Penn State's Zematitis scores a 9 on the wonderlic

[imirish06]

http://mb29.scout.com/fpennstatefrm1.showMessage?topicID= 36759.topic

[Scott Weber]

Yeah, that looks like a real reliable source - it's just some dude posting it on a message board!

[FondestMemory]

i'll say it in every wonderlic thread. the wonderlic test means absolutely nothing.

[LeftWideOpen]

i'll say it in every wonderlic thread. the wonderlic test means absolutely nothing.

besides the fact that the guy scoring low on it is a dumbass.

teams are more hesitant to hand their franchises over to dumbasses. i don't see a problem with it because it's only one part of a huge process.

[fire on my lips]

i'll say it in every wonderlic thread. the wonderlic test means absolutely nothing.
Have you seen the test? If you get below a 20 on that, you must be considered mentally disabled or something.

[itsjdiggity]

Zematitis sounds like a disease

[lanolynn]

i think its hilarious when the players get like a 6 on these. the questions are easy as shit. here's a sample of the test. http://espn.go.com/page2/s/closer/020228test.html

[bigmike]

i don't know, but the test needs a new name. I can't really take it seriously until they change it from some rejected popsicle brand name.

[FondestMemory]

Have you seen the test? If you get below a 20 on that, you must be considered mentally disabled or something.

yeah, i understand how easy of a test it is. but it gives you no help in determining how well somebody can play football.

you can be dumb as a rock bookwise, but have incredible football smarts.

one doesn't always have something to do with the other.

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

yeah, i understand how easy of a test it is. but it gives you no help in determining how well somebody can play football.

you can be dumb as a rock bookwise, but have incredible football smarts.

one doesn't always have something to do with the other.
Some people are horrible test-takers.
Some people get very anxious when they take tests and can't concentrate.

Fuck, I've never been anxious taking a test before, but if someone sat me down in a room and said basically "This test is putting you in the 1st round because you're smart, or the 4th round because you're retarded", I think I'd be a little nervous too.

[lanolynn]

yeah, i understand how easy of a test it is. but it gives you no help in determining how well somebody can play football.

you can be dumb as a rock bookwise, but have incredible football smarts.

one doesn't always have something to do with the other.playbooks in the nfl are so thick that if you show you cant remeber how to do simple math and logic your gonna have trouble. also the test is timed so it makes you make quick decisions, like you have to in a game.

[bigmike]

playbooks in the nfl are so thick that if you show you cant remeber how to do simple math and logic your gonna have trouble. also the test is timed so it makes you make quick decisions, like you have to in a game.
well trying to answer how many hands are on a clock within like 30 minutes is alot different from having 4 seconds to get rid of the football before a 850 monster crushes you.

but i see your point.

[fire on my lips]

yeah, i understand how easy of a test it is. but it gives you no help in determining how well somebody can play football.

you can be dumb as a rock bookwise, but have incredible football smarts.

one doesn't always have something to do with the other.
How are you supposed to be able to memorize plays if you can't figure out simple things.
I agree that they getting a six on this test doesnt mean that you have no brain for football, but if you lack in one, chances are you won't be that bright at the other.
If you do that poorly on this test, a team that wants to draft you will have to seriously guess your ability to guide their team or follow instructions.

[FondestMemory]

playbooks in the nfl are so thick that if you show you cant remeber how to do simple math and logic your gonna have trouble. also the test is timed so it makes you make quick decisions, like you have to in a game.

reading a defense is completely different than figuring out which number in a pattern doesn't belong. they have nothing to do with one another.

and yes, i know playbooks are thick. but if you're football smart, you can handle them. and chances are, if you've excelled enough in college to be considered for the nfl, you've had enough football smarts to understand how playbooks work.

they are in no way related. some of the best football players are fucking morons. it's what you can do on the field, not how well you do long division.

[FondestMemory]

How are you supposed to be able to memorize plays if you can't figure out simple things.
I agree that they getting a six on this test doesnt mean that you have no brain for football, but if you lack in one, chances are you won't be that bright at the other.
If you do that poorly on this test, a team that wants to draft you will have to seriously guess your ability to guide their team or follow instructions.

they have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

the dumbest guy in the world can be the greatest football player. it's all about football smarts, book smarts don't mean shit on the field. they don't mean a damn thing.

[lanolynn]

reading a defense is completely different than figuring out which number in a pattern doesn't belong. they have nothing to do with one another.

and yes, i know playbooks are thick. but if you're football smart, you can handle them. and chances are, if you've excelled enough in college to be considered for the nfl, you've had enough football smarts to understand how playbooks work.

they are in no way related. some of the best football players are fucking morons. it's what you can do on the field, not how well you do long division.the point with the test and reading a defense is you have to do both quickly. its not what its on the test that teams are concerned about its how quickly a player can think. players doing bad on the is an indication they won't make good decisions when they have to make them quickly. and half the time in college the really talented players don't follow a structure like they'll have to in the nfl. i think the quote mac brown always uses about vince young is something like " we just let vince be vince" that won't work in the nfl. i'll give you an example. the titans first round pick last year, pacman jones, scored somwhere between a 4 and a 6 and everyone said that didn't matter, but when he got on the field he led the team in penalties, constantly blew coverages, and really only started because there wasn't any other options. the only thing he did well was return kicks, which is real hard, catch ball run.

[FondestMemory]

the point with the test and reading a defense is you have to do both quickly. its not what its on the test that teams are concerned about its how quickly a player can think. players doing bad on the is an indication they won't make good decisions when they have to make them quickly. and half the time in college the really talented players don't follow a structure like they'll have to in the nfl. i think the quote mac brown always uses about vince young is something like " we just let vince be vince" that won't work in the nfl. i'll give you an example. the titans first round pick last year, pacman jones, scored somwhere between a 4 and a 6 and everyone said that didn't matter, but when he got on the field he led the team in penalties, constantly blew coverages, and really only started because there wasn't any other options. the only thing he did well was return kicks, which is real hard, catch ball run.

you honestly can't tell me you think making a quick read is the same as doing quick math. i hope not at least. there's different kinds of thinking quickly. answering questions on this kind of test has nothing to do with football. different people excel at different things. i'm sure you can score higher than a 6. does that make you a better corner than pacman jones. no, not at all. why? because it doesn't fucking matter.

pacman jones was a rookie. a lot of rookies have the same kind of problems. there's a learning process. not everybody is gonna step right in and be great. there's an adapting that takes place. the fact that he scored so low on the test is merely a coincidence.

but your last line makes it sound like you have no clue about football, so i don't expect you to understand where i'm coming from.

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

Bottom line:

Zematitis and Pac-Man Jones are CB's. There's not that many different options for a CB. Man to man. Zone. Run support. Blitz.

Pac-Man Jones' blown coverages and penalties are not because of a lack of intellgence. They were because of a lack of DISCIPLINE.

[lanolynn]

you honestly can't tell me you think making a quick read is the same as doing quick math. i hope not at least. there's different kinds of thinking quickly. answering questions on this kind of test has nothing to do with football. different people excel at different things. i'm sure you can score higher than a 6. does that make you a better corner than pacman jones. no, not at all. why? because it doesn't fucking matter.

pacman jones was a rookie. a lot of rookies have the same kind of problems. there's a learning process. not everybody is gonna step right in and be great. there's an adapting that takes place. the fact that he scored so low on the test is merely a coincidence.

but your last line makes it sound like you have no clue about football, so i don't expect you to understand where i'm coming from.there's a difference between rookie mistakes and looking like you've never played football before. if you could have to players with the same athletic ability but one was dumd and one was smart, which one would you take. you'd take the smarter one. the nfl needs things like this that measure the intangibles. if they just went by how well a player did in college you'd have way more first round busts. you can neverbe a sure about a player, but if a tea is on the fence about a player the wondelic score can help make that decision. the reason the nfl is dominating other sports is because its run by really smart people and if the wonderlic was unecessary they'd get rid of it.

[FondestMemory]

there's a difference between rookie mistakes and looking like you've never played football before. if you could have to players with the same athletic ability but one was dumd and one was smart, which one would you take. you'd take the smarter one. the nfl needs things like this that measure the intangibles. if they just went by how well a player did in college you'd have way more first round busts. you can neverbe a sure about a player, but if a tea is on the fence about a player the wondelic score can help make that decision. the reason the nfl is dominating other sports is because its run by really smart people and if the wonderlic was unecessary they'd get rid of it.

so, who would you rather have as your quarterback: dan marino or ryan fitzpatrick? fitzpatrick, right? since he scored high and marino didn't. i'll take the 'dumb' one.

and there's more to picking a player than how they did in college. there's the entire combine. they do a shitload of drills. all of which show certain things of importance. and they also take the wonderlic, which is completely pointless.

there's other intangibles that are way more important than math skills. and if it's so important, why was pacman still taken so high even with his low score?

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

so, who would you rather have as your quarterback: dan marino or ryan fitzpatrick? fitzpatrick, right? since he scored high and marino didn't. i'll take the 'dumb' one.

and there's more to picking a player than how they did in college. there's the entire combine. they do a shitload of drills. all of which show certain things of importance. and they also take the wonderlic, which is completely pointless.

there's other intangibles that are way more important than math skills. and if it's so important, why was pacman still taken so high even with his low score?
But...but...but....Ryan Fitzpatrick scored 50/50! And he threw for 300 yards and 3 TD's in one game!

[FondestMemory]

But...but...but....Ryan Fitzpatrick scored 50/50! And he threw for 300 yards and 3 TD's in one game!

haha, ya know, i was actually half expecting that to be an actual attempt at an argument. i'm glad you brought it up sarcastically before anybody could actually use it.

i actually almost changed it, but i couldn't remember who else scored high other than steve young. if i remember right, rob johnson did pretty well on it.

either way, it's fucking pointless.

[imirish06]

Yeah, that looks like a real reliable source - it's just some dude posting it on a message board!


If you took the time to read the thread instead of rushing to make some smart ass remark you'd realize that a valid source was posted in the thread. I only posted the message board thread because I love watching Penn State fans eat crow.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/insider/columns/story?columnist=mcshay_todd&id=2373838&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.es pn.go.com%2fnfl%2fdraft06%2finsider %2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist%3dmc shay_todd%26id%3d2373838

"A perfect score is 50, and the highest score any player posted in this year's class was a 41 (Oklahoma DT Dusty Dvoracek). The lowest score of this year's class was an eight (Syracuse DE Kader Drame, Alabama ILB Freddie Roach, Louisville DT Montavious Stanley, N.C. State TE T.J. Williams and Oklahoma DC Chijioke Onyenegecha), and the average score of all the quarterbacks was a 24.6.

The Wonderlic Personnel Test (WPT) is a short-form intelligence test that measures players' ability to think on their feet, follow directions and make effective decisions under pressure. While Young and Vick exposed their weaknesses in those areas, other quarterbacks shined. Grambling's Bruce Eugene (41), Montana State's Travis Lulay (37), USC's Matt Leinart (35) and Oregon's Kellen Clemens (35) all posted impressive scores.

Prospects at other positions who excelled include Ohio State OC Nick Mangold (35), Tulsa TE/FB Garrett Mills (35), Oregon LB Keith Ellison (36), Cal-Poly State DE Chris Gocong (36), Cornell OL Kevin Boothe (37), Virginia WR Marques Hagans (37), Stanford DT Babatunde Oshinowo (37) and Boston College OT Jeremy Trueblood (37).

Others didn't fare so well, such as Penn State DC Alan Zemaitis (9), Marshall DC Chris Hawkins (10), Miami DE Javon Nanton (10), South Carolina DS Ko Simpson (10), Central Missouri State WR Delanie Walker (10), Syracuse DE James Wyche (10), LSU WR/RS Skyler Green (11), Tennessee DB Jason Allen (11), Clemson DE Charles Bennett (11), Abilene Christian DB Danieal Manning (12), Texas Tech DS Dwayne Slay (12), South Florida RB Andre Hall (13), Pittsburgh DC Josh Lay (13), UCLA TE Marcedes Lewis (13), Mississippi State RB Jerious Norwood (13) and Tarleton State RB Derrick Ross (13). "

[LeftWideOpen]

Some people are horrible test-takers.
Some people get very anxious when they take tests and can't concentrate.

Fuck, I've never been anxious taking a test before, but if someone sat me down in a room and said basically "This test is putting you in the 1st round because you're smart, or the 4th round because you're retarded", I think I'd be a little nervous too.

The test doesnt hold that much weight. If you can play, you get chosen in the appropriate position. What this test does is maybe help separate two people who are a near toss-up in teams eyes. It's no different then when a team passes over somebody for character issues. If you have RB #1 who is 6'0 and runs a 4.4 forty and RB #2 who runs the same but got busted a few times for drugs ...you take #1. Same thing ..if RB #1 scored a 12 on the Wonderlic and #2 scores a 40, you probably choose #2.

reading a defense is completely different than figuring out which number in a pattern doesn't belong. they have nothing to do with one another.

and yes, i know playbooks are thick. but if you're football smart, you can handle them. and chances are, if you've excelled enough in college to be considered for the nfl, you've had enough football smarts to understand how playbooks work.

they are in no way related. some of the best football players are fucking morons. it's what you can do on the field, not how well you do long division.

Some of the best football players are morons ...but what about the number of good football players who might be great if they weren't? When you talk about guys like Dan Marino, you are talking about exceptions. For every Marino, there are 20 Heath Shuler's. Some people are just flat out stupid and their athleticism (which got them by in college) is no longer enough to separate them in the NFL. The Wonderlic is simply just one way of evaluating a player and helping make a decision.

With that said, you don't completely forget about a guy because he scores low. But, it does help you separate two guys who are similar. It's only a small part of the process.

they have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

the dumbest guy in the world can be the greatest football player. it's all about football smarts, book smarts don't mean shit on the field. they don't mean a damn thing.

This test isn't just about book smarts. It's about cognitive skills, which you use in football. Cognitive skills and book smarts are two different concepts.

[fire on my lips]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/insider/columns/story?columnist=mcshay_todd&id=2373838&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.es pn.go.com%2fnfl%2fdraft06%2finsider %2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist%3dmc shay_todd%26id%3d2373838

"A perfect score is 50, and the highest score any player posted in this year's class was a 41 (Oklahoma DT Dusty Dvoracek). The lowest score of this year's class was an eight (Syracuse DE Kader Drame, Alabama ILB Freddie Roach, Louisville DT Montavious Stanley, N.C. State TE T.J. Williams and Oklahoma DC Chijioke Onyenegecha), and the average score of all the quarterbacks was a 24.6.

No one on the U finished last. YAY. :groupflip

[imirish06]

With that said, you don't completely forget about a guy because he scores low. But, it does help you separate two guys who are similar. It's only a small part of the process.

This test isn't just about book smarts. It's about cognitive skills, which you use in football. Cognitive skills and book smarts are two different concepts.


well said

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

haha, ya know, i was actually half expecting that to be an actual attempt at an argument. i'm glad you brought it up sarcastically before anybody could actually use it.

i actually almost changed it, but i couldn't remember who else scored high other than steve young. if i remember right, rob johnson did pretty well on it.

either way, it's fucking pointless.

You said the "RJ" name in front of a Bills fan. DIE MOTHERFUCKER!


....j/k.

[lanolynn]

so, who would you rather have as your quarterback: dan marino or ryan fitzpatrick? fitzpatrick, right? since he scored high and marino didn't. i'll take the 'dumb' one.

and there's more to picking a player than how they did in college. there's the entire combine. they do a shitload of drills. all of which show certain things of importance. and they also take the wonderlic, which is completely pointless.

there's other intangibles that are way more important than math skills. and if it's so important, why was pacman still taken so high even with his low score?you are retarded. the point of the wonderlic isn't to test math skills, it's to test comprehension and whether or not a player can make a good decision quickly. if you want to talk about players being drafted too high explain ryan leaf, explain joey harrington, explain tim couch. all these test these players go through are relevant even if they aren't exact. you obviously think sean salisbury is the ultimate source for all things football since only you and him think the wonderlic is pointless.

[FondestMemory]

you are retarded. the point of the wonderlic isn't to test math skills, it's to test comprehension and whether or not a player can make a good decision quickly. if you want to talk about players being drafted too high explain ryan leaf, explain joey harrington, explain tim couch. all these test these players go through are relevant even if they aren't exact. you obviously think sean salisbury is the ultimate source for all things football since only you and him think the wonderlic is pointless.

first off, i've never heard sean salisbury talk about the wonderlic. if it comes up, i stop listening because it's irrelevant.

you're right, the wonderlic is to test comprehension. but you're completely missing my point. a test like this and quick football decisions are completely unrelated. answering a question quickly and reading a route or a defense aren't in the same ball park.

and you almost just proved my point. i can't explain tim couch or ryan leaf. it's hit or miss. the draft isn't an exact science. for every failure who scored low on it, you can find a success with the same score or lower. there's not enough proof to sway it's relevance one way or another. it's pure coincidence. a shit player may score super high, and a great one scores low. does that have anything to do with what they do on the football field? no. not at all. it's all chance. scoring high doesn't guarentee greatness, and scoring low doesn't promise failure. some people give the test way too much credit.

but go ahead, call me retarded again. it makes you sound so smart and puts that much more weight behind your argument.

[FondestMemory]

The test doesnt hold that much weight. If you can play, you get chosen in the appropriate position. What this test does is maybe help separate two people who are a near toss-up in teams eyes. It's no different then when a team passes over somebody for character issues. If you have RB #1 who is 6'0 and runs a 4.4 forty and RB #2 who runs the same but got busted a few times for drugs ...you take #1. Same thing ..if RB #1 scored a 12 on the Wonderlic and #2 scores a 40, you probably choose #2.



Some of the best football players are morons ...but what about the number of good football players who might be great if they weren't? When you talk about guys like Dan Marino, you are talking about exceptions. For every Marino, there are 20 Heath Shuler's. Some people are just flat out stupid and their athleticism (which got them by in college) is no longer enough to separate them in the NFL. The Wonderlic is simply just one way of evaluating a player and helping make a decision.

With that said, you don't completely forget about a guy because he scores low. But, it does help you separate two guys who are similar. It's only a small part of the process.



This test isn't just about book smarts. It's about cognitive skills, which you use in football. Cognitive skills and book smarts are two different concepts.

well said. i see what you're saying, but i still don't see the relevance. you're talking about it as an absolute last determining factor between player 1 and player 2. if they're similar in so many other ways, athletically and character wise, yeah, this may help sway one way or the other. but at that point it's basically down to a coin flip.

it is only a small part of the process, i agree with that completely. but most people don't see it as that. they think the world is ending for somebody if they score low. i just think people put too much weight behind it. yes, for every marino there's 20 shulers. but for every fitzpatrick there's 10 elways. there's just not enough consistent support to prove it's relevance as anything other than an extreme last resort.

and i know it's not just about book smarts. but my point is still the same. the kind of cognitive skills used to score high or low aren't the same kind of quick decisions used to read a defense or jump a route. you could score low on it and still determine what the defense is doing over somebody who scored high. everybody has different strengths and weaknesses.

so basically, do teams look at the results? sure, sometimes. probably mostly after everything else though. do the results need to be made into a big deal if they're low? no, not at all.

[LeftWideOpen]

well said. i see what you're saying, but i still don't see the relevance. you're talking about it as an absolute last determining factor between player 1 and player 2. if they're similar in so many other ways, athletically and character wise, yeah, this may help sway one way or the other. but at that point it's basically down to a coin flip.

it is only a small part of the process, i agree with that completely. but most people don't see it as that. they think the world is ending for somebody if they score low. i just think people put too much weight behind it. yes, for every marino there's 20 shulers. but for every fitzpatrick there's 10 elways. there's just not enough consistent support to prove it's relevance as anything other than an extreme last resort.

and i know it's not just about book smarts. but my point is still the same. the kind of cognitive skills used to score high or low aren't the same kind of quick decisions used to read a defense or jump a route. you could score low on it and still determine what the defense is doing over somebody who scored high. everybody has different strengths and weaknesses.

so basically, do teams look at the results? sure, sometimes. probably mostly after everything else though. do the results need to be made into a big deal if they're low? no, not at all.

i agree here. i am by no means calling for scouting reform, but i think the wonderlic plays one small part in a large process and i think it has a place in that capacity. people who exaggerate it are bound to be disappointed when the guy who is projected as a mid first rounder scores an 8 still goes in the mid first round.

[FondestMemory]

i agree here. i am by no means calling for scouting reform, but i think the wonderlic plays one small part in a large process and i think it has a place in that capacity. people who exaggerate it are bound to be disappointed when the guy who is projected as a mid first rounder scores an 8 still goes in the mid first round.

agreed. i'm not calling for scouting reform either. i honestly think they just try to throw as many things as possible at the players at the combine to see how they handle it. how they take directions and all that stuff. i more have a problem with these results being made public and getting blown out of proportion.

[lanolynn]

first off, i've never heard sean salisbury talk about the wonderlic. if it comes up, i stop listening because it's irrelevant.

you're right, the wonderlic is to test comprehension. but you're completely missing my point. a test like this and quick football decisions are completely unrelated. answering a question quickly and reading a route or a defense aren't in the same ball park.

and you almost just proved my point. i can't explain tim couch or ryan leaf. it's hit or miss. the draft isn't an exact science. for every failure who scored low on it, you can find a success with the same score or lower. there's not enough proof to sway it's relevance one way or another. it's pure coincidence. a shit player may score super high, and a great one scores low. does that have anything to do with what they do on the football field? no. not at all. it's all chance. scoring high doesn't guarentee greatness, and scoring low doesn't promise failure. some people give the test way too much credit.

but go ahead, call me retarded again. it makes you sound so smart and puts that much more weight behind your argument.yeah the retarded thing was a littleout of line, but i was drunk and angry because the preds lost again. i think you and i basically agree, we're just phrases are arguments differently. i think the wonderlic is important, but not anymore close to the most important thing. i think its a good thing for coaches and gms to have when looking at players who, but just like 40s, vertical jumps, lifting, and all the other test prospects go through, doing well on it or doing poorly is no guarentee of what type of player you are. the draft is a complete coin flip and coaches and gms want to have every possible bit of info they can get on a guy before they draft him.