Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts_Fan12

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    13,997
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by Colts_Fan12

  1. 12 minutes ago, krunk said:

    I like Hooker but it probably wouldn't happen that way for the reasons I listed.  Earl Thomas can do all the things that I mentioned Hooker isn't good at or hasn't shown thus far to be good at.

    I think he has more than enough talent to be a ball hawking stud if we would just use him as a single high safety and stop utilizing him wrong he isn't gonna be a game changer in our boring Tampa 2 we need to make changes and modify our D if we want to get the most out of Malik

    • Like 2
  2. 4 minutes ago, krunk said:

    Ohio State plays the same defense the Colts play.  He knew what scheme he was drafting Hooker for.  If they have any interest in trading him I think it's more or less injury related along with him not being all that physical and combined with the fact that he's not really multi-faceted when it comes to being able to flip flop safety positions.   And finally he's more less average in man coverage. They may be looking for more of a Darnell Savage type guy back there.  A guy who can play man or zone coverages, play at the line of scrimmage and picks balls off also.

    we should just trade him to Seattle and let Pete Carroll turn him into the next Earl Thomas 

  3. 2 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    You already know where my disagreements are going to be here.

     

    1) He didn't know he was going to fire Pagano. If Luck plays that year and we win the division and a playoff game, Pagano would have been kept.

     

    2) He was working with Grigson's scouts and staff, for the most part, and working off of his own info from scouting for KC, while working closely with Pagano's staff. 

     

    3) I don't think you understand what the staff wants to do with the defense. That's based on you calling it an outdated Tampa 2.

     

    4) I still think Hooker is a good fit for the defense I believe they want to run. Safety is crucial, especially if you have a ball hawk.

     

    5) Even still, it stands to reason that their idea of how to spend the 15th pick in the draft is different now than it was three years ago.

     

    6) Biggest factor -- if they are considering moving Hooker -- is likely his inability to stay on the field, which makes them uninterested in making a long term commitment to him. Better to get something of value for him than to let him walk and get a 5th round comp pick three years from now.

     

    And I'll say again, I'm highly skeptical of these rumors, and I don't want them to trade Hooker. 

    I honestly don't believe they are true rumors either and I hope they aren't but unless we get our head out of our butt and play him the right way he will be gone either by being cut traded or he will just leave to go somewhere he will be utilized better and I wouldn't blame him one bit either 

  4. 1 hour ago, Superman said:

     

    He didn't have his staff in place, and was drafting for a different coach/defense. I still think Hooker can play in Eberflus' defense, and he's still a big time playmaker when healthy, but it doesn't make sense to hold that pick over the staff's head given all the changes that have taken place since then.

    he knew when he drafted Hooker he was gonna can Pagano so I don't get this at all. if you weren't planning on playing a scheme to benefit Hooker why the heck did he waste the guys time should have drafted someone to better fit his outdated Tampa 2.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  5. 3 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

    I never once said Hooker was horrible.  However, he is definitely not in the conversation as being a top safety in the league

    except he is.... and has been highly regarded as being avoided by opposing QBs why on earth wouldn't you wanna keep one of the best Linebackers and a top safety instead of one or the other 

  6. reading this thread makes me feel like our fans don't want any top talent on defense. one guy has suggested trading our best player and probably one of the best linebackers in the whole league and others have suggested our top Safety... 

     

    let's just go back to having  no one worth a crap on defense and see how you all like that 

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  7. On 4/17/2020 at 12:24 PM, richard pallo said:

    I still think the best chance of acquiring a player in a trade is Hooker for OJ Howard.  You have to put yourself in Ballards shoes.  If he decided to make Hooker available in a trade what would he want in return?  A 1st?  I think no one will offer him a 1st so he would probably like a 2nd.  The same price the Bucs want for Howard.  Both young 1st rd. starters from the same class.  We get a new starting TE and replace Hooker with Odum or someone else.  This is a conversation I would be willing to have if I were Chris.  Anyway the draft is finally almost here.  Trades could start heating up soon.  

    stop throwing hooker into every trade he shouldn't be traded end of story 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  8. 5 hours ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

    I realize Kirk Cousins took us deep in 2019 but he was fool's gold. Normally an average QB (bottom of top 15) doesn't do that. The end result was getting blown out by 49ers 10-27 without even reaching the NFC title game. Cousins beat the saints in the playoffs in over time on a ticky tacky no-pass interference call on third down in red zone, couldn't beat the saints in regulation while leading 20-10 like we did in 2017. See, it could be interpreted a number of ways.

     

    Anyway, I was not trying to make it a Cousins debate. 

     

    Colts need a QB, I suggested there's a chance to get Cousins. Whether I'm happy with the current situation has nothing to do with this, there's a chance Cousins could be available after 2020 season and if not, he and Vikings would be tied up until 2022. 

     

    As the discussion is about all the QBs that could be had for Colts, I wanted to mention another option.

    yeah well dont give me hope lol cause I would be doing backflips down the street if we got Kirk on the Colts!!!

    • Like 2
  9. 1 minute ago, buccolts said:

    Otto Graham, for those who only count the number of championships.

    lol I know right?! like a team accomplishment can somehow determine how great you are personally! haha

    • Like 1
  10. 4 hours ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

    No he didn't play at Mahomes or Jackson level.

     

    Saying MVP level for Cousins is a serious insult at these two young QBs, let's not repeat that. Cousins played in the same level as Tannehill. Tannehill had same TD: INT ratio and similar passing yards per game in 10 games he played, with more rushing TDs than Cousins. Tannehill was also a "MVP candidate" in theory, but really they both weren't. 

     

    There were Only two exceptional QB performances from Patrick Mahomes and Lamar Jackson. (Then there was Derrick Henry among other positions). 

     

    Then there was quite a drop-off to other QBs. There were only 2 MVP candidates last year, and one became MVP candidate level in post season by winning the Super Bowl after MVP award was given to the regular season MVP. 

     

    Let's not insult what Lamar Jackson did last year. That was league haunting stuff. That's called MVP. Or how Mahomes came back from injury and won SB.

    just cause pat and lamar had unheard of seasons doesn't make what Kirk did useless lol

  11. Just now, VikingsFanInChennai said:

    MVP candidate is not what wins games, Keenum won 13 games out of 18. In one year. 

     

    Cousins has won 18 games out of 31 games. In two years. 

     

    Pro Bowl, MVP "candidature", popular fan votes and likes do not matter, how team performed and how many wins they achieved is the only thing that matters at the end of season.

    no but being an MVP candidate is what gets you paid as a player and that's what your biggest problem is with him. the guy has good stats so obviously the team knew they needed to pony up you dont get a player playing at MVP level for cheap unless by some miracle it's a rookie 

    • Like 2
  12. 2 minutes ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

    Because we had better performance from Teddy or Keenum for a fraction of cost. 

    when was Teddy or Keenum ever a top QB and an MVP candidate? I mean I have always liked Teddy as well but the guy couldnt hold Kirk's jock

    • Haha 1
  13. Just now, w87r said:

    Mind blowing.

     

    I think they are more complaining about having to pay a QB.

     

    Their just not used to having good QB's, so they are not used to paying them I guess.

     

    I'm not even a Cousins fan either. That's the most frustrating part for me.

     

    I'm not invested at all. Just doesn't make sense.

    I mean when you are used to trash that costs peanuts at QB its probably pretty shocking when you have to pony up for one that is actually good 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...