Jason Peters

[Orton's Arm]

The problem I have with Peters along the OL is his short bus Wonderlic score. I mean, that guy really bombed the Wonderlic. You want your offensive linemen to be athletic and strong, which he is. But you also want them to be able to recognize blitzes and not get outsmarted by men like Belichick.

 

Maybe he could be moved to a position that doesn't demand as high a level of intelligence, such as DL. I know it'd be a big switch, and he might not contribute much right away. But long term, a great athlete with a low IQ has more to offer along the DL than the OL.

[ndirish1978]

I can see him signing for a gift certificate to Mighty Taco.

[Matt in KC]

The problem I have with Peters along the OL is his short bus Wonderlic score. I mean, that guy really bombed the Wonderlic. You want your offensive linemen to be athletic and strong, which he is. But you also want them to be able to recognize blitzes and not get outsmarted by men like Belichick.

 

Maybe he could be moved to a position that doesn't demand as high a level of intelligence, such as DL. I know it'd be a big switch, and he might not contribute much right away. But long term, a great athlete with a low IQ has more to offer along the DL than the OL.

601765[/snapback]

The Wonderlic is just another tool that is used to try to predict performance. In Peters' case, we have actual performance to judge, which is a much much better predictor.

 

I think Peters was our best O-Lineman last year (and yes, I know that’s not saying too much). I hope we give him a decent contract, and lock him up. He could mature here, and command a huge salary on another team when he hits FA if we don’t. IMO landing Peters easily adds as much value to the team as having an additional 1st round draft pick (solid performance without the excessive $$)..

[Orton's Arm]

The Wonderlic is just another tool that is used to try to predict performance.  In Peters' case, we have actual performance to judge, which is a much much better predictor. 

 

I think Peters was our best O-Lineman last year (and yes, I know that’s not saying too much).  I hope we give him a decent contract, and lock him up.  He could mature here, and command a huge salary on another team when he hits FA if we don’t.  IMO landing Peters easily adds as much value to the team as having an additional 1st round draft pick (solid performance without the excessive $$)..

601843[/snapback]

I think Peters' best game was the New England game. But it wasn't like he spent that game blocking guys one-on-one. When you need to keep your TE or some FB in to help your RT, it really makes it tough on your offense.

 

Peters didn't show as much in 2005 as Mike Williams did in 2004. I just don't see either player as part of the long-term solution on the OL.

[The Dean]

The Wonderlic is just another tool that is used to try to predict performance.  In Peters' case, we have actual performance to judge, which is a much much better predictor. 

 

I think Peters was our best O-Lineman last year (and yes, I know that’s not saying too much).  I hope we give him a decent contract, and lock him up.  He could mature here, and command a huge salary on another team when he hits FA if we don’t.  IMO landing Peters easily adds as much value to the team as having an additional 1st round draft pick (solid performance without the excessive $$)..

601843[/snapback]

 

 

Wonderlic scores are WAY overrated, but have some minimal application for a relative unknown coming out of college.

 

An NFL players Wonderlic is as worthless as a jduncan post. As you said, an NFL player will be judged by his performance. His ability to learn a new position/formation/etc will be judged by coaches based on their interaction with the player and his performance in practice and on the field.

[Toledo Bill]

From the good site of Billsdaily.com

 

Exclusive Rights Free Agents

These players have no bargaining power and will remain with the Bills if they want them.

 

CB Jabari Greer - Not much depth at corner, likely to get qualifying offer.

OT Jason Peters - Team will look for longterm deal.

WR Jonathan Smith - He's a playmaker. Tender will be made.

OL Lawrence Smith - Injured player will likley not get tendered.

RB Shaud Williams - Will definitely be tendered an offer.

 

What kind of deal does he have right now with us?

601297[/snapback]

 

If we can't sign someone better than Shaud Williams... that would be pretty sad.

[tennesseeboy]

Whatever it takes...I like that guy.

[Orton's Arm]

Wonderlic scores are WAY overrated, but have some minimal application for a relative unknown coming out of college.

 

An NFL players Wonderlic is as worthless as a jduncan post. 

602025[/snapback]

I disagree. The New England Patriots, for example, place a higher premium on intelligence than most other teams do, and look at the Super Bowl rings they have to show for this. They're especially picky when it comes to smart OL.

 

You could say the Wonderlic may have some degree of inaccuracy when measuring a guy's intelligence. Just because one guy scored, say, 15% higher, doesn't necessarily mean he's 15% more intelligent. But Peters' score is insanely low, which tells me the guy just doesn't have the brains to be a consistently good OL.

[The Dean]

I disagree. The New England Patriots, for example, place a higher premium on intelligence than most other teams do, and look at the Super Bowl rings they have to show for this. They're especially picky when it comes to smart OL.

 

You could say the Wonderlic may have some degree of inaccuracy when measuring a guy's intelligence. Just because one guy scored, say, 15% higher, doesn't necessarily mean he's 15% more intelligent. But Peters' score is insanely low, which tells me the guy just doesn't have the brains to be a consistently good OL.

602167[/snapback]

 

 

I guarantee you..GUARAN-GODDAMN-TEE you, the Pats are not looking at the wonderlic scores of a player they already have on their roster...who they have personal interaction with...who they've seen play.

 

That was the crux of my point. The Bills will not worry about Peter's wonerlic. The coaches know what he can and can't do...how smart he is/isn't. The new coaches will consult the old, find out during training camp, look at film, etc. Tell me you honestly believe McNally will go back and assess Peter's wonderlic before deciding if Peters can adjust to a new scheme or wrinkle he may want to employ.

[UConn James]

The problem I have with Peters along the OL is his short bus Wonderlic score. I mean, that guy really bombed the Wonderlic. You want your offensive linemen to be athletic and strong, which he is. But you also want them to be able to recognize blitzes and not get outsmarted by men like Belichick.

 

Maybe he could be moved to a position that doesn't demand as high a level of intelligence, such as DL. I know it'd be a big switch, and he might not contribute much right away. But long term, a great athlete with a low IQ has more to offer along the DL than the OL.

601765[/snapback]

 

What time Joe and Tom will meet in Chicago if Joe is on a train leaving Kansas City that goes 50 mph and Tom is on a bus from Boston that goes 70 mph is an abstract on a piece of paper. A 300-pound DLman coming across the line is a jolt.

 

Maybe Peters had to pee during the Wonderlic just like Losman. Maybe he's not good at book learnin' but is great at hands-on instruction/football prodigy like the guy in that movie "The Program." Most of us walk a narrow path in life, and we're all good at certain things and not others.

 

JP showed some good stuff in his time, against some good DEs. That said, he could always turn into a Robert Hicks. I'd say we sign him to a pretty safe contract, 2 or 3 years and a middle-of-the-road $ figure.

[Orton's Arm]

I guarantee you..GUARAN-GODDAMN-TEE you, the Pats are not looking at the wonderlic scores of a player they already have on their roster...who they have personal interaction with...who they've seen play.

 

That was the crux of my point.  The Bills will not worry about Peter's wonerlic.  The coaches know what he can and can't do...how smart he is/isn't.  The new coaches will consult the old, find out during training camp, look at film, etc.  Tell me you honestly believe McNally will go back and assess Peter's wonderlic before deciding if Peters can adjust to a new scheme or wrinkle he may want to employ.

602193[/snapback]

IIRC, McNally has indicated a preference for tough, smart OL. Peters may be tough, but he sure isn't smart.

 

You say the Patriots aren't looking at the Wonderlic scores of the players already on their roster. But probably, that's because you had to have a pretty solid Wonderlic score to get on their roster in the first place, especially at QB, OL, or some other high IQ position. If Peters hits free agency, there's no way the Patriots throw starter-type money at the guy.

 

I've looked at sample Wonderlic questions, and someone with a reasonably high level of intelligence should be able to get a solid score on the test. There's no way that a reasonably bright OL will bomb it as badly as Peters did. If the Bills are serious about making Peters the starting RT, it's because of one of two things:

- They've allowed themselves to be swayed by wishful thinking about his intelligence

- They've made the decision that an OL can use athleticism to overcome lack of brains.

 

Either way, a major commitment to Peters at OL would be a mistake; one the Bills would end up paying for at some point.

[The Dean]

IIRC, McNally has indicated a preference for tough, smart OL. Peters may be tough, but he sure isn't smart.

 

You say the Patriots aren't looking at the Wonderlic scores of the players already on their roster. But probably, that's because you had to have a pretty solid Wonderlic score to get on their roster in the first place, especially at QB, OL, or some other high IQ position. If Peters hits free agency, there's no way the Patriots throw starter-type money at the guy.

 

I've looked at sample Wonderlic questions, and someone with a reasonably high level of intelligence should be able to get a solid score on the test. There's no way that a reasonably bright OL will bomb it as badly as Peters did. If the Bills are serious about making Peters the starting RT, it's because of one of two things:

- They've allowed themselves to be swayed by wishful thinking about his intelligence

- They've made the decision that an OL can use athleticism to overcome lack of brains.

 

Either way, a major commitment to Peters at OL would be a mistake; one the Bills would end up paying for at some point.

602209[/snapback]

 

 

 

As usual, you miss the point entirely. At least you are consistant.

[Orton's Arm]

As usual, you miss the point entirely.  At least you are consistant.

602212[/snapback]

Some people who see your point may fail to agree with it. Apparently you have yet to realize this.

 

Information about the Wonderlic (which I found elsewhere):

 

What the scores mean roughly translates to this:

 

50= highest possible score, superior intelligence

 

21= average intelligence

 

14= equivalent to unskilled worker

 

Below 14= moron

 

Here are some averages:

 

Offensive tackles: 26

Centers: 25

Quarterbacks: 24

Guards: 23

Tight Ends: 22

Safeties: 19

Middle linebackers: 19

Cornerbacks: 18

Wide receivers: 17

Fullbacks: 17

Halfbacks: 16

 

So what was Peters' score? Did he get a 21, making him average? No. Did he at least get a 14, making him a standard-issue unskilled worker? No. He got a nine--nine!

 

You act as though personal interaction between McNally and Peters may cause the former to realize Peters is a fairly smart guy after all. The only way that happens is if McNally puts on rose colored glasses. Because there's no way that a smart OL walks away from the Wonderlic with just a nine.

[Frez]

Jason Peters was our BEST offensive lineman at the middle to the end of our season. I thought he did a great job.

 

I don't care if he scored a -14 on that test, the kid can play.

[The Dean]

Some people who see your point may fail to agree with it. Apparently you have yet to realize this.

 

Information about the Wonderlic (which I found elsewhere):

So what was Peters' score? Did he get a 21, making him average? No. Did he at least get a 14, making him a standard-issue unskilled worker? No. He got a nine--nine!

 

You act as though personal interaction between McNally and Peters may cause the former to realize Peters is a fairly smart guy after all. The only way that happens is if McNally puts on rose colored glasses. Because there's no way that a smart OL walks away from the Wonderlic with just a nine.

602223[/snapback]

 

 

See, this is where your argument falls to pieces (actually, it started in pieces...but, I digress). First of all, here's a good site to go to for information on the Wonderlic:

 

http://www.wonderlic.com/default.asp

 

Note the absence of the use of "moron" for any score? Even the company that created and administers this test makes no claims that it can decide if someone is a "moron". This company site WILDLY overstates the usefullness of intelligence tests (it's their business, after all) and even they're not big enough morons to call someone else a moron based on their test.

 

I make no assumption about Peter's intellect (particularly his FOOTBALL intellect) based on his (I believe confidential) Wonderlic score. I do understand how Wonderlic scores are designed, administered and how they are supposed to be used. (As you may or may not know or care, I'm a research professional. I design and evalute tests and scales on a regular basis as well as analyze and interpret the data from these tests.)

 

A test like the Wonderlic is meant to be used as a general mesaure of intelligence and aptitude (not football specific) mostly for PRE-EMPLOYMENT or PRE-acceptance into an program of some sort. The best use of these tests is to roughly separate the wheat from the chaff. They are designed to help HR professionals (in this case, NFL scouts and GMs) assess ONE of the qualities of a, for the most part, unknown prospective employee/player.

 

I'm sure Peters low reported Wonderlic score was partially to blame for his being undrafted when he came out. (I'd also bet it was not the ONLY reason.) So, the Bills brought him in for a look-see despite his low reported score. They interviewed him, tested him with their own tests and then made a real assessment of his potential for contributing to the Bills.

 

Now that he has been a part of this team, McNally has a good idea of what Peters is capable of, physically and mentally. And, while McNally's judgement isn't perfect, if he's half-way good at his job, it's a safe bet his judgement is a better predictor than the Wonderlic score. Any manager/coach/GM who would use the results of an employee's score on a standardized test (especially one not specifically designed to measure the skill-set of a particular job) instead of relying on the past-performance, personal experience with that employee and peer and supervisor evaluations of that employee is beyond incompetent.

 

As for the meanings of the scores themselves. Individuals score poorly (very poorly, sometimes) on tests for a variety of reasons. Lack of knowledge is a potential reason as is lack of inate intelligence in the particular area being tested. (Intelligence is far too complicated a concept to discuss here. Suffice it to say there are people who can't answer very simple and seemingly basic questions but can solve complex problems that elude those who answer those same questions with ease.) Another reason some score poorly on tests is a learning or reading disability. For those people, tests are a terrible predictor of success as they are usually capable of learning through different/alternative methods.

 

Then again, some guys just don't give a rat's ass about the tests and make patterns on the answer form. I know a guy who's EXTREMELY intelligent who did that with his SAT's the first time he took them. I took my grad school entrance exams drunk. Passed easily, but didn't get the kind of score "expected of me". I knew i was going to get accepted and the score meant NOTHING to me. Can you imagine one of my professors, who has experience with me, has seen/read my work, who has evaluated me on his/her own tests going back to look at my entrance exam scores to decide what grade to give me? That would be absurd.

 

Some people can test poorly and be very intelligent...some can score well and suck at their job (for various reasons). My guess is you'd score fairly well on a standardized test. You can write complete sentences, etc. But, after a short interview (I'm guessing here, of course, I've never met you) I would reject for employement in any company I've ever worked for. You miss the point of discussions, use played and ridiculous arguments and come across as a poor-man's devils'a advocate. You seem to be less than intellectually creative (I'm being generous here) and totally rigid in your beliefs. You demonstrate little ability to see the world through other's eyes and ears and seem to be totally unaware that the world you experience is just that...it is not the "world as it is".

 

You also seem to lack humility and an adanced sense of humor. All of those things are far more important, in my field, then the results of a standardized test (or any test, most likely). In football, the demonstrated ability to follow the coaches directions, make adjustments and the innate "feel for" and "understanding of" the position and the game are far more important than the Wonderlic score. One uses the score as an indicator BEFORE they can assess those important skills and abilities. Once those skills and abilities are assessed first hand, and for a period of time, the scores are irrelevant.

[stuckincincy]

See,..

602265[/snapback]

 

Long post.

 

There is a problem with timed tests, which is generally not popularized.

 

Some folks, intelligent folks, think about other possibilities besides the offered choices. They see more, read more into the posed question and ponder its meaning.

 

And they sometimes get slaughtered and branded as dopes in such tests.

[The Dean]

Long post.

 

There is a problem with timed tests, which is generally not popularized.

 

Some folks, intelligent folks, think about other possibilities besides the offered choices. They see more, read more into the posed question and ponder its meaning.

 

And they sometimes get slaughtered and branded as dopes in such tests.

602283[/snapback]

 

 

I ADD all the time on those things. I can usually FORCE myself to do them fairly well...but, my mind like to wander.

 

Good point!

[Simon]

I'd say Peters is worth about $1 more than whatever somebody else is willing to pay him. Fortunately we have a wily, experienced GM with a long history of succesful contract negotiations to maneuver the Bills through this uncharted territory.

And I wonder if Peters is stupid enough to equate test scores with functional intelligence?

[Orton's Arm]

See, this is where your argument falls to pieces (actually, it started in pieces...but, I digress).  First of all, here's a good site to go to for information on the Wonderlic:

 

http://www.wonderlic.com/default.asp

 

Note the absence of the use of "moron" for any score?  Even the company that created and administers this test makes no claims that it can decide if someone is a "moron".  This company site WILDLY overstates the usefullness of intelligence tests (it's their business, after all) and even they're not big enough morons to call someone else a moron based on their test. 

And yet you call people morons based on their posts.

 

As for the meanings of the scores themselves.  Individuals score poorly (very poorly, sometimes) on tests for a variety of reasons. Lack of knowledge is a potential reason as is lack of inate intelligence in the particular area being tested.  (Intelligence is far too complicated a concept to discuss here.  Suffice it to say there are people who can't answer very simple and seemingly basic questions but can solve complex problems that elude those who answer those same questions with ease.)  Another reason some score poorly on tests is a learning or reading disability.  For those people, tests are a terrible predictor of success as they are usually capable of learning through different/alternative methods.

The reading disability thing I could buy. I also agree that one person might have an aptitude for, say, engineering, while another might have more of a natural gift for music. But bear in mind that all the world's languages have a word for basic, generic intelligence. A word like "smart." The hope is to use a standardized test to give you a rough idea as to how smart this person is.

I took my grad school entrance exams drunk.  Passed easily, but didn't get the kind of score "expected  of me".  I knew i was going to get accepted and the score meant NOTHING to me.  Can you imagine one of my professors, who has experience with me, has seen/read my work, who has evaluated me on his/her own tests going back to look at my entrance exam scores to decide what grade to give me?  That would be absurd.

The difference between you and Peters is that your test meant nothing to your future, so you acted accordingly. Yet you point to Peters' low score as a major reason why he might not have been drafted. Just a guess, but if you knew millions of dollars were on the line, you would have showed up sober for that test.

 

My guess is you'd score fairly well on a standardized test.  You can write complete sentences, etc.  But, after a short interview (I'm guessing here, of course, I've never met you) I would reject for employement in any company I've ever worked for.  You miss the point of discussions, use played and ridiculous arguments and come across as a poor-man's devils'a advocate.  You seem to be less than intellectually creative (I'm being generous here) and totally rigid in your beliefs.  You demonstrate little ability to see the world through other's eyes and ears and seem to be totally unaware that the world you experience is just that...it is not the "world as it is". 

Well, at least this time you're putting more thought into insulting me than merely labeling me a moron. As long as we're making employment decisions based on this discussion board, would you welcome an employee who had the habit of expressing disagreement by insulting the intelligence of those with whom he disagreed? If you feel I've failed to see things from your point of view, perhaps you should take a look in the mirror to see whether you might have better expressed yourself with a little more logical reasoning, and fewer personal insults.

 

Speaking of looking in the mirror, consider your statement my beliefs are rigid. I've often noticed that when someone expresses a point of view with which you disagree, you're quick to call them a moron. I can't imagine any way to be less open to other points of view. You say I miss the point of discussions. Well, sometimes the point I feel needs to be made is different than the one you might like to focus on. You seem to be saying that if you're convinced X is the critical issue, and I'm convinced Y is what's really important, that you're right and I'm wrong.

 

You're convinced I lack intellectual creativity. You are of course entitled to your own opinion. But in this case, your opinion only means so much given your tendency to look down on others with different points of view. A way of looking at things that some might find creative, or outside the box, you might see as contrived, ridiculous, or missing the point. An excellent example of this is the recent discussion of the Rooney Rule. To the best of my recollection, you did not once acknowledge that there might have been even a shred of intellectual merit or sane thinking among any of those with whom you disagreed. Because of behavior such as this, I find it very difficult to believe you can be objective when evaluating the intellectual or creative merit of ideas or thinking processes with which you disagree.

 

In football, the demonstrated ability to follow the coaches directions, make adjustments and the innate "feel for" and "understanding of" the position and the game are far more important than the Wonderlic score.  One uses the score as an indicator BEFORE they can assess those important skills and abilities.  Once those skills and abilities are assessed first hand, and for a period of time, the scores are irrelevant.

602265[/snapback]

What really matters is how Peters will respond in the heat of battle, with defensive coordinators trying to confuse him with complex blitz schemes. The coaches have had little opportunity to evaluate Peters in such conditions. In any case, I find it difficult to believe someone with that low of a Wonderlic score would provide consistently good mental performance on the field. If you can find me several Pro Bowl offensive tackles who got single digit Wonderlic scores, I'll stand corrected.