I heard some guy call into 97.1 talking about how Hooker might have been a wasted pick, if we re-sign Goff and let it roll for a few years. Karsch and Anderson got into a fairly in-depth discussion about whether or not it matters, but I feel like they missed the bigger point.

Goff is GOING to get hurt. It’s statistically improbable that he plays healthy for his entire career. This year, Bridgewater is our stop gap solution, because Hooker is still recovering from injury. And, don’t get me wrong, if we have to rely on Bridgewater, I think he is capable and experienced enough to step in and win games.

What we have for the future, though, is a young, hungry guy under contract. A mobile quarterback with a high level skill set, who has been learning our specific playbook from minute one in the NFL.

So, if you look around the league right now, you have Burrow, Cousins, Watson, Rodgers, etc out for the season. The argument for Hooker is that we potentially have QB1 with Goff and QB1A with Hooker. When you lose THAT guy, you want to be able to double tap with the next man up. QB depth is strangely overlooked in the league. In the worst case scenario, Brad Holmes might come out looking like even more of a genius for having two starting QBs on staff.

If we never have to/get to use Hooker, it may be a bit of a question mark. But, if Goff goes down next year, and we have his perfect replacement or upgrade sitting in the wings, the train just might be unstoppable.

I AM NOT equating Hooker to Tom Brady, but if you look back at the Bledsoe/Brady season for the Patriots in 2001, we’re potentially set up the same way. I believe in the pick like you do.

It might even come down to a situation where you can sub in depth for the starter to give him a break, or on situational downs. If we need to pick up a 3rd and long, bet on the guy with the more complete skill set. If we’re ahead by two scores and you want to keep Goff pristine, sub in Hooker for a while.

I’m torn between never wanting to see him play, or using him to his max potential. He may be the best backup to ever play the game, we may rely on him for a season, or we may be able to showcase him for a few games and use him to garner more draft capital, a la Matt Flynn to the Seahawks. Any way you look at it, IF he’s good, he’s another BH special. Value in a mid round pick with high upside, and another building block toward creating a dynasty instead of a one and done type of situation.

I think the one thing that Brad learned from his time with the Rams is that sustainability is far more important than a flash-in-the-pan SB win. I think he came here to build a dynasty, like the Steelers, Patriots, or Cowboys; and I believe we’re seeing it happen in real time.