Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Film Room: Malik Hooker


Ricky Spanish

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins PhD said:

So we draft Hooker.  That means we are shifting Coleman back to SS.  I don't hate this.  But, he is going to need to add a touch of weight. 

95 percent of the guys that come into the professional sports (not just the NFL) need to add weight. I don't know why people act like weight is such big deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr. Miagi said:

95 percent of the guys that come into the professional sports (not just the NFL) need to add weight. I don't know why people act like weight is such big deal. 

Oh, my bad, I meant Coleman. He is under 200 lbs.  Usually SS's average between 200-220. When Coleman was forced into the SS role, he was definitely a little light for the position.  If that was to be his full-time position I would expect he would put on a little weight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, caatfan said:

He's in need of some coaching on tackling, but big time potential in pass D. Don't see him being available at 8. Chargers seem to really like him, assuming he doesn't get grabbed before the 7th pick.

We don't use a FS as a tackler. We need a FS who is a ball hawk that has range. He fits the bill.

16 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins PhD said:

So we draft Hooker.  That means we are shifting Coleman back to SS.  I don't hate this.  But, he is going to need to add a touch of weight. 

Coleman did well last year at SS and as he ages he will need to be there. The biggest problem with Colman at SS was he wasn't at FS.

11 minutes ago, CWORS said:

I really like his ball skills but his raw in my opinion. I don't think he provides much more of an impact than what Coleman already provides for us so I would pass on him at No.8. 

You obviously have never watched him play. Dude has way more range than Colman. Better hands too.

8 minutes ago, Mr. Miagi said:

Hooker needs to be a better tackler but he is probably the closest thing to Earl Thomas.

Tackling is not a huge deal in our system at FS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that you guys think Hooker will get anywhere near us is funny. Right now it looks like zero QBs are going to be taken top 5, if that happens all the prospects we are eyeing will probably be gone. We will most likely be looking at Barnett, Foster, Davis, Williams. Maybe Thomas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Daeavorn said:

The fact that you guys think Hooker will get anywhere near us is funny. Right now it looks like zero QBs are going to be taken top 5, if that happens all the prospects we are eyeing will probably be gone. We will most likely be looking at Barnett, Foster, Davis, Williams. Maybe Thomas.

There is always a wildcard team that takes someone unexpected or another team that trades into the top 10 to get a QB. It's not completely out of question he could be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, XClown1986 said:

There is always a wildcard team that takes someone unexpected or another team that trades into the top 10 to get a QB. It's not completely out of question he could be there.

No its not, but we shouldn't expect it. He is a high value safety with incredible range and safety is the hardest position to fill. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ChuckWag78 said:

Just hypothetical, if both Hooker and Adams were available, I would rather have Adams/Colman at SS/FS than Colman/Hooker at SS/FS.

Colman has proven he is capable of being a difference maker at the FS position.

Thoughts?

I would take Adams over just about anyone other than Garrett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...