Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
Originally posted by mkmasn:
Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
Originally posted by mkmasn:
1. Don't we already have a Cyprien Bandwagon thread?
2. He carried his defense. I haven't really seen another S in this year's draft do that. For all the whiffs and poor form people like to say he shows, how can he have led his team in tackles? Against some pretty decent football programs like Rutgers, Texas A&M, Louisville, etc...
3. He's a Goldson CLONE with better pass coverage. I've only seen one or two S in the draft that can hit half as hard as this kid.
4. /thread or merge: http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/171447-jonathan-cyprien-bandwagon/
This is not a bandwagon thread. It's the exact opposite. Carrying a defense with no other NFL prospect on it? Any NFL level player would do that. That doesn't make him the type of elite NFL prospect that is successful in the big league. I don't see what makes him a great at coverage either. Seems like he plays in the box far too often for that...
Yes it is. Go read that thread and read the same discussion. The pros and cons of the player. Just because it's masked under a different name, doesn't make it a different discussion.
Because that's his call, to play in the box? It's not the coach calling the defense? Also, who's calling him elite? I'm calling him an early second round pick. I'm calling him a #34, not a #1. Nowhere in any of my posts about him have I ever said anything other than an early second rounder.
Frankly, IDGAF who we draft. The scouts, analysts and coaches know better than I do, so when I see a kid who can fill a role we just lost, Goldson, and is not only ranked very highly in a strong draft class, but continues to rise, I go watch some video. And from what I've seen is playmaking ability and hard hits. As for coverage, virtually every analyst, again -- and these guys have watched more hours of film on the kid than you've collectively spent on the toilet -- states he has the speed and coverage ability to play deep.
Here's a hypothetical question for ya:
Is it possible the couple plays where you watched him get burned was due to bad coverage call?
The decision to play in the box is not his, however, the fact that the coach is making that decision usually says something about a player. I tend to give coaches the benefit of knowing what they're doing, so I assume his coach knows that his best contribution will be in the box. Is that definitive? No, but it is something I don't love when watching a player. Same with any position. If a college kid was never asked to go deep and only went for intermediate routes, I would assume the coaching staff doesn't see him as a deep threat.
If you don't give a f*** who we draft then why are you on the forum discussing the draft? That's actually what this is for. For fans to give their opinions, share knowledge, ask questions, and debate. Clearly you must give a f***. Did I miss something?
Also, not to be a prick about it, but your question in no way qualifies as a hypothetical one. It's actually just a question.
1. Of, based on, or serving as a hypothesis.
My original question, "Is it possible the couple plays where you watched him get burned was due to bad coverage call?" is 100% hypothetical. I have no knowledge of the coaches call on the plays in question. I pose the hypothesis the coach called the wrong defense. I can't scientifically prove it, nor do I want to, but it's still a hypothetical question nonetheless. If the coach calls the plays, is it possible the coach is not very good? Why does a star player at a small school not get the benefit of the doubt, but the coach does?
Which brings me to: Playing at a small school has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on that player's skills transferring to the NFL. The Nevada Wolf Pack is from the Mountain West Conference, IIRC... Not exactly a head turner in terms of college football. Joe Flacco went to Delaware and just won the SB.
That's just SB starting QBs. The list of other starting caliber players gets much bigger. Brian Urlacher went to New Mexico State, DeMarcus Ware from Troy, Jared Allen and Idaho State... there's some "elite" players to ease your troubled mind.
IDGAF because it clearly doesn't matter what I think. You base your opinion of the kid on what you see from the three videos you could find on youtube and immediately shoot down my opinion, even though the majority of analysts tend to feel the same way about the kid as I do.
The coaches are going to draft someone, regardless of my opinion. The analysts are going to be high on him even if I think he's garbage. So... IDGAF who we draft. That doesn't mean I don't have an opinion.
I do take issue with this statement, however:
I also realize the analysts love him. Thus the title of my thread. I understand many people who I respect see a lot in him. But I don't! I don't get what others see! I saw 3 full games focusing on him, and did not see anything that stood out. I'm not even arguing he's bad...i'm more confused. He's one of the few players getting positive reviews from EVERYONE, and yet I can't see it. Usually with a prospect like that his skills jump out. I have a right to express this confusion and request that people explain to me what it is that makes him good. Your point was that he led his team in tackles. My counterpoint was that being the best player (assuming most tackles correlates with that) in a small school doesn't make someone the type of player that will succeed in the NFL. Here I used the term "elite" not to explain an elite NFL player, but a player who is elite enough for a small school to be a successful NFL player.
Now you're just trying to cover your tracks. I said he carried his team, using an example of leading the defense in tackles. Which, if you think about it, as a safety, that's actually pretty remarkable. Goldson ranked second to PWilly. Only 2 NFL safeties made the top 10 in tackles. 2 CBs too. The rest were LBs.
"Elite" is not subjective. It literally means the best of the best. In your wanting a "debate," you automatically placed me at the extreme end of the supporter camp (which a lot of us tend to do on this board). But I will not agree on your definition of elite, since it's a made up definition, so I guess this "debate" is over.
Boy, this sure does sound like a conversation from the Jonathan Cyprien Bandwagon thread. Let's see... small time football program? Yep, we discussed that. Other safety prospects who may or may not be better? Yep. Ranking and questioning that ranking? Yep. Seriously. Not trying to be a prick either, but there's already a thread about this. In fact, there are two.
The more active of the two:
The one with less replies: