My opponent beat me to him on the waiver wire by one spot, and he’s starting Thigpen over Tony Romo. :)

Of course it depends on who ends up declaring. There are really no good Seniors coming out this year. Stafford, Bradford and Sanchez are all underclassmen that are eligable to come out if they want, but may decide not to.

If Bradford or Stafford are there at our first round pick and there aren’t really good prospects after that I think we have to go ahead and take the QB in the 1st round.

Thigpen could turn out to be the real deal and in that case we would have a franchise QB on the bench that desperate teams (like the Chiefs were) would be calling offering crazy trades for that would give us more picks in the future.

But if Thigpen turns out to be anoher flash in the pan like Derrick Anderson with the Browns, we will be glad we invested the picks in a guy that can be ready to take over if Thigpen is flopping.

Plus think of the advantages of drafting a high round QB while you have a starter that is playing well rather than having nobody at the position and needing the guy you draft to start for you as soon as possible. Instead of having to cave in to whatever ridiculous contract that QBs agent demands (like the Falcons and Matt Ryan) just so we can get him to camp on time to be ready to play.

Having a decent guy like Thigpen that hopefully by the end of the year we will know is going to be the starter next season gives the GM more time to negotiate since if the QB misses most or all of training camp, who really cares since he’s going to be sitting on the bench anyway. Plus it will give the drafted QB time to sit on the bench and learn which will help them if/when it is time for them to start.

You can never have enough good QBs on your roster but we have seen what happens when you don’t have any.

He has work to do to make it in a conventional NFL offense. Right now they are getting by in the spread, but thats not going to last. Its a matter of time before the defenses get enough film to shut it down. When that happens, will Thigpen have developed enough to still be a good starter?

They thought Thigpen had talent and potential, thats why they went and got him and why they kept him on the roster to develop while most people thought he should have been cut away because of a couple of bad performances.

So Thigpen DIDN’T come completely out of the blue. If the coaches thought the same of him as you did he wouldn’t even have been on the team. No doubt he has surprised them by how quickly he’s taken command of the team and how well he is playing, but you’re being intellectually dishonest to say it was blind luck.

I write off people that have blind hatred for Carl and anyone connected to him (you have said many times that no matter what coach was hired by Carl or what QB Carl drafted that it was doomed to failure just because Carl picked them) just because of their vendetta.

Of course, since you write off almost all criticism of Herm and Carl as “blind hatred” instead of addressing the argument, your position is really a Catch-22. You claim you’ll respect arguments that may establish fault with Herm and Carl so long as they’re not based on “blind hatred”, but since you dismiss almost all arguments as “blind hatred” from the start then you can automatically claim that nobody’s argument is valid, regardless of whether or not the person actually hates the people in charge. I feel comfortable pointing out the hypocrisy in your position since I’ve repeatedly taken pains to emphasize that I don’t hate Carl and Herm and that I just think they’re bad at their jobs only to have you conveniently forget those comments whenever you feel like scoring a few points with the peanut gallery so you can shout down my (and anyone else’s) position without bothering to consider them.

Why do you do this? No clue. Maybe you’re someone so emotionally invested in this team that it’s basically equivalent to a religion with you and you’re not one to brook religious dissent. Maybe you’ve got a bad short term memory and you actually forget the positions people take so you create unintentional straw men based on a faulty impression of what you think they believe. Maybe you’re just a shitty debater and you like to rip on people whenever they outclass you in a debate.

I don’t seriously consider the arguments of people that base all their opinions on hatred for other people and view it through that prism.

Right…I’m sure that’s why you obsessively answer my posts to scream “Carl Hater”. Because my opinion means so little to you. It’s been my experience that the only people who engage in that sort of behavior are those who feel personally threatened by the opinions they attack and that when they try to dismiss arguments by saying “I don’t care what you think” they’re usually lying.