Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Troy Aikman- HOF worthy?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by yourfavestoner View Post
    He threw it 50 less times and the only category Manning has him beat at is 400 more passing yards. I don't really get how that helps your argument.

    And it is 7-8 after the Colts lost in the first round to SD this season.
    Not going to get into this, but for those curious:

    Aikman postseason career

    Peyton postseason career

    To be fair, Aikman played 16 playoff games to Peyton's current 15. But obviously Troy has a big lead at an 11-5 record.

    Ugh, being reminded of the Colts' one-and-dones bums me out. I just wish they would win more playoff games, even if they can't reach the Super Bowl. San Diego might very well be their worst possible match-up in the AFC.
    Pugnacity, testosterone, truculence, and belligerence.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by njx9
      do the cowboys win a super bowl without aikman? do they win one without emmitt or irvin? what if you take away any part of the line? or the defensive line or secondary?

      "wins" are just another stat, and they're the one the qb may have the LEAST control over. but then, mark rypien was one of the best qbs of all time, right?
      Replace Aikman with Ben Roethlesberger, and they probably win 2-3 Super Bowls. Replace Peyton Manning with Ben Roethlesberger, and we might be a Wild Card team a few times.
      PICTURE ME ROLLIN'
      GO COLTS! NAPTOWN

      Comment


      • #93
        But maybe the dynamic of the Cowboys doesn't work with Peyton, etcetera. It's always good for debates, but you never really know.
        Pugnacity, testosterone, truculence, and belligerence.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by 3pac View Post
          Playoff performance/wins, most notably SB rings.



          Sacks allowed, Pro Bowls reached, years played, name-recognition (if a lineman has a household name, he's clearly doing something very right...I admit that's kind of a goofy thing to say, but it's true).



          The Jason Garret thing is an exaggeration. The point is that he managed the amazing talent around him. Emmit Smith is without a doubt one of the best RBs to ever play the game. Michael Irvin is one of the best WRs. I'm not saying Aikman was by any means bad, he was good. But there's a difference between someone who's good and can organize the talent around him and someone who actually IS the talent that echoes throughout the team, ala Peyton or (I say begrudgingly) Brady.



          No, there IS way too much weight behind SB rings. Dan Marino never one won, but Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have. SB rings are a sign of a great TEAM, which probably has at least one great LEADER. That leader does NOT have to be the quarterback.

          Even if Dilfer had won ANOTHER ring it wouldn't, in my eyes, qualify him for anything. It'd just be yet another reminder of how amazing the team's defense was, and how decently effecient the offense was. SB rings are like icing, stats are the cake.
          You completely contradict yourself. First you say Aikman is overrated because of his rings. Then you say Dilfer, even if he won another SB wouldn't be deserving. What happened to people giving too much credit to QBs with SB rings? If they get too overhyped then why wouldn't Dilfer get the same credit?

          Fact of the matter is that Aikman lead those teams to the SB unlike Dilfer who rode the coattails of the Balitmore Defense. Aikman gets credit for those rings because he was the General of the team and he lead them to victory and earned his respect as one of the great QBs of his era.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
            You completely contradict yourself. First you say Aikman is overrated because of his rings. Then you say Dilfer, even if he won another SB wouldn't be deserving. What happened to people giving too much credit to QBs with SB rings? If they get too overhyped then why wouldn't Dilfer get the same credit?
            What? How am I contradicting myself at all. I'm showing how little SB rings matter. Even if Dilfer won another one, no one would be recommending him for the HOF, yet when people like Aikman get brought up, the whole "3 SB RINGS 3 SB RINGS" gets repeated over and over, as if it's why he deserves it so much. And if Dilfer did get nomination, then it shows the stupidity of putting all the weight on winning SBs for QBs.

            Fact of the matter is that Aikman lead those teams to the SB unlike Dilfer who rode the coattails of the Balitmore Defense. Aikman gets credit for those rings because he was the General of the team and he lead them to victory and earned his respect as one of the great QBs of his era.
            One could just as easily argue that Aikman rode the coattails of the HOFers around him. Being a general of a team doesn't mean anything. Gary Brackett is the general of the Colts defense, but that doesn't mean he's a higher caliber player than Bob Sanders of Dwight Freeney.
            PICTURE ME ROLLIN'
            GO COLTS! NAPTOWN

            Comment


            • #96
              3 SB's will do a lot for a decent QB. Big Ben probably won't have great stats compared to Brady and Manning, but he'll probably get in because he won some SB's...

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by jsagan77 View Post
                3 SB's will do a lot for a decent QB. Big Ben probably won't have great stats compared to Brady and Manning, but he'll probably get in because he won some SB's...
                Which is stupid, IMO. But sadly probably true.
                PICTURE ME ROLLIN'
                GO COLTS! NAPTOWN

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Geo View Post
                  But maybe the dynamic of the Cowboys doesn't work with Peyton, etcetera. It's always good for debates, but you never really know.
                  EXACTLY my point! Do I really believe that Troy Aikman is a better quarterback than Peyton Manning? Not necessarily, no. All I'm trying to do is point out that you can find stats to back up any argument. That's why the winning stat and Superbowls are the most important ones. That's the point of playing the game after all, and why they hold so much weight in Hall of Fame voting.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by njx9
                    do the cowboys win a super bowl without aikman? do they win one without emmitt or irvin? what if you take away any part of the line? or the defensive line or secondary?

                    "wins" are just another stat, and they're the one the qb may have the LEAST control over. but then, mark rypien was one of the best qbs of all time, right?
                    Those questions cannot be answered. We can talk hypotheticals, but I don't think you're that kind of guy.

                    I have to disagree with you though about QBs not being able to control whether a team wins or not. That is the one position that can make the biggest difference, all other things being equal.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by 3pac View Post
                      What? How am I contradicting myself at all. I'm showing how little SB rings matter. Even if Dilfer won another one, no one would be recommending him for the HOF, yet when people like Aikman get brought up, the whole "3 SB RINGS 3 SB RINGS" gets repeated over and over, as if it's why he deserves it so much. And if Dilfer did get nomination, then it shows the stupidity of putting all the weight on winning SBs for QBs.



                      One could just as easily argue that Aikman rode the coattails of the HOFers around him. Being a general of a team doesn't mean anything. Gary Brackett is the general of the Colts defense, but that doesn't mean he's a higher caliber player than Bob Sanders of Dwight Freeney.
                      If SB rings hardly matter, then why say Aikman got in because of his rings?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by yourfavestoner View Post
                        EXACTLY my point! Do I really believe that Troy Aikman is a better quarterback than Peyton Manning? Not necessarily, no. All I'm trying to do is point out that you can find stats to back up any argument. That's why the winning stat and Superbowls are the most important ones. That's the point of playing the game after all, and why they hold so much weight in Hall of Fame voting.
                        Yes, that's true, but it works both ways. The W/L can change just as much as the stats. In the end, its all hypothetical which is why this discussion we're all having is so pointless at the end of the day.

                        All it really comes down to is one simple personal opinion: do you think SB rings are the most important "stat" for QBs? And sadly for us, none of us will probably change each others' minds.
                        PICTURE ME ROLLIN'
                        GO COLTS! NAPTOWN

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
                          If SB rings hardly matter, then why say Aikman got in because of his rings?
                          Because my opinion is not the opinion of everyone else, as evidenced by this discussion.
                          PICTURE ME ROLLIN'
                          GO COLTS! NAPTOWN

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Geo View Post
                            But maybe the dynamic of the Cowboys doesn't work with Peyton, etcetera. It's always good for debates, but you never really know.
                            I think they might work, but who knows. Peyton certainly is a better passer than Aikman, and he is certainly productive as hell. Aikman could have run a pass heavy offense and put up big numbers too, but not in Peyton's league I think. Here's the big deal though. Would Peyton have choked when the Cowboys needed him? I don't put the blame solely on Peyton's shoulders for the big losses the Colts had, but he did have some bad games. With the teams the Cowboys faced Aikman had to make plays at some point in time that Peyton might have choked at.

                            It's a fun discussion though, because I think the world of Peyton. He's got all the talent in the world, and he is the best QB in the league to me. He's a rare QB that actually makes things happen. Most QBs get credit for not screwing up while their defense and running game picks up the slack. I don't see that with Peyton. I see the offense work through him, and because of him. It would've been a treat to see him against the 90s teams.
                            "If you have one finger pointing at somebody, you have three pointing towards yourself."
                            ~Nigerian Proverb

                            Da riddum is too much for you.
                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nKx27QrgO0

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by 3pac View Post
                              What? How am I contradicting myself at all. I'm showing how little SB rings matter. Even if Dilfer won another one, no one would be recommending him for the HOF, yet when people like Aikman get brought up, the whole "3 SB RINGS 3 SB RINGS" gets repeated over and over, as if it's why he deserves it so much. And if Dilfer did get nomination, then it shows the stupidity of putting all the weight on winning SBs for QBs.



                              One could just as easily argue that Aikman rode the coattails of the HOFers around him. Being a general of a team doesn't mean anything. Gary Brackett is the general of the Colts defense, but that doesn't mean he's a higher caliber player than Bob Sanders of Dwight Freeney.
                              Do you take the time to read other post in this thread?


                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by 3pac View Post
                                Which is stupid, IMO. But sadly probably true.
                                Seriously? What is so stupid about that? No QB ever to play the game has accomplished as much as Ben has. He may have started off as a Bus Driver QB, but he has turned into much more than that. If he was simply a guy behind the wheel he would've been exposed by now.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information