BillyJack said:

Do people around here refuse to READ????

I agree that the game is changing and a higher I.Q. aptitude because of the game preparation and shemes is definately more beneficial and statistically for a GM to invest money you want to feel the player has the mental chops.

I just dont agree that some sort of timed Iq test gives a good cross section for NFL analysis because some guys dont test well, some guys have a different sort of intelligence that when under physical pressure they have more of a pure "football" intelligence.

I do think BQ is (obvious a ND grad) is probably going to test better andl probably in general much more analytic and quick than DA. Some guys like DA however by his genetic gifts can override or equate to more or an analytic skill on the playing field.

I wish these two were morphed into one really.

I think like the SAT/ACT debate the wonderlic because its lack of overall ability to accuratly predict future success it is only a small and fairly unimportant factor... unless you score a sub 10....

Future success that can be accurately identified by a specific test is like the search for the holy grail. My problem with your position shep is not about which qb you are backing rather fundamentally pointing to some IQ test as some sort of future talent identifier is dubious. IE Jeff Maas:43/Drew Henson 42/bruce Eugene 41/Darrel Hackney 40

Donovan Mcnabb 14

Daunte Culpepper 18

Terry Bradshaw 15

Dan Marino 15

Jim Kelly 15

Randal Cunningham 15

Vinny Testerverde 17

Steve Mcnair 15

Those examples are obviously on both extreme ends of the spectrum but it shows you enough samples both ways that the conclusion that this is somehow an accurate prediction model is dubious.

Those scores must have precluded some of those Hall of famers and future ones and the other scores in the 40's for players mostly never heard of must be some sort of mistake.

Iq Aptitude tests that somehow define future success does not exist.... just like the movement away From SAT/ACT as quality predictors of future success (those tests at least are all academic without the physical/adrenaline response/fight or flight variable)

IF BQ does not win the Job outright after 3 camps and preseason/2 coaching staffs than he is not what you think he is and all fans hope he might be. I still think he is the starter this year but if DA does win the job than it is pretty clear that BQ does not have what it takes or DA is better.

mz. said:

But I don't think anyone was really thinking intelligence correlated negatively with performance, was there??

No, inspite of some very creative efforts stating otherwise. THAT is the point. I'm hoping nobody wants to see us starting a DUMB QB besides the Steelheads and Loverboy.

Thanks for your research mz the pussy.

- Tom F.

@osusev said:

Very true, indeed.

Those people are called everybody.

@osusev said:

The wonderlic like other IQ tests will support a specific sample and hurt others.

NEWS FLASH: The NFL has a timed test - it's called a play clock.

@pumpkin-eater said:

How is what you described any different from a high-pressure, timed test? Succeeding at both requires the same exact mental skill set.

All it really means to me is what i already know and that is that bq is likely to make faster and "maybe" better decisions than DA on the field under pressure...

Both of these guys carry a hardnosed blue collar get er done work ethic...

Ah Sev, you so silly.

Try reading some threads.

@osusev said:

Then why measure QB arm strength, leadership skills, accuracy or pocket presence? Intelligence is just as important as these characteristics, each of which I'm guessing you'd deem important to quarterbacking...

The wonderlic like other IQ tests will support a specific sample and hurt others. It does not mean they sample that score lower are stupid it just means this sort of medium does not play to there strengths.

You keep talking about the "it" factor..... that is a quotient that can not be tested for yet you argue about the wonderlic as a solid platform that somehow equates to NFL success.

Does DA seem slower to me? yes but I have met many people who are quite intelligent that use a different methodology on how they come to conclusions that have similar personas like DA.

Einstein failed mathematics..... I am sure his failing grade was not a measure of his future success. Trying to fit future potential by trying to test intelligence and specific aptitudes is a slippery slope.

Bill Gates and many like him never graduated college yet they are seen as "brilliant" because of their obvious successful careers.

BQ's 40 something qb rating in his last game was just a number that was obviously affected by other variables and not a good way to measure his future success. Yet his starting debut he was rated over 100.... different days different results because of other variables... neither can be used one way or the other to predict his future.

SAT/ACT scores are definately another controversial testing methodology that people can vastly change their results from one attempt or another.

Shep there is NO bottom line to your findings just you trying to shape this argument to fit your position. testing scores mean very little for predicting future success, it just means some people test well on certain days and others dont.

Trying to use these IQ aptitude scores as a crystal ball for future NFL success is silly.

But I don't think anyone was really thinking intelligence correlated negatively with performance, was there??

mz. said:

These researchers from the University of Louisville did....

http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol10Iss1/TestingSuccess.htm

Nice job mz the pussy...really, you put in a lot of effort.

@shepwrite said:

The Top 12 passers last year were well above the overall average.

We'd obviously need to expand the study bigtime, but I figured I'd report my meager results anyhow...

Zombo said:

Did he not take it again and get a 23?

Do you know if Quinn took it before?

Do you know anyone on the planet that thinks Eli Manning is a smarter quarterback than Peyton Manning? One person?

Eli scored 11 points higher than Peyton. Quinn scored 6 points higher than Anderson.

How you can use this information to definitively say that Quinn is smarter than Anderson is beyond me.

One day he took a human resources test and he scored higher than Anderson on the same test. That's what we know. We also know that one day Eli took said test and scored much higher than Peyton.

Conclusion: It's a human resources test. Scouts find it helpful. To use the reported scores as the end-all of a QB's football intelligence, and therefore his definitive prognosis for success n the NFL ... is phucking absurd.

Zombo

Because the questions on this test are easy as hell...and the fact that you have to take this test is public knowledge. You can look it up and learn the format...scoring that low is ridiculous.