Video: Troy Aikman admits rival was greatest quarterback of all time

[silver]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nbc-y...st-quarterback-of-all-time-152244100-nfl.html

Troy on the Dan Patrick Show

Hall of Fame quarterback Troy Aikman joined The Dan Patrick Show to discuss a handful of football-related topics, one of which was the difference between the current offensive era and the one in which Aikman played. Both he and Patrick agree that the dramatic uptick in passing numbers in recent years has made it nearly impossible to compare current quarterbacks to past greats, at least statistically. Aikman, whose career numbers would look pedestrian next to those of Matthew Stafford or Jay Cutler, relies on more of an eyeball test to evaluate the greatness of a signal-caller.

When asked, in his estimation, who is the greatest quarterback of all time, the three-time Super Bowl winner says it has always been an easy answer for him. (Hear Aikman's pick at the 4:45 mark in the video above.)

"Joe Montana," said Aikman. "And I don't care if we're comparing him against anyone from today's game or not, or what his numbers may or may not look like. I saw him do it on the biggest stage, in the biggest moments and bring his team back and do the things that I think are required of the position."

 

[DenCWBY]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nbc-y...st-quarterback-of-all-time-152244100-nfl.html

Troy on the Dan Patrick Show

I happen to agree with him. As much as I hate to admit it, Montana was most clutch in the most pressured situations IMO. Even in college, he had it and never really lost it until the very end of his NFL career when he physically could not go any further. He didn't look like much physically but he could put the ball on the $$ every time you needed it especially in crucial situations.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

As much as I hated the 49ers....I always liked and respected Joe Montana. He always seemed like a great player and always seemed like a pretty good guy as well.

Although IIRC he bombed when they tried him out as a commentator on one of the NFL shows.

 

[jazzcat22]

Great listen, thanks for posting the link.

 

[Nav22]

Aaron Rodgers, and that's not recency bias. Nobody's ever done it better.

QBs are simply better now than they were in previous eras. Just like kickers, punters, receivers and tight ends.

 

[Dhragon]

Aaron Rodgers, and that's not recency bias. Nobody's ever done it better.

QBs are simply better now than they were in previous eras. Just like kickers, punters, receivers and tight ends.

Aaron Rodgers, when he is done, will most likely be in the conversation of greatest of all time. But as of now, I'd still go with Montana.

Receivers are only better because of rule changes. Tight ends I dispute are better. Better as receivers sure - but most T/Es nowadays can't block nearly as well as the old school ones. That is part of being a great T/E as well IMO. Today's "great" T/Es are just big receivers.

 

[jazzcat22]

Aaron Rodgers, and that's not recency bias. Nobody's ever done it better.

QBs are simply better now than they were in previous eras. Just like kickers, punters, receivers and tight ends.

They have better stats, and seem better, because the receivers can't be touched and some of those QB's wear dresses, and can't be touched.
all subjective though.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nbc-y...st-quarterback-of-all-time-152244100-nfl.html

Troy on the Dan Patrick Show

The title is very confusing to me...how was Montana a rival for Aikman?

Did they ever even play head to head?

Montana was the back up in 92 when Dallas began its run of dominating the 49ers. I'm not really sure how Montana could be a rival.

 

[silver]

The title is very confusing to me...how was Montana a rival for Aikman?

Did they ever even play head to head?

Montana was the back up in 92 when Dallas began its run of dominating the 49ers. I'm not really sure how Montana could be a rival.

Me neither. I just copied and pasted the article. Aikman faced Montana me thinks in 1990.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

The title is very confusing to me...how was Montana a rival for Aikman?

Did they ever even play head to head?

Montana was the back up in 92 when Dallas began its run of dominating the 49ers. I'm not really sure how Montana could be a rival.

I think it's just a bad title, I'm sure Troy wouldnt say that. Clearly Troy's main rivals were Young and Favre.

 

[Red Dragon]

I thought Steve Young was his rival.

 

[Red Dragon]

Montana was a great player, but I hate his arrogance.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Aaron Rodgers, and that's not recency bias. Nobody's ever done it better.

QBs are simply better now than they were in previous eras. Just like kickers, punters, receivers and tight ends.

Rodgers is great but not the same game Montana and the old guys played in. More rules to make the QB job easer than the old days.

 

[Longboysfan]

Thanks - good listen.

 

[Aikmaniac]

I'm also of the opinion that Montana is the best ever. When I was younger, I watched football even more than I do now. I just remember Montana making quarterbacking in the NFL look easy. He never seemed to be flustered. I actually remember feeling somewhat sorry to see his last couple years in KC.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I think it's just a bad title, I'm sure Troy wouldnt say that. Clearly Troy's main rivals were Young and Favre.

That's what I was thinking.

 

[Nav22]

They have better stats, and seem better, because the receivers can't be touched and some of those QB's wear dresses, and can't be touched.
all subjective though.

I respectfully disagree. I've watched Montana play and he's not on the same level as Rodgers, in my opinion. Rodgers is scary good and his numbers back that up. I get that the rules are different now, but I think that excuse is mostly a cop-out to protect the legends of yesteryear.

QBs are FAR, FAR more efficient than they used to be. You honestly think that's JUST because of an emphasis on illegal contact and not letting the QB get clobbered 2 seconds after a pass anymore? Pssshhh.

Rodgers is great but not the same game Montana and the old guys played in. More rules to make the QB job easer than the old days.

It's not the same game, but players are also better now than they used to be. It's not like they're playing 12 vs 11 now. All they did was re-emphasize illegal contact and protect QBs from getting blasted unnecessarily. Oh, QBs today also deal with more exotic defenses and creative blitz packages than they did back in the day.

Kickers and punters are WAY better nowadays and that's not even debatable. Not sure why it's so sacrilegious to suggest that QBs have gotten better too. They're bigger, stronger, more athletic and FAR more efficient than they used to be.

 

[Nav22]

Aaron Rodgers, when he is done, will most likely be in the conversation of greatest of all time. But as of now, I'd still go with Montana.

Receivers are only better because of rule changes. Tight ends I dispute are better. Better as receivers sure - but most T/Es nowadays can't block nearly as well as the old school ones. That is part of being a great T/E as well IMO. Today's "great" T/Es are just big receivers.

WRs are bigger, stronger and faster than they used to be. That's not even debatable.

They also make INSANE catches today that guys simply weren't capable of making 20+ years ago. I don't see how an unbiased observer could think these guys aren't better than their predecessors.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

I respectfully disagree. I've watched Montana play and he's not on the same level as Rodgers, in my opinion. Rodgers is scary good and his numbers back that up. I get that the rules are different now, but I think that excuse is mostly a cop-out to protect the legends of yesteryear.

QBs are FAR, FAR more efficient than they used to be. You honestly think that's JUST because of an emphasis on illegal contact and not letting the QB get clobbered 2 seconds after a pass anymore? Pssshhh.

It's not the same game, but players are also better now than they used to be. It's not like they're playing 12 vs 11 now. All they did was re-emphasize illegal contact and protect QBs from getting blasted unnecessarily. Oh, QBs today also deal with more exotic defenses and creative blitz packages than they did back in the day.

Kickers and punters are WAY better nowadays and that's not even debatable. Not sure why it's so sacrilegious to suggest that QBs have gotten better too. They're bigger, stronger, more athletic and FAR more efficient than they used to be.

I didn't say any of that. But QBs took a ton more hits in those days. It wasn't a penalty to hit them back then. That took a toll on those guys.
That's all I'm saying.

 

[ringmaster]

I respectfully disagree. I've watched Montana play and he's not on the same level as Rodgers, in my opinion. Rodgers is scary good and his numbers back that up. I get that the rules are different now, but I think that excuse is mostly a cop-out to protect the legends of yesteryear.

QBs are FAR, FAR more efficient than they used to be. You honestly think that's JUST because of an emphasis on illegal contact and not letting the QB get clobbered 2 seconds after a pass anymore? Pssshhh.

It's not the same game, but players are also better now than they used to be. It's not like they're playing 12 vs 11 now. All they did was re-emphasize illegal contact and protect QBs from getting blasted unnecessarily. Oh, QBs today also deal with more exotic defenses and creative blitz packages than they did back in the day.

Kickers and punters are WAY better nowadays and that's not even debatable. Not sure why it's so sacrilegious to suggest that QBs have gotten better too. They're bigger, stronger, more athletic and FAR more efficient than they used to be.

Rodgers is a fantastic QB and I think his game is of the old school style which means he could play in that era as Montana did but as for me Montana was the best I've ever seen and if Montana was playing in such an era now his numbers would rival that of Aaron Rodgers and if not better in imo athletically Rodgers is a superior QB than Montana was but their passing skills were/are virtually the same.