Your lead-in is absolutely hyperbolic nonsense. They had Tannehill and never had the tandem of Hill and Waddle weaponry-wise in front of Henry.Yeah, because Henry, in his prime, won all those Championships.
You, obviously, have faith that DH would still be hungry, willing and able to make a huge difference, rather than just play out the string for an unfamiliar team/surroundings. Having seen how that type of thing has worked out for this franchise before, I don't have that much confidence in him being that huge of a difference maker.
There is legitimacy to both lines of thought, though, and having a different opinion doesn't make others stupid as you purport. It isn't as "black or white" as you make it sound, and the "your was is the only way" attitude wears thin after a while.
I mean it's fine to have a firm opinion, which you have expressed (literally) a hundred times, and stand by those convictions, but there are no guarantees in this situation, as you keep stating there are.
Why would we sign Henry if we didn't immediately gather that he has the fire in the belly and do a fair amount of investigation to substantiate that? You're using past experiences to cite the "my way is the only way". It isn't but I'm much more effective at selling my thoughts than most. If you can't convince me otherwise, I stand victorious!