Like many of you, I have found myself daydreaming about the prospect of watching Kyler Murray run circles around our NFC West foes on his way to taking us to the promised land. With his twinkle toes and golden arm, it’s hard not to get caught up in the hype. But can we really be certain he’ll be better than Rosen, much less survive the rigors of the NFL in general? Can we be sure enough to risk everything and potentially set ourselves back a decade or more if it blows up in our face?

Sure, on paper he’s a "better fit" in Kingsbury’s system. But I worry about his long term durability and it’s likely Kingsbury will run more of a hybrid system at this level, anyway.

It doesn’t seem to matter who it is, the NFL always finds a way of eventually catching up to dual threat QBs, literally and figuratively. It’s nearly impossible to sustain the same level of effectiveness with any longevity. The added exposure significantly increases the number of career jeopardizing hits. Regardless of how effective Murray may be initially, it’s just not realistic to expect him to sustain it for 10 plus years. And if we’re going to take the kind of seismic franchise risk we’re talking about, with all the assets we’d be giving up on, and all the new investments we’d have to make, I don’t see how we can justify it without better odds.

As tantalizing as it always seems to be, explosive athletic ability does not always translate to championships in the NFL, at least not at the QB position. If anything, history indicates the opposite. The GOAT, Tom Brady, is certainly not known for his mobility. Yet all he has done in his stellar 19 year career, is take his team to 13 conference championships and win 6 out of his 9 Super Bowls appearances. We will likely never see anything like it again. His is already the greatest career a QB has ever had, and he’s still going. I would venture a guess that Kingsbury would find a way to make his offense thrive with Brady at the helm.

It’s not just Brady, within the pantheon of all-time greats, only a few QBs were capable of running as a legitimate threat, and fewer still used that ability as a primary function of achieving their success. It’s certainly not a negative to have the ability to run, but it’s definitely not an indicator of wins and losses.

In just the span of Brady’s career, the league has been introduced to its fair share of super hyped dual threat QBs. Almost all of them have succumbed to the inevitable reality that the NFL will find a way to make QBs pay for exposing themselves to additional hits. Several sustained injuries, the rest learned quickly they would have to adjust their style in order to stick around. Examples like Vick, RG3, Wentz, Kaepernick, Newton, Mariota and Watson, all were supposed to represent the next big trend in the NFL. Now they’re more like cautionary canaries in the coal mine. It's not that they haven't changed the landscape of the NFL, but not to the extent most of us imagined. I understand some of those players are currently playing and still have the potential to do great things. But none of them were/are able to sustain the style of play they entered the league with. I get the allure, every so often a talent comes around that makes everyone go gaga imagining the possibilities. But the history of the NFL is riddled with the unfulfilled promise of most of those players.

I’m not saying Rosen will be anything like Brady, but it’s likely he’ll be far more agile in 10 years than Brady has ever been in his life. Rosen’s obviously not a running threat, but he’s more than nimble enough to make teams pay if they leave open running lanes. We’ve already witnessed that. And it’s hard to ignore, when given the chance, Rosen has displayed moments of breathtaking elite arm talent.

Another thing I find worrisome, is the constant comparisons of Murray being the next Russell Wilson. First off, if it only required taking a flyer with a 3rd round pick to acquire him, that would be a no brainer. But we’re talking about the 1st pick in the draft the year after trading up to take a QB with the 10th pick in last year’s draft. The organizational domino effect would be monumentally consequential and irreversible.

I think it’s also important to distinguish the different styles of QBs with the ability to run. A legitimate "dual threat" QB is just as likely to run for an 80 yard touchdown as they would throw for one. It wouldn’t be uncommon for them to have games with rushing statistics comparable to a running back. A "mobile" QB can make you pay with their feet but typically only in strategic moments. And they don’t take nearly as many chances or shots to the body.

In my opinion Wilson is not a true "dual threat" QB. He is definitely an elusive, mobile QB who will pick a few key moments in games to extend plays or pick up chunk yardage. But you don’t see him consistently having double digit rushing games or taking as many unnecessary hits. He uniquely uses his capabilities to confound defenses and keep them honest. Murray could potentially do the same thing, but that’s not what makes him special. And it’s likely he would not be used that way in a classic college style Air Raid offense. And if we find ourselves saying we wouldn’t be running a pure version of the Air Raid in the NFL, I would then question the reasoning for making the change in the first place.

We should all reassess why we’re willing to give up on Rosen so quickly. It would also help to check our societal knee jerk impulse to always be on the lookout for greener pastures. It’s easy to get caught up in the enthusiasm of shiny new toys. But just because we can, doesn’t mean we should.

There are plenty of examples of players who struggled their first year, yet went on to do great things. Everyone was calling Goff a bust after his first year. Two years later he took his team to the Super Bowl. Aikman went 1-15 his rookie year. In the process of earning that forgettable achievement, he completed 52.9% of his passes, had a TD/INT ratio of 9/18 and earned a QBR of 55.7. I think we all know how he turned out. Peyton Manning still holds the rookie record for interceptions on his way to, wait for it, a 3-13 record. There are just too many examples of QBs flipping the script after a horrible first year, especially after being matched with an offensive guru who knows what they're doing. Rosen has all the tools you could want in a franchise QB. It’s not his fault he’s had to work with 5 different OCs in the last 4 years. I’d be very curious to see what Kingsbury can do with him short and long term.

To help explain the extent of my apprehension, let’s do a thought experiment. Imagine if Vick entered the draft the year after Peyton Manning. Then imagine if the Colts got caught up in the Vick hype and decided to throw in the towel and make the switch to Vick. They then trade Manning for a ham sandwich and a pack of chewing gum (aka, a 3rd round pick) to make room to select Vick #1 overall. Now imagine Colts fans having to watch as not just Manning goes on to have a legendary career, but the franchise cornerstone defensive player they could have had, had they not used the 1st pick on Vick, also goes on to have a great career with another team (see my article on draft scenarios here). In the meantime, Vick has some highlight reel moments for a few years before his relevance diminishes and he ends up bounces around the league. He eventually retires without achieving anything significant and the Colt fan base is left with telling stories to unwitting strangers of how they used to have the great Peyton Manning but traded him after only one year. That scenario is not entirely implausible here.

Now before you all get your tighty whiteys in a bunch, I’m not saying Rosen will be the next Manning or Brady, or Murray will turn out like Vick. But it’s really not a stretch to imagine the Cards choosing Murray, only to watch Rosen catapult to stardom while Murray gets broken in half his first game. We could just as easily watch in anguish as Murray has a league altering career with another team while Rosen never reaches his potential with us. The fact is, no one knows. But we’ve already made a significant investment in Rosen, and it’s not like he didn’t show promise. The deciding factor should be what we would have to give up in draft picks, cap space and opportunity costs by making the switch vs. what we potentially gain. If they were both in this draft and all things were equal, it would at least be a reasonable discussion to take Murray. But it would still be a tough decision.

Finally, consider the cost of making the change – We know we’ve already invested a 10th overall pick, along with a 3rd and 5th round pick for Rosen. While I disagree with the pundits who claim he would only fetch a 3rd round pick in a trade, it is possible. It’s pretty much a certainty we won’t come close to recovering our original investment. And that doesn’t factor the instant cap hit the Cardinals would have to absorb by trading him. We would essentially be paying half his total contract for only one year of service. That’s a tough pill to swallow when there are so many other impact positions that could help us in this coming draft.

I say we must stand pat with Rosen and build a winning supporting cast around him.