In 17 years, Dan Marino, one of the greatest statistical QB's of all time, "only" had better than a 60% completion percentage 5 times; in 16 years, John Elway had better than a 60% completion percentage 3 times. In 15 years, Dan Fouts had better than a 60% completion percentage 5 times. In 11 years, Roger Staubauch had better than a 60% completion percentage 1 time. In 11 years, Jim Kelly had better than a 60% completion percentage 4 times. In 14 years, Terry Bradshaw never had a season where completed more than 60% of his passes. Do you see a pattern here? And all those guys are Hall of Fame QB's.
About the only exception(s) were QB's who played in a West Coast offense that favored short passes. The fact that Aikman was anywhere near 70% for the was utterly unheard of in that day. He was one of the most accurate QB's to ever play the game. That's not even debatable.
How about them apples?
.
Welp, it looks to me like them apples are still stuck in the 1990s, or before.
I'm just keeping in the present time, which says that no matter how much the 1990s fanboys are stuck in the glory days of the 1990s, statistically, Dak is outperforming Aikman back then.
Tony did the same thing, but the same fans who are talking about how great Aikman is now would call you crazy or mock you for thinking Tony was as good, or better than, Aikman.
You can talk about rings all you want, but Troy didn't get those on his own. There were 53 other players who contributed to those rings...good players.
The truth is, you guys aren't seeing what you think you're seeing with Dak.
The things you say give you away that some of you aren't being objective about Dak.
The same people saying Dak throws all "dink and dunk" passes will go say Aikman was the guy making the kinds of passes Cowboy fans want to see.
But Dak is performing better thank Aikman, per pass.
You, or everyone else parroting the term "dink and dunk" doesn't make you right.
It makes you a parrot, repeating things that aren't true for your ego, for who knows why.
The statistics don't lie..
It makes you look like you think things should be how you think they ought to be, because you were a fan back in the day. And those were the good old days.
Nobody player could be as good as the players from the era you grew up watching.. The world revolves around your false assumptions about the glory days... The players just can't be as good as they were back then,
Wrong, actually.
Dak is better, thus far in his career if we're being truthful. If we're being objective.
Romo averaged 219.1 yards passing per game.
Dak is averaging 223 yards passing per game.
You can't ignore his production.
The lack of production in the redzone isn't his fault....
You also can't ignore that he produces on the level of Romo in terms of yards.
And he throws less interceptions.
It's crazy fans don't see, or don't want to see, what's sitting right in front of them.
Dak is legit.
Being stuck in the nostalgia of the 1990s was not only detrimental to our team evolving as fast as it should have after the Aikman era, it's detrimental to fans' ability to recognize a good player..
Some of you guys don't want to recognize new players because they don't live up to the images fans have in their heads about what the talents of new players should look like, because new players don't do exactly what old ones did.
There's a reason we've been losers for so long, with no championship, our growth was ******** by Jerry doing the same things fans today still haven't snapped out of, living in glory days of the past rather than evolving and moving forward.