Some wonderloc scores found via google: Hot damn, that Alex Smith is going to be the greatest quarter back ever!
Vince Young's first score was a 6. That's below the level of literacy. Looking at your list, it's clear that a high Wonderlic correlates to success. Yes there are some exceptions, like smith, but if you ran a regression on that statistic, you'd come up with some very good p values.
So you would take the results of a standardized test, complete disregard someone's talent level, motivation, and leadership skills. Let's see Terry Bradshaw, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, Randall Cunningham, Elvis Grbac, and few others scored below 17. What happened with most of these players? Derek Anderson - 19 Most of busts in recent drafts have come from the higher end (40-35). I haven't heard of half of these guys, except for Eli Manning. I don't care how great Wonderlic is at measure someone's success outlook or possibly IQ, it can't measure talent and heart. Let's just be honest.
Alex Smith - 40 sucks Eli Manning - 39 wasn't good even though he won SB Matt Leinart - 35 sucks Tom Brady - 33 good Steve Young - 33 good Joey Harrington - 32 sucks Quincy Carter - 30 sucks Rex Grossman - 29 sucks Troy Aikman - 29 good Matt Hasselbeck - 29 good Peyton Manning - 28 good Akili Smith - 26 sucks Byron Leftwich - 25 sucks Ben Roethlisberger - 25 good David Carr - 24 sucks Brett Favre - 22 good Michael Vick - 20 sucks Dan Marino - 16 good Vince Young - 15 sucks Steve McNair - 15 good Donovan McNabb -14 good Brock Berlin - 13 sucks Marcus Vick - 11 sucks Don't see any type of correlation. Dan Marino and Brett Favre are two of the greatest QB's ever and they didn't score too great on their wonderlics.
The test is only part of a total player evaluation. Nothing more, nothing less. It isn't meant to measure heart or talent. But you have to admit a 6 for a QB raises a question mark. That score is almost below the scale. Regarding heart, I think that is a big part of VY's problem.
Wow, pass or fail. Too bad there aren't any quarterbacks who fall into the category between good and sucks.
Yeah it is a pretty small sampling to draw any conclusions from, especially when you're dealing in absolutes. If someone could produce a list of starting QBs since the test began being administered then we might get a better picture.
how many samples do you need, there are only so many "good" qbs in the league and historically. its a small size to begin with
