Jump to content

The Wunderlich test for quarterbacks

bills in oregon
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Cruiserplayer
Cruiserplayer

The range of the score does matter. Unfortunately it is a huge strike if the player cannot spell wonder.

YoloinOhio
YoloinOhio

Josh Allen’s score - wow   They are all good except for Lamar. That’s a bad sign for a QB as nfl offenses and defenses continue to get more complex. 

SouthNYfan
SouthNYfan

48    Ryan Fitzpatrick    Harvard    QB 48    Greg McElroy    Alabama    QB 43    Jason Maas    Oregon    QB 42    Blaine Gabbert    Missouri    QB 42    Drew Henson    Michigan    QB  

PIZ Veteran

PIZ

Posted
Posted

See anyone familiar?  Good thing he's not a QB.

 

SCORE
NAME
COLLEGE
POSITION
4 Darren Davis Iowa State RB
4 Morris Claiborne LSU CB
5 Ed Prather Mississippi State DB
6 Oscar Davenport North Carolina QB
6 Frank Gore Miami RB
6 Vince Young Texas QB
7 Kelvin Benjamin Florida State WR
7 Tavon Austin West Virginia RB
7 Terrelle Pryor Ohio Sate QB
8 Bobby Wagner Utah State LB
8 Vince Evans USC QB
8 Chris Leak Florida QB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaBillsFanSince1973 All Pro

DaBillsFanSince1973

Posted
Posted
Just now, Commonsense said:

This has already been discussed. Go back and look at the stuff from Albright. That explains how teams view the scores and it makes sense.

 

 

I assume you mean this guy?

 

 

 

if it was worthless, why even take it? again, if worthless, it must mean no team/scout/gm/hc look at the 47 as any better or worse than a 13? or better yet, don't look at it at all and are more interested in their ability on the field as well as how much can be absorbed in the mental game?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CommonCents All Pro

CommonCents

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

 

 

I assume you mean this guy?

 

 

 

if it was worthless, why even take it? again, if worthless, it must mean no team/scout/gm/hc look at the 47 as any better or worse than a 13? or better yet, don't look at it at all and are more interested in their ability on the field as well as how much can be absorbed in the mental game?

 

 

Yes he mentioned how teams view abnormally low scores. That's all that matters. Not how Albright or the rest of us view it. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Augie Hall of Famer

Augie

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

 

 

I wonder if she used flash cards when he was a tike?

 

 

13

 

I took some management succession aptitude testing for a regional bank I worked for. I was told I scored extremely high in the analytical thinking and problem solving, but I should never leave home without a calculator. Hey! When’s the last time you did high school math???  That’s why calculators were invented!  If it was the Wonderlic I would have brushed up. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Call_Of_Ktulu Veteran

Call_Of_Ktulu

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

 

 

these guys were the only ones leaked.

 

Josh Allen, 37

Josh Rosen, 29

Sam Darnold, 28

Baker Mayfield, 25

Lamar Jackson, 13

I've watched a lot of Josh Allen but I'm going to rewatch a ton of his games this week to see if I'm missing something. Everyone has him as the top pick right now, maybe his attributes project better at the pro level.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted

Ultimately it’s not thaaaat different than the 40 or bench or... 

 

1) different positions will curve differently for benchmarks. Guys like your qb or mlb will have higher expectations than a DT

 

2) there’s a range of “cool, no question he can do the job.” Your wide out running a 4.45, is like you qb high 20s

 

3) a wr running a 4.3 is fantastic but doesn’t mean he will succeed just like a 47 on the wonderlic doesnt. It’s a nice piece of a picture  but the rest has to still come together

 

4) a 4.6 doesn’t mean you can’t be a WR but I sure want to take another look at the film, maybe ask how you felt about the time, and generally check out the red flag, just like a 17 wonderlic at qb

 

5) a 4.9 at wr is probably a dealbreaker unless you catch that they tripped. Likewise a 3 on the wonderlic is probably a dealbreaker unless they took it with the flu, have a learning disability and also didn’t have their reading glasses. 

 

Its not worthless, but on its own doesn’t tell enough 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Pasaluki said:

Imo with the wonderlich anything above 10 is fine. Some people don't test well. But below 10 ehh it may be a minor concern. 

 

If I recall correctly a 20 is average andslots up to about 100 on an iq test, and every 5 points on the wonderlic really roughly slots up to 10 iq points for bar napkin purposes.

 

frankly, under 10 is in the “are they literate” category as you are getting into just guessing being about the same on average. I don’t mean that as a joke or insult but you have to have a real talk at that point to see if they guy needs special accommodations to learn the system or is just that level of “I don’t care” 

 

on a related note, I think teams would be wise to employ some sort of special education person on their staff to help work with guys and identify opportunities for how to better teach some of them. I don’t think an old school coach is the best candidate to come up with a learning plan for someone that might have a disability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDIGGZ Hall of Famer

KDIGGZ

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

I've watched a lot of Josh Allen but I'm going to rewatch a ton of his games this week to see if I'm missing something. Everyone has him as the top pick right now, maybe his attributes project better at the pro level.

Scouts say he tried to do too much rather than play within the offense. He didn't have any players with him and felt like he had to do it all on his own. That will certainly make you throw some questionable passes. And he throws the ball faster than anyone ever recorded so good luck having receivers at Wyoming catch some of those passes. He has never had the best coaching either. They say he is the most improved player coming out having since worked with pro coaches at the senior bowl as well as Jordan Palmer. He certainly has a ways to go still but he has the goods that get scouts and coaches excited. Watch the 3rd quarter of the senior bowl on YouTube and you will see a lot to like

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDIGGZ Hall of Famer

KDIGGZ

Posted
Posted

In Gronk's defense he did have a good education growing up. Williamsville school district has been tops in Wny for a while. Some of these kids from the South have a much harder time because the schools down there are so bad. It's not unheard of for kids to graduate who can barely read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
prissythecat Veteran

prissythecat

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Pasaluki said:

Imo with the wonderlich anything above 10 is fine. Some people don't test well. But below 10 ehh it may be a minor concern. 

 

 

The average score on Wonderlic is 20. 10 means that the person meets minimum literacy standard iirc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reed83HOF All Pro

Reed83HOF

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, kdiggz said:

Some of these kids from the South have a much harder time because the schools down there are so bad. It's not unheard of for kids to graduate who can barely read.

That's so their state stays red....:P

Edited by Reed83HOF
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WMDman Veteran

WMDman

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Cruiserplayer said:

Tyrod scored a 15. Bobbie Dixon a 25.

Boobie’s actually a pretty smart guy, he’s taking online courses back at Mississippi state and he always post his physics grades on his IG story and they’re  pretty good

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LeGOATski Hall of Famer

LeGOATski

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

I've watched a lot of Josh Allen but I'm going to rewatch a ton of his games this week to see if I'm missing something. Everyone has him as the top pick right now, maybe his attributes project better at the pro level.

You didn't miss anything. Did you know Fitz went to Harvard and had an almost perfect Wonderlich score?

 

It means ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dave mcbride Hall of Famer

dave mcbride

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, K-9 said:

I don't mean to single out Kelly and Marino, but they are two HOFers often mentioned in the low wonderlic discussions. And yeah, nobody ever confused them with keen intellects so I don't think much was expected in that department, lol. But they could break down a defense and expound on various defensive concepts and why certain offensive schemes may work against them during the interview process in their draft years. That's all that matters to teams and I'm concerned about the reports of Jackson's poor performance along those lines in his various interviews so far. 

A couple of things - football scheming (offense and defense) is a lot more complex now than in 1984,  and more is asked of qbs than ever (that is, it's more of a passing league than a running league now than it was then). Secondly, people of privilege -- and in this i include ALL draftable qbs who play at big time schools and get invited to the combine -- get far more prep on this sort of thing than in the past. I really don't think people took these sorts of tests as seriously in the early 1980s as they do now. Hence I don't think invoking marino/kelly tells us anything about about the present. That's why such a low score scares me. (And for the record, kelly was a great player, but he ran a really simple scheme that relied heavily on talent (great o-line, receivers, and rb).

 

Bottom line: it's less easy to get through life in the nfl as a meathead qb than it was 30-40 years ago. I firmly believe that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
K-9 Hall of Famer

K-9

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

A couple of things - football scheming (offense and defense) is a lot more complex now than in 1984,  and more is asked of qbs than ever (that is, it's more of a passing league than a running league now than it was then). Secondly, people of privilege -- and in this i include ALL draftable qbs who play at big time schools and get invited to the combine -- get far more prep on this sort of thing than in the past. I really don't think people took these sorts of tests as seriously in the early 1980s as they do now. Hence I don't think invoking marino/kelly tells us anything about about the present. That's why such a low score scares me. (And for the record, kelly was a great player, but he ran a really simple scheme that relied heavily on talent (great o-line, receivers, and rb).

 

Bottom line: it's less easy to get through life in the nfl as a meathead qb than it was 30-40 years ago. I firmly believe that.

I don’t disagree with anything here, especially about the added complexity of today’s schemes; on both sides of the ball. I only cite Kelly and Marino as they were mentioned as examples of guys who scored low and still succeeded. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dpberr Veteran

dpberr

Posted
Posted

I don't care about these test results.  I always found the NFL's reliance on this antiquated test to be peculiar.

 

I'd hope the teams would develop their own tests to gauge how *well* and how *fast* a QB can read a defense and make adjustments. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokinES3 RFA

SmokinES3

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, WMDman said:

Boobie’s actually a pretty smart guy, he’s taking online courses back at Mississippi state and he always post his physics grades on his IG story and they’re  pretty good

Yeah I've seen some of that. He's above average intelligence to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buffalobloodfloridahome RFA

buffalobloodfloridahome

Posted
Posted
On ‎3‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 9:18 PM, prissythecat said:

  You miss the point of the test.  They aren’t looking for a research scientist .  What they. don’t want is dolts like Vince Young and his 6.  Most successful QBs score  above the average which is 20 I believe ?

25 is the bar with a few exceptions. Tyrods big time 15 says allot about his inability to see the field. Cam Newton had a 21 and Derek Carr a 20 but for the most part successful QBs are at 25 or more and anything more than 25 really didn't make them any better or any worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HappyDays Hall of Famer

HappyDays

Posted
Posted

http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2014/04/wondering-about-the-wonderlic-does-it-predict-quarterback-performance/

 

To determine whether the Wonderlic has any effect on QB performance, we examined the test results and NFL performance of 50 quarterbacks dating back to 2007. We included different measures of quarterback efficiency including QBR, Sack Percentage, Adjusted Net Yards Per Attempt, Passer Rating, and Interception Rate Per Attempt. From the various tests we ran, we found a negligible correlation between all the variables and Wonderlic scores of quarterbacks.



 

Not a single variable tested had a correlation above .2 (or below -.2), suggesting a minimal or very weak correlation between quarterbacks’ Wonderlic scores and the other variables at best.

 

Furthermore, the results of the regressions we ran tell a similar story. After individually regressing QBR, Sack Percentage, Adjusted Net Yards Per Attempt, Passer Rating, and Interception Rate Per Attempt on the corresponding Wonderlic scores, we did not find a single relationship that proved to be statistically significant at the 5% level, and most are not even close. That is, a quarterback’s score on the Wonderlic Test does not serve as a significant predictor for any of the metrics we analyzed.

 

It’s unclear whether intellectual proficiency isn’t as important for quarterback as we might think, or that the Wonderlic isn’t very good at measuring it; regardless, it’s very clear that the Wonderlic isn’t, and shouldn’t be considered, a good predictor of quarterback performance.  At the end of the day, scouts are better off watching tape, pro days, and the combine rather than reading test scores.

 

Something to think about before you give the wonderlic any weight.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower All Pro

D. L. Hot-Flamethrower

Posted
Posted (edited)

I bet some teams have metrics that take all the different results(combine, college stats erc.) from all the categories and they spill out pretty decent correlations in totality. Smart analysts won't include data that has no impact. This test is still in because it is a remnant of the past...hey we've always done it this way. And, there are still a few old relics that like it, as there are some of this board. End of the day if you believe someone is not smart and they score a 13 you get confirmation.

Edited by horned dogs
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...