Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Troy Aikman vs. Steve Young

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

  • Troy Aikman vs. Steve Young

    I grew up an Aikman fan but respect Young's talent too. Seeing ESPN's Year of the Quarterback show tonight, I wondered if it would be fair to compare Aikman's career to Steve Young. They were 2 of the best QBs of the 90's. Each are HOF'ers, SB winners, multiple Pro-Bowlers and All-Pros. But they played in different offenses and Steve's career passer rating is obscene (96.8) compared to Troy's somewhat average looking one (81.6).

    Looking at their career numbers, I am shocked at Aikman's stats. I still am a Aikman fan, but I didn't know that there was such a huge gap, statistically, between he and Young. My childhood memories had him even with ol Steve. lol

    Is it fair to compare these two? If not, what 90's QB should Aikman be compared to?

    Would Troy have put up similar numbers if he were a 49er for his career?

    Aikman's career stats LINK

    Young's career stats LINK

    "I don't do Pro Days, we send our scouts to those. I would rather spend my time watching film. The eye in the sky never lies. Functional Strength and athletic ability are the first things we look for in a college prospect." - Mark Dominik, Buccaneers GM

  • #2
    I gotta go with Steve Young. Troy's got two rings on him but other than that, Young was superior to Aikman in every area.

    Comment


    • #3
      I gotcha, I feel like that's how most will go, too.

      But is it fair to compare the two? Young's numbers are waaaaaaaaay better.

      Also, who is more like these two today?

      I always thought of Troy as a great leader and super accurate passer, but I guess my memory and bias betrays me on the accuracy part.

      /shrugs

      "I don't do Pro Days, we send our scouts to those. I would rather spend my time watching film. The eye in the sky never lies. Functional Strength and athletic ability are the first things we look for in a college prospect." - Mark Dominik, Buccaneers GM

      Comment


      • #4
        Troy was a good quarterback. Steve Young always had better statistics without a consistently good run game as Aikman did with Smith. Overall I believe Young was the better player due to being a dual threat on the ground and in the air. When he first came to San Francisco he was so inconsistent though. Both were championship quarterbacks though so whatever.

        "Every light must fade, every heart return to darkness!"
        -San Francisco 49ers: Five Time Super Bowl Champions-
        Originally posted by Borat
        Oh, my bad. Didn't realize SWDC was the pinnacle of class and grace.

        Comment


        • #5
          As someone who watched football as an adult back then, I can safely say that Steve Young was only about three or four times as good as Aikman.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Monomach View Post
            As someone who watched football as an adult back then, I can safely say that Steve Young was only about three or four times as good as Aikman.
            I wouldn't go that far. Steve had a few things on troy such as his ability to read the game and his pocket awareness. Troy on the other hand had a stronger arm and was more accurate. That huge gap in their qb rating was due to a few factors. Troy went through a few growing pains and their offensive system. Steve was placed in the perfect system for his skill sets, the west coast. Troy on the other hand ran the Air Coryell, which had more deep or mid range passes that relied on a heavy running game.

            I seriously doubt Steve could have preformed as well as Troy in the cowboy's offense and vice versa.

            Comment


            • #7
              Aikman really was a very accurate QB. Stats don't measure accuracy as you can see vividly illustrated with guys like Tim Tebow and Jake Locker. Some guys are counted on to attempt far more low percentage throws than others, simple as that. Many other factors go into completion %, but with guys like a Locker or Aikman, they were asked to make a ton more tough throws than guys like Tebow and Young.

              It's like comparing the performance of a sushi chef vs a classically trained french chef. They're both working with food, but those are two completely different jobs that aren't concerned with one another. Young and Aikman really didn't play the same game when you really think about it, although they're both obviously playing football.

              Young was a great QB, but his stats were inflated due to situation.

              Aikman was a great QB, but his stats were deflated due to situation.

              Referring to stats will only mislead when comparing football players.

              Shaun Alexander was an average football player.

              The Seattle Seahawks running game of the early to mid 2000's was among the best ever.

              Aikman was a great talent, but his stats will always keep him from getting his due because he just never was asked to rack #'s or carry his team. Young, Aikman, Montana, Elway...none of them are putting up huge #'s on that Cowboy team. But a lot of guys would on that 9ers team. That's just the nature of football. Nobody plays their position alone. Some jobs are easier than others even if the title is the same.

              Overall, I'd take Young because I think he was a smarter, quicker thinking player and his ability to run the ball was deadly. Aikman was a better passer, imo.

              If they were both on the Bengals or Browns or something back then, I'm fairly certain Aikman would have won the job. Purely speculation of course, but I think he was considered the more talented player by NFL personnel. Two different sets of strengths and weaknesses though. Maybe Shanny takes Young and Parcells takes Aikman.

              All I'm saying is the stats are definitely misleading no matter what the comparison when it comes to football. Look at the actual player to form your perception.

              Comment


              • #8
                Very great points and thoughts. Appreciate it.

                "I don't do Pro Days, we send our scouts to those. I would rather spend my time watching film. The eye in the sky never lies. Functional Strength and athletic ability are the first things we look for in a college prospect." - Mark Dominik, Buccaneers GM

                Comment


                • #9
                  Just about anyone decent would look like a god behind the best offensive line of the 90s while handing off to the best RB of the 90s and throwing to the second best WR of the 90s.

                  In terms of skill, Young by a country mile.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Young was simply the much better QB.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ness View Post
                      Troy was a good quarterback. Steve Young always had better statistics without a consistently good run game as Aikman did with Smith. Overall I believe Young was the better player due to being a dual threat on the ground and in the air. When he first came to San Francisco he was so inconsistent though. Both were championship quarterbacks though so whatever.
                      The big run game difference, Emmitt Smith was more than 1/3rd of the Triplets, the evidence is that he was the NFL's career rushing yardage leader & the centerpiece of the Dallas offense that won 3 SBs in the early 90s.

                      Trivial, but Young is left-handed while Akman is right-handed, ball rotates in different directions.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Not even close. There were many quarterbacks in the 90's better than Aikman.


                        Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Aikman was just the 90's version of Terry Bradshaw, they both won the lottery and ended up on 2 of the most talented teams ever assembled.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think Young was a much better quarterback. And more importantly for someone who is young and missed both their primes, Young is a much less ******** broadcaster.

                            Bonekrusher.

                            Originally posted by JordanTaber
                            Football...it's rocket surgery now, folks.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Steve Young plz.


                              http://minnesotasportstwentyfourseven.blogspot.com/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information