Archer: Jerry Jones - Tony Romo is at his best

[kidd]

Of course they wouldn't. The majority of the game is put on the QBs shoulders these days and it's amazing how some are performing. As I indicated earlier Aikman had Smith to rely on and the offense succeeded to the level he succeeded. Romo has had only one solid year of being able to rely on the running game. It's a tribute to him that he has been able to crank out the numbers he has had. Had he had the benefit of an Enmity Smith who knows what the team would have accomplished.

The only thing Aikman has on Romo is the rings. Aside from that, he has nothing.

Unfortunately, that's all that really counts in the grand scheme of things.

Personally, I think it's unfair but it is what it is.

 

[boozeman]

The only thing Aikman has on Romo is the rings. Aside from that, he has nothing.

 

[kidd]

Laugh if you want while hanging from Troy's jock but you know I'm right.

Look it. I love me some Troy Aikman as much as the next guy but I see what I see.

 

[kidd]

Come to think of it. Aren't you the one who was always sarcastically posting about how "a QB needs help!!1!" ? Especially when trying to put down Romo?

I find it funny because Aikman was the essence of a QB that needed help.

 

[Genghis Khan]

By the way as far as Aikman being deadly, the highest passer rating he ever attained was 99. Most of the time he was in the 80s.

One of the reasons QB rating is a terrible statistic.

Aikman never threw a lot of TDs for instance. He rarely had to; Emmitt always ran for a billion TDs a year. Should this beheld against Aikman? Of course not. Same thing with passing yards . But these are weighed heavily in QB rating.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Some perspective: Jason Campbell, Brad Johnson, Daunte Culpeper, and Chad Pennington, to name a few, have better QB ratings than Aikman.

Anyone want to argue any of those guys were better QBs than Aikman? Then stop using QB rating for anything meaningful.

If you're still not convinced, here's some more for you and let's take Aikman out of the equation. Joe Montana is only 10th all-time in QB rating. Phillip Rivers is 6th. Uh oh. Matt Ryan is right behind Montana at 11. UH OH. Pennington is 12. Matt Schaub is 13. Culpeper is 14.

More?

Dan Marino? 18. Brett Favre? 20. Right behind them is David flipping Garrard at 22. Meanwhile Jim Kelly is 29th all-time, with an 84.4 rating.

It's a complete joke. Seriously, stop using QB rating.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Some perspective: Jason Campbell, Brad Johnson, Daunte Culpeper, and Chad Pennington, to name a few, have better QB ratings than Aikman.

Anyone want to argue any of those guys were better QBs than Aikman? Then stop using QB rating for anything meaningful.

If you're still not convinced, here's some more for you and let's take Aikman out of the equation. Joe Montana is only 10th all-time in QB rating. Phillip Rivers is 6th. Uh oh. Matt Ryan is right behind Montana at 11. UH OH. Pennington is 12. Matt Schaub is 13. Culpeper is 14.

More?

Dan Marino? 18. Brett Favre? 20. Right behind them is David flipping Garrard at 22. Meanwhile Jim Kelly is 29th all-time, with an 84.4 rating.

It's a complete joke. Seriously, stop using QB rating.

I'm not comparing those QBs to Aikman. I am comparing him to Romo. As I pointed out before some stats are constant and if that doesn't count for something why keep them. Forget about QB ratings but you can't overlook all of them. Stats continue to be a tool for evaluating players at every position. As before I think Aikman was a great QB but as a pure position comparison Romo has performed better. With Aikman' s lack of mobility he would not have come close to dealing with the game the way Romo has.

 

[townsend]

I don't think Tony wins 3 SBs with the 90s Cowboys. Especially considering that Aikman's best seasons were pretty early in his career, when Romo was prone to post season flubs.

Look at the rushing perfomances of the Seahawks, Giants, and Packer losses. He's lost with good runners.

 

[Smitty]

I like Romo a lot but you can't say he hasn't personally choked in big moments.

Hopefully he can put together a 3-4 game run at the right time. Because him going out with a ring is the only way he'll get the respect he actually deserves for how good he's really been, and probably puts him in the Hall of Fame.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I don't think Tony wins 3 SBs with the 90s Cowboys. Especially considering that Aikman's best seasons were pretty early in his career, when Romo was prone to post season flubs.

Look at the rushing perfomances of the Seahawks, Giants, and Packer losses. He's lost with good runners.

Super Bowls are a team accomplishment. Troy didn't win the Super Bowls. He was part of a team who won them. If you just carve out the performances of Aikman and Romo it becomes self evident who has accomplished more at the position. That's the point I am trying to make.

 

[townsend]

Championship teams, and especially dynasty teams are so perfectly calibrated, I'd assume a drastic change would probably screw it up.

I think Romo would probably win 1.

That being said, if you wanna see how Aikman would do playing for Romo's teams, look no further than the 2005 season and the first half of the 2006 season.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Championship teams, and especially dynasty teams are so perfectly calibrated, I'd assume a drastic change would probably screw it up.

I think Romo would probably win 1.

That being said, if you wanna see how Aikman would do playing for Romo's teams, look no further than the 2005 season and the first half of the 2006 season.

Maybe so but again I am not emaking a team comparison. I am looking at two individuals and how they performed at their position. Stated another way I am evaluating them in the same manner you would baseball players performances regardless of the teams record.

 

[shoop]

Please do not try to use stats to support Aikman being better than Romo. Romo has had shit for a running game for most of his career. Romo is a great QB, and one could argue elite, but with a good team around both of them, Aikman was deadly.

Actually depending on how you want to look at it stats is the perfect way to compare the two. Romo's completion percentage is better (65.2 career vs Aikman's 61.5) Int% is lower (2.6% to 3%) and his QB rating is higher (97.6 vs 81.6). Those to me are the areas you can directly compare without talking about different eras. All while acknowledging that to this point Aikman had a better supporting cast including an all timer at RB.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I'm not comparing those QBs to Aikman. I am comparing him to Romo. As I pointed out before some stats are constant and if that doesn't count for something why keep them. Forget about QB ratings but you can't overlook all of them. Stats continue to be a tool for evaluating players at every position. As before I think Aikman was a great QB but as a pure position comparison Romo has performed better. With Aikman' s lack of mobility he would not have come close to dealing with the game the way Romo has.

7 out of the top 10 in QB rating are playing in 2015. Either we are in a ridiculously amazing golden age of QBs right now, or you can't use QB rating to compare QBs from different eras to QBs of today.

 

[jsmith6919]

Maybe so but again I am not emaking a team comparison. I am looking at two individuals and how they performed at their position. Stated another way I am evaluating them in the same manner you would baseball players performances regardless of the teams record.

There's no way to compare them just looking at qbr though. The game is not the same as it was, hence even scrub qbs having higher qbr now.

 

[townsend]

Maybe so but again I am not emaking a team comparison. I am looking at two individuals and how they performed at their position. Stated another way I am evaluating them in the same manner you would baseball players performances regardless of the teams record.

I think playoff performance is an excellent criteria for evaluation.
Look at his passer rating in the playoffs during the dynasty era. Almost all of those games were 100+ passer rating games.

Compare that to Romo who's struggled some in the playoffs, (not as much as some people believe but the Giants, and Seahawks games were obviously sub par performances.) no way Romo replicates the 92-95 post season.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I don't think Tony wins 3 SBs with the 90s Cowboys. Especially considering that Aikman's best seasons were pretty early in his career, when Romo was prone to post season flubs.

Look at the rushing perfomances of the Seahawks, Giants, and Packer losses. He's lost with good runners.

I think given the supporting cast of the 90s teams, I think Romo definitely would have won at least 2 (92 & 93). Not sure would have won another after that though.

 

[townsend]

I think given the supporting cast of the 90s teams, I think Romo definitely would have won at least 2 (92 & 93). Not sure would have won another after that though.

I don't know if Romo beats the 92 49ers. Aikman was on fire in that post season, putting up all-timer playoff numbers. Against a team the likes of which Romo has never faced.

 

[L.T. Fan]

7 out of the top 10 in QB rating are playing in 2015. Either we are in a ridiculously amazing golden age of QBs right now, or you can't use QB rating to compare QBs from different eras to QBs of today.

The game has shifted to the QB in the past few years. That's why the numbers are where they are. The balanced attack is not in vogue. The Mannings, Rodgers,Romo s, etc. on and on. Most teams that have this type QB puts the game on their shoulders. It's more of a current fad than anything else but I think it will ebb back the other way as well. There are bus drivers and franchise players at the position currently.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I think playoff performance is an excellent criteria for evaluation.
Look at his passer rating in the playoffs during the dynasty era. Almost all of those games were 100+ passer rating games.

Compare that to Romo who's struggled some in the playoffs, (not as much as some people believe but the Giants, and Seahawks games were obviously sub par performances.) no way Romo replicates the 92-95 post season.

Well if you cherry pick numbers you can have any outcome you desire.