Please show me the light (Cyprien)

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/

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/

Te'o also carried his defense in a better conference & Division we should draft him too? & yes he does compare to Goldson in miss tackles & whiffs he plays in the box more like a SS by the way OVER RATED

Originally posted by Norwalks_Best:

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/

Te'o also carried his defense in a better conference & Division we should draft him too? & yes he does compare to Goldson in miss tackles & whiffs he plays in the box more like a SS by the way OVER RATED

Cool story, bro. It's funny how virtually EVERY analyst and reporter agree he is slated to go early second round -- right where he should be, btw -- and still say he's one of the most complete safeties in the draft...

Originally posted by mkmasn:

Originally posted by Norwalks_Best:

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/

Te'o also carried his defense in a better conference & Division we should draft him too? & yes he does compare to Goldson in miss tackles & whiffs he plays in the box more like a SS by the way OVER RATED

Cool story, bro. It's funny how virtually EVERY analyst and reporter agree he is slated to go early second round -- right where he should be, btw -- and still say he's one of the most complete safeties in the draft...

Like every reporter/analyst was surprised when 49ers selected Aldon Smith you got to watch the tape son

Just how good is his pass coverage and closing speed?
If he could possess a cheerleader's soul through her snatch, then I expect him to slap WRs around on gameday!

Originally posted by Norwalks_Best:

Originally posted by mkmasn:

Originally posted by Norwalks_Best:

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/

Te'o also carried his defense in a better conference & Division we should draft him too? & yes he does compare to Goldson in miss tackles & whiffs he plays in the box more like a SS by the way OVER RATED

Cool story, bro. It's funny how virtually EVERY analyst and reporter agree he is slated to go early second round -- right where he should be, btw -- and still say he's one of the most complete safeties in the draft...

Like every reporter/analyst was surprised when 49ers selected Aldon Smith you got to watch the tape son

Ummm... they were surprised because it was a reach. The reach payed off, but still a reach.

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...

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

hypothetical
adjective
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.

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/41220138

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:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/171447-jonathan-cyprien-bandwagon/

The one with less replies:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/171221-jonathan-cyprien/

First, I love small school players, Robert Alford being one of my favorite players in the draft. However I expect a certain level of play against their competition that I didn't see from Cyprien. The idea that I watched 3 YouTube clips has a really negative connotation. That's game footage. Not highlights. 3 full games. I get that the analysts have seen more, but I'm also basing my opinion on what I see. I'm aware of what the analysts are saying, and I'm impressed by it. So much, in fact, that I'm doubting what I see and am posing the question about what I'm missing. Also, keep in mind that one online analyst influences another. Matt Miller and Daniel Jeremiah for example, converge on opinions quite a bit, as of late. All I'm saying is that I saw 3 games and came away unimpressed. I'm unimpressed by his stats (expect more dominance from a small school player) and don't see what the fuss is about. He'll be drafted (by us or someone else) and over the next few years I'll get to watch more, but as of now, I don't get why everyone loves him. So I'm asking!

Originally posted by mkmasn:

Originally posted by Norwalks_Best:

Originally posted by mkmasn:

Originally posted by Norwalks_Best:

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/

Te'o also carried his defense in a better conference & Division we should draft him too? & yes he does compare to Goldson in miss tackles & whiffs he plays in the box more like a SS by the way OVER RATED

Cool story, bro. It's funny how virtually EVERY analyst and reporter agree he is slated to go early second round -- right where he should be, btw -- and still say he's one of the most complete safeties in the draft...

Like every reporter/analyst was surprised when 49ers selected Aldon Smith you got to watch the tape son

Ummm... they were surprised because it was a reach. The reach payed off, but still a reach.

Yea like CK7 was 2 you got to see game tape not highlights

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
First, I love small school players, Robert Alford being one of my favorite players in the draft. However I expect a certain level of play against their competition that I didn't see from Cyprien. The idea that I watched 3 YouTube clips has a really negative connotation. That's game footage. Not highlights. 3 full games. I get that the analysts have seen more, but I'm also basing my opinion on what I see. I'm aware of what the analysts are saying, and I'm impressed by it. So much, in fact, that I'm doubting what I see and am posing the question about what I'm missing. Also, keep in mind that one online analyst influences another. Matt Miller and Daniel Jeremiah for example, converge on opinions quite a bit, as of late. All I'm saying is that I saw 3 games and came away unimpressed. I'm unimpressed by his stats (expect more dominance from a small school player) and don't see what the fuss is about. He'll be drafted (by us or someone else) and over the next few years I'll get to watch more, but as of now, I don't get why everyone loves him. So I'm asking!

I can relate I also watched game tape of Cyprien & was unimpressed unlike Robert Alford who impressed me on game tape. Cyprien plays more of like a SS but a weak tackler whiffs alot ala Goldson I actually like Matt Elam better as a SS or in the later rounds JJ Wilcox.

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
First, I love small school players, Robert Alford being one of my favorite players in the draft. However I expect a certain level of play against their competition that I didn't see from Cyprien. The idea that I watched 3 YouTube clips has a really negative connotation. That's game footage. Not highlights. 3 full games. I get that the analysts have seen more, but I'm also basing my opinion on what I see. I'm aware of what the analysts are saying, and I'm impressed by it. So much, in fact, that I'm doubting what I see and am posing the question about what I'm missing. Also, keep in mind that one online analyst influences another. Matt Miller and Daniel Jeremiah for example, converge on opinions quite a bit, as of late. All I'm saying is that I saw 3 games and came away unimpressed. I'm unimpressed by his stats (expect more dominance from a small school player) and don't see what the fuss is about. He'll be drafted (by us or someone else) and over the next few years I'll get to watch more, but as of now, I don't get why everyone loves him. So I'm asking!

I completely agree on not paying attention to what a lot of these draft analysts say. I've paid more attention then I ever have this year and next year is going to be even more dedication (I already have a running list going of next year's class). I know these guys suck collectively because of Joeckel. As a fan that was actually watching games. I called Joeckel the #1 pick back in September (or maybe October? When they played LSU). He still might not go #2 but at the time he was being listed as a 2nd rounder by the majority of website I checked. And I remember thinking: "WTF? Are these guys even paying attention?" I didn't see a SINGLE source that had Joeckel as a top 10 talent, much less #1 at the time.

From watching trends, the majority of online content about the draft (from ESPN to NFL.com to CNNSI to the fan sites), I get the feeling a lot of them don't actually watch games during the season. When they do, its pretty funny when they say really stupid predictions which is why they usually don't say much during the season unless a guy has a big statistical day. A lot of these sites follow each other and essentially appear to copy content.

Now the one big perk is as draft day comes closer, a lot of these guys are in a position to hear whisperes of draft boards which is why their stuff doesn't really have much accuracy until it comes closer to draft time, because they aren't really scouting, they are just repeating.

On Cyprien, it really just comes down to this. He is a rare and exceptional athlete. You either see that or don't. I don't know what else to say about that. You can either tell how fluid he his, how easily he changes directions, how explosive he is, how he accellerates, how he doesn't show any stiff hips or you dont see it. I see all those things I listed and more. As I've been over, the problems in his game aren't likely to really knock him down much because you don't judge a player where they are AT, you judge where they will BE at the next level. So when players make mistakes, its not just "Its a mistake ding the player" its more about "is that something he is going to be able to correct? Does he have the tools to continue to become better?"

I like Cyprien, and others do, because he has all the basic tools and foundation to become a really good safety in the NFL.

You guys really wanna draft plug and play a rookie safety or corner on a 49ers 2013 Super Bowl contending team?

I guarantee you they will be targeted and torched especially by elite teams with elite QB's & WR's.

John Cyprien Weaknesses: Doesn't have elite range or the height/length combination to play as a single-deep safety. Quick enough to make a hit after the catch when deep, but is often a step slow to recognize the pass coming into his area. Aggressive in coverage, he can be sucked up by play action and will jump underneath routes, allowing plays over the top. Lacks elite change of direction and quickness in man coverage, and does not recover like a corner if beaten by a quick move off the line or in space.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/john-cyprien?id=2539223

Eric Reid Weaknesses: Gets overaggressive at times; will jump on short crossers, opening up the back half of the field, and overrun stretch plays to allow cutback lanes. Not a consistently powerful tackler, and will lunge and miss in the open field as he often fails to break down quickly. Recovery speed will be questioned, might be tough for him to catch NFL receivers if he takes a false step or in the aid of a teammate. Had shoulder surgery after his junior season in high school, though it hasn't hurt him in college.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/eric-reid?id=2540152

Matt Elam Weaknesses: Would rather drift laterally against the run rather than plant his outside foot, free outside arm, and force run upfield immediately. For how many hard hitting splash plays he makes, he could be much more aggressive every down. Little urgency to his game. Seen standing around far too often. Waits on screen rather than attacking while ball is getting there. Tries to make the big hit far too often, lunges, leads with shoulder, or leaves his feet rather than just wrapping up

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/matt-elam?id=2540153

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
First, I love small school players, Robert Alford being one of my favorite players in the draft. However I expect a certain level of play against their competition that I didn't see from Cyprien. The idea that I watched 3 YouTube clips has a really negative connotation. That's game footage. Not highlights. 3 full games. I get that the analysts have seen more, but I'm also basing my opinion on what I see. I'm aware of what the analysts are saying, and I'm impressed by it. So much, in fact, that I'm doubting what I see and am posing the question about what I'm missing. Also, keep in mind that one online analyst influences another. Matt Miller and Daniel Jeremiah for example, converge on opinions quite a bit, as of late. All I'm saying is that I saw 3 games and came away unimpressed. I'm unimpressed by his stats (expect more dominance from a small school player) and don't see what the fuss is about. He'll be drafted (by us or someone else) and over the next few years I'll get to watch more, but as of now, I don't get why everyone loves him. So I'm asking!

I completely agree on not paying attention to what a lot of these draft analysts say. I've paid more attention then I ever have this year and next year is going to be even more dedication (I already have a running list going of next year's class). I know these guys suck collectively because of Joeckel. As a fan that was actually watching games. I called Joeckel the #1 pick back in September (or maybe October? When they played LSU). He still might not go #2 but at the time he was being listed as a 2nd rounder by the majority of website I checked. And I remember thinking: "WTF? Are these guys even paying attention?" I didn't see a SINGLE source that had Joeckel as a top 10 talent, much less #1 at the time.

From watching trends, the majority of online content about the draft (from ESPN to NFL.com to CNNSI to the fan sites), I get the feeling a lot of them don't actually watch games during the season. When they do, its pretty funny when they say really stupid predictions which is why they usually don't say much during the season unless a guy has a big statistical day. A lot of these sites follow each other and essentially appear to copy content.

Now the one big perk is as draft day comes closer, a lot of these guys are in a position to hear whisperes of draft boards which is why their stuff doesn't really have much accuracy until it comes closer to draft time, because they aren't really scouting, they are just repeating.

On Cyprien, it really just comes down to this. He is a rare and exceptional athlete. You either see that or don't. I don't know what else to say about that. You can either tell how fluid he his, how easily he changes directions, how explosive he is, how he accellerates, how he doesn't show any stiff hips or you dont see it. I see all those things I listed and more. As I've been over, the problems in his game aren't likely to really knock him down much because you don't judge a player where they are AT, you judge where they will BE at the next level. So when players make mistakes, its not just "Its a mistake ding the player" its more about "is that something he is going to be able to correct? Does he have the tools to continue to become better?"

I like Cyprien, and others do, because he has all the basic tools and foundation to become a really good safety in the NFL.

Thank you! Honestly, the explanation you just gave is exactly what I was looking for. When I watched him play I saw mistakes. Receivers running past him, missed tackles, etc.. What I was not looking for from this thread is for someone to tell me that every analyst has him graded as a 1st rounder. I already know that! Your explanation about his fluidity and athleticism is much appreciated and something I will go back to watch. In honesty, the reason I love Alford so much isn't because of what I saw in terms of production on tape, but his instincts. Even on plays where he got flagged for PI I was impressed. With Cyprien I may have been to quick to dismiss his positive traits and write them mistakes off as a lack of ability. I still believe that a guy who will succeed in the NFL needs to really really dominate at a smaller school (see Iupati).

As for the "expert" analysts, I think some of them are quite good. Even if most of them (admittedly) don't do much game-tape viewing until around this time (starting after the SB). I love players where there is consensus. I think there are several ways to evaluate a prospect: game tape, stats, workout numbers, etc.. Consensus is another way. Usually when EVERYONE speaks positively about someone, the signs are good. The issue is that with twitter now the opinions are starting to converge, and one analyst becomes very influenced by another. Still, like I've been saying, I am very impressed by how many people promote this guy.

Thanks for the great response.