But the Cowboys did NOT have a better QB. That's what you're missing. The Cowboys brought in other QBs during that 80s era, but they did not turn out to be better than Danny White.
I agree that the Cowboys didn't. I don't think that makes White great and I don't think it means we wouldn't have done better than we did with a better QB.
That's the thing for me. I think there's a difference in acknowledging that we got to three NFC championships WITH White as QB and saying we got to three championships BECAUSE White was quarterback.
The first statement says that he was part of the success no matter how much of a role he played or didn't play in it. The second gives him credit that I don't think he deserves. The defense saved our hide when those playoff victories could have unraveled because of White's problems with turnovers. Holding opponents to 0, 13 and 17 points allows your quarterback some cushion to not be flawless.
That doesn't mean the defense was flawless, either. After holding the Rams to 13 points in a blowout in the wild card in 1980, the defense gave up 27 to Atlanta and if it were not for White and the offense, Dallas would not have advance. But again, if the defense had been terrible in the first game, then Dallas would possibly have been one and done because those turnovers by White would have meant something. The playoffs crashed in the championship, though, when White and the offense mustered only seven points.
In 1981, the defense gave up zero points in the divisional game, so any good QB could have likely won that one. Then, there was the San Fran game where the defense wasn't good enough and the offense couldn't keep pace. Considering how many turnovers we got in that game, it shouldn't have been close.