Wow-a lot closer than I thought and pretty funny. Too bad Troy has 3 Super Bowl rings, a SB MVP and a spot in Canton! http://sportsmockery.com/2017/05/fa...as-better-than-troy-aikman-and-its-hilarious/
Drew Brees was on ESPN this morning and he summed up QB stats the best...The only stat that matters is Winning.... Brees mentioned how all his numbers were a product of the system he was in. The only number he cared about was getting that W....If it meant 50 passes were needed then so be it...If the plan was for 50 rushing attempts then so be it... Aikman always had Emmitt Smith behind him. Anytime Dallas got close to the red zone in those days, everything funnelled through Emmitt, and they won a lot. But don't think for a second that Troy didn't have the ability to put up huge numbers, because he obviously did. Few QB's in league history were as accurate with the football as Aikman....Video game numbers simply weren't needed from the Cowboy QB. It's about winning the game...
So the Cowboys have EE for Emitt, Bryant for Irvin, they need to go out and sign Cutler from the booth and they will have their new triplets.
Aikman was better. The league changes and it's way different now than before. It's like comparing apples to oranges, even with rating and percentages. That being said Cutler was overrated and then underrated. Maybe teams didn't think he was a leader but there are only so many QB spots and most were filled this offseason. He made it as runner-up for the Jets and then knew he couldn't start immediately when McCown was signed instead, so he looked into securing his future career. He has game left in him still and he could do well on a better team, but it's all about opportunity and he wasn't letting one go away to chase after one that probably doesn't exist.
dawg-"huge numbers?" "few qbs were as accurate as aikman?" i get the whole emmitt smith redzone thing to why his tds stats aren't higher. he completed 61.5% of his passes. He's tied for 29th all-time for passing completion % and 34th for most passing yards. so that's top 35 for each. Hall worthy for sure, but when you see the names around his for both stats, it's kind of funny. it doesn't scream HALL OF FAME, but when you add 3 Super Bowls, a SB MVP and no losses in the SB, a lot changes. Aikman is and was better than Cutler, but their stats head to head are damn close. It's the 3 SBs that are a huge separation maker.
Game has changed A LOT even in just the 25 or so years since Aikman's rookie season. When talking about Aikman's accuracy, yeah - 61.5% (29th all-time) doesn't look great. But look at the names ahead of him on the list: all but a handful (Montana. Young, Favre) started before him or were contemporaries. 20 of the 29 started their careers in 2000 or later; another 5 started in 1998-1999.
I assumed it went without saying that the game has changed dramatically since Aikman played....Aikman never had a "Wes Welker" type possession guy to boost the percentages. He had a deep vertical game with Irvin, Harper and they even threw Deion in for some go routes... I don't think any knowledgeable football fan would ever question the accuracy of Troy Aikman, and I know that nobody who played in that era ever did....He was the QB of a great team that focused around a power running game... Jay Cutler doesn't belong in the same sentence as Troy Aikman...One is a 3 time world champion HoF'r, and the other is a whiny little bitch that inspires nobody on Sunday.
The best way I can describe Jay Cutler is this: I'm a Browns fan, and though there have been ample opportunities over the years for my team to pursue Jay Cutler, I love the fact that they never have. That pretty much says it all.... and obviously I would never say the same about a modern day Aikman.
The only thing I could see Cutler being a good fit is as a backup QB. But only for at the most 2 games fill in.
Troy aikman was a great qb, but honestly I think in a lot of ways is overrated. I've never been one to crown a QB based on rings so I realize I'm in the minority, and he had some huge moments in the playoffs, but Dallas thrived because of a mixture of great coaching, great scouting, incomparable running game, and a great defense. When all that happens, yes, you stand great odds of winning championships. Steve young won only one championship, but he was clearly the better qb. We won games Jason Garrett as qb, I think we won a playoff game with babe laufenberg, we won games with an old washed up Bernie Kosar...it explains why Aikman didn't need to be the best qb in the league to win and why his stats aren't so great, yet he won championships.
That was a big part of it, yes. I think the most incredible thing was the fact that as awesome as our line was, not a single one of them were 1st round selections. I think we had maybe one 2nd round guy, and that was Larry Allen.
I do not give two shits about the stats. To put Cutlers name in the same sentence as Aikmans is a sin against football humanity.
Press-i was not trolling at all. i saw this and posted it for a discussion. i am all over this webpage on topics from the NFL to movies and tv shows. I'm across the board. I see stuff and post it. When I saw the stats, I was stunned how close they were. And as I said earlier (see post) Aikman was a lot better than Cutler rings or no rings. Just saying the stats are eerie close. If anyone wants to say Cutler was better than he's a fool. I'm happy Gid brought up the Minnesota trade as I mentioned that as well on here or another thread. That trade alone single handedly rebuilt the Cowboys team that went 1-15 in Troy's first year I believe. Gid called it fleecing. Might as well call it highway robbery!
Cat, it amazes me how you post about so many topics. I don't read everything, (I have no interest in WWF for instance). But every once in a while you post something that is really interesting. Thanks. That said, you might use a little more caution at times. Your initial post here came from SportsMockery.com. I can easily see how some would look at it as sports trolling.
