In regard to PsychoÃ¢Â€Â™s view on Aaron Brooks...

GumboBC · 07-12-2004, 08:42 AM

Ahhhhhhh.... Judge Gator has made his ruling.

Here\' the evidence WhoDat has presented:

1. WhoDat said \"scouts\" said Brooks was dumb.
But, he didn\'t present any names or actual statements. I have never seen any scout say Brooks was dumb. Where\'s the proof?

2. WhoDat says Brooks is dumb based on the interviews he has seen.
That\'s a personal opinion. Is WhoDat an \"intelligence profiler\" ? No way that holds up.

3. WhoDat presented Brooks\' wonderlic score.
While a score of 17 is slightly below average, it doesn\'t prove anything. Even Mr. Wondelic (and there is really a Mr. Wonderlic) has said the wonderlic test can\'t say for sure how intelligent someone is.

And finally........... No one has enough, or can get enough evidence to prove anything. Which has been the point I\'ve been trying to make all along.

[Edited on 12/7/2004 by GumboBC]

GumboBC · 07-12-2004, 08:54 AM

And another thing. The wonderlic isn\'t designed to test intellignce. The wonderlic is designed to test \"how quickly\" someone can process information.

Oh, and the proof:

Unlike other knowledge tests, it is not designed to gauge intelligence. Instead, it assesses a person\'s ability to reason in a short period of time, which makes it the ideal test for prospective NFL players.

Deciphering defenses at the line of scrimmage. Reading an offensive formation for clues on the upcoming play. Those are tasks a player must perform before he ever lunges for a tackle or throws a pass.

http://www.petebigelow.com/clips.php?a=1&b=2

More Proof:

The difference between the Wonderlic and a more comprehensive IQ exam is that subjects get only 12 minutes to complete 50 questions. The test is designed to give employers a glimpse into the problem-solving ability of the job candidate and doesn\'t provide in-depth analysis about one\'s intelligence.

\"It is not diagnostic,\" said Charlie Wonderlic, president of Wonderlic, Inc., in Libertyville, Ill.
http://www.jsonline.com/packer/prev/...er18041701.asp

Edit: WhoDat - I have provided you with overwhelming evidence that the wonderlic doesn\'t measure how intelligent someone is. Even from Charlie Wonderlic himself. Now, would you like to step up to the plate and admit that you\'ve put way too much stock in how valueable the wonderlic is?

This is all fun and everything, but you have been defeated..LMAO... :P

[Edited on 12/7/2004 by GumboBC]

GumboBC · 07-13-2004, 01:46 AM

I just like giving WhoDat a hard time.

I\'ve leared a lot of things just by having to research the arguments WhoDat presents. I\'ve learned all about the \"odds\" in Vegas. I know much more about the \"wonderlic\" test. The list goes on.....

Truth be known, I like hearing the negative side. I don\'t even know if you can call it the \"negative\" side. I mean, when you underachieve all these years, it\'s not all negative, it\'s the \"truth.\" A lot of it anyway.

I\'ll be glad when training camp gets here. I\'ve thought of everything in the world to talk about. You can only talk about Aaron Books, Delhomme, and \"what\" we need to do to improve so many times.

Well, I\'ll be gone from the board for a few weeks (hold your applause) Maybe saintfan can hold things down while I\'m gone.

And gator and WhoDat can keep everyone from taking in too much sunshine.

Oh,

For the record: I don\'t think Brooks is the sharpest knife in the drawer. But, I don\'t think he\'s stupid either.

Danno · 07-13-2004, 06:56 AM

The facts are that Brooks haters can come up with their own stats to shown Brooks is inadequate, and even more easily the Brooks supporters can come up with twice as many stats to show Brooks is above average.

You will never change the minds of a Brooks Hater... ever.

He can win the Superbowl and the Brooks Haters will swear it was in spite of him, or he had a lucky day.

Its pointless to argue with someone who has their mind made up already.

Why bother? We\'ve all said everything that can be said about Brooks both positive and negative. Aren\'t you getting tired of it?

I\'ll bet Brooks isn\'t dumb enough to type the same argument to the same people 7 zillion times.

saintfan · 07-13-2004, 08:47 AM

Here\'s the rub with the wonderlic...

Delhomme scores fairly well and goes undrafted right?

Brooks Scores \"middle of the road\" and is drafted low right?

Anybody know where Dan Marino was drafted? His wonderlic score was 16 and he was drafted 27th overall...the 5th QB taken in 1983. Now we can look at all the records he owns and we can say Mr. Marino is an exception. On the other hand we might look at Marino\'s situation (much like many many others) and determine a couple things:

a. Scouting / Drafting is FAR from an exact science
b. A person\'s wonderlic score is probably not something someone would want to submit as evidence in a trial

If you\'re trying to debate a football player\'s ability to play football based on the wonderlic it is my opinion that you\'re gonna lose that argument based on the overall performance of those in the NFL who scored poorly and performed average or better. There are too many Hall of Fame and future Hall of Fame players that didn\'t do well on it.

07-12-2004, 08:42 AM	#61
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	In regard to PsychoÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s view on Aaron Brooks... Ahhhhhhh.... Judge Gator has made his ruling. Here\' the evidence WhoDat has presented: 1. WhoDat said \"scouts\" said Brooks was dumb. But, he didn\'t present any names or actual statements. I have never seen any scout say Brooks was dumb. Where\'s the proof? 2. WhoDat says Brooks is dumb based on the interviews he has seen. That\'s a personal opinion. Is WhoDat an \"intelligence profiler\" ? No way that holds up. 3. WhoDat presented Brooks\' wonderlic score. While a score of 17 is slightly below average, it doesn\'t prove anything. Even Mr. Wondelic (and there is really a Mr. Wonderlic) has said the wonderlic test can\'t say for sure how intelligent someone is. And finally........... No one has enough, or can get enough evidence to prove anything. Which has been the point I\'ve been trying to make all along. [Edited on 12/7/2004 by GumboBC]
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

07-12-2004, 08:54 AM	#62
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	In regard to PsychoÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s view on Aaron Brooks... And another thing. The wonderlic isn\'t designed to test intellignce. The wonderlic is designed to test \"how quickly\" someone can process information. Oh, and the proof: Unlike other knowledge tests, it is not designed to gauge intelligence. Instead, it assesses a person\'s ability to reason in a short period of time, which makes it the ideal test for prospective NFL players. Deciphering defenses at the line of scrimmage. Reading an offensive formation for clues on the upcoming play. Those are tasks a player must perform before he ever lunges for a tackle or throws a pass. http://www.petebigelow.com/clips.php?a=1&b=2 More Proof: The difference between the Wonderlic and a more comprehensive IQ exam is that subjects get only 12 minutes to complete 50 questions. The test is designed to give employers a glimpse into the problem-solving ability of the job candidate and doesn\'t provide in-depth analysis about one\'s intelligence. \"It is not diagnostic,\" said Charlie Wonderlic, president of Wonderlic, Inc., in Libertyville, Ill. http://www.jsonline.com/packer/prev/...er18041701.asp Edit: WhoDat - I have provided you with overwhelming evidence that the wonderlic doesn\'t measure how intelligent someone is. Even from Charlie Wonderlic himself. Now, would you like to step up to the plate and admit that you\'ve put way too much stock in how valueable the wonderlic is? This is all fun and everything, but you have been defeated..LMAO... :P [Edited on 12/7/2004 by GumboBC]
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

07-13-2004, 01:46 AM	#63
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	In regard to PsychoÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s view on Aaron Brooks... I just like giving WhoDat a hard time. I\'ve leared a lot of things just by having to research the arguments WhoDat presents. I\'ve learned all about the \"odds\" in Vegas. I know much more about the \"wonderlic\" test. The list goes on..... Truth be known, I like hearing the negative side. I don\'t even know if you can call it the \"negative\" side. I mean, when you underachieve all these years, it\'s not all negative, it\'s the \"truth.\" A lot of it anyway. I\'ll be glad when training camp gets here. I\'ve thought of everything in the world to talk about. You can only talk about Aaron Books, Delhomme, and \"what\" we need to do to improve so many times. Well, I\'ll be gone from the board for a few weeks (hold your applause) Maybe saintfan can hold things down while I\'m gone. And gator and WhoDat can keep everyone from taking in too much sunshine. Oh, For the record: I don\'t think Brooks is the sharpest knife in the drawer. But, I don\'t think he\'s stupid either.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

07-13-2004, 06:56 AM	#64
Danno Site Donor 2014 Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,640	In regard to PsychoÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s view on Aaron Brooks... The facts are that Brooks haters can come up with their own stats to shown Brooks is inadequate, and even more easily the Brooks supporters can come up with twice as many stats to show Brooks is above average. You will never change the minds of a Brooks Hater... ever. He can win the Superbowl and the Brooks Haters will swear it was in spite of him, or he had a lucky day. Its pointless to argue with someone who has their mind made up already. Why bother? We\'ve all said everything that can be said about Brooks both positive and negative. Aren\'t you getting tired of it? I\'ll bet Brooks isn\'t dumb enough to type the same argument to the same people 7 zillion times.

07-13-2004, 08:47 AM	#65
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	In regard to PsychoÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s view on Aaron Brooks... Here\'s the rub with the wonderlic... Delhomme scores fairly well and goes undrafted right? Brooks Scores \"middle of the road\" and is drafted low right? Anybody know where Dan Marino was drafted? His wonderlic score was 16 and he was drafted 27th overall...the 5th QB taken in 1983. Now we can look at all the records he owns and we can say Mr. Marino is an exception. On the other hand we might look at Marino\'s situation (much like many many others) and determine a couple things: a. Scouting / Drafting is FAR from an exact science b. A person\'s wonderlic score is probably not something someone would want to submit as evidence in a trial If you\'re trying to debate a football player\'s ability to play football based on the wonderlic it is my opinion that you\'re gonna lose that argument based on the overall performance of those in the NFL who scored poorly and performed average or better. There are too many Hall of Fame and future Hall of Fame players that didn\'t do well on it.
	C'mon Man...

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey