Originally Posted by Hervoyel
But even if we took Carr (and there's no good reason to take him over Peppers) Banks should have started in 2002. That's all on that regime. At least McNair has the excuse of being ignorant at that point. Casserly/Capers/Palmer all should have known better.
How would that have played to fans who wanted to see the rookie #1 pick? As you inferred, hindsight is always 20/20. But that would have been tough to explain, when so many other #1 picks (Aikman, Bledsoe, Couch) all started as rookies.