Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Is hooker living up to his hype ?


love the shoe

Recommended Posts

He's not a bust. Far from it. But he's been out of position on several key plays the past two games and that has cost the team. Lets see if the team and Hooker can shore things up in the next two weeks. I expect that to happen. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know if he ever could have, considering how much hype there was. 

 

Regardless, I think his value diminished considerably once we fired Pagano and hired Eberflus.  I'll guess that he's put in position to show his talents about 50% of the plays, not 90% like he might have under Pagano. I don't see that changing as long as Eberflus is here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bhougland said:

I wonder how we would assess Ballard if he didn't get credit for Leonard.  Grigson didn't get credit for Luck and Ballard really shouldn't for Nelson.

 

Drafts have been pretty poor when you compare them to other GMs.

That's a fair point actually.  Never saw it like that before.  He did trade down and got Leonard and still got Nelson, so that was a good move.  Still, that draft had 3 or 4 QBs projected to go in the top 7 picks so its not like it took a genius to trade down from 3 to 6 and still get a good player plus another pick.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cgi4life said:

I think the defense we run and a lack of pass rush limits hooker.  If u want to compare him to Ed Reed we have to remember the Ravens had a great pass rush and good corners that enabled him to roam freely 

 

Oh boy, I remember those days...

 

Peter Boulware

Adalius Thomas

Ray Lewis

Chris McAllister

Kelly Gregg

Haloti Ngata

 

All on that defense.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bhougland said:

I wonder how we would assess Ballard if he didn't get credit for Leonard.  Grigson didn't get credit for Luck and Ballard really shouldn't for Nelson.

 

Drafts have been pretty poor when you compare them to other GMs.


Ballard shouldn’t get credit for Nelson?

 

Oh, dear God!   Please make it stop.  What are the magic words?   This is painful. 
 

He makes the right move, one opposed by many here.  And now that it looks like an obvious move those who are frustrated with this season, and Ballard as well,  now want to deny him credit for a genius move. 
 

I appreciate this is a disappointing season,  but let’s not stop using logic and common sense as we try to figure out what went wrong this year.... 

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, pgt_rob said:

Hooker simply needs another great player around him at corner to help him. He’s got an eye for nabbing the ball but I think he’s forced to play too soft zone with terrible corners. 

Shouldn't that be the other way around for a great player? Hooker should make the corners look better than they are.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Ballard shouldn’t get credit for Nelson?

 

Oh, dear God!   Please make it stop.  What are the magic words?   This is painful. 
 

He makes the right move, one opposed by many here.  And now that it looks like an obvious move those who are frustrated with this season, and Ballard as well,  now want to deny him credit for a genius move. 
 

I appreciate this is a disappointing season,  but let’s not stop using logic and common sense as we try to figure out what went wrong this year.... 

 

 

Actually, it was an obvious move.  There were three QBs plus Saquon Barkley, Chubb, Minkah Fitzpatrick, Derwin James, Roquan Smith and Nelson all at the top of that draft.

 

It was obvious that he was going to get a good player at 6, just like it was obvious Grigson was going to get a good player at 1.  That's his point.

 

And Ballard could have gotten other good players if he traded out of 6. We don't know that two other players he could have picked would not of worked out, including the OL playing LT for NE . That would or could have been the "right" move too.

 

Getting a good player in the first half of round 1 is not special, but whiffing on pick 15 kind of stands out.

 

Malik Hooker = Bjoern Werner ??????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Actually, it was an obvious move.  There were three QBs plus Saquon Barkley, Chubb, Minkah Fitzpatrick, Derwin James, Roquan Smith and Nelson all at the top of that draft.

 

It was obvious that he was going to get a good player at 6, just like it was obvious Grigson was going to get a good player at 1.  That's his point.

 

And Ballard could have gotten other good players if he traded out of 6. We don't know that two other players he could have picked would not of worked out, including the OL playing LT for NE . That would or could have been the "right" move too.

 

Getting a good player in the first half of round 1 is not special, but whiffing on pick 15 kind of stands out.

 

Malik Hooker = Bjoern Werner ??????


Sorry, Doug.   You in particular don’t get to call it an obvious move.   You’ve opposed the move as a mistake fir two straight years.
 

Now it’s obvious? 

 

The move YOU WANTED was for Ballard to trade down again and get more picks.   That was your obvious move.   You opposed taking a guard in the top-10.   You wanted a second trade.  You’ve argued long and loud for that.

 

Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. 
 

I appreciate that this is yet another way for you to argue that Ballard isn’t good at his job.   But only people who don’t know football try to make those  arguments.... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, love the shoe said:

I mean to me he is always a step late in Coverage or too far down the field making a tackle. I like the guy out of Michigan state . I cannot thi k if his name smh . Thoughts ?maybe its just me 

I remember back in the day, when the Tampa defense began showing cracks, and was starting to get beat.  Warren Sapp got targeted for a lot of criticism.  And he answered his critics with an emphatic:  "I am doing my job.  For this defense to work, every single position has a job to do, and they must do it.  If they try to cover for someone else because they didn't do their job, your job gets left open, and the defense falls apart."
I can't help but think of Warren Sapp's analysis when I think of Malik Hooker.  He has a job to do:  deep cover middle.  And he has guys around him that need to do their jobs, too.  But on one side he as a rookie corner (Ya-Sin) who is still getting used to playing zone.  On the other side he has a rookie safety (Willis) who is getting used to NFL speed.  In front of him, the starting nickle is injured, and he has Wilson there, who keeps getting turned around and beat.  The temptation is strong to cheat to their side, to help, but you have a job to do.  And when they screw up, it means that you have an extra step or two required to go clean up what they didn't make happen.  He's got a job to do.  And it ain't easy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hoose said:

He's not a bust. Far from it. But he's been out of position on several key plays the past two games and that has cost the team. Lets see if the team and Hooker can shore things up in the next two weeks. I expect that to happen. 

you know those two big plays the Texans made against us was all hooker fault. Twice he bit down on slot receiver leaving Hopkins one on one. He more of a liability then a safe beat.  In all the stats hooker not even sniffing the top ten lets alone top 20

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


Sorry, Doug.   You in particular don’t get to call it an obvious move.   You’ve opposed the move as a mistake fir two straight years.
 

Now it’s obvious? 

 

The move YOU WANTED was for Ballard to trade down again and get more picks.   That was your obvious move.   You opposed taking a guard in the top-10.   You wanted a second trade.  You’ve argued long and loud for that.

 

Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. 
 

I appreciate that this is yet another way for you to argue that Ballard isn’t good at his job.   But only people who don’t know football try to make those  arguments...

 

The comparison was to Grigson taking Luck.  Both selections were equally obvious or not obvious.

 

Some advocated for Grigson (Irsay) trading the pick and keeping Manning.  I mentioned that, and to select Nick Foles in the third to sit behind Manning as we used the picks to rebuild the team around him. (As a possibility. I didn't think it was the direction the Colts were going so I didn't harp on it on this forum)  Both GMs had great options.  Both chose to keep the pick.   

 

If you're not trading the pick, the selection of a good player at that spot is obvious considering the pool of players on the board.  Trading the picks could have been the "right" move too.  To the point, credit or noncredit should be dispensed equally.  

 

And I've never said Ballard isn't good at his job,( as if saying he isn't is some sort of heresy)  I'm pretty mild when it comes to saying that GMs suck or should be fired.  Anything said in that vain about Ballard is sarcasm.

 

And even if I'd offer the thought about which mid first round pick was better, Grigson's Kelly at 18 or Ballard's Hooker at 15, I'm still not saying that Ballard isn't good at his job, or that Grigson was better.

 

But this isn't a Ballard thread, and Grigson is old news.   

 

Despite what you might say, I've never said that Hooker sucks or should be replaced.  My sincere opinion was expressed in my first post in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

Some of it is Eberflus has him playing close to the LOS a lot of times. He needs  to let him do what he is best at. Plus no pass rush kills the secondary.

But that's the problem, at its root.  An NFL defense needs all 11 players involved in stopping all aspects of the offense.  Prevent defense allows the offense to convert underneath plays.  You can't have one player back there perpetually playing prevent defense or else the other 10 guys won't be able to get off the field on 3rd down.  

 

To Hooker's credit, when he does play close to the LOS, the opponents run game is muted.  Of course, we then see him behave like any other FS helping with the run game and gets beat deep.

 

The idea that you can pick a player to do nothing but play long ball prevent is an idea that's doomed to failure, IMO.  And I think Ballard picked Hooker not solely because of his long ball prevention skills, but because of the high ceiling that comes with being fast and athletic and could learn all aspects of FS play.  Hooker may still do that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...