Reply With Quote
Troy Aikman...I mean he actually won a Super Bowl. He was also the MVP of one SB.
Besides that, you said it yourself, Cunningham was on a brilliant Vikings team. They still didn't win it, they didn't even make it.
Aikman had a few more yards than Cunningham, but he also attempted more passes. There is no comparison when it comes to touchdowns and interceptions, however. Randall had 207 TD's and only 134 INT's...Aikman had 165 TD's and 141 INT's. Add another 5,000 yards rushing and 35 rushing TD's to Randall's totals. Didn't Cunningham also win 3 MVP awards? As far as I know, Aikman never won the award. I know the argument is going to be that Aikman won 3 Super Bowls and Cunningham never won one. Cunningham played on some pretty good teams, especially the Minnesota team that blew the NFC championship game against Atlanta when the kicker picked the perfect time to miss his first field goal of the year. It will be interesting to see how HOF voters treat Randall...
Troy Aikman...I mean he actually won a Super Bowl. He was also the MVP of one SB.
Besides that, you said it yourself, Cunningham was on a brilliant Vikings team. They still didn't win it, they didn't even make it.
Aikman, no need to expound.
Aikman - he had a major cannon
Randall was the better athlete.....Troy was the better football player.
Aikman, no doubt about it.
Aikman was better, won super bowls and big games. Randall was one badass mobile QB though, i liked watching him.
Aikman would have never won a super bowl with the Vikings. Aikman had Emmit Smith and a better defense than Randall ever had. You can't accurately say since one player was on championship teams and the other wasn't he was better.
You can't accurately compare and argue individule performance(Who is better) with team success.
Exactly.
Troy Aikman hands down Randall wasn't nearly as accurate as Troy was Randall
could throw it further down the field then Troy..but Troy never had to gun
it that far down the field Jimmy Johnsons ball control offense spread it evenly through out the field
Cunningham probably deserves to be in the HOF, but the numbers are skewed by his longevity. He played 16 seasons, to Aikman's 12. (A lot of those seasons were injury marred, though.) In those 16 seasons, he only had 7 good seasons, one of those being a phenomenal one in Minnesota. He had a great run from 87-90, but was wildly inconsistent from year to year after that.
Aikman was far more consistent, while Cunningham was more of a game breaker.
In my opinion Cunningham while not as accurate as Aikman. Was like Ron Mexico (Vick) is today. He had the ability to beat you with his arm or legs, from what I can tell that was unheard of at the time.
In the late 80's and early 90's Randall was the most electrifying of the scrambling QB's you had Elway who was a houdini escaping many a certain sack back there of course, and then Steve Young would come later from behind the shadow of Montana in SF. Randall was the one giving the highlight reels though.
I'll never forget him almost goin down for a sack vs the Giants at the Meadowlands and then somehow springing up and finding the WR in the Endzone!!! I liked watching Randall, unlike Ron Mexico he could throw the ball with a little more Accuracy and a little more patience. Mexico takes off at the first chance he gets, he thinks run first then pass last.
What he said ^
This kind of reminds me of the Marino-Elway discussion, only on a slightly lower scale. Same answers applied to both guys.
Aikman all the way... extremely accurate, smart, and a winner. The lack of TD passes (and thus poorer TD/INT ratio) was due to Emmitt Smith, who would take it in everytime they got in the red zone...
Cunningham was a good if not revolutionary quarterback, but not in the same class as Aikman
Boy, was Cunningham fun to watch, but it's sooo hard arguing against those three Super Bowl rings Mr. Aikman owns.
Aikman was the Man! Damn I miss watching him play!
Last edited by TheAdmiral#50; 06-04-2005 at 11:16 AM.
Cunningham was a great athlete,But Cunningham didn't seem to have that football sence that great QBs have.
Cunningham didn't even have the respect of many of his teammates. He was too aloof and one reason he'd take off running on plays was because he didn't have a good grasp of the playbook. There were a few Eagles who would rather have had a broken down Jim McMahon under center.
Not only was Aikman extremely accurate, Aikman's legacy IMO, is his leadership! He was a very smart QB, who was never "Flashy" but more "blue collar" than anything. It was a shame he could'nt have played longer.
I just feel that Aikman used the great players surrounding him to their fullist...where I don't think Randall would have won three rings with the boys.
When it comes down to it the only thing that matters in football is winning. Aikman did it... Cunningham didn't. Cunningham was a better stat QB. Aikman was a winner.
NO comparison AIKMAN is the Man!
I agree, no way that Randall would have won it, he was on some EXTREMELY talented Eagles teams and never got it done. Contrast that with somebody like Steve McNair, who routinely was as successful if not more so with much less talent around him.I just feel that Aikman used the great players surrounding him to their fullist...where I don't think Randall would have won three rings with the boys.
Randall also never took a team from total nothingness and stuck it out and won three superbowls. Not many #1 pick quarterbacks can make that claim. That said, he has a mean punting leg, and I think he still owns the NFL record for a 95 yd quick kick on a 3rd down one night on MNF.
Bull . He picked up the most complicated playbook in football in Minnesota and went 15-1, along with helping set the league scoring record. As a matter of fact he had to learn Marion Campbell, Fred Bruney, Buddy Ryan, Rich Ko e, Ray Rhodes, Denny Green, Dave Campo, and Brian Billick's designated offenses throughout his career. Aikman for the most part only had to learn one.
He took off running a lot because his WR's were terrible. Keith Jackson (the All-Pro TE) was good, but he only got about 30 balls a season. Cris Carter wasn't stud Cris Carter until he was a Vike. The best reciever on the team was Keith Byars, the tailback. You didn't play Tecmo Bowl as a kid?
The only thing Randall and Steve McNair have in common is skin color and their position on the field. If you want to accurately compare Cunningham to a former or active player, look no further than Steve Young (except the whole lefty-righty thing).
Which is a big part of any players success. Consitency in coaching. A player can't be successful if they are constantly having to learn new schemes every year or so.As a matter of fact he had to learn Marion Campbell, Fred Bruney, Buddy Ryan, Rich Ko e, Ray Rhodes, Denny Green, Dave Campo, and Brian Billick's designated offenses throughout his career. Aikman for the most part only had to learn one.
Easy buddy, that's why I said CONTRAST.
I think that Randall might have some parallels to Manning/McNabb, not in style of play, but in similar situations about the same time in their career.
All are/were expected to be the man, with a lot of talent around them, but always had someone just a little better keeping them from achieving their ultimate goals. But Manning and McNabb don't have a Buddy Ryan-style defense helping their case on the other side of the ball.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
