It is quite possible that the consensus "best choices" for the Jaguars, J. Allen and Garrett, will be gone when the Jaguars are on the board. If they are unable to trade back at this point, who would be a better choice for them, Jamal Adams or Malik Hooker? Both appear to have elite talent and have drawn comparisons to Sean Taylor (Adams) and Ed Reed (Hooker). It would be hard to pass on both these guys if the comparisons are accurate.

 

Adams seems like the more logical pick to me since Cyprien has underachieved. Gipson was very disappointing at free safety, but one has to wonder if he was utilized correctly this season. Hooker has also had just one season as a starter and might be too risky if taken this high.

---

Adams is a very good Safety, but Safeties like Hooker only come around every 5-10 years. He's drawing comparisons to Ed Reed and you simply cannot pass that up. Hooker has to be the pick. 

---

If we go to a traditional split safety then Hooker would be the better choice. Single high, it'll be Adams

---

Adams is more well rounded and a far better run defender. Hooker is a far better playmaker and deep coverage safety.

---

Hooker for a FS or Adams at SS

---

Yeah, they are pretty much impossible to compare. If you want an FS that can be a ballhawk, take Hooker. If you want a SS that is well rounded, play well in coverage, be good in the box, etc. than it's Adams.

 

As an overall player I think Hooker is a bit more rare, but I think Adams is an elite talent himself and fits what we likely need much more than Hooker. I'd be cool with either if we go safety.

---

Hooker all day.

---

I feel Hooker is more SS than FS. 

---

I feel Hooker is more SS than FS.

You havn't watched him then

---

At 6'2 205 he can play either spot at a high level imo.

---

I'd take Hooker as a FS and move Gipson to SS. Gipson would be an upgrade over Cyprien and Hooker should be an elite FS.

---

Hooker, but it doesn't matter because we're not drafting a safety fourth overall.

 

I'd take Hooker as a FS and move Gipson to SS. Gipson would be an upgrade over Cyprien and Hooker should be an elite FS.

Gipson ain't playing no in-the-box safety he'd get lit up. If it's Hooker+Gipson that means we're moving to a 2 high look.

 

At 6'2 205 he can play either spot at a high level imo.

Not really.

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

You always take the best available player on the board. If you watch Hooker play, you see how special he is. The guy is drawing comparisons to Ed Reed. If he's there, we can't pass that up, even if we do have Gipson.

---

I'd take Hooker as a FS and move Gipson to SS. Gipson would be an upgrade over Cyprien and Hooker should be an elite FS.

Gipson doesn't really care for contact so that would be a hard no for me.


But to answer the original question: Hooker all day. He may be my favorite prospect other than Myles Garrett.

---

If we go to a traditional split safety then Hooker would be the better choice. Single high, it'll be Adams

If we hire Mike Smith we wont run single high safety 

He runs a cover 2 shell

So Hooker would be the better pick

---

<B><FONT color=cyan>Jags this is your year</FONT></B>

Hooker, but it doesn't matter because we're not drafting a safety fourth overall.

 

Gipson ain't playing no in-the-box safety he'd get lit up. If it's Hooker+Gipson that means we're moving to a 2 high look.

 

Not really.

 

 

I didn't really mean for Gipson to play as an "in the box" Safety, but having talent like Hooker is too good to pass up, so I would go to a cover 2 where we would play with 2 deep Safeties. On running downs, we could bring in Sample to play "in the box". 

---

If we hire Mike Smith we wont run single high safety 

He runs a cover 2 shell

So Hooker would be the better pick

I really hope this doesn't happen.  The last thing we need is another coach that runs their own flavor of a base defense no matter who is on the roster.  It needs to be fluid and based on our talent, not a square peg/round hole situation.

---

I really hope this doesn't happen.  The last thing we need is another coach that runs their own flavor of a base defense no matter who is on the roster.  It needs to be fluid and based on our talent, not a square peg/round hole situation.

Smith is fairly flexible as HC. In Atlanta he started off as run the ball offense with a standard 4-3 base, then towards the end he turned to an air it out offense with a 3-4 base in order to get more pass rush. Just didn't work out because they didn't have the talent for it

---

Smith is fairly flexible as HC. In Atlanta he started off as run the ball offense with a standard 4-3 base, then towards the end he turned to an air it out offense with a 3-4 base in order to get more pass rush. Just didn't work out because they didn't have the talent for it

That'd be fine then.  Just as long as the coach is flexible.

---

Not really.

Yes really.

---