Two questions regarding Romo and Aikman

[DFWJC]

Since so many here are bored and we've been overwhelmed with QB talk lately, it got me to wondering how each of you would answer two questions.

(If someone wants to set this up as a poll, feel free to do so)

Question#1:
If Romo were to replace Aikman on those 90s Super Bowl teams and was playing at his current level (last year and before injury), would he then also have three rings?

Question #2:
If Aikman was playing at his peak right now for same exact Cowboys teams that Romo has played for during his 4 years of starting, would he have any rings?

---
I think there is a real strong chance that the answers are yes (or at least 2 rings for Tony) and no (no rings at all for Troy so far, but more playoff wins.) And I was a huge Aikman fan.

 

[casmith07]

Answer #1: Yes.

Answer #2: No.

 

[DFWJC]

This assumes same players and coaches, of course....just swap places.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

No and no.

But leaning to a maybe on the second one.

 

[Doomsday101]

I'm a firm believer that teams win championships not QB's. I take nothing away from Troy Aikman he was an outstanding QB and has earned everything he has accomplished. As for Romo I would like to think that if we had the league leading rusher and the line as well as the depth behind that line that yes he very well could have a ring.

 

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Answer #1: Yes.

Answer #2: No.

This. I Tony was on those great 90's Cowboy teams there would he would have a totally different perception.

 

[SDCowboy]

Since so many here are bored and we've been overwhelmed with QB talk lately, it got me to wondering how each of you would answer two questions.

(If someone wants to set this up as a poll, feel free to do so)

Question#1:
If Romo were to replace Aikman on those 90s Super Bowl teams and was playing at his current level (last year and before injury), would he then also have three rings?

Question #2:
If Aikman was playing at his peak right now for same exact Cowboys teams that Romo has played for during his 4 years of starting, would he have any rings?

---
I think there is a real strong chance that the answers are yes (or at least 2 rings for Tony) and no (no rings at all for Troy so far, but more playoff wins.) And I was a huge Aikman fan.

#1. Yes he would. Just compare the numbers, percentages and ratios. As an actually player, not a leader but an individual player, I'm sorry, but Romo is better than Aikman was. Stats don't say everything but they do say a lot. Aikman was an amazing leader and very clutch though.

#2. Doubtful. His almost 1:1 TD-INT ratio wouldn't help his cause on a team with a D that doesn't create many turnovers. Aikman was very clutch but I just don't see a way he wouldn't get killed on this current team. He wasn't very mobile and would likely be concussed every other game.

 

[aikemirv]

Since so many here are bored and we've been overwhelmed with QB talk lately, it got me to wondering how each of you would answer two questions.

(If someone wants to set this up as a poll, feel free to do so)

Question#1:
If Romo were to replace Aikman on those 90s Super Bowl teams and was playing at his current level (last year and before injury), would he then also have three rings?

Question #2:
If Aikman was playing at his peak right now for same exact Cowboys teams that Romo has played for during his 4 years of starting, would he have any rings?

---
I think there is a real strong chance that the answers are yes (or at least 2 rings for Tony) and no (no rings at all for Troy so far, but more playoff wins.) And I was a huge Aikman fan.

1. I would never underestimate what Troy did in those years of 92-95 with his playoff record and his turnover ratio especially in those first 2 Superbowls (he was fantastic) so I could never give a definite yes or no although I believe Tony could have won a couple.

2. Troy Aikman would have never lasted with the oline performances put up against the NY Giants and the Minnesota Vikings. We would have won the Seattle playoff game IMO but that team was not going anywhere after that.

 

[DFWJC]

I'm a firm believer that teams win championships not QB's. I take nothing away from Troy Aikman he was an outstanding QB and has earned everything he has accomplished. As for Romo I would like to think that if we had the league leading rusher and the line as well as the depth behind that line that yes he very well could have a ring.

Not to mention that great coaching staff and that very dominant, playmaking defense.

 

[rcaldw]

Aikman was better than Romo. Stats don't tell a thing, two different eras of football. Look at Aikman's size, arm strength, accuracy, and playing his best football in the biggest games, and you have the answer to your real question.

Is Romo as good as Aikman was? No.

 

[zrinkill]

Aikman was better than Romo. Stats don't tell a thing, two different eras of football. Look at Aikman's size, arm strength, accuracy, and playing his best football in the biggest games, and you have the answer to your real question.

Is Romo as good as Aikman was? No.

I agree with this ...... but it does not answer either of those questions.

 

[rcaldw]

I'm a firm believer that teams win championships not QB's. I take nothing away from Troy Aikman he was an outstanding QB and has earned everything he has accomplished. As for Romo I would like to think that if we had the league leading rusher and the line as well as the depth behind that line that yes he very well could have a ring.

Teams win championships and there is no bigger player on a team than the QB. Therefore QB's win championships too.

There is a reason #8 has 3 rings, and it wasn't just his surrounding cast, it was him too.

The 1995 Cowboys team is perhaps the best example of that. They were no longer a DOMINANT team, but they got the job done.

 

[DFWJC]

Aikman was better than Romo. Stats don't tell a thing, two different eras of football. Look at Aikman's size, arm strength, accuracy, and playing his best football in the biggest games, and you have the answer to your real question.

Is Romo as good as Aikman was? No.

So were you maybe considering answering the actual questions?

I don't think ayone is saying that Romo is better than Aikman. At least for sure the OP did not.

 

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Aikman was better than Romo. Stats don't tell a thing, two different eras of football. Look at Aikman's size, arm strength, accuracy, and playing his best football in the biggest games, and you have the answer to your real question.

Is Romo as good as Aikman was? No.

Stats don't tell the whole story but to say they don't mean a thing is ridiculous.

 

[rcaldw]

I'm a firm believer that teams win championships not QB's. I take nothing away from Troy Aikman he was an outstanding QB and has earned everything he has accomplished. As for Romo I would like to think that if we had the league leading rusher and the line as well as the depth behind that line that yes he very well could have a ring.

Teams win championships and there is no bigger player on a team than the QB. Therefore QB's win championships too.

There is a reason #8 has 3 rings, and it wasn't just his surrounding cast, it was him too.

The 1995 Cowboys team is perhaps the best example of that. They were no longer a DOMINANT team, but they got the job done.

 

[Stautner]

A hard to say on the first one. I don't think Romo would have been as effective with the 1990's team as Aikman, because what makes Romo successful (big passing game) is not what the 1990's team was built on, and not what made Troy such a vital element of those teams. Troy's passing stats were very moderate, and his role was largely to run the offense like a well oiled machine. His value was largely in making sure that happened and holding everyone accountable to the same standard - his standard was what everyon had to live by.

That said, the team was talented enough to win with Romo, but it's just not possible to measure the value of Aikman's inatangibles.


The answer to the second question is no, they likely wouldn't have won a Super Bowl with Aikman on today's team. Maybe some of Aikman's qualities would have help this team get and stay on track, maybe not, but that can't be assumed. O-line problems likely would have been their anyway, and tha would have been hard for anyone to overcome.

 

[rcaldw]

Stats don't tell the whole story but to say they don't mean a thing is ridiculous.

Take the statement in the context of the discussion. Football has changed, and it is geared more than ever to the offensive side of the ball. Aikman took horrendous shots that would have been penalties today, and he took them regularly.

Irvin was mugged in ways that would be penalties today. Right now you can't breath on a receiver at times.

Just look at QB ratings, and have they have gone up in recent times.

And in addition to all this, the bottom line in football, at the QB position, is WINNING, and stats don't always tell that story. A crucial interception can ruin a game, where 2 interceptions in less crucial spots can be overcome. It is about managing games and making big plays when they are a must.

 

[DallasEast]

Question#1:
If Romo were to replace Aikman on those 90s Super Bowl teams and was playing at his current level (last year and before injury), would he then also have three rings?

Yes. Aikman's offensive line would have given Romo the same level of protection consistently. Some of the things Romo has done to succeed in the passing game despite offensive line breakdowns would have been unnecessary.

Question #2:
If Aikman was playing at his peak right now for same exact Cowboys teams that Romo has played for during his 4 years of starting, would he have any rings?

No. As tough as Aikman was, he may not have survived 2008, 2009 or last season. 2006? Maybe. 2007 is the question mark. Then again, he would have had the luxury of sharing the roster with Patrick Crayton and Jacques Reeves during that particular postseason, so I'm not so certain.

 

[aikemirv]

Aikman was better than Romo. Stats don't tell a thing, two different eras of football. Look at Aikman's size, arm strength, accuracy, and playing his best football in the biggest games, and you have the answer to your real question.

Is Romo as good as Aikman was? No.

I believe Romo's accuracy is better than Aikman's statistically. His YPA are higher also so you can't use that excuse either.

Aikman 61.5% and 7/ YPA

Romo 64.1% and 8.0 YPA


Size / arm strength are attributes - don't make you better.

 

[SDCowboy]

Aikman was better than Romo. Stats don't tell a thing, two different eras of football. Look at Aikman's size, arm strength, accuracy, and playing his best football in the biggest games, and you have the answer to your real question.

Is Romo as good as Aikman was? No.

Stat's don't tell the whole story but they do mean a whole lot. Aikmans percentages and ratios are horrid for the modern era. The guy wasn't playing in the 50s. He was playing throughout the 90s. Romo percentages, ratings and ratios DWARF Aikmans in just about every single category.