Hooker a bust?

[RedRamage]

I was very surprised when Goff had to sit out for a bit that Bridgewater came in, not Hooker. I know that Bridgewater has more experience of course, but he also wasn't involved with the Lions offense for nearly a full year.

On one hand I don't think you need to be in peak physical shape to be a successful QB and I also doubt that the Lions massively overhauled their offensive scheme and terminology from last year. Still... you have a guy who's been practicing and learning the plays and the terminology and has time spent working with the player in Hooker, and then you've got a guy who just came back to the team like a week ago... and he's the guy the coaches pick to go in? That was surprising to me.

Now, calling a 3rd round pick who's barely had any actual field time and has only had about 1.5 NFL seasons of being able to practice/play... calling that person a bust is admittedly a bit of a clickbait title. Still, it just seems odd to me that Hooker didn't get the nod and it makes me wonder if the staff doesn't have high confidence in Hooker.

[Nate7474]

I think it’s more about the mental makeup and the comfort of having a vet in that role at that time for this coaching staff. I don’t think you can call Hooker a bust but I wouldn’t be surprised to see him traded for a low round pick and vet brought in as a backup instead. 
 

Maybe he goes to where Ben Johnson ends up as someone who knows his offense not necessarily as the starter either. 

[Motor City Sonics]

It's because it was a playoff game and Teddy had experience.  

[Sports_Freak]

8 hours ago, Nate7474 said:

I think it’s more about the mental makeup and the comfort of having a vet in that role at that time for this coaching staff. I don’t think you can call Hooker a bust but I wouldn’t be surprised to see him traded for a low round pick and vet brought in as a backup instead. 
 

Maybe he goes to where Ben Johnson ends up as someone who knows his offense not necessarily as the starter either. 

To Chicago as a backup? Chicago is committed to Williams. 1-1 picks get multiple years to pass or fail.

[Nate7474]

45 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

To Chicago as a backup? Chicago is committed to Williams. 1-1 picks get multiple years to pass or fail.

I was thinking more along the lines of if Johnson went to the Raiders. Maybe Cleveland who could use a cheap QB?

Edited January 21 by Nate7474

[Tenacious D]

Why are we trading Hooker?  What a luxury to have him continue to develop and be available as insurance.

[Nate7474]

Not necessarily.

Just seems like Dan likes having a Vet backup and frankly he’s not much younger than Goff if you’re grooming him. We also could go for some draft capital. 

[Sports_Freak]

21 minutes ago, Nate7474 said:

I was thinking more along the lines of if Johnson went to the Raiders. Maybe Cleveland who could use a cheap QB?

If he's under contract with the Lions, keep him. He was pretty highly regarded in college until he got hurt. Good backup while he's still signed.

[MichiganCardinal]

Only the coaching staff knows because we never actually see him. I don’t expect him to be traded though. His value is about as low as it could be.

It doesn’t inspire confidence that in the end of his second season in the league, shortly after his 27th birthday, the team thought a guy who was coaching high school ball a month ago gave them a better chance to win. I’m sure Teddy being a veteran played into that, but the point remains.

[Jimbo]

I think it was the situation with being down.  If we were up, he might of played.  Just a tough spot to put a young player in.

Who knows if he's bust or not. 

[Motown Bombers]

Hooker was inactive. He was the emergency QB. He could only go in if both Goff and Bridgewater got injured. 

Edited January 21 by Motown Bombers

[buddha]

nobody is going to trade for hendon hooker.  he has no value.  he hasnt played.

[RedRamage]

On 1/20/2025 at 11:12 PM, Tenacious D said:

Why are we trading Hooker?  What a luxury to have him continue to develop and be available as insurance.

Because he's a bust... at least in hypothetically. My original post was positing that the Lions may not have had confidence in Hooker because he put Bridgewater in when Goff had to come out instead of Hooker. I found it odd that they put in the guy who'd only been back for like a week or two in place of the guy who'd been with the team all year, learning the playbook, getting the reps (if just the backup reps) in practice, developing with and getting to know the players.

So *IF* the Lions don't have faith in Hooker, maybe we trade him. But obviously if I'm totally misreading the situation and the Lions still think highly of Hooker, then don't.

[RedRamage]

On 1/21/2025 at 3:35 PM, Motown Bombers said:

Hooker was inactive. He was the emergency QB. He could only go in if both Goff and Bridgewater got injured. 

But that only shifts the timing of the decisions, not the results of the decision. The Lions still decided that Bridgewater provided a better options for them if Goff went down.

[buddha]

On 1/24/2025 at 2:48 PM, RedRamage said:

Because he's a bust... at least in hypothetically. My original post was positing that the Lions may not have had confidence in Hooker because he put Bridgewater in when Goff had to come out instead of Hooker. I found it odd that they put in the guy who'd only been back for like a week or two in place of the guy who'd been with the team all year, learning the playbook, getting the reps (if just the backup reps) in practice, developing with and getting to know the players.

So *IF* the Lions don't have faith in Hooker, maybe we trade him. But obviously if I'm totally misreading the situation and the Lions still think highly of Hooker, then don't.

trade him for what?  a conditional 7th?  the lions benched him for a high school football coach, why would any other team trade anything of value for that?  the only team i can think that would do that would be the jets or bears because of their coaching staffs.

i actually think the bridgewater stuff was lions hubris and not a cut at hooker.

next preseason determines if hooker stays or goes.  he's not a young man.  this should be his prime.  but not everyone moves on the same schedule development-wise.

[Longgone]

20 minutes ago, buddha said:

trade him for what?  a conditional 7th?  the lions benched him for a high school football coach, why would any other team trade anything of value for that?  the only team i can think that would do that would be the jets or bears because of their coaching staffs.

i actually think the bridgewater stuff was lions hubris and not a cut at hooker.

next preseason determines if hooker stays or goes.  he's not a young man.  this should be his prime.  but not everyone moves on the same schedule development-wise.

Hooker went in the 3rd. He’d have gone higher if healthy. He’s healthy now and has been coached in a good pro system. He has shown the requisite skills and he has value.

[RandyMarsh]

8 minutes ago, Longgone said:

Hooker went in the 3rd. He’d have gone higher if healthy. He’s healthy now and has been coached in a good pro system. He has shown the requisite skills and he has value.

Agree about the first part but not sure about the last sentence, I don't think he has enough sample size to say one way or another how his NFL skills are. Also you have to consider that he only has 2 years left on his rookie deal so any team trading for him really only has 1 year to evaluate and make a decision whether to spend the money to keep him or not. 

[Longgone]

1 hour ago, RandyMarsh said:

Agree about the first part but not sure about the last sentence, I don't think he has enough sample size to say one way or another how his NFL skills are. Also you have to consider that he only has 2 years left on his rookie deal so any team trading for him really only has 1 year to evaluate and make a decision whether to spend the money to keep him or not. 

He has played enough and practiced enough to see the skills he was projected to possess. Regular season games are only a part of your exposure.

[holygoat]

 I doubt anyone is trading more than a future 7th for Hooker. Pre-injury draft hype is meaningless at this point, and his limited NFL action is neither deep nor wildly impressive. And fair or not, other GMs will wonder why Campbell put Bridgewater in over Hooker, even if for just one snap.

[Longgone]

13 minutes ago, holygoat said:

 I doubt anyone is trading more than a future 7th for Hooker. Pre-injury draft hype is meaningless at this point, and his limited NFL action is neither deep nor wildly impressive. And fair or not, other GMs will wonder why Campbell put Bridgewater in over Hooker, even if for just one snap.

You are making an assumption based on nothing really. His value is based on his abilities, which were hindered by injury at draft time. That is resolved and he has close to 2 years of pro training. That does not make him less valuable. No rational evaluator is going base judgment on something like the Bridgewater situation.

[holygoat]

Hooker's college performance becomes less relevant each year he's removed from it. Two full seasons into his NFL career, Hooker's perceived NFL value is based far more on what he has done in the NFL, which is bupkis. If he does have any value beyond a late Day 3 pick, we'll find out this off season. A weak QB draft class should have QB-needy teams beating down the door for Hendon if you're right, but I don't think you are.

 

[Longgone]

7 hours ago, holygoat said:

Hooker's college performance becomes less relevant each year he's removed from it. Two full seasons into his NFL career, Hooker's perceived NFL value is based far more on what he has done in the NFL, which is bupkis. If he does have any value beyond a late Day 3 pick, we'll find out this off season. A weak QB draft class should have QB-needy teams beating down the door for Hendon if you're right, but I don't think you are.

 

I’m not talking about his college performance, I’m talking about his innate abilities and his training in a professional system. What they do in games is just the tip of the iceberg.

[holygoat]

11 hours ago, Longgone said:

What they do in games is just the tip of the iceberg.

lolwut?

[Jimbo]

Its funny how anyone that has not been in the organization knows how good Hooker is or isn't.  Bridgwater wasn't just a high school football coach lol.  He is a very good veteran that knew the system.  It definitely doesn't look good for Hooker although it doesn't mean he's terrible.  I do think if he was playing very good in practice, the Lions would of found ways to use him throughout the year although no one knows.  We will know in this off season.  He might be asked to be traded (for peanuts because that will be what he gets) or let go so he can compete with a team that he has a chance of starting.  If the Lions comply, then we know they weren't impressed with him.  There just really isn't a way to tell if he is a bust because we have a top 10 QB that hasn't gotten hurt (thank god).  Was he worth a 3rd round pick.  Obviously not now because he hasn't played and 3rd round picks could of contributed with our injury filled season.

[RedRamage]

4 hours ago, Jimbo said:

Its funny how anyone that has not been in the organization knows how good Hooker is or isn't.

For the record... I'm well aware of my ignorance here. This is just message board chatter. I'm not claiming that Hooker is or isn't a bust... that the Lions do or don't like him... or that other teams do or don't value him at all. It's just speculation based on Bridgewater vs. Hooker getting the nod.