Aaron Rodgers is the GOAT

[SteelersPride]

I think we are all guilty of overvaluing our favorite teams players (EX... I think Randy Moss is the best WR of all time) but Aikman was the glue on that team, it's Irvin and especially Emmitt who would have been above average at best on another team.

Big g n gis a cowboys fan, supposedly

 

[PDay8810]

Like your fellow Dallas fans, the biggest problem is you have an over-inflated opinion about your own players. Aikman on almost any other team is an above-average starter at best.

nope...if anything, the biggest problem you have is you think your OPINION is the authority on a subject. Stats can be ne manipulated and you do that better than anyone.

AND....you still can't name a great QB without talent around him.


NOT ONE COWBOY fan has said Dak nor Aikman were the greatest. They just subject to your bull shit that it is or was the talent around him

Look at Bradshaw....HOF'er's everywhere on is teams. Elway didn't win shit without a running game.

haul ass shithead....we know you hate Dallas and it clouds your football opinions

 

[Nosferatu]

I can't argue against people who say Erin Rodgers is the best ever but I don't agree, I think Dan Marino is the best QB of all time...

 

[Across The Field]

I think we are all guilty of overvaluing our favorite teams players (EX... I think Randy Moss is the best WR of all time) but Aikman was the glue on that team, it's Irvin and especially Emmitt who would have been above average at best on another team.

Glue guy doesn't mean elite. Also, we saw 35-year old Emmitt Smith almost hit 1,000 yards with 9 TDs on Arizona in his final year. He was an all-time great, without question. Aikman? No.

 

[Across The Field]

nope...if anything, the biggest problem you have is you think your OPINION is the authority on a subject. Stats can be ne manipulated and you do that better than anyone.

AND....you still can't name a great QB without talent around him.


NOT ONE COWBOY fan has said Dak nor Aikman were the greatest. They just subject to your bull shit that it is or was the talent around him

Look at Bradshaw....HOF'er's everywhere on is teams. Elway didn't win shit without a running game.

haul ass shithead....we know you hate Dallas and it clouds your football opinions

Nothing you posted was intelligent or true. Good job.

 

[Nosferatu]

Glue guy doesn't mean elite. Also, we saw 35-year old Emmitt Smith almost hit 1,000 yards with 9 TDs on Arizona in his final year. He was an all-time great, without question. Aikman? No.

I never said anything about Elite. 35 year old Emmitt? lolzzz averaging 3.5 a carry and like 1,000 means anything. The benchmark since they went to 16 games should be 1,200. Emmitt and Aikman are both all time greats but neither are elite. Emmitt is a little overrated and Aikman a little underrated.

 

[Across The Field]

I never said anything about Elite. 35 year old Emmitt? lolzzz averaging 3.5 a carry and like 1,000 means anything. The benchmark since they went to 16 games should be 1,200. Emmitt and Aikman are both all time greats but neither are elite. Emmitt is a little overrated and Aikman a little underrated.

The dude was 35 years old with a ridiculous amount of carries on that body. Also, that was a bad Cardinals team. They went 6-10 and had Shaun King starting for them. That was a pretty impressive year.

Despite having an all-timer at RB, a very talented WR duo in Irvin and Harper, a solid TE, and arguably the best OL in the history of the game, Aikman barely had more than a 1:1 TD/INT ratio, hit 20 TD passes once, had double digit INTs in 9 of his 12 years, and completed 61.5% of his passes. That's not impressive.

 

[Nosferatu]

The dude was 35 years old with a ridiculous amount of carries on that body. Also, that was a bad Cardinals team. They went 6-10 and had Shaun King starting for them. That was a pretty impressive year.

Despite having an all-timer at RB, a very talented WR duo in Irvin and Harper, a solid TE, and arguably the best OL in the history of the game, Aikman barely had more than a 1:1 TD/INT ratio, hit 20 TD passes once, had double digit INTs in 9 of his 12 years, and completed 61.5% of his passes. That's not impressive.

lolzzz

In 1994 & 1995 Emmitt had 46 rushing touchdowns, 38 came from 10 yards and under, 32 of them were from 5 yards and under, Aikman didn't have many touchdowns because when the Cowboys had the ball inside the 10 they ran it until Emmitt scored so Aikmans TD/INT ratio means nothing.

 

[GNG]

AND....you still can't name a great QB without talent around him.

Most SB winning QB's have great talent around them. Montana & Brady both were surrounded by talented players and both had a great head coach.

 

[GNG]

lolzzz

In 1994 & 1995 Emmitt had 46 rushing touchdowns, 38 came from 10 yards and under, 32 of them were from 5 yards and under, Aikman didn't have many touchdowns because when the Cowboys had the ball inside the 10 they ran it until Emmitt scored so Aikmans TD/INT ratio means nothing.

Emmitt was a real buzz saw down near the end zone.

 

[GNG]

The dude was 35 years old with a ridiculous amount of carries on that body. Also, that was a bad Cardinals team. They went 6-10 and had Shaun King starting for them. That was a pretty impressive year.

Despite having an all-timer at RB, a very talented WR duo in Irvin and Harper, a solid TE, and arguably the best OL in the history of the game, Aikman barely had more than a 1:1 TD/INT ratio, hit 20 TD passes once, had double digit INTs in 9 of his 12 years, and completed 61.5% of his passes. That's not impressive.

Yet Aikman is in the HOF.

 

[Across The Field]

lolzzz

In 1994 & 1995 Emmitt had 46 rushing touchdowns, 38 came from 10 yards and under, 32 of them were from 5 yards and under, Aikman didn't have many touchdowns because when the Cowboys had the ball inside the 10 they ran it until Emmitt scored so Aikmans TD/INT ratio means nothing.

Well if you're talking about low TD numbers, that's one thing. What about all the INTs? If he wasn't throwing that much, why couldn't he keep his INTs under 10? Also, again, 61.5% completion? With that line and those weapons? Come on man. Being a glue guy doesn't make up for that. He clearly wasn't the kind of guy who should be mentioned with the Mannings, Marinos, Bradys, Rodgers, Brees of the league.

And for what it's worth, I think Bradshaw was insanely overrated. His qualitative numbers are garbage, but like Aikman, he was surrounded by studs at basically every position.

 

[Nosferatu]

Emmitt was a real buzz saw down near the end zone.

Yep, no matter how many carries it took.

 

[Across The Field]

Yet Aikman is in the HOF.

That's what happens when you're a QB with 3 SB rings. It wasn't his numbers. He's not even remotely close to the upper echelon in any metric.

 

[Across The Field]

Yep, no matter how many carries it took.

Come on man. 4.2 YPC for his career, and that was skewed a lot because he played til he was 35. He averaged 3.6 YPC in his age 31-35 seasons. Even being able to play that long with the load he carried is incredibly impressive.

 

[Nosferatu]

Well if you're talking about low TD numbers, that's one thing. What about all the INTs? If he wasn't throwing that much, why couldn't he keep his INTs under 10? Also, again, 61.5% completion? With that line and those weapons? Come on man. Being a glue guy doesn't make up for that. He clearly wasn't the kind of guy who should be mentioned with the Mannings, Marinos, Bradys, Rodgers, Brees of the league.

And for what it's worth, I think Bradshaw was insanely overrated. His qualitative numbers are garbage, but like Aikman, he was surrounded by studs at basically every position.

Aikman's comp % was higher than Marino, Moon, Kelly & Elway.

His INT % is lower than Moon, Kelly, Elway, Warner & Favre.

The reason you are seeing current QB's put up these crazy numbers is because of rule changes. Fucking Sam Bradford is 7th all time in INT %.

 

[Nosferatu]

Come on man. 4.2 YPC for his career, and that was skewed a lot because he played til he was 35.

No it wasn't. He never averaged over 4.2 a carry after he was 26 years old.

 

[GNG]

That's what happens when you're a QB with 3 SB rings. It wasn't his numbers. He's not even remotely close to the upper echelon in any metric.

If he wasn't good he wouldn't be in the HOF.

 

[Across The Field]

Aikman's comp % was higher than Marino, Moon, Kelly & Elway.

His INT % is lower than Moon, Kelly, Elway, Warner, Favre.

The reason you are seeing current QB's put up these crazy numbers is because of rule changes. Fucking Sam Bradford is 7th all time in INT %.

Fair points, but even with that, his QBR all-time is a good amount lower than Marino, Favre, Kelly, and Warner, because it takes into account different factors that were brought about by the fact that he was on such a stacked team.

There's a very interesting metric called "Approximate Value" on profootballreference.com. It places a value on each individual player based on a ton of in-depth metrics. You can guess most of the guys at the top - Manning, Rice, Brees, Favre, Marino, Bruce Smith, Reggie White, Ray Lewis, Rod Woodson, etc. Aikman comes in at 183rd all-time. I'm not saying he was horrible by any means, but if he didn't play on the Cowboys, it stands to reason he would be nowhere near a HOFer.

 

[Nosferatu]

Fair points, but even with that, his QBR all-time is a good amount lower than Marino, Favre, Kelly, and Warner, because it takes into account different factors that were brought about by the fact that he was on such a stacked team.

There's a very interesting metric called "Approximate Value" on profootballreference.com. It places a value on each individual player based on a ton of in-depth metrics. You can guess most of the guys at the top - Manning, Rice, Brees, Favre, Marino, Bruce Smith, Reggie White, Ray Lewis, Rod Woodson, etc. Aikman comes in at 183rd all-time. I'm not saying he was horrible by any means, but if he didn't play on the Cowboys, it stands to reason he would be nowhere near a HOFer.

Aikman > Brees