Who is the dumbest football player ?

[dc.]

You think no Super Bowl after the greatest career of a QB to that point ... is because his Wonderlic was low?

 

That is the ultimate in not understanding the idea of causation and correlation. And by the way, as one of the links I provided you proves, there is NO correlation even (not to mention no causation) between Wonderlic score and NFL success. Period.

[dc.]

By the way, so you ask for "evidence" ... and provide you with more than half a dozen research studies (not opinions, research studies) that support my claim. And that's not evidence enough. It's just opinion.

 

As for calling scouting stupid... there is a difference between "scouting" the industry and "scouting" the skill. As I have tried to distinguish multiple times in this thread, I believe that the "scouting industry" is a joke - as are scouting industries in many sports. There is little to no accountability for scouting as an industry. How often do you see any scouting discussions about mistakes and being held accountable? Never. It was the players fault he didn't meet the hype, not the industry's fault for creating undeserved hype.

 

Scouting as an individual skill and necessity are of course necessary. Not only in drafting - and distinguishing your team from the "industry" that is so full of crap - but also in prepping your team for games.

 

I could call militarism a joke. That doesn't mean I am calling the need for militaries a joke. I am calling the complex a joke.

 

 

 

As for being a homer... If Flacco was a 27 and Brady was a 33 and Peyton was a 28 and Eli was a 29... then you obviously believe Eli to be the best of those quarterbacks? I mean, you said it applies to Flacco-Brady and it applies to Peyton-Eli... so I assume it applies to all?

[Oldschool739]

By the way, so you ask for "evidence" ... and provide you with more than half a dozen research studies (not opinions, research studies) that support my claim. And that's not evidence enough. It's just opinion.

 

As for calling scouting stupid... there is a difference between "scouting" the industry and "scouting" the skill. As I have tried to distinguish multiple times in this thread, I believe that the "scouting industry" is a joke - as are scouting industries in many sports. There is little to no accountability for scouting as an industry. How often do you see any scouting discussions about mistakes and being held accountable? Never. It was the players fault he didn't meet the hype, not the industry's fault for creating undeserved hype.

 

Scouting as an individual skill and necessity are of course necessary. Not only in drafting - and distinguishing your team from the "industry" that is so full of crap - but also in prepping your team for games.

 

I could call militarism a joke. That doesn't mean I am calling the need for militaries a joke. I am calling the complex a joke.

 

 

 

As for being a homer... If Flacco was a 27 and Brady was a 33 and Peyton was a 28 and Eli was a 29... then you obviously believe Eli to be the best of those quarterbacks? I mean, you said it applies to Flacco-Brady and it applies to Peyton-Eli... so I assume it applies to all?

In response to both of your posts....I have been very clear about the validation of the wonderlic as being just a part of the many ways to evaluate a player for the NFL....You just keep twisting it back to what you want the discussion to be about....I could provide studies that show the ones you posted as very questionable but I don't care in the least about that.....It has far less to do with this conversation as the wonderlic does in evaluating talent.....I am smart enough to know that the reason a football team has a staff is because 1 person can't do it all, or remember it all.....The issue here is not some brain study with more views than politics, it's about a process of determining if an athlete has the full package to play for your team and your system.....And as for your last twisting of my words, I was giving an example where it could be applied but you want to quickly discount that one. You might have a case of confirmation bias....

But Eli had a 39 not 29 and if you ask a NYer, I'm sure they would say yes he is better, since he beat Brady both times in the SB.....

Enough of this, if you have something to actually prove the wonderlic to be a joke as you call it, show it.....If not then you can quit trying to change my mind because it ain't happening, as I am sure I'm not going to change yours.....

[dc.]

I did show it. One article in there directly addresses wonderlic's correlation w player success. There is none.

 

I showed my hand now you want to back down and say you could show evidence but don't want to waste your time. Nice. Very convincing.

 

And I'm still waiting for you to say it straight... Does Eli's Wonderlic make him a better QB or smarter QB than Brady? His brother? If you say so, fine... But I doubt you'd find anyone to agree with you. Even in NY. You're saying # of SB wins makes the QB... It's absurd and you know it. I guess Trent is better than Marino.

 

Please... Show me anything that supports the validity of Wonderlic... Show me anything but SB wins that supports Eli as the better QB... Please.

[Oldschool739]

I did show it. One article in there directly addresses wonderlic's correlation w player success. There is none.

 

I showed my hand now you want to back down and say you could show evidence but don't want to waste your time. Nice. Very convincing.

 

And I'm still waiting for you to say it straight... Does Eli's Wonderlic make him a better QB or smarter QB than Brady? His brother? If you say so, fine... But I doubt you'd find anyone to agree with you. Even in NY. You're saying # of SB wins makes the QB... It's absurd and you know it. I guess Trent is better than Marino.

 

Please... Show me anything that supports the validity of Wonderlic... Show me anything but SB wins that supports Eli as the better QB... Please.

You haven't shown anything to discredit the wonderlic, just another minority opinion...

The wonderlic is part of the combine, so let's take a look at the process....

1. Scouts observe players thru their college play, can that alone determine if he can play in the NFL, NO.....

2. They observe them at the combine, can that alone suffice, NO.

3. They observe at Pro Day, can that alone, NO

4. Personal workouts, can that alone, NO.

But when you put them all together, as any prudent professional would do, then you can make an intelligent decision.....

You can spend your time looking for off the wall articles to support your opinion if you like, but I am very secure in my own opinion which is supported by actual team owners, scouts, GM's, HC's etc......I'm sure they are all jokes in your eyes, but they are millionaires, what are you ?

[Spen]

LOL

 

DC < Millionaires

 

Argument over.

[dc.]

When did that scholarly academic research on brain function and decision making become off the wall articles?

 

I presented six+ pieces of evidence. One directly addressed the misuse of Wonderlic by the NFL. Please present more than your opinion.

 

I'm done with this conversation until you take up the last mantle and actually pick a draft year so we can analyze how well the millionaire scouts did with all their decision making genius.

 

I stand by my only major claims in this thread:

1. That not all data is good data, especially made up and misused data like Wonderlic.

2. That scouting is flawed by the echo chamber of hype that they themselves create and never ate held accountable for.

3. That Peyton Manning is smarter than Eli regardless of Wonderlic. And that that either shows Wonderlic and it's flaws or that scouts now are ignoring their own data because Peyton is widely called the smartest QB in the game.

[Oldschool739]

When did that scholarly academic research on brain function and decision making become off the wall articles?

 

I presented six+ pieces of evidence. One directly addressed the misuse of Wonderlic by the NFL. Please present more than your opinion.

 

I'm done with this conversation until you take up the last mantle and actually pick a draft year so we can analyze how well the millionaire scouts did with all their decision making genius.

 

I stand by my only major claims in this thread:

1. That not all data is good data, especially made up and misused data like Wonderlic.

2. That scouting is flawed by the echo chamber of hype that they themselves create and never ate held accountable for.

3. That Peyton Manning is smarter than Eli regardless of Wonderlic. And that that either shows Wonderlic and it's flaws or that scouts now are ignoring their own data because Peyton is widely called the smartest QB in the game.

You are like talking to a 2am drunk, I explain to you 5 times or more and you continue to ask, what about this !!!!!

As far as Eli being smarter than Peyton, absolutely yes....He has won with less trickery, smoke and mirrors than his brother Peyton has had to use to get half the Lombardi's he's got....And to that point ,Peyton said when he came into the nfl and I quote, "He is way smarter than me"....

And if you actually think you are smarter than nfl scouts and their systems to evaluate players, then you are mentally unstable....

But keep trying, just don't hurt yourself trying to find a point....

[dc.]

 

 

Meanwhile, we now know the perfect response to any criticism you make of ... well, any NFLer... "If you really think you're smarter... you're mentally unstable."

 

Disagree with Ozzie or Harbs? Unstable.

Disagree with flacco? Unstable!

 

You say I'm having trouble making my point; have you noticed yet I'm primarily reciting your own words back to you. You consistently make outrageous and overly simplified claims, and then can't handle when someone says, "that's a little extreme..."

 

As for asking on repeat... Pick a draft. Please.

[Oldschool739]

Meanwhile, we now know the perfect response to any criticism you make of ... well, any NFLer... "If you really think you're smarter... you're mentally unstable."

 

Disagree with Ozzie or Harbs? Unstable.

Disagree with flacco? Unstable!

 

You say I'm having trouble making my point; have you noticed yet I'm primarily reciting your own words back to you. You consistently make outrageous and overly simplified claims, and then can't handle when someone says, "that's a little extreme..."

 

As for asking on repeat... Pick a draft. Please.

True to form, you take every comment to some bazaar extreme when anyone with any level of common sense knows what was really meant.

And listen Sonny boy, criticism doesn't bother me in the least....I'm an old scrapper from the streets, and there ain't no reverse in this old dude.

But let's take a look at your point of view, the wonderlic is a joke, no need to see how intelligent a player is to determine how he can learn and process information.......scouts are a joke, all they do is feed the media a bunch of PR nonsense......The brain is flawed and cannot store info without being hindered by too much......A qb that wins 2 SB's in half the time it took his brother to win one, is dumber than him because the other one is more complicated.....So to prove your point, whatever in the clouds of Sandy that might be, you want me to pick a draft, God only knows where you're going from there......I got an idea, why don't you go down to the Ravens FO tomorrow and show them your Einstein plan to eliminate all these unnecessary positions and how they will hit on every draft pick and see how that works out for you...

Be sure to wear a helmet to deflect all the hits to he head you're gonna get while being thrown through the exit door.....

[dc.]

No, no one knows what was meant. And I am happy that you are an old scrapper from the streets, that is good for you, but it does you no good in helping you make sense.

 

Asking you to accept the logical conclusions of your statements is not taking anything to an extreme.

 

If you want to logically conclude that Wonderlic scores are related to Super Bowl wins... then fine. But it's nonsensical. Why would Wonderlic correlate to Super Bowl wins but not to all the other stats in a player's career?

 

That's not taking anything to an extreme. It's asking a basic question. You have pretty much said, "Yeah, Marino was great... but he didn't win a Super Bowl, so maybe Wonderlic was to blame." It's simply absurd.

 

If you want to logically conclude that I have no ability to criticize the systems used by the NFL in evaluating talent, then fine. But it's nonsensical. We all criticize NFL decision making all the time. It's what 90% of your posts are about.

 

That's not taking anything to an extreme. It's repeating your own words to you. I actually think the Ravens do a great job of scouting precisely because they buck the system used by so many other teams. I also think the NFL, like any good business, would welcome worthy criticism if it made sense. The Wonderlic doesn't make sense for the NFL. You don't think there are people in the league that know that or think that?

 

You want me to believe that Wonderlic is worthy of our time and attention, and yet you have no data to show that. I have, multiple times, presented you with data that says otherwise.

 

This, by the way, is not the same as saying that intelligence doesn't matter. It is saying that the tool the NFL uses to try to gauge player competence is flawed. And it is.

 

I don't know why you're confused about my point, as I have stated it in simplest forms many times. I will state it again for you - and from now on I'll reply only with these lines until you pick a draft. (If you want to know why I want you to pick a draft, you should re-read ... as I have explained clearly why I want you to pick a draft).

 

1. Not all data is good data. The Wonderlic is a great example of bad data.

2. Bad data will hurt decision-making. Many scouts - knowingly or unknowingly - use bad data and bad decisions are made. It's confirmation bias.

3. Pick a draft and let's evaluate how well it was scouted.

[Oldschool739]

No, no one knows what was meant. And I am happy that you are an old scrapper from the streets, that is good for you, but it does you no good in helping you make sense.

 

Asking you to accept the logical conclusions of your statements is not taking anything to an extreme.

 

If you want to logically conclude that Wonderlic scores are related to Super Bowl wins... then fine. But it's nonsensical. Why would Wonderlic correlate to Super Bowl wins but not to all the other stats in a player's career?

 

That's not taking anything to an extreme. It's asking a basic question. You have pretty much said, "Yeah, Marino was great... but he didn't win a Super Bowl, so maybe Wonderlic was to blame." It's simply absurd.

 

If you want to logically conclude that I have no ability to criticize the systems used by the NFL in evaluating talent, then fine. But it's nonsensical. We all criticize NFL decision making all the time. It's what 90% of your posts are about.

 

That's not taking anything to an extreme. It's repeating your own words to you. I actually think the Ravens do a great job of scouting precisely because they buck the system used by so many other teams. I also think the NFL, like any good business, would welcome worthy criticism if it made sense. The Wonderlic doesn't make sense for the NFL. You don't think there are people in the league that know that or think that?

 

You want me to believe that Wonderlic is worthy of our time and attention, and yet you have no data to show that. I have, multiple times, presented you with data that says otherwise.

 

This, by the way, is not the same as saying that intelligence doesn't matter. It is saying that the tool the NFL uses to try to gauge player competence is flawed. And it is.

 

I don't know why you're confused about my point, as I have stated it in simplest forms many times. I will state it again for you - and from now on I'll reply only with these lines until you pick a draft. (If you want to know why I want you to pick a draft, you should re-read ... as I have explained clearly why I want you to pick a draft).

 

1. Not all data is good data. The Wonderlic is a great example of bad data.

2. Bad data will hurt decision-making. Many scouts - knowingly or unknowingly - use bad data and bad decisions are made. It's confirmation bias.

3. Pick a draft and let's evaluate how well it was scouted.

If there is anything illogical in this whole thread it is your self absorbed confidence that you are smarter than the proven system that billionaires and the best people they can hire have come up with.....

And I don't want you to believe anything in particular, I have said over and over and over in this thread that the wonderlic is just 1 part of the process and that none of the steps by themselves can assure a viable player, how your twisted mind got wonderlic = SB is beyond the scope of sanity......Let me say this real S L O W for you, the wonderlic is about intelligence, not TALENT.....

But here is a tidbit about it that you obviously don't know, these college athletes are first introduced to it in their 1st yr of college and by the time they get to the combine, they have been through it so many times that it is almost second nature, so with that in mind, how stupid do you think a player is that gets a 4 or 6 or anything less than the normal 20 ?

Does that mean that some of the high scores are padded, of course, but they obviously were far smarter from the beginning.

I've seen men as strong as a bull but didn't know how to fight and get beat up by a lesser but smarter man, so intelligence is a vital factor in any athlete's success......Just look at the latest Aldon Smith saga, all the talent in the world, great on the field, presents himself well, but off the field, he has the mental capability of a water bug.....He scored an 18 on the wonderlic........Give it up dude, you can twist and turn all you want to but you cannot discount any 1 step of the process that the most intelligent men in pro football have come up with for their business, and that intelligence test is part of it.....Plain Fact....

[dc.]

1. Not all data is good data. The Wonderlic is a great example of bad data.

2. Bad data will hurt decision-making. Many scouts - knowingly or unknowingly - use bad data and bad decisions are made. It's confirmation bias.

3. Pick a draft and let's evaluate how well it was scouted.

YOU compared the Wonderlic to Super Bowl wins when you tried to correlate it to Marino, Manning and Manning.

 

 

Give it up dude, you can twist and turn all you want to but you cannot discount any 1 step of the process that the most intelligent men in pro football have come up with for their business, and that intelligence test is part of it.....Plain Fact....

 

This is EXACTLY what I disagree with. 100%.

 

You can, I can, we can and more importantly we SHOULD discount parts of the process that do not work. That Wonderlic works is not a plain fact. Just because it has been used doesn't mean it is appropriate or working. Perhaps this is why in the last 2 years, the NFL has been CHANGING the Wonderlic and considering abandoning it altogether...

 

I will repeat: I have never said intelligence doesn't matter. I have said Wonderlic is not an appropriate measure of intelligence.

 

But sure, keep saying that "you cannot discount any 1 step of the process"... that's the exact opposite of everything that has made intelligent football men who they are. The ones who succeed do so precisely by questioning and discounting that which fails. Wonderlic fails.

[ForceEight]

Here's a few more relevant links.

 

Wonderlic test "useless": http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/21736480/its-a-wonder-nfl-prospects-dont-boycott-useless-wonderlic-test

Wonderlic not meant for football: http://deadspin.com/5899735/why-does-the-nfl-still-use-the-wonderlic

And my favorite, "I took the stupid Wonderlic": http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/02/19/baffoe-i-took-the-stupid-wonderlic-test/

 

You can talk all day until your nose is runny and your face is blue about how important the test must be because "millionaires" use it, but the fact of the matter is that they really don't. Media observations about the test are really just points of conversation for dimwitted folks who have little else to use as data or evidence in comparing and contrasting players.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that scouts are useless (especially actual scouts, e.g. what the Ravens use, as opposed to scouting services), but anyone who is putting any merit into the Wonderlic, especially from an outside perspective, doesn't really have any argument in the first place.

[dc.]

I'm going to end my part in this with a quick change in tone...

 

Let's just talk Jamarcus Russell for one moment. Huge #1 pick. Huge hype. Huge pick. And almost everyone in love with the pick. For evidence of that, look at this SI link citing coaches and scouts discussing Russell before the draft. Link.

 

Here's my point in this whole thread:

 

Most people look back at Russell and say, "What a bust" and "What a goof" and "Wow he ruined such promise." And certainly, a lot of that is true. Russell deserves as much blame as anyone for his failure.

 

But how often do people look back and actually say, "Wait, why was this guy scouted to be the #1 overall pick no questions asked!?" When do you ever hear someone say, "Man, the scouts blew it! What did they get wrong?"

 

I laugh especially because the only other QB mentioned as competing with Russell in most of the scouting remarks I have read is... Brady Quinn. Whoops twice on that one, scouts. Sure, maybe it was a weak QB draft ... but why don't the scouts say that?

 

So I leave with a simple question... Why don't we put more on the scouts? Why don't we put more pressure on the system and ask a little bit more about what is wrong? Saying "You can't question a system created by the best minds" is bull. Every time the system fails we should be looking for its flaws. The entire universe agreed that Russell was the #1 QB and overwhelmingly the #1 pick... the Raiders had to do it; it was the obvious move! But then, no.

 

So let's find the flaws - find the things not supported by evidence - and adjust them. Wonderlic's value to the NFL is not supported by evidence. And this might just be why the league is adding other "aptitude" tests.

[Oldschool739]

Here's a few more relevant links.

 

Wonderlic test "useless": http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/21736480/its-a-wonder-nfl-prospects-dont-boycott-useless-wonderlic-test

Wonderlic not meant for football: http://deadspin.com/5899735/why-does-the-nfl-still-use-the-wonderlic

And my favorite, "I took the stupid Wonderlic": http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/02/19/baffoe-i-took-the-stupid-wonderlic-test/

 

You can talk all day until your nose is runny and your face is blue about how important the test must be because "millionaires" use it, but the fact of the matter is that they really don't. Media observations about the test are really just points of conversation for dimwitted folks who have little else to use as data or evidence in comparing and contrasting players.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that scouts are useless (especially actual scouts, e.g. what the Ravens use, as opposed to scouting services), but anyone who is putting any merit into the Wonderlic, especially from an outside perspective, doesn't really have any argument in the first place.

Thank you for your minority opinion, that makes 2......But you haven't added anything to the discussion that hasn't already been said and is nothing more than a meaningless opinion to people that actually do the things that you and I can only speculate about.....

If it had no merit to it as you and dc say, then don't you think that the best minds in pro football would recognize it and replace it with something better.....Come on, it's not rocket science....Mike Vick scored a padded 20, and you know his story, Plax scored a 15 and you know his story, VY a 6 then 11 and you know his story....I'm sure there are cases where it is the opposite but I would like to see a study done on the percentage of low scoring players as per high scoring ones....I am confident that it would show a pattern of failure for the low ones....But we aren't likely to see that....The league and owners are comfortable that it gives them what they need to evaluate players intelligence, and that is the only fact that matters here.....They write the checks, they make the rules, the players abide by them or they are gone....

And we get to speculate.....

[Oldschool739]

I'm going to end my part in this with a quick change in tone...

 

Let's just talk Jamarcus Russell for one moment. Huge #1 pick. Huge hype. Huge pick. And almost everyone in love with the pick. For evidence of that, look at this SI link citing coaches and scouts discussing Russell before the draft. Link.

 

Here's my point in this whole thread:

 

Most people look back at Russell and say, "What a bust" and "What a goof" and "Wow he ruined such promise." And certainly, a lot of that is true. Russell deserves as much blame as anyone for his failure.

 

But how often do people look back and actually say, "Wait, why was this guy scouted to be the #1 overall pick no questions asked!?" When do you ever hear someone say, "Man, the scouts blew it! What did they get wrong?"

 

I laugh especially because the only other QB mentioned as competing with Russell in most of the scouting remarks I have read is... Brady Quinn. Whoops twice on that one, scouts. Sure, maybe it was a weak QB draft ... but why don't the scouts say that?

 

So I leave with a simple question... Why don't we put more on the scouts? Why don't we put more pressure on the system and ask a little bit more about what is wrong? Saying "You can't question a system created by the best minds" is bull. Every time the system fails we should be looking for its flaws. The entire universe agreed that Russell was the #1 QB and overwhelmingly the #1 pick... the Raiders had to do it; it was the obvious move! But then, no.

 

So let's find the flaws - find the things not supported by evidence - and adjust them. Wonderlic's value to the NFL is not supported by evidence. And this might just be why the league is adding other "aptitude" tests.

We can question all we want to, it won't change what they feel is best for the league, but I have no problem with a different opinion than mine as long as it makes some sense.....Of course there are a lot of misses in the draft, and even worse decisions on vets that don't fit or are OTH, but this is the best they have come up with and I haven't heard of any other aptitude test being used besides the wonderlic.....

It's like saying you don't need your gallbladder, that you can function without it, yes you can, but not as good as with it.... Good discussion.....

[dc.]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000139911/article/wonderlic-to-be-supplemented-by-new-aptitude-test-at-combine

[Oldschool739]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000139911/article/wonderlic-to-be-supplemented-by-new-aptitude-test-at-combine

They feel they can make it better by enhancing it with this new part, but they are not eliminating it.

 

"National Football Scouting president Jeff Foster confirmed the test is not a replacement for, but rather a counterpart to, the much-criticized Wonderlic test."

 

But thanks, I hadn't seen that though.....

[dc.]

I think it's a first step to gutting it.

[RavenMad]

To be fair to scouts, it can be hard to project how players are going to handle becoming professionals. As soon as some guys get paid they take that as a green light to do whatever the hell they want except concentrate on football.

 

The new rookie wage scale will negate some of that because these guys won't make big money until their 2nd contract but in order to do that they will have to be productive in years 1-5. That also means it will be even more important to draft well as you might be getting the most productive years of a player at his cheapest price thus putting more pressure on scouts to get it right.

 

With that said, show me a scout that says he got his projections correct 100% of the time and I will show you a liar.

[Oldschool739]

To be fair to scouts, it can be hard to project how players are going to handle becoming professionals. As soon as some guys get paid they take that as a green light to do whatever the heck they want except concentrate on football.

 

The new rookie wage scale will negate some of that because these guys won't make big money until their 2nd contract but in order to do that they will have to be productive in years 1-5. That also means it will be even more important to draft well as you might be getting the most productive years of a player at his cheapest price thus putting more pressure on scouts to get it right.

 

With that said, show me a scout that says he got his projections correct 100% of the time and I will show you a liar.