The smartest guy in the room...

[Patjew]

It's vaguely about Belichick. Or was at one point.

Oh, we're way past that now, buddy!

 

[upstater1]

Uh oh, I'm going to have to start questioning your literacy skills.

Neither a vague reference to a 'noted deficit of literacy skills' or betting on a hypothetical count as empirical measures.

I'll bet your average o-lineman, the quintessential image of the big dumb jock, is as smart as your average message board user. As a matter of record, o-lineman score pretty high on the Wonderlic. And over the last few years, I've seen some pretty dumb comments from message board users. Present company excluded, of course.

You're wrong. Low SATs, low GPAs, sometimes even illiteracy, are common among college football players. I've been employed by universities since 1992. One of them is considered one of the top 5 football schools in the nation. I've sat on admission committees. It's undeniable that football players get preferential treatment for admission, and that their scores are well south of the average student. This is empirical evidence. The NCAA tracks average SATs and GPAs of football players. The data is out there. I'm actually shocked that you don't know this.

Let me give you one example of how one university gets around the requirements that their players get an education. The U of Miami actually has players sit out the Fall semester academically so that they remain focused on football. Instead, they take intersession classes both before and after the semester to make up the lost credits. Those classes are specifically designed for football players.

Ever hear of Football 101 and Football 201? Granted these kids will never actually qualify for a diploma, but some of these programs deliberately bring in lots of questionable kids KNOWING they are not capable.

Now, you might say the SATs are only measures of book smarts, but I would point you toward the qualifying guidelines. You get 400 points for putting your name on the test. Some of the qualifying scores are in the low 700s. It's possible to do that by answering several questions correctly and simply guessing on the rest.

 

[TripleOption]

Oh? And why would you say that? First off, I didn't see where he was an editor. He was a reporter.

Secondly, do you know anything about the current free press in Russia? I could send you some very enlightening articles about it.

Even better. And if you read it, it was the early 90's.

Not that Russia is currently the greatest place to be, but in the 90's it was even worse.

 

[scout]

Great article, this reporter always has something unique to add when he guests on Maher. Couple of things, why do people think Ditka was a good coach, let alone smart? What did he ever do without the help of Buddy Ryan?
On 60 minutes, Parcells admits he is not well read. He is a good football coach.
Many, many times a bad football coach will get hired, fired, and rehired, because he is part of the system, until a new trend becomes fashionable.
The fact of the matter, BB is smarter then most people around him, in the football category or anything goes for $200. He attended prep at Andover and went on to Wesleyan. I'm sure there are some coaches that are his equal, but probably fewer then the number of Superbowl rings he's owns.

 

[PatsFan37]

You're wrong. Low SATs, low GPAs, sometimes even illiteracy, are common among college football players. I've been employed by universities since 1992. One of them is considered one of the top 5 football schools in the nation. I've sat on admission committees. It's undeniable that football players get preferential treatment for admission, and that their scores are well south of the average student. This is empirical evidence. The NCAA tracks average SATs and GPAs of football players. The data is out there. I'm actually shocked that you don't know this.

Let me give you one example of how one university gets around the requirements that their players get an education. The U of Miami actually has players sit out the Fall semester academically so that they remain focused on football. Instead, they take intersession classes both before and after the semester to make up the lost credits. Those classes are specifically designed for football players.

Ever hear of Football 101 and Football 201? Granted these kids will never actually qualify for a diploma, but some of these programs deliberately bring in lots of questionable kids KNOWING they are not capable.

Now, you might say the SATs are only measures of book smarts, but I would point you toward the qualifying guidelines. You get 400 points for putting your name on the test. Some of the qualifying scores are in the low 700s. It's possible to do that by answering several questions correctly and simply guessing on the rest.

I think we're talking about two different things and I respect your experience, though I think you shouldn't be shocked, shocked, when I don't know about "data that is out there" for college football, which I don't follow. After all, I'm not a football player, just your average message board poster who presumably would ace the wonderlic.

Speaking of which, would you really want to pit average message board members (Tom Casale was one of them) against football players? How do you think he'd score? That's really what I meant about lacking empirical evidence.

Anyway, I wasn't talking about college football and neither was the article (remember the article? thread's about the article). I was talking about the NFL, which narrowly selects from college football, just as academic colleges narrowly select from high schools. I certainly wouldn't justify a statement about college students by citing statistics on high school dropouts.

We've gone a bit far afield, so I'll leave it at that. Remember to smile, we're having fun here.

 

[upstater1]

I think we're talking about two different things and I respect your experience, though I think you shouldn't be shocked, shocked, when I don't know about "data that is out there" for college football, which I don't follow. After all, I'm not a football player, just your average message board poster who presumably would ace the wonderlic.

Speaking of which, would you really want to pit average message board members (Tom Casale was one of them) against football players? How do you think he'd score? That's really what I meant about lacking empirical evidence.

Anyway, I wasn't talking about college football and neither was the article (remember the article? thread's about the article). I was talking about the NFL, which narrowly selects from college football, just as academic colleges narrowly select from high schools. I certainly wouldn't justify a statement about college students by citing statistics on high school dropouts.

We've gone a bit far afield, so I'll leave it at that. Remember to smile, we're having fun here.

I'm using college football as the measure because that's where one can draw empirical evidence that measures the average football player against the average college student. And the NFL doesn't select narrowly based on intelligence but rather on other factors. In fact, the higher up you go into the athletic skill rankings for colleges, the more the deficient they are in terms of their literacy scores. Why? Because colleges are much more likely to try to make "arrangements" for superior athletes than they would for average athletes. So, the narrow selection actually works against the NFL athlete (in terms of literacy) since the top college football players are also disproportionately "less literate" than the average college football player. This assumes, of course, that by top I'm referring to the kids with many offers from the well-known football factories, the kids who, by and large, end up landing in the NFL draft eventually.

As for Tom Casale, let me put it to you this way: Can he read at an adult level? Then yes, he probably surpasses a majority of players. I don't want to impugn all players since a lot of them take real majors. But the numbers don't lie. When a majority of a school's football players achieve substandard scores, enroll in bogus classes, don't graduate, and enroll in the same major (in some cases reserved for football players) then it doesn't take a brainiac to know what's up.

The vast majority of NFL players come from college, and that's why I brought up those collegiate measures. That's why I referred you to college data as one of the empirical measures of intelligence.

Other than the wonderlic, I can't think of any other empirical measures.

Seriously, take a look at the wonderlic:

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/closer/020228test.html

I submit to you that NOT acing this test means you are not capable of making adult and responsible decisions in our society today. It doesn't mean you can't be a football coach, however. You can. If by football coach we mean offering insight into aspects of your position and/or offering encouragement and advice to people you're training. I have doubts that you could have questionable literacy skills and have any strategic responsibilities in terms of coaching. Most of those guys are capable of abstract thinking and, yes, manipulating a computer. But then again, look at Wade Phillips.

I'll give you one more example of how this breaks down: when I worked the court/jail system as a younger man, I would marvel at how felons in the system could calculate instantly how much actual time they would have to do. If they agreed to a plea of 250 days, they would know instantaneously that this meant only 83 days to serve (or whatever). In their world, that's all they needed to know. Just because they had that skill set and form of intelligence does not mean they could move on and learn to master other things. Most of these men were either illiterate or functionally illiterate. The implication I'm drawing is that we all have a certain level of intelligence but that building the skills (in today's world, these are mostly literacy skills) to prosper takes a lot of work, and if you haven't done it at a younger age, it's going to be difficult to catch up. Judging by college football recruitment, most top football players have not built up sufficient literacy and life skills to survive outside the sport.

Just look at that wonderlic.

 

[fgssand]

HEH...Frame reference at the end of comment:

Esterbrook sux
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 3, 2008 at 2:00 PM

COMMENT:
Hey, Eatmyshorts....I mean Esterboob, I mean Esterbelichickhater, I mean Why don't you read what Roger Cossak, the LAW professor from Pepperdine has to say above your garbage (#11 if you can count past 10). I guess the thought that the guy actually told the truth never once crossed your biased mind now did it? What is the big deal in taping what is out in the open for millions to see every broadcast when it is totally obvious it cannot and never was able to be used in a game?? http://www.fansforaccuratemedia.com/
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/breaking_down_belichick/page4#comments

 

[TripleOption]

I'll give you one more example of how this breaks down: when I worked the court/jail system as a younger man, I would marvel at how felons in the system could calculate instantly how much actual time they would have to do. If they agreed to a plea of 250 days, they would know instantaneously that this meant only 83 days to serve (or whatever). In their world, that's all they needed to know. Just because they had that skill set and form of intelligence does not mean they could move on and learn to master other things. Most of these men were either illiterate or functionally illiterate. The implication I'm drawing is that we all have a certain level of intelligence but that building the skills (in today's world, these are mostly literacy skills) to prosper takes a lot of work, and if you haven't done it at a younger age, it's going to be difficult to catch up. Judging by college football recruitment, most top football players have not built up sufficient literacy and life skills to survive outside the sport.

Just look at that wonderlic.

Now, why would you say that? Did it ever occur to you that the inmates were, in fact intelligent? Although the were illiterate, that doesn't mean that they are idiots. It is very possible that they had horrible childhoods and were out of school very young (not a stretch). There are guys who never finished middle school that can run a drug empire very efficiently. By contrast, I know people with Master's Degrees that don't know their a** from their elbow in the real world.

 

[upstater1]

Now, why would you say that? Did it ever occur to you that the inmates were, in fact intelligent? Although the were illiterate, that doesn't mean that they are idiots. It is very possible that they had horrible childhoods and were out of school very young (not a stretch). There are guys who never finished middle school that can run a drug empire very efficiently. By contrast, I know people with Master's Degrees that don't know their a** from their elbow in the real world.

Did you even bother to read what I wrote?

 

[TripleOption]

Did you even bother to read what I wrote?

Your implication was that even people who weren't intelligent could become proficient at a specific skill. My counter is that you have no clue just how intelligent those people were.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

The piece is interesting, as is the entire collection. Definitely worth a lunch time read. I do, however, disagree with the cited article.

Smart people flourish when surrounded by smart people. I always thought that BB picked especially bright Coordinators for that reason (even the Rat was smart; Romeo and Charlie are both smart guys; Dante and Ernie too). If BB is half as good as his record indicates, then I would have to think that, when the door is closed, he allows his confidants and Coordinators to challenge him at every step of the way and that the environment in which he actually works is much more intellectually stimulating than the author allows.

So, the article is cleverly written and takes some cheap shots at the Dawg Pound and others, but I really disagree with the author's premise. Bill Belichick's peers aren't the players and certainly not the brain dead coaches cited by the author, but the people with whom he chooses to surround himself in his inner sanctum. As far as I can see, this is usually a pretty bright bunch of guys.