NFL goes woke - Eliminates wunderlic test of general intelligence in pre-draft process

Facts don't care about feelings but when liberals try to control their narrative "facts" and label opposing truth as "misinformation," what you get is a screwed up society in 2022 and beyond. Time to wake up.

The ultimate "woke" QB, Colin Kaepernick, actually had a very good Wonderlic score (38).

Tom Brady scored 28, same as Peyton Manning.

Ryan Fitzpatrick aced it with a 48.

The test has little to no predictive value; it's a wonder it lasted this long.

Vince Young scored a 6

bricro wrote:

The ultimate "woke" QB, Colin Kaepernick, actually had a very good Wonderlic score (38).

Tom Brady scored 28, same as Peyton Manning.

Ryan Fitzpatrick aced it with a 48.

The test has little to no predictive value; it's a wonder it lasted this long.

It accurately showed whether a person was an idiot or not. There is always value in knowing which people are stupid. Always.

What did Fauci and AOC score?

2600 bro wrote:

What did Fauci and AOC score?

I don't know. I'm guessing they both scored quite high.

APGAR wrote:

bricro wrote:

The ultimate "woke" QB, Colin Kaepernick, actually had a very good Wonderlic score (38).

Tom Brady scored 28, same as Peyton Manning.

Ryan Fitzpatrick aced it with a 48.

The test has little to no predictive value; it's a wonder it lasted this long.

It accurately showed whether a person was an idiot or not. There is always value in knowing which people are stupid. Always.

Exactly. Having a high score will not ensure success, if that were the case Stephen Hawking would have been MVP, but a low score is definitely a red flag that should be paid attention to.

long distance dedication wrote:

APGAR wrote:

It accurately showed whether a person was an idiot or not. There is always value in knowing which people are stupid. Always.

Exactly. Having a high score will not ensure success, if that were the case Stephen Hawking would have been MVP, but a low score is definitely a red flag that should be paid attention to.

Exactly, just look at Vince Young. A marvelous athlete but didn't have it between the ears.

While a high score didn't accurately predict success a low score did accurately predict future problems.

dhe8eheh wrote:

While a high score didn't accurately predict success a low score did accurately predict future problems.

Where's the cutoff? Josh Gordon scored 24.

If we make the cutoff a C (35), the league instantly becomes almost 100% white and probably unwatchable.

If we make it lower than that, there are plenty of problem players in the 20s.

dhe8eheh wrote:

While a high score didn't accurately predict success a low score did accurately predict future problems.

Yep its to weed out as sholes an idiots. Whys everyone calling it racist?

They need to end the 40 yd dash as well, very racist

bricro wrote:

The ultimate "woke" QB, Colin Kaepernick, actually had a very good Wonderlic score (38).

Tom Brady scored 28, same as Peyton Manning.

Ryan Fitzpatrick aced it with a 48.

The test has little to no predictive value; it's a wonder it lasted this long.

Brady scored 33

Somehow people still think great athletes are these amazing geniuses, they're not. It's sports. Anyone who intellectually argues sports is an idiot, it's a children's game. You can teach 8 year Olds to play a position in football. As another poster has mentioned, most of the best athletes to ever play in the NFL have mediocre scores. The test is useless.

Did Wonderlic ever provide anything of value?

It's sports wrote:

Somehow people still think great athletes are these amazing geniuses, they're not. It's sports. Anyone who intellectually argues sports is an idiot, it's a children's game. You can teach 8 year Olds to play a position in football. As another poster has mentioned, most of the best athletes to ever play in the NFL have mediocre scores. The test is useless.

That would be my instinct.

Has the value of this test in drafting players ever been analyzed?

brien evans wrote:

dhe8eheh wrote:

While a high score didn't accurately predict success a low score did accurately predict future problems.

Where's the cutoff? Josh Gordon scored 24.

If we make the cutoff a C (35), the league instantly becomes almost 100% white and probably unwatchable.

If we make it lower than that, there are plenty of problem players in the 20s.

It's not a test on the typical grading system of 70% = C. Getting a 35 on it means you are above average IQ. The average score I believe is in the low 20s. I think a score around or below 10 is a red flag for more cognitive positions like QB, O Line, and WR. I'd be concerned with a QB under 20, but mid 20s is very workable. Professional sports like football require fast processing speed, and memory to remember the playbook, but other skills associated like math or verbal ability are pretty irrelevant.

A reasonable talent evaluator would view a low wonderlic score as a red flag for QBs, safeties, and mike linebackers.

These positions require a lot of pre game prep, ability to understand offensive/ defensive systems, and in game decision making.

For a RB, an offensive lineman, or even a corner the wonderlic probably isn't as important as raw speed, strength, and agility are the make or break traits for those positions.

There will always be low wonderlic guys who succeed and high wonderlic guys who fail. Still, for drafted NFL players, I'd bet there is a positive correlation between Wonderlic scores and career length.

It 100% has been analyzed by teams. I would not expect them to release the results as the value of this info is effectively greater if only your team has it.

This brings up another question: If the test is useless, doesn't provide any value, or doesn't predict success, then why couldn't the teams just ignore the results? They are investing hundreds of millions of dollars into their draft picks and have a reasonable right to ask for these tests, ESPECIALLY given the nature of the NFL draft (all teams competing to best evaluate which player is a best fit for their team).

This is also a wildly broad ruling that I'd love to research some more. Basically, if you can't use a standardized test “demonstrably a reasonable measure of job performance”, then does this outlaw drug tests for work? What do they mean by standardized? How far down does it go? The SAT is a standardized test to get into college, which in itself precludes job opportunities.