Warner/Aikman

Now, even if you hate the Cowboys please be real on your answer. We all know Aikman was and is the best ever at timing and precision. However, I've been debating with my friend about Kurt Warner's one year at St Louis, in 1999, where he threw for 41 TD's and 11 INT's I believe. For the people who watched all of Aikman's games and watched the Rams that year, can you say that Warner was somewhat close to Aikman that year as far as timing and precision - dropping back and just nailing a guy on stride on all different types of routes, now I'm not talking about stats or anything, but like a guy who can almost drop back blindfolded and nail a guy in stride. THAT year in Warner's career, can you atleast say he was close to Aikman as far as dropping back, makin the read, using precision and accuracy and reading the receivers?

Sure he was great that year. I think Warner has been killed by injuries these past few years. I have read though that he's doing ok in N. Y. so that's good. He's a guy I like to do well.

Aikman was a smart QB, but I think his talent was and is overrated. Warner was better than Aikman ever had been, that one year, IMO. Can you see Elway, Marino, or Montana playing with that Dallas team? Shoot, I think Warren Moon would've been incredible with that team, but maybe I'm a little biased there.

I tend to agree on Warners year being better than any season Aikman ever put together. I consider Aikman a better QB overall (setting aside that built in Dallas Crackboys animosity and answering you honestly) but I think Warner simply had one of those miracle seasons that somebody seems to get every so often.

I don't recall Aikman ever having one of those though and a number of players have had them on teams that didn't go to the Super Bowl. Warner had his and that year the Rams went the distance.

Still when it's all said and done I think I'd rather look back one day and say: "David Carr never had that one incredible season where he could do no wrong but his team won a few rings with him leading them" than "David Carr won us that Super Bowl the year he could do no wrong and had a good career" or worse yet "Sure we never won a Super Bowl while Carr was here but remember that one year when he tore up the league statisticaly?"

Sure winning one would be awesome but Aikman got the Cowboys there three times (If I'm not mistaken, I really don't pay that much attention to the Cowboys unless they're on the opposite side of the ball from the Texans) and was better longer. I'd rather have that I think.

HJam72 said:

Aikman was a smart QB, but I think his talent was and is overrated. Warner was better than Aikman ever had been, that one year, IMO. Can you see Elway, Marino, or Montana playing with that Dallas team? Shoot, I think Warren Moon would've been incredible with that team, but maybe I'm a little biased there.

Click to expand...

Yup, you're biased. IMO it is hard to say Warner wasn't helped out by the cast of characters around him like Marshall Faulk in his prime, Torry Holt, Isaac Bruce, Orlando Pace, Grant Wistrom, etc. Warner had a better peak, Aikman had a better career and was a better QB. In particular, he was special for one thing very few QB's have achieved (as a negative example see Peyton Manning) Aikman upped his game in the post-season. Montana may carry that as well, but Warner, Moon, Elway and Marino did not carry that off as well.

When Warner was with the Rams and at his peak, his leading receiver(# of catches) was Marshall Faulk. Just something to ponder when thinking of "the greatest show on turf."

You can throw out Moon and Warner (because he was the one year guy, anyway), but I still think guys like Montana, Marino, and Elway were better than Aikman. Aikman had a HUGE O-line. The best to ever play. The only thing close is that O-line that San. Fran. had during the same stretch--which is part of the reason that some think that Steve Young was better than Montana (I find that humorous). He also had a more experienced JERRY RICE and Aikman had Irvin and Emmitt. I'll give you that that Dallas team was the best team that's ever played, but not that Aikman was the biggest reason for it. Aikman was good and solid, but then who wouldn't be with ALL DAY LONG to throw or to put up a jump ball to Irvin after he pushed off somebody in the endzone?

Elway, Montana, Marino--in that order. That's my opinion of the QB's and not the entire team that they played on. I'd probably put quite a few others in front of Aikmen also, but I'm not as sure about them. Jim Kelly--there's another one, and I, for one, can't believe that so many Dallas fans put Aikman ahead of Roger Staubach. It's amazing what 300+ lb. lineman can do for a QBs status in this world.

All I know is Troy Aikman has 3 Super Bowl victories in as many tries and of course he had a good supporting cast. It is a team game.

HJam72 said:

You can throw out Moon and Warner (because he was the one year guy, anyway), but I still think guys like Montana, Marino, and Elway were better than Aikman. Jim Kelly--there's another one, and I, for one, can't believe that so many Dallas fans put Aikman ahead of Roger Staubach. It's amazing what 300+ lb. lineman can do for a QBs status in this world.

Click to expand...

I didn't say Aikman overall was better than Montana, Marino and Elway. My statement was that Aikman had a very special quality that he shared with Montana that many others, Moon, Marino, Kelly, did not have--he consistantly upped his game in the post-season.

The Staubach thing is just about age and recency. Aikman did it more recently so he gets talked about more. IMO Staubach was better and had his career included the six years he was in the Navy, Dallas would have one or two more SB titles--people down here would really hate that.

I think even Troy has said Roger was the better QB. He was the ultimate competitor, tough as nails, smart and just a winner.

I think that Troy Aikman has the record for post-season wins. I'm not one for statistics but he was money in big games and that's what matters.