Whitlock's main point is that Thigpen is not a franchise quarterback and had a low completion percentage (58%) even though he operated in the shotgun offense, which makes it easier for quarterbacks to complete passes.
Whitlock bases a player's grade on how well he meets or fails to meet Whitlock's preseason expectation for him. Under this criteria, I'm not sure how Thigpen could receive anything besides an "A." I assume that before the season started, there were no expectations for Thigpen since nobody had ever heard of him. And, I would assume that, after the Atlanta game, everybody expected that Thigpen would or should be cut.
Given these assumptions, and the fact that, after the Atlanta game, Thigpen threw for over 2,400 yards with 16 TDs (and 8 picks), I don't see how he could receive anything but an "A." I think these are pretty good numbers for a guy who most people thought should have been cut in September. Granted, he had some bad games at the end of the season (Den. SD. Cinn.), but he also does not have a lot of offensive power around him.
Thigpen may not be a franchise quarterback. He may not even be the quarterback next year. But, given his experience level and the expectations for him this year, he had a pretty good year. In fact, given his expectations, he probably had the best year of any Chief.
Anybody have any thoughts on the "grades."




