NFL's success using Wonderlic Test subject to interpretation

By D. Orlando Ledbetter

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

At the NFL Scouting Combine, no stone in a player's background is left unturned.

In addition to the ad hoc character analysis, teams also try to test the intelligence of the prospects.

“One guy did ask me, which one would I take: a pillow or a blanket?," Georgia defensive tackle Jeff Owens said. "I said, 'A blanket because with a blanket, if I get cold I can cover up and I can also use it as a pillow.' "

One can conclude that Owens is a survivor and is pretty resourceful from his answer. But can he get to the quarterback or stop the run?

The prospects are also given the Wonderlic Personnel Test, which was introduced to the NFL by the legendary Paul Brown in the late 1960s. The test requires the players to answer as many of the 50 questions as possible in 12 minutes.

However, three professors -- Brian D. Lyons of Fresno State, Brian J. Hoffman of the University of Georgia and John W. Michel of Towson University -- have published a research paper questioning the validity of the test in the NFL employment setting.

The paper was published in a journal called Human Performance in July 2009 and is entitled: "Not much more than g? An examination of the impact of intelligence on NFL performance."

The group studied a total of 762 players from the draft classes of 2002 (256 players), 2003 (257) and 2004 (249). In sort of a Moneyball-styledanalysis, they crunched the performance numbers of the players' first three years in the league. The average player tenure in the league is 3-1/2 years, according to the NFL Player Association.

The study concluded that general mental ability (GMA) was unrelated to future NFL performance, the draft selection process or the number of games started in the NFL.

“The Wonderlic has limited return on investment with its use in the NFL," Lyons said. "That's kind of contrary to what the traditional employment context speaks to with GMA, which is, GMA is one of our strongest predictors of future employee performance. In [most] occupations, the smarter you are, the better you are going to perform.

“But in this context, because it's so physically based, the results point to that [GMA] really doesn't matter."

Traditionally, quarterbacks and offensive linemen tend to have the higher Wonderlic scores. Falcons left guard Justin Blalock had a 41, the highest of the 2007 draft class.

“Those positions are thought to be more kind of cognitively based," said Lyons, whose expertise is human resource management. "You do need some degree of decision-making. You do need some degree of problem-solving type of skills.

“The problem is that the Wonderlic really doesn't evaluate necessary football-related knowledge that you need to perform."

Lyons contends that teams could get better predictors on performance by doing more football intelligence-based testing.

“You are concerned about whether a person can retain playbook knowledge," Lyons said. "Then there should be tests or evaluations geared toward whether or not a person can memorize plays, memorize routes, schemes and defensive schemes, too."