Who wore No. 8 better, Young or Aikman?

[boozeman]

Exactly. Steve Young dinked and dunked his way in the WC offense and had the greatest WR ever to play the game at his disposable. He was a good QB.

But I'll take Aikman, who could make every throw and was a master in the timing offense Norv Turner used. 3 SB's to 1 makes it pretty easy.

I'd take Aikman for our team, our offense, Turner's offense.

That's where it starts and stops.

Just as Young struggled outside of the Walsh system, Aikman proved that he was not great outside of what Turner had designed for him.

Great players are like that...sometimes they are just great in the environment they were in. No shame in it either.

There are very few players that could thrive in any system, any where.

This debate is about as useful as the Emmitt/Barry Sanders debate. Even less so.

 

[boozeman]

I kind of agree with Boberts.

To me Aikman was the ultimate bus driver QB. The team was set up where he wasn't required to do too much.

Just keep the train moving along the tracks.

I'm not trying to slam the guy but that's just how I saw him. He was the 90's version of Phil Simms, IMO.

Now you are being ridiculous.

That offense required precision when we threw it. Simms had one shining Super Bowl where he came even close to what Aikman pretty much produced in terms of passing accuracy each and every Sunday.

 

[UncleMilti]

I'd take Aikman for our team, our offense, Turner's offense.

That's where it starts and stops.

Just as Young struggled outside of the Walsh system, Aikman proved that he was not great outside of what Turner had designed for him.

Great players are like that...sometimes they are just great in the environment they were in. No shame in it either.

There are very few players that could thrive in any system, any where.

This debate is about as useful as the Emmitt/Barry Sanders debate. Even less so.

Agreed. And Aikman was money in the postseason, whereas Young was a bit of an underachiever. Young was was part of the Niners running game, both passing and with his legs. Aikman was asked to throw mid range and long pinpoint passes. Smith cleaned up in the 4th quarter of many games. Aikman didn't need to throw 40 times per game nor did he throw 3 yard TD passes...he had #22 because the team was built to be run-first.

Statistics will never tell the whole story.

 

[NoDak]

He was the 90's version of Phil Simms, IMO.

God damn.

 

[boozeman]

God damn.

I am not an Aikman lover but geez.

Comparing him to that yellow toothed albino twerp is just over the top.

 

[Clay_Allison]

Aikman's not as good as anybody, Emmitt's not as good as anybody either. Jesus, we're lucky we beat all those teams with their much better players.

I guess Nate Newton and Erik Williams were so awesome they managed to carry the offense with a crap bus driver QB and an average RB.

That's not what I see when I watch the replays of that team, but who am I to doubt the constantly repeated bullshit narrative.

 

[Simpleton]

Aikman's not as good as anybody, Emmitt's not as good as anybody either. Jesus, we're lucky we beat all those teams with their much better players.

I guess Nate Newton and Erik Williams were so awesome they managed to carry the offense with a crap bus driver QB and an average RB.

That's not what I see when I watch the replays of that team, but who am I to doubt the constantly repeated bullshit narrative.

Yea, I don't really get how we won 3 in 4 years with a bus driver QB, an above average RB and a WR who couldn't do anything but push off. I guess it was our yeehaw kickass OL comprised of a bunch of guys who were nothing but JAG's until about 1991 despite being in the league for 5+ seasons.

Must've been that defense led by batshit Haley who can't even make it to the final stage of the HOF vote.

 

[1bigfan13]

All I'm saying is Aikman was good at what he did but he didn't have to do near as much as the other elite QBs of that era. Guys like Young, Montana Marino, Elway, Kelly, etc.

That's why I made the comparison to Simms. They were in similar situations where they weren't leaned on heavily like you saw with other great teams.

Also, look at what Aikman's replacements did in his absence. They usually performed admirably and the Cowboys usually held their own. Even broken down Kosar gave us a couple of quality performances.

That tells me that the QB was not the engine that made that train go.

 

[Carl]

Aikman's not as good as anybody, Emmitt's not as good as anybody either. Jesus, we're lucky we beat all those teams with their much better players.

I guess Nate Newton and Erik Williams were so awesome they managed to carry the offense with a crap bus driver QB and an average RB.

That's not what I see when I watch the replays of that team, but who am I to doubt the constantly repeated bullshit narrative.

I like this. Aikman, like all players, had limitations; but his combo of Accuracy and velocity has not been repeated in the NFL.

 

[Cotton]

Aikman quite possibly had the most accurate arm in the history of the NFL. That is bringing a lot to the game.

 

[data]

Steve Beuerlein would've won 4 SBs.

 

[skidadl]

I effing hated Steve Young with a passion and kind of still do with his insolent hair.

But I can't sit here and say, yup, Troy was better hands down.

Both with different kind of players. Aikman was the most accurate passer I have ever seen. He also had outstanding chemistry with Irvin/Novacek and ran Turner's offense magnificently. Young could create plays and honestly could take over games.

Some might disagree, but we beat those 49er teams back then because we had the better team, not the better QB.

I'd still prefer Aikman because he was part of that team. All in all, it's dumb to compare individuals like there is a right answer.

It is like thinking Staubach would have had the same success winning SBs in Pittsburgh as Bradshaw did. Different QBs asked to do different things within the systems they were in.

Well sonofa beech, we have some real common sense happening here on the board.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Steve Beuerlein would've won 4 SBs.