Guest viewing is limited

Titans Talk - Home for all things Tennessee Titans

Status
Not open for further replies.
Homer...

Yes great post! What you did was to summarize what is both good and maybe not so good about young as a pro. Yes the awesome talent, leadership and competitiveness. But also that you can't force fit him into a certain type of offense and forget about changing his delivery point. That's simply the way he throws.

Based on your analysis i wonder how vince would fit into this offense. I see great running ability as being like gravy on a country fried steak dinner. The meat and potatoes of being an nfl QB is being able to pass effectively and efficiently. Being able to run is something extra, a bonus. We have seen that with mcnair, mcnabb and culpepper. Rich gannon was like that to a certain extent and steve young was the ultimate example of a great passer who was also a great runner. But the point is that these guys beat you first with their arms and second with their legs.
 
RollTide said:
Based on your analysis i wonder how vince would fit into this offense. I see great running ability as being like gravy on a country fried steak dinner. The meat and potatoes of being an nfl QB is being able to pass effectively and efficiently.
Click to expand...

anyone else just get hungry?
 
RollTide said:
No wonder i got such a poor score. I forgot to fiqure in that hefty tennessee sales tax! :stars:
Click to expand...
Even with the hefty TN sales tax the total for 6 loaves of bread at 10 cents each would be around 66 cents.
Those wonderlic questions are easy, or is it just me
 
DeadHorse.gif
 
RollTide said:
Racially or culturally biased is what many like to call a test when the results don't fit your world view. Or the way you would like things to be.

Why would the nfl use a racially biased test? 70% of the players are black. It seems to me they would have gone out of their way to find a test that was not that way. I assume you have actually looked at those sample questions?

A loaf of bread costs 10 cents. Mary bought 6 loaves so how much did it cost her? Cultually biased?

You have a question involving 5 shapes. 4 are 4 sided and one is a pentagon. Which one is different? Cultually biased?

And who formulates these tests anyway? Some klansman? No, it's a bunch of psychoplogists and socialists, i mean social scientists. The same exact people who will rail about how biased the test when the results come out..

My wife is from the philippines. Based on your thinking she would do poorly on this test after all she comes from a different culture and is not white. She got all 15 sample questions right. I guess those darned asians in general ruin those cultually biased theories eh?

She did well not just because she is smart but because she is educated which gets to the heart of the matter. To do well on the wonderlic you have to be able to read with comprehension and do basic math. If you can't read well enough to understand the questions or your math skills are poor you will suck on this test.

Remember this is a timed test. You have only 12 minutes to answer 50 questions. That's not even 15 seconds per question. Reading comprehension is everything.
Click to expand...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0761912304/ref=sib_dp_pt/102-7327760-6802552#reader-link

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/pr/95/950816Arc5120.html

"Standardized tests can not accurately measure intellectual merit because racial and gender stereotypes interfere with the intellectual functioning ofthose taking the tests, according to Stanford psychology Professor Claude Steele. "

http://www.theafrican.com/Magazine/IQ.htm

http://www.liberalartsandcrafts.net/contentcatalog/social/bias.shtml
"Cultural bias has long been a problem for test designers. The kinds of biases found in schools, including standardized tests, vary from language differences to exposure to certain historical truths."

http://www.apa.org/monitor/mar98/dial.html
"In 1972, Robert Williams, an African-American psychologist, developed the Black Intelligence Test of Cultural Homogeneity to demonstrate that testing of information indigenous to one’s culture can result in higher IQ scores for those with a different cultural background from the mainstream. "

http://www.nasponline.org/publications/cq312beyondg.html
"Yes, certain minority groups score consistently lower on intelligence tests than European-Americans, but the cause, in our opinion, has to do with the concept of fairness. Most intelligence tests measure crystallized abilities, those abilities acquired through formal and informal experiences and education. By definition, these abilities are inseparable from prior learning or achievement, so they cannot be true measures of innate ability. Those who have enriched backgrounds and educational experiences typically score better on crystallized measures than those who come from impoverished or varied backgrounds. Does this mean the former children are smarter? We think not.

Those who use group differences to draw conclusions about racial group intelligence tend to ignore within-group variability and often collapse different abilities into a global IQ score for subsequent group comparisons (Suzuki & Valencia, 1997). For instance, we typically use language to measure crystallized abilities, so anyone whose primary language is not English, or those who use colloquial or nonstandard forms of English, will be less likely to do well on crystallized tasks or any other tasks requiring verbal facility. Intelligence test scores are intimately related to academic achievement in a reciprocal fashion (Ceci & Williams, 1997). If one has a good education and enriched environment, one will probably score better on intelligence tests. However, if one has a limited experience and education, one will not score as well. For these reasons, intelligence tests can be unfair for children of color or cultural difference, but the unfairness is not statistical, it's the result of the clinician's error in interpreting a low crystallized score as being the result of low intelligence. Ever since Binet and Simon developed the first "true" intelligence test, our intelligence tests have been unfair to some groups, individual people of cultural or linguistic difference from the overall normative population."
 
Some of that is plain stupid IMO. The Titans are not going to educate Vince Young or any other player nor are they going have their coaches start speaking different languages or colloquial or nonstandard forms of English. If Vince Young cannot get right a simple math question or know the difference between a 4 sided object and a 5 sided object then just maybe he or another player with a low score isn't going to make it in the NFL. Trying to use cultural differences when 70% of the men taking the test are black if truly ridiculous. Remember, this whole thing started with the report Young got a 6 on this test. A 16 is a lot different than a 6. A 16 can play QB, a 6 is lucky to play in the defensive line and no way could play QB no matter how you twist the cultural or linguistic, colloquial or nonstandard or whatever. A 6 is a crystallized moron who should not have been in college to begin with. Oh, did we forget to mention that these guys taking this test are guys who went to college? Isn't that one of the big findings? " If one has a good education and enriched environment, one will probably score better on intelligence tests." Oops, there goes the theory. These guys are not bums taken off the street. These are young men who have been to 3 or 4 or more years of college.
 
Soxcat said:
A 6 is a crystallized moron who should not have been in college to begin with. Oh, did we forget to mention that these guys taking this test are guys who went to college? Isn't that one of the big findings? " If one has a good education and enriched environment, one will probably score better on intelligence tests." Oops, there goes the theory. These guys are not bums taken off the street. These are young men who have been to 3 or 4 or more years of college.
Click to expand...

Excellent point Sox, if this dude hasn't enriched his empty head through 3 years of college, what kind of progress should we expect him to make in the NFL. I know a wonderlic has nothing to do with being a football player, but you have to have a brain to play QB in the NFL, it's not just all physical tools. It's about decision making, he's obviously not the best decision maker upon choosing his representation, this is a clear example. What other bad decisions will come out of this?
 
The person he chose to represent him is new, yes, but he is a respected lawyer in Houston who has started a Sports Agent firm. Vince Young isn't his only client this year.

As far as smarts to play football, teams will bring him in and run him thru drills watching film and working out plays. THAT will tell them what they need to know, not the wonderlic.
 
I hope someone calls in to the Reese show this Friday and asks him if the Titans have a test or how they measure/evaluate football smarts. I would think Young will be put in a room with game film going and having coaches asking him what his reads are, etc.

Everyone from Reese on down will be out of the game if they draft Young and he's a flop. No way do the Titans draft Young without feelings reasonably certain he can fun an NFL offense.
 
Prag...

I don't care what some stanford psychologist says about tests in general. Anyone can see that the questions on the wonderlic have no cultual basis. You link articles that are frankly stupid and have no relevance to this discussion. All the people who take this test are healthy young males. All have adequate nutrition. All have high school diplomas and some college.

I especially like the correlation between scores on IQ tests and economic status. Well duh. Economic staus and intelligence correlate. Really? No s**t sherlock smarter people make more money in a free market society than less smart people.

Once again you can't see the forest through the trees. It's the wonderlic we are talking about. It's a test for aspiring nfl players.

How does your nauseating articles explain why asians do well on these tests? Why do jewish people score as good or better than white gentiles?

Maybe acedemics in the psychology and social science community should stop formulating these racist tests. It's not some klansman in alabama who developed the stanford-binet test. Why can't they in their incredible superior wisdom come up with a non racist test?
 
Soxcat said:
A 16 is a lot different than a 6. /QUOTE]

The point of the original post that started this was that I was trying to explain differences in scores from groups of different people. I dont really remember which ones now. And yes Tide I'm being lazy in not looking it up :winker: But I think they were Mcnair, Culpepper and Mcnabb that all scored about 1 standard deviation from the average of the rest of the scores.

Now I personally and this is opinion- dont think that those three guys are less intelligent than the average. So I reasoned that the differences in those scores are a fault of the test. I said the test could have been culturaly biased. Now culturally biased is not a euphuism for racial biased; it can include race and socioeconomic status among other common factors. (yes I can provide support for that if you need it Tide)

There is a phenomenon in intelligence and other forms of standardized tests called the black-white gap, where consistently for several years african americans have scored about 1 standard deviation from the mean. In a basic iq test this would be 85 where the mean is 100. Several reasons have been thrown about- many inflamatory, many scientific- with no clear conclusions. But the general consensus most recently is "cultural differences." Meaning that educational expereinces, family and community norms and values, differing enrichment opportunties, etc have led to this gap.

Well, intelligence is supposed to be innate ability by most theories. Its not supposed to be about previous learned behavior for the most part. So it has been said that the tests are biased or unfair toward those with specific environmental advantages, namely minorities with low SES.

So, what the point of all this was to say that it is possible that someone scoring a 15 or 16 could have the same innate intelligence as someone that scores at the average. This is all speculation- or an educated guess.

So Mcnair and others scoring a 15 or 16 on this test could be of equal innate intelligence as more affluent players scoring closer to the average.

Now again I'm being a bit lazy- I dont really know these players backgrounds. But the the fact that this group of players all scored about 1 standard deviation from the mean is a unique coincendence. :hmm:
Click to expand...
 
The Wonderlic is not a test for NFL players. The Wonderlic is a standardized test that is used in all facets of the business world.

Someone give bamaboy his meds....
 
RollTide said:
I don't care what some stanford psychologist says about tests in general. Anyone can see that the questions on the wonderlic have no cultual basis. You link articles that are frankly stupid and have no relevance to this discussion. All the people who take this test are healthy young males. All have adequate nutrition. All have high school diplomas and some college.

I especially like the correlation between scores on IQ tests and economic status. Well duh. Economic staus and intelligence correlate. Really? No s**t sherlock smarter people make more money in a free market society than less smart people.

Once again you can't see the forest through the trees. It's the wonderlic we are talking about. It's a test for aspiring nfl players.

How does your nauseating articles explain why asians do well on these tests? Why do jewish people score as good or better than white gentiles?

Maybe acedemics in the psychology and social science community should stop formulating these racist tests. It's not some klansman in alabama who developed the stanford-binet test. Why can't they in their incredible superior wisdom come up with a non racist test?
Click to expand...


First a correlation depicts a relationship- but not a causal one. Would you say Jessica Simpson is smarter than Phd at APSU? Greater wealth means greater opportunity for enrichment. So kids in poverty with equal intelligence to more affluent individuals are going to score worse on iq tests because they are less prepared for the tests themselves.

I personally dont believe that the blue-collar worker is less intelligent than the lawyer and that is why he is where he is. Furthermore, intelligence studies dont support that. Thats one reason why you see generational development in education and wealth. For example my wife is a first year college graduate- her mother was one of the few that finished high school, her grandmother didnt finish the 4rth grade. My dad was one of the only in his family to get a college education, his dad worked in factory- now I finished a graduate degree. We didnt get more intelligent each generation- but were each in a better position take advantage of that intelligence.

You say you dont care about what a standford psychologist says about tests. You prefer to go off your own arguements than listen to an expert that spends his life studying the subject. And you called me arrogant?

Actually the articles to explain why particular groups score better on those tests. Mostly due to environmental factors- cultural & family norms etc.

The whole point of all this is say you cant view those scores without context. I thought we agreed on that earlier. I'm just providing context. A 16 is not just a 16. Its relevance is depicted by its context.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top