way.



Romo vs. Staubach: The other stuff
Win %Playoff winsSuper BowlsPro BowlsMVP
Romo.5791030
Staubach.71811260
Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com



Staubach was also a Bert Bell MVP award winner, a Super Bowl MVP and is now in the Hall of Fame. At the age of 34, Romo would need a miracle to get within Staubach's range.



Tony Romo vs. Troy Aikman

Aikman started from his rookie season in 1989 until his retirement in 2000.



Romo vs. Aikman: Key stats (rankings)
TD-INT ratioRatingYPAAYPA
Romo6th6th3rd6th
Aikman33rd16th22nd22nd
Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com



This gets a little complicated here. Aikman’s raw rate-based numbers were never phenomenal. But he started as a rookie on a bad team during a significantly different era than the one he finished in. As a result, lesser players from the sample range who started their careers later have misleadingly better numbers. Mark Brunell, Brad Johnson and Elvis Grbac are three such examples.

His interception rate of 3.0 was still only 0.3 points higher than Romo’s, and his completion percentage of 61.5 was lower than only Steve Young, Joe Montana and Johnson.

Ultimately, these numbers are skewed by how long Aikman lasted as well as how many problems he and the Cowboys had early on.

For a more fair comparison to Romo, let’s remove his first two and last two seasons. That would place him exactly where Romo is right now, career-wise.



Romo (2006-2013) vs. Aikman (1991-1998)
TD-INT ratioRatingYPAAYPA
Romo6th6th3rd6th
Aikman9th3rd6th5th
Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com



That's a little more reasonable.



Romo vs. Aikman: The other stuff
Win %Playoff winsSuper BowlsPro BowlsMVP
Romo.5791030
Aikman.5701136
Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com



Aikman was 0-11 as a rookie. If we again remove those outside years, his winning percentage was .667. He's also in the Hall of Fame and has a Super Bowl MVP. And if there was any doubt, he had Romo easily, here are his combined numbers from the 1992 and 1993 playoffs:



Troy Aikman: 1992 and 1993 playoff stats
RecordComp.%TD-INTYPARating
6 games6-071.413-38.7115.7
Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com



Aikman wins, hands down.



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...nk-among-all-time-dallas-cowboys-quarterbacks

What absolute utter apologists. So, "He was starting on a bad team!" - Aikman didn't just suck in his rookie year! He was trash the first 3 years of his career, was good for 4 after that, and went to garbage again.

Stop rewriting history.

Aikman's first 3 years in the league

55.7
66.6
86.7 - 11 TDs, 10 INTs (Awful)

4 years of solid play

He then had one season where he had a rating over 85 and was banged up the final three years of his career.