Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Hooker didn't if make a tackle


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, indyagent17 said:

QB's do not throw his way very often

16 targets this year according to pff which is low

 

i guess the problem is teams dont even need to test him to beat us, they should use him differently imo

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm wrong about this, but how exactly does an offense "target" a FS who is playing the prevent zone?  

 

He's the DB we see on TV coming over the top coverage to help the CB who has slightly trailing coverage.  The FSs job is to get over in time to break up the play.  Or in Hooker's billed ability, to get there way ahead of time to intercept the ball.

 

In a pass situation like that, is it the FS or the CB who is being targeted?  Do the stats double count as both being targeted?

 

I think there are schemes where the FS is actually responsible for covering a receiver one on one.  That would be where a target is more accurately measured, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking, a FS racking up a lot of tackles in a games is not a great thing. That means your DL and LB's aren't making the plays they should and the ballcarrier is getting to your last line of defense consistently.

 

I see Hooker's lack of tackles in this game more of a product of his role in the scheme playing the deep FS role and everyone else racking up the tackles (Walker with 16, Leonard with 6, Geathers with 6).

 

I'm not saying any criticism of Hooker is unwarranted (he's definitely not playing up to his potential this season, due to scheme or otherwise), but the reason for this thread is just silly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, DougDew said:

Maybe I'm wrong about this, but how exactly does an offense "target" a FS who is playing the prevent zone? 

its when they throw to someone in his zone which is rather big.  there are free safeties that see a lot more targets than hooker does

 

personally i dont like how the are using him either, the free safety gets more chances when your team plays man or cover 3

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aaron11 said:

its when they throw to someone in his zone which is rather big.  there are free safeties that see a lot more targets than hooker does

 

personally i dont like how the are using him either, the free safety gets more chances when your team plays man or cover 3

So in cover 2 on a deep route, does the CB break off his coverage to follow a more shallow route and Hooker picks up the deep receiver by himself?

 

So he would be covering one half of the deep zone.  And he doesn't get targeted because he's a really good safety or because the other one is the easier target?

 

I'm not sure what targeting has to do with it.  I assume offenses pick on the weakest link, and Hooker is not that in our secondary, that's probably true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Pacergeek said:

Hooker is one of the most overrated Indianapolis Colts I can remember

 

 

nonsense. (hint: i didn't say nonsense)

He's not Ed Reed, but he's not bad- at all. Watch what happens in the secondary when he's not there.

And what's with this mangled thread title? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

So in cover 2 on a deep route, does the CB break off his coverage to follow a more shallow route and Hooker picks up the deep receiver by himself?

 

yeah but sometimes the corner can double the deep receiver if there is no one else

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aaron11 said:

 

yeah but sometimes the corner can double the deep receiver if there is no one else

Yeah, I would think that he would just run with the receiver into the deep zone if there is no other receiver heading into his shallow zone.

 

I'm just wondering how targets on a free safety is measured since there could be times when the corner is providing double coverage. 

 

It seems clearer to use targets as a way to measure a CBs coverage skills, especially in a man scheme.  It seem more fuzzy to do it with a safety in a zone scheme. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah, I would think that he would just run with the receiver into the deep zone if there is no other receiver heading into his shallow zone.

 

I'm just wondering how targets on a free safety is measured since there could be times when the corner is providing double coverage. 

 

It seems clearer to use targets as a way to measure a CBs coverage skills, especially in a man scheme.  It seem more fuzzy to do it with a safety in a zone scheme. 

 

yeah target numbers certainly are not the end all be all.   cover 2 is meant to take away deep passes but we didnt score enough to force many deep throws

 

last year we did and it made hooker more valuable imo 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

 

nonsense. (hint: i didn't say nonsense)

He's not Ed Reed, but he's not bad- at all. Watch what happens in the secondary when he's not there.

And what's with this mangled thread title? 

When he does not play, the secondary is awful. When he does play, the secondary is awful. Hooker should be called "The Ghost" instead of Hilton because he's usually invisible. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, DougDew said:

An elite player.....maybe even simply a good football player...should be able to contribute in a meaningful way no matter what scheme is being played.  Some players are better at some things than other things, but still....

 

If you have to tailor the play calls to accommodate a player who can only contribute in one way, that player pretty much stifles the ability to do anything else. 

 

So he's great at playing prevent zone defense, and only when he lines up far enough away from the LOS.  I would think that it would open up the underneath pretty widely and forces the other players to be exceptionally good.  We don't have the elite underneath players to keep offenses from moving the ball at will.  And it will be tough to accumulate that many underneath players and still afford a QB, IMO.

Elite underneath players? I actually think that our lb core is our strength on d right now. Add in Moore and Willis. Our d is bend but dont break and protect the red zone. Gives up yardage but minimize points. I cant figure why we make other qbs look all pro, other than scheme. Think we held rbs under 100 yds for like a 1.5 seasons or close to it. Also held most offenses to respectable numbers. Our O is not carrying their weight, poor field position, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Pacergeek said:

When he does not play, the secondary is awful. When he does play, the secondary is awful. Hooker should be called "The Ghost" instead of Hilton because he's usually invisible. 

Oversimplification is overly simple.

The secondary has been terrible because of it's insistence of using the most basic, Jr. High cover two principals with the idea being that it's plug and play and the young guys won't blow assignments, a smaller cog in the bend don't break approach that Eberflus is going for. When the pass rush isn't on point, guys like Drew Brees are going to be perfect against it. 

It's my opinion that a secondary with Kenny Moore, Piere Desire and Malik Hooker isn't short on guys who can play. So what we're watching is a by product of other things. If you wanted to trash a guy, I probably wouldn't bother with responding to an overreaction to Rock. Ok tackler, didn't mind his general competitiveness, but he didn't cover very well and got caught up in his fair share of PI calls.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Classic. A roasting thread about a player and the OP didn't even spell it right. 

 

Seems folks just do what they do best.....find a punching bag and go for it. Damned if the logic fits or not, just punch away. Hey, but it makes us all feel better if we put a player or coach down, I mean after all, I'm suffering here!

 

Lol.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2019 at 11:50 PM, Thunderbolt said:

You win some and you lose some.  I think Ballard needs fire his scouts and hire new ones.

Another TJ Green clone....

My good God. Let's just knock every player on the team because we are real Colt fans and we know everyone's coverage on every play and know better than the coaches. 

I believe it was the Texan game Hooker got roasted on here unmercifully for a TD down the right sideline that appeared to be a blown coverage by Hooker. Later in the week Desir apologized for blowing the coverage. They were in man and he played zone and let his man blow by him uncontested. Hooker got blamed big time. 

Hooker isn't pro bowl caliber yet but is damn good.  I know I am in the minority but will stand by my contention that he is a good safety on a pass rush hungry team. Till we start putting pressure on the QB all of our secondary will continue to look bad.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2019 at 11:43 PM, Jdubu said:

Yeah, Hooker has been pretty much a non factor this season. Again, you just have to ask, is it the players or is it the scheme? Either it’s the scheme or Hooker has continued to decline throughout this season along with several others 

 

Scheme ... we dont ask any of out defenders to do much of anything but be there to make a tackle smh

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2019 at 11:02 PM, Chloe6124 said:

Let’s be fair hooker was drafted before any of the current coaches were here. He may not be the guy to fit the coaches schemes.

Rubbish.  I could cut and paste u what Ballard said in a video bout Hooker after they drafted him.  He thought he was by far the best player at 15. Couldn't wait to turn the card.  He viewed him as a game changer regardless of the scheme he played in.  Another free pass for Ballard. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like teams don't have to throw it deep on us very often because we couldn't put up more than 20 points a game. Alot of deep throws were off play action. He seemed fine last year's when we were burrying teams. He isn't a tackling specialist. Willis is tho. If you want to see him shine then our offense is gonna have to put more than 10 points on the board in the first half.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2019 at 12:10 AM, CR91 said:

Guys I'm telling you it's the scheme. If the colts wanna play like the 2013 Seahawks, they need to play cover 1 not cover 2. Yes that is more aggressive and requires more man coverage, but we need to do something to help our dline. They were a complete liability since the first game of the season

I hate the soft zone coverage schemes that the Colts play.  Any defense that knowingly has “no coverage zones” as an accepted part of the scheme is a big problem.  Hooker has been disappointing as he is not the ball hawk that many thought he would be but our scheme is horrible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

I hate the soft zone coverage schemes that the Colts play.  Any defense that knowingly has “no coverage zones” as an accepted part of the scheme is a big problem.  Hooker has been disappointing as he is not the ball hawk that many thought he would be but our scheme is horrible. 

 

hooker's problem is not his coverage. Imo, he doesn't trust his eyes. I feel like if he took a few more chances, he'd be in better position to make a play on the ball

Link to post
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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would be a good deal for the Pats, not the most unbelievable trade either.
    • You ask a lot of good questions.    Unfortunately, I don't think that I, or anyone else,  has a lot of good answers.   Here's what I think we know.   Over The Cap has the Colts with just over $26 Mill.   Spotrac shows less,  and after the Carrie signing, I think we're going to be at $22.4 or so.   I also think we'd like to find a way to thread the financial needle and sign both Houston and Ertz (as a FA).   Even if you allowed $12 Mil for that, (Houston $7 mill and Ertz $5m)  that would leave us with roughly 10-$12 mill, give or take.   Currently, with our 6 picks,  Spotrac shows that will take roughly $6.5 to sign them.   But we all know Ballard has never had a draft class with less than 8 picks,  so expect two more, and that will bring the money needed to sign them to roughly $8 Mill.   Suddenly, we'd be down to $2-4 Mill and change.   Now, this is the part, where I don't know if @w87r  will step in for more financial adjustments that will show that we will have a few more $ than my math shows.    He's a wiz that way!      But typically, teams want 5-10% in reserve for in-season transactions.   BUT....   can you afford to have that much in reserve when your cap has shrunk to $185?     Yes?    No?    I don't know?     Who knows?   So....    lots of questions that need answers....    and we just don't know?    Both Houston and Ertz look like situations that might not resolve themselves until May......    So, we're left hanging....  
    • I vaguely remembered something like this but misremembered that I saw it on Hard Knocks so figured it couldn't haven't been the Colts.   Now that you mention this though, I think you're right.
    • OK....    I thought what I was saying was pretty obvious, but perhaps not,  so I'll try again....   If Chris Ballard wants to blow up and destroy everything he's spent the last 4 years building, I can't think of anything that would do it better than what you suggest.   I'm NOT saying CB should give Q and Darius blank contracts and say "fill in with the numbers you want"....   but CB will re-sign them and they will be big and generous contracts done without a lot of public fighting (unless someone gets WAY out of line with what they're asking.   But I'm not expecting that.)   Ballard has built a franchise built on culture.   We talk about here.   The team talks about it non-stop.    It's buzzing all over the city of Indianapolis.   It's even now buzzing around the NFL.    To suddenly play hardball with your best players, or worse,  trade them because they don't play the right position,  would literally destroy what he's built.   Blow-up the locker room.  Undercut  the relationships Frank Reich has with his players.   The rest of the team would see how we treated Q and Darius and think....   "why should I play hard for this franchise?   F*** them!   I'll ask to be traded the first chance I get."   In case you haven't noticed,  players demanding to be traded has caught on in the NFL.   It's not just for basketball or baseball anymore.   Ballard would lose all credibility with everyone.   He'd have wasted his 4 years here.   Reich would be screwed.   The front office would be furious.   Irsay would likely want to fire him.   It would destroy this franchise.   Final thought....    since you love to throw around what Belichick does....    deal with this...   when the Patriots were winning Super Bowls and making deep playoff runs year after year...     do you know who some of the top players were, besides Brady?     Logan Mankins,  offensive guard.   Rob Gronkowski,  Tight End.    Vince Wilfork,  Nose Tackle.  Donte Hightower, Inside linebacker.    Four key players.    All paid very well.    All Belichick favorites.    None, with the possible exception of Gronk played a sexy, glamour position that you obsess about.       I expect to agree with NONE of this.    But as someone who covered the NFL for 30 years as a member of the media,  and has followed football as close as I could for 25 more years (55 in all)  this is my judgement what would happen if Ballard would do what you suggest.     Sorry.    Good luck.....  
    • There are a few national writers who have speculated that Justin Houston will sign elsewhere either during or just after the draft. A fair question if that happens is: what are the Colts’ remaining options?  1. Sign someone like Melvin Ingram or Ryan Kerrigan. Not very good options, but I’d take Ingram.  2. Draft at least one DE early. This is the best and most obvious option, but after the second round, the pickings are going to be slim. So it will have to be a Day 1 or early Day 2 pick.  3. Roll with what you’ve got. Ugly option to even think about.  Conclusion: At this point, the Colts’ pass rush is seriously hurting if Houston isn’t resigned. Ballard of course knows this. Here’s hoping there’s a breakthrough in negotiations pre-draft, because signing Houston gives the team flexibility in the draft.  If the Colts allow Houston to sign elsewhere, given that this is a weak DE draft class, the Colts are putting themselves in a position where they HAVE to get a top DE early. And that could have them reaching Day 1 to make sure they do. To avoid that, give Houston a sweetener in the offer and get him signed!
  • Members

    • stitches

      stitches 8,425

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Robert Johnson

      Robert Johnson 97

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IinD

      IinD 2,146

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 9,268

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ClaytonColt

      ClaytonColt 289

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • tvturner

      tvturner 503

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ScotColt

      ScotColt 185

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...