Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Oct 20, 2014 at 08:25 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Wonderlic Scores...  (Read 1563 times)
leighclay
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 3979
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,194



« Reply #10 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 14:00 »

(Must you guys always objectify?  Gawd, this board is like so phallocentric), 

Well, that's one of the reasons I'm here.   Wink

I think the scores are good indices for postitions like IOL, QB, S and ILB, places where there's alot of play calling and scheme reading/directing.  It seems not to matter much for wide receivers.

Or maybe we're looking at a social dynamic here; young kids that are skilled but dumb get shuffled out to WR or RB, where they can rely on natural ability and do less thinking. 

That's what I wonder.  Does it really show whether a kid is better suited for a certain position, or does it not relate at all to some?  Can someone who does really well on the test excel anywhere on the field, depending of course on his physical ability, or do the smart guys only do well at IOL, ILB, QB & S?  Can you be too smart for the "natural ability" positions - tending to overthink rather than just perform?

Or is it all a crock of shit?

Would love to see hard stats on that kind of thing.  Just because I'm often a geek that way...
Logged

I'm still the one with the boobs.
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12194
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,317



« Reply #11 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 14:08 »

Eli got a 39.  Ben got a 25.  End of story.
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
RoundTripperKipper
N00b
*

Karma: 389
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


« Reply #12 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 14:12 »

Eli got a 39.  Ben got a 25.  End of story.

Yes, but after contact Ben scored a 40 and Eli scored a 24.
Logged
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12194
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,317



« Reply #13 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 14:28 »

Eli got a 39.  Ben got a 25.  End of story.

Yes, but after contact Ben scored a 40 and Eli scored a 24.

 clap
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
Big Virgil
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 3768
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,249



« Reply #14 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 14:45 »

Jeff Reed scored a .29 on his test.

Quote
(Must you guys always objectify?  Gawd, this board is like so phallocentric)

Did you copy and paste Brinker's "why'd ya have to be such a dick" into the Fancy College Boy Talk generator?

LOL
Logged

Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
I wouldn't say I've been *missing* it, Bob.
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8121
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,722



« Reply #15 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 14:52 »

Jeff Reed scored a .29 on his test.

Quote
(Must you guys always objectify?  Gawd, this board is like so phallocentric)

Did you copy and paste Brinker's "why'd ya have to be such a dick" into the Fancy College Boy Talk generator?

I guess I did, at that.

Quote
Eli got a 39.  Ben got a 25. 

I got a rock.
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
KeystoneKC
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 552
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,639



« Reply #16 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 18:44 »


To answer Leigh's question (Must you guys always objectify?  Gawd, this board is like so phallocentric),  I think the scores are good indices for postitions like IOL, QB, S and ILB, places where there's alot of play calling and scheme reading/directing.  It seems not to matter much for wide receivers

Sorry dude, you lost me at objectify.  I only got a 7 on the damn test.
Logged

Cleveland:  The only NFL city to never play in, or host, a Superbowl.  That bears repeating.
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8121
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,722



« Reply #17 on: Mar 24, 2009 at 21:08 »


To answer Leigh's question (Must you guys always objectify?  Gawd, this board is like so phallocentric),  I think the scores are good indices for postitions like IOL, QB, S and ILB, places where there's alot of play calling and scheme reading/directing.  It seems not to matter much for wide receivers

Sorry dude, you lost me at objectify.  I only got a 7 on the damn test.

Well, at least you can take solace in the fact that you scored higher than Vince Young.
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
vinman3
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1762
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,783


Master of the Obvious


« Reply #18 on: Mar 25, 2009 at 06:38 »

Eli got a 39.  Ben got a 25.  End of story.

Yes, but after contact Ben scored a 40 and Eli scored a 24.

THAT is bringing it on post 14. Nicely done. I concur with Finny's  clap
Logged

It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife; the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sun up. Sleep tight, mates, in your quilted Chambray nightshirts.
Big Virgil
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 3768
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,249



« Reply #19 on: Mar 25, 2009 at 08:16 »


To answer Leigh's question (Must you guys always objectify?  Gawd, this board is like so phallocentric),  I think the scores are good indices for postitions like IOL, QB, S and ILB, places where there's alot of play calling and scheme reading/directing.  It seems not to matter much for wide receivers

Sorry dude, you lost me at objectify.  I only got a 7 on the damn test.

From King of Queens about Penso's post:  You realize, there is a point where we can no longer protect you.

(Doug's response to Spence being down on himselft for being to chicken to get the "Spock Ear" surgery).
« Last Edit: Mar 25, 2009 at 08:18 by Big Virgil » Logged

Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
I wouldn't say I've been *missing* it, Bob.
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!