Wonderlic Score ... 'a new record score' ... A FOUR ... A what !?... A Four !! ... What !!?

[Fritz]

We can talk shit about a guy for having a lousy three-cone drill time, but we can't say anything negative about a guy for doing poorly on the Wonderlic drill.

[smuggler]

No doubt they sign disclosure agreements, so the release of the score isn't an issue per se. It's the timing and method that's disturbing.

[woodbuck27]

We can talk shit about a guy for having a lousy three-cone drill time, but we can't say anything negative about a guy for doing poorly on the Wonderlic drill.

Were your test results all over the neighborhood? Shit happens.

Some folk carry their shovel for 'the wrong reasons'. (-:

[denverYooper]

Yeah. And 1 in 88 kids has autism spectrum disorder. We're all retarded now. Some are just dumber than others.

Not me. I'm special.

My mom told me so.

[Zool]

We can talk shit about a guy for having a lousy three-cone drill time, but we can't say anything negative about a guy for doing poorly on the Wonderlic drill.

We can talk shit about them getting busted with weed. We can talk shit about basically every aspect of their lives, but a guy is too effing lazy to study for a test that 4th graders would get a B, and we're the assholes.

[woodbuck27]

Next..

[pbmax]

We can talk shit about them getting busted with weed. We can talk shit about basically every aspect of their lives, but a guy is too effing lazy to study for a test that 4th graders would get a B, and we're the assholes.

That 4th grader is probably terrible at football.

http://deadspin.com/5899735/why-does-the-nfl-still-use-the-wonderlic

1) NFL performance on the football field was only found to have a statistically significant correlation with Wonderlic scores among two positions: Tight end and defensive back. Correlations were statistically negligible across all other positions. (Yes, even QB.) In other words, with the exception of TEs and DBs, a player's Wonderlic score (high or low) gave no predictable projection for their eventual productivity as an NFL player. It was worthless.

2)Tight ends and defensive backs showed a (significant) negative correlation.

Takeaway? This DB will be perfectly fine. As will Finley.

[hoosier]

1) NFL performance on the football field was only found to have a statistically significant correlation with Wonderlic scores among two positions: Tight end and defensive back. Correlations were statistically negligible across all other positions. (Yes, even QB.) In other words, with the exception of TEs and DBs, a player's Wonderlic score (high or low) gave no predictable projection for their eventual productivity as an NFL player. It was worthless.

2)Tight ends and defensive backs showed a (significant) negative correlation.

Takeaway? This DB will be perfectly fine. As will Finley.

Ok but the correlation is statistically negligible or even negative when the wonderlic score is within what range? Because I am not sure anyone has even seen a 4 before...who's to say the non/negative correlation doesn't start to turn around as x approaches zero?

[pbmax]

Ok but the correlation is statistically negligible or even negative when the wonderlic score is within what range? Because I am not sure anyone has even seen a 4 before...who's to say the non/negative correlation doesn't start to turn around as x approaches zero?

Knock yourself out hoosier

http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/intelligence-and-football-testing-differentials-collegiate-quarterback-passing-performance-a

[Joemailman]

Knock yourself out hoosier

http://www.thesportjournal.org/artic...-performance-a

Those guys need to get a life.

[GrnBay007]

....or he's just that cocky he said I don't give a F@ck about their tests and messed with it.

And does it really matter to a team if they are confident he can learn their system?

[woodbuck27]

http://deadspin.com/5899735/why-does-the-nfl-still-use-the-wonderlic

"The scores will never become available, except to NFL teams who presumably have done their homework on any correlation between Wonderlic and performance. If they have, none of them have ever shown an inclination to heavily weight their draft board by it." Fr. Article

" "You have to watch out for the smart ones," Giants GM Jerry Reese said in 2007.

"If things aren't going well, they have other careers to fall back on. The ones who are good at football and only football, they'll do whatever it takes to stay in the league." " Jerry Reese

[pbmax]

....or he's just that cocky he said I don't give a F@ck about their tests and messed with it.

And does it really matter to a team if they are confident he can learn their system?

The League administers the test, so its impossible to know how much emphasis an individual team might place in it. Teams, icluding the Giants, have their own battery of tests they give including psychological profiles. McGinn always places a big emphasis on the wonderlic, but his commentary is always backwards looking and specific to a player (or possibly someone the Packers could have had or kept). So he isolates on cases where his contention is correct. If you were to look at the broader data like the studies have done, I doubt there is much to it, except for the fact that a team then can weave it into a narrative about a player.

Like Jerry Reese staying away from smart players, preferring those who have no choice but to play football. I am sure he remembers each player who could retire early and do something else. But I doubt he spends too much time wondering how well his players can adapt.

[pbmax]

No doubt they sign disclosure agreements, so the release of the score isn't an issue per se. It's the timing and method that's disturbing.

Maybe, but part of that agreement might be that the League will make an effort to keep the results confidential. If they can't, players are simply going to stop taking it. Many refuse to do certain drills, this test would be no different.

[Fritz]

The League administers the test, so its impossible to know how much emphasis an individual team might place in it. Teams, icluding the Giants, have their own battery of tests they give including psychological profiles. McGinn always places a big emphasis on the wonderlic, but his commentary is always backwards looking and specific to a player (or possibly someone the Packers could have had or kept). So he isolates on cases where his contention is correct. If you were to look at the broader data like the studies have done, I doubt there is much to it, except for the fact that a team then can weave it into a narrative about a player.

Like Jerry Reese staying away from smart players, preferring those who have no choice but to play football. I am sure he remembers each player who could retire early and do something else. But I doubt he spends too much time wondering how well his players can adapt.

Let's see...I could work my ass off, make at least $450,000 a year, risk long term health problems, be on televison, play an aderenaline-charged game that boys play, be a local celebrity, pick up hot strippers all the time just by mentioning my career, get a pass from local cops when I get busted, get treated with kids gloves by the judicial system if I do get charged, and get all my drinks paid for at the bar in exchange for being friendly.

Or....I can retire and start a new career as a computer analyst and make $150,000 a year sitting in a cubicle.