Wonderlic Scores are in

[EPL0c0]

Yeah, he didn't take the field by himself in Dec and Jan.

Very true. Romo didn't give up 2 long TD runs against Baltimore. Romo didn't fumble the ball at the 4yard line and have it returned for a TD against Philadelphia. I hope folks realize these things and hopefully the team holds those particular players accountable for their mistakes; no matter who it is.

But those are things Romo has no control over. What he does have control over is what Tony Romo does: no more careless ball handling, no more poor decisions. And...IMO, ditch the efforts to emulate Tom Brady and just be Tony Romo. The Tony Romo from 2006 and 2007 looked A LOT better than the Tony Romo of 2008 IMO. But what he did in 2006 and 2007 means nothing in 2009. I hope 2009 he gets back to being the Tony Romo that took the league by storm.

 

[DFWJC]

Wonderlic smunderlic, when I turn on the tape, can they play the game? That's the biggest question!

Amen. These guys putting emphasis on something that so few really care about need to look at history. They would not have drafted a many a Hall of Famer by worrying about these silly scores. I would look at them if I were GM for a day, but how they actually play the game is the bottom line.

 

[DFWJC]

Its amazing that some of these guys are as stupid as they are.

I understand most go to college just to play ball, but the Wonderlic is comprised of pretty simplistic questions.

I just took it, got interupted by a quick phone call, and still scored a 35. And I'd say I'm of average intelligence. I have no idea how these guys can only score a 7, or 12. If I were a GM, I wouldn't touch those cavemen with a 12 foot poll.

So you pass on the Bradshaws and Marinos of the world? That's a nice 1-15 team your building Mr GM.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

fascinating

Intriguing

 

[FCBarca]

i dont know why so many people put so much stock into this.

Some don't put much stock into it, i.e. Tennessee when it came to Vince Young :laugh2:

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-22-pompei-scout-mar22,0,7151782.story

here are some of the big names

so to establish some benchmarks and to make it easier for a reference point, I think it would be easier to have the Stafford mark and the Vince Young mark he famously set years ago.

High and low.

 

[amuze]

uhh, I don't think the Wonderlic is supposed to test a person's judgment, just their mental quickness. Those are two very different things. I don't have any evidence for this, but I suspect that Pacman Jones had a pretty good Wonderlic, because byall accounts he's a sharp guy. But he has the judgment of a poorly-trained Border Collie.

Now, whether or not the test is a very good indicator of "football intelligence" or even intelligence at all is another question. My hunch is that it's only ok at measuring those things. But I don't think a high score will make you less prone to getting into trouble at the local "scrip club."

That's not important for a decision-making position like quarterback or anything. :laugh2:

 

[FCBarca]

I love the scout's take on Louis Delmas' score, he 'plays smart'

 

[alancdc]

This is about as crazy as, I don't know, putting stock in someones 40 times in shorts and t-shirts. I heard that Knowshawn Moreno's stock was dropping because he ran a slow 40 time. I don't know about you, but the eyeball test tells me that this guy is one heckofa RB.

 

[joseephuss]

Wonderlic smunderlic, when I turn on the tape, can they play the game? That's the biggest question!

I don't think anyone is saying to use the Wonderic test as the biggest question. It is just a tool just like the 40 time. It is not the top way to rate a player and not the only way to do it, either.

You may be able to use the Wonderlic as a tie breaker in the evaluation of players. Look at the tape of player "A" and player "B". Both can play the game and you can only choose one when it is your turn to draft. Perhaps you choose the one with the higher Wonderlic test score if there is a big difference in their scores. Perhaps you choose the one with the faster 40 time if there is a big difference in their times.

Anyone that just looks at the Wonderlic test to evaluate a player would be doing a poor job of scouting, but to dismiss the Wonderlic test scores would not be a good thing as well.

 

[DFWJC]

so to establish some benchmarks and to make it easier for a reference point, I think it would be easier to have the Stafford mark and the Vince Young mark he famously set years ago.

High and low.

Or how about Craig Krenzal's off the charts score...a true indicator of his future stadom! Or Marino's terrible score...maybe nobdy should have bothered to draft that numbskull.

 

[ethiostar]

I put as much stock on the Wonderlic as i do on regular IQ tests, which is very very little.