This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The test is bad, but I don't think it means that much. It does raise warning flags and I want to know two things:1) Can he read? I'm not being facetious, I really want to know if he read well enough to study the playbook (although they are mostly pictures).
Noted.Irony.
Hi bigjim,Thanks. That's exactly what I was guessing.
Understatement. Young has expert legal backing but it is apparent Adams is WAY out of his league as an agent. Thus far Adams has fat fingered his dealings with Young worse than a thumbless virgin attempting to get into a bra. This is bad and only getting worse. Folks love the conspiracy theories especially in regards to sports. For prime examples check out the NBA and matters concerning Ewing going to the Knicks; officiating pertaining to Jordan and allegations against fixing games for ratings. The NFL has always done a great job of keeping their image high above such matters but this issue of Young's test score is interesting. I am shocked spin and collateral damage control has been so passive thus far.
Hey Clint,I can't speak for others but I think you're making as broad a generalization as you're accusing others of. I personally think Vince Young's performance against USC was one of the most amazing sporting performances in memory. I also think he's got the intangibles of owning the huddle and calm under pressure that many prospective NFL QBs can only dream of. I've also heard/read good things about Young as a person. And have been open to the concept of Young as a top 3 overall pick.
This doesn't make sense from the NFL's point of view. They have no interest in seeing a player drafted any higher than their talent would dictate. The only explanation coming from the conspiracy theorists is that the low score damages the NFL's ability to market Young. I don't see why they would want to inflate his draft slot and then have him bust on the field. That would be more damaging to the NFL. In fact, one could make the argument that it would be better for the NFL's marketing efforts for Young to fall in the draft. Then he would presumably go to a better team and make a bigger impact (e.g. Rothlisberger).
Hi Red,I'd guess becuase the Wonderlic seems to be something that most of the players, even the ones that don't participate in the combine drills, go ahead and take.
When my daughter took the ACT as a high school sophmore, her proctor misread the time and had everyone turn in their test. I was upset with her that she did not just fill in answers and she said she didn't know the time was up. Anyway ACT sent us a certified letter with an offer to retest or get money back. I made her retest and she got to take it solo with only the proctor the next weekend, so one possibility was a timing error which would negate the score and force a retake, not saying that's what happened but it is a possibility.The NFL appears to be comfortable sticking to the "scoring error, 16 on the retest" story...but BigRed hits the nail on the head. If it was REALLY a scoring error, why doesn't the league a) explain the exact nature of the scoring error [and why it didn't impact any other test] and b) simply rescore the first test versus giving him a new exam.
Hey Hawk,I'm rooting for Vince Young, but again, until the NFL explains the situation with clarity and complete openness [which they probably aren't going to do], I'm going to add his intellectual capacity to his risk profile. There's so much information floating around with little confirmation. About the only things that seem clear are he re-took the test and got a 16, and that his first test was scored in error. Yet, no one has addressed why/how the first test was in error and why they simply didn't rescore that test.
LOL@ anyone who would judge how bright someone is, based on a wonderlic score. Not everyone is a great test taker..Hey Hawk,I'm rooting for Vince Young, but again, until the NFL explains the situation with clarity and complete openness [which they probably aren't going to do], I'm going to add his intellectual capacity to his risk profile. There's so much information floating around with little confirmation. About the only things that seem clear are he re-took the test and got a 16, and that his first test was scored in error. Yet, no one has addressed why/how the first test was in error and why they simply didn't rescore that test.
And as much as I like Young and think he's a good kid, LOL at Mack Brown saying he's "very bright." A score of 16 [the 2nd time around] is hardly indicative of someone "very bright." He may be more than intelligent enough to run an NFL offense, but "very bright?"
LOL@ anyone who would judge how bright someone is, based on a wonderlic score. Not everyone is a great test taker..Hey Hawk,I'm rooting for Vince Young, but again, until the NFL explains the situation with clarity and complete openness [which they probably aren't going to do], I'm going to add his intellectual capacity to his risk profile. There's so much information floating around with little confirmation. About the only things that seem clear are he re-took the test and got a 16, and that his first test was scored in error. Yet, no one has addressed why/how the first test was in error and why they simply didn't rescore that test.
And as much as I like Young and think he's a good kid, LOL at Mack Brown saying he's "very bright." A score of 16 [the 2nd time around] is hardly indicative of someone "very bright." He may be more than intelligent enough to run an NFL offense, but "very bright?"
It's an intelligence test, designed explicitly to determine how "bright" someone is...In fact, employers all across the nation rely on the test...from the Wonderlic site itself:www.wonderlic.comLike any standardized test it's hardly a complete assessment of someone's overall intellect, but let's not pretend like it's not designed to measure EXACTLY whether or not Vince Young is "very bright" or not.
I don't know how bright he is, but if he was only 3 hrs from graduating he should have been used to taking test. Texas is not an easy school, which is why I believe something is wrong.LOL@ anyone who would judge how bright someone is, based on a wonderlic score. Not everyone is a great test taker..Hey Hawk,I'm rooting for Vince Young, but again, until the NFL explains the situation with clarity and complete openness [which they probably aren't going to do], I'm going to add his intellectual capacity to his risk profile. There's so much information floating around with little confirmation. About the only things that seem clear are he re-took the test and got a 16, and that his first test was scored in error. Yet, no one has addressed why/how the first test was in error and why they simply didn't rescore that test.
And as much as I like Young and think he's a good kid, LOL at Mack Brown saying he's "very bright." A score of 16 [the 2nd time around] is hardly indicative of someone "very bright." He may be more than intelligent enough to run an NFL offense, but "very bright?"
Hi BT,With all due respect to Texas, an athlete of his stature gets through if he can show up for class.
Let's not pretend that athletes aren't allowed to skate by, but I won't condemn UT for this when everyone is guilty. While I was at Penn, our best hoops player was Jerome Brown and Cornell broke a story that he scored an 880 on his SATs; yet he was attending Wharton where the mean SAT score in his entry class was 450 points higher.
I think perhaps more amusing to me than VY's wonderlic drama is all these people using the fact that he went to Texas as evidence of his intelligence.Brace yourself for this next revelation: exceptions are made and rules are broken for athletes in most if not all schools, and I would venture to guess the higher the stakes (national championship) - the more it happens.I don't know how bright he is, but if he was only 3 hrs from graduating he should have been used to taking test. Texas is not an easy school, which is why I believe something is wrong.LOL@ anyone who would judge how bright someone is, based on a wonderlic score. Not everyone is a great test taker..Hey Hawk,I'm rooting for Vince Young, but again, until the NFL explains the situation with clarity and complete openness [which they probably aren't going to do], I'm going to add his intellectual capacity to his risk profile. There's so much information floating around with little confirmation. About the only things that seem clear are he re-took the test and got a 16, and that his first test was scored in error. Yet, no one has addressed why/how the first test was in error and why they simply didn't rescore that test.
And as much as I like Young and think he's a good kid, LOL at Mack Brown saying he's "very bright." A score of 16 [the 2nd time around] is hardly indicative of someone "very bright." He may be more than intelligent enough to run an NFL offense, but "very bright?"
Yeah but he is 6'5" and 220 worth of dumb.....Marino had the same score.....
Only if the player provides them. Even in my graduate classes there are students who get "special" testing procedures. (Although I am certainly not claiming this is the case here, one of the smartest kids I ever taught may well have been the worst standardized test taker ever because of dyslexia.)
Again- and I am stubbed by how many people don't get this: you cannot do well on the wonderlic if you can't read quickly. The test does not measure how people "think on their feet, follow directions, and make effective decisions under the pressure of a time clock. It was originally developed in 1937 as a tool to quantify the mental abilities of potential job candidates." First and foremost, it measures how fast you read. You can be anywhere from stupid to genius and not be able to read quickly. So any test that you must read in a timed format that measures intelligence has the ability to skew this information. I am not saying Young is smart. I just think that the group of people here who get self esteem from reading comments and writing pithy replies are ignorant about the multiplicities and layers of intelligence.LOL@ anyone who would judge how bright someone is, based on a wonderlic score. Not everyone is a great test taker..Hey Hawk,I'm rooting for Vince Young, but again, until the NFL explains the situation with clarity and complete openness [which they probably aren't going to do], I'm going to add his intellectual capacity to his risk profile. There's so much information floating around with little confirmation. About the only things that seem clear are he re-took the test and got a 16, and that his first test was scored in error. Yet, no one has addressed why/how the first test was in error and why they simply didn't rescore that test.
And as much as I like Young and think he's a good kid, LOL at Mack Brown saying he's "very bright." A score of 16 [the 2nd time around] is hardly indicative of someone "very bright." He may be more than intelligent enough to run an NFL offense, but "very bright?"
www.wonderlic.comLike any standardized test it's hardly a complete assessment of someone's overall intellect, but let's not pretend like it's not designed to measure EXACTLY whether or not Vince Young is "very bright" or not.
Hey weasel,According to the creators AND the thousands of companies and organizations that use the test...it does EXACTLY what you contend it doesn't. There's absolutely no debating that the Wonderlic was designed to test the aforementioned. You are more than entitled to believe it fails in its design, but clearly Wonderlic, the NFL and tens upon thousands of other entities disagree.Again- and I am stubbed by how many people don't get this: you cannot do well on the wonderlic if you can't read quickly. The test does not measure how people "think on their feet, follow directions, and make effective decisions under the pressure of a time clock. It was originally developed in 1937 as a tool to quantify the mental abilities of potential job candidates." First and foremost, it measures how fast you read. You can be anywhere from stupid to genius and not be able to read quickly. So any test that you must read in a timed format that measures intelligence has the ability to skew this information. I am not saying Young is smart. I just think that the group of people here who get self esteem from reading comments and writing pithy replies are ignorant about the multiplicities and layers of intelligence.LOL@ anyone who would judge how bright someone is, based on a wonderlic score. Not everyone is a great test taker..Hey Hawk,I'm rooting for Vince Young, but again, until the NFL explains the situation with clarity and complete openness [which they probably aren't going to do], I'm going to add his intellectual capacity to his risk profile. There's so much information floating around with little confirmation. About the only things that seem clear are he re-took the test and got a 16, and that his first test was scored in error. Yet, no one has addressed why/how the first test was in error and why they simply didn't rescore that test.
And as much as I like Young and think he's a good kid, LOL at Mack Brown saying he's "very bright." A score of 16 [the 2nd time around] is hardly indicative of someone "very bright." He may be more than intelligent enough to run an NFL offense, but "very bright?"
www.wonderlic.comLike any standardized test it's hardly a complete assessment of someone's overall intellect, but let's not pretend like it's not designed to measure EXACTLY whether or not Vince Young is "very bright" or not.
I don't think it has anything to do with stereotyping. In fact, please elaborate because I'm not quite clear even what that means. Most people I've discussed this situation with don't believe the cloak and dagger "too top secret to explain on the record" decision to retest, after allowing further preparation, rather than properly rescore a test already taken. And to allow Mack Brown and Charley Casserly to act as NFL spokepersons on the dispersal of information they probably shouldn't be aware of in the first place? To me this is a clear case of "where there's smoke, there's fire" deduction. The numbers here don't surprise me in the least.
Hey Shick...not sure where you're going with that. But I'm openly disappointed with Young's score [whether it be a 6, a 16 or both] and fail to see how I'm succumbing to stereotypes. I think he's a talented and, by most accounts, good kid and hope he does succeed in the league. But wanting him to succeed and objectively looking at the risks inherent in that success are two very different things.We know Young is a phenomenal athlete, improved by leaps and bounds in his passing efficiency, and has unbelievable poise under intense game pressure. We also know that he's got an unorthodox delivery, is a raw passer not used to running a pro-style offense, and we can now add to that at worst...a serious issue with intellectual capacity [or a learning disability] and at best [if he got a 16], someone that's on the low end of historical QB ranges and will have to be someone that bucks the odds [much like McNair and McNabb have done in recent years].
I don't disagree with any of your assessment.The question was Conspiracy or Legit? How on earth can anyone give an honest opinion? We're all in the dark there. All opinions given on that are uneducated, mine also. When we don't know, we fall back on what we want to know.
