but I don’t think he looked much better than Thigpen, and I don’t see us replacing Huard with another young guy until next season at the earliest.

That the reason McMahon struggled may have had something to do with the fact that he only had one season in college where he completed 50% of his throws or better. His career completion percentage for Rutgers was 49.4%

http://www2.jsonline.com/packer/rev/apr01/quarterback-mikemcmahon.asp

Here’s the really sick thing about it, Matt Millen drafted a guy that should have struggled to get picked up as an undrafted free agent with a 5th round pick. And I thought Carl Peterson was clueless about evaluating rookie QBs.

But it took five years for Tony Romo to be ready to start for his team, and he was a better QB than Thigpen in college.

agreed

And “mental toughness” and “gamer attitudes” are nice, but unless they’re backed up by an ability to consistently execute the gameplan the coaching staff asks you to execute intangibles don’t really mean a lot. So far, Thigpen has not demonstrated an ability to do that.

Scouts and GMs often get enamored with “measurables” or “tools”…like how much the guy can bench-press or how fast he can run or how hard he can throw. Personally, I think it’s a very limiting viewpoint. Don’t get me wrong, athleticism is great, but I think that sometimes people get so awed by somebody’s physical attributes that they fail to realize that skills like accuracy, and decision-making, and instinct are also tools (albeit less visibly impressive ones) and that they’re often as important (and sometimes more important) than physical tools. So far I’ve seen some impressive physical tools for Tyler Thigpen but very little in the way of skills, so while I don’t have a problem with Thigpen being the third-string QB for this team I also don’t think that the Chiefs should invest all that much in him and that they should be seriously looking for somebody who’s less of a project.

Are very rarely found on the waiver wire, so I wouldn’t get too angry with the Chiefs for not grabbing someone after the preseason. The options were basically Culpepper, Leftwich, Harrington, Simms and a bunch of other guys who’d either flopped elsewhere as starters or who had never demonstrated any ability to be a starting QB. Doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea to keep looking of course, just that you shouldn’t fault the Chiefs for not dumping Thigpen for the first warm body :)

Sometimes if there aren’t good options it’s fine to let things ride for a bit. I’m not a big fan of Croyle or Thigpen, but I don’t think there’s anything out there worth pursuing that would likely be better than either of them (or Huard) so I’m fine with them standing pat with what they’ve got for now.

A situation to watch, though, would be Green Bay if Aaron Rodgers gets hurt (as he’s been prone to do) because they’ve got two rookies backing up Rodgers and no vets. I doubt there’s a chance in hell we’ll get Brian Brohm out of the situation, but we could end up with Matt Flynn, who’s not guaranteed to be a good NFL QB option but is probably a better option than Thigpen.

And apparently he was really shaky in his preseason time. I don’t think it really means much, though…I think Brohm’s got a lot more upside than Flynn, so while Flynn may be better right now in two years I think Brohm will probably be the best QB on the Green Bay roster.

Would have to be listed as one of our assistant coaches in the program at that point.