panthers55

Again it should factor little to nothing. Certainly not as much as it is garnering until there is more data. If we use it to sway us to Young it better be right or it did more harm than good if Stroud ends up the better QB in a few years.

Not being hostile simply pointing out obvious flaws in placing much stock in this test at this point. The problem is not in using it as one factor among a number of things in evaluating a QB, but like in the case of Stroud it is saying based on this research he stands little chance to be successful given his low score despite film of games showing the opposite. As someone who administered cognitive and performance related tests for 30 years I know the limits of what they actually measure versus what they claim. And issues like attention span for example have significant impact for example on continuous performance tests.

So that means that there is a positive correlation between high processing speed and success in physical activities like quarterbacking. But given their data on quarterbacks upon which they decided that an 80 was a cutoff score was 117 quarterbacks over 8 years which they culled done to 27 starting quarterbacks and did their analysis. They are suggesting from that they can predict with 100% that a really low score means you won't be successful. No outliers so far because your N is so low which makes it very limited to use for prediction until much more data has been captured. And if the adage is not judging rookies until year 3 why are they using 2021 data? You wanted questions. I got em... https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathletic.com/4430449/2023/04/20/panthers-nfl-draft-bryce-young-s2-test/%3famp=1

That is my point. We have never had a qb with a low score be successful? Lots of hype there. Makes people sway toward making it mean more than it should. If you want to see how fast he processes watch film and see him do it. Put him through all kinds of drills if you want. I readily admit that fast processing speed is a plus but doubt any of the guys get to this level and don't have good processing speed. It has to be a matter of degrees.

The issue isn't whether the test measures what is supposed to or even if a person over time scores similarly without significant practice effect. It is whether small differences in processing speed, visual field, spatial visualization, roblem solving which are actually measured by many nonverbal IQ tests to differing extents, is predictive of success in the NFl. To say no one who ever scored low actually suceeded suggests no outliers at all which I suggest is because the N is too low. Beyond that though is the other end of the spectrum. How many scored high and didn't succeed. You need to know that to decide what to think of Young. Was a difference of 10 points predictive of success or failure or was it only at the extremes which would be predictable. What if a really low score is a big reg flag but small differences in scores don't really mean much about success.

This is great. If CJ really scored that low and Young scored so high then watching to see how they do will go a long way toward showing how valid this test really is. Since apparently no one who scored a low score has even suceeded.

Widely used norm based tests have hundreds of thousands of subjects collected over decades. That is why they are valid for ongoing use. This test is less than 8 years old and has less than a 1000 quarterbacks evaluated. What I have seen were cherry picked players and how they performed versus how they scored. And since this test is supposed to be predictive of success it takes years of actually playing to see if who had high or low scores failed or succeeded. So that 1000 quarterbacks is now cut by a third. And then the folks who were tested but didn't make it to the actual NFL reduce it more. So how many folks are we talking about? Truth is the information touted as proof is more anecdotal than well researched and valid. There're a number of performance based tests to detect ADHD for example that are purported to be effective and have decades of use that really aren't nearly as useful as they would want you to believe.

Most cognitive tests are based on a score of 100 as the 50th percentile and it goes up or down from there. These are norm based tests whose scores are uaed to compare one against the other. Clearly this is different with a top score of 99 and you receive a score based on how well you perform against a standard typically known as a criterion referenced test. The problem is that it is hard to decide how much weight to give a factor which doesn't have much longevity or a large pool of testers to compare and make meaningful conclusions. And if you put weight on a test with little validity it is worse than ignoring it completely

Of course it is one test battery which is likely heavily nonverbal with timed tests and tasks. But if it isn't reliable and valid for predicting future qb success then it is worse than useless and actually counterproductive since you are using the results to make decisions putting weigh on factors which are not positively correlated with actual success.

Two questions. How big a difference is a 98 versus an 89 in processing speed? Milliseconds, seconds? And since it has been around for 7 or 8 years how reliable and valid can it predict NFL success? Does a 94 mean they will be a probowler but not win the Superbowl versus an 89 who will be a bust. This will be interesting to track over time..

Actually it would have. Grass is more of a cushion than turf and even cold dirt is much softer than concrete

Young will be the pick. He has the personality, drive, and attitude to be the best in the league although he would say he just wants to be the best version of himself. He was a psych major and had great teachers and mentors along the way. I am not as worried as I was about injuries when he said he was always smaller than everyone else and just takes that as a given. So he knows how to avoid contact and not take full body assaults. He really seems special. I honestly have changed my mind and readily see what the coaches see in Young. I like everyone will be rooting for good health.

Difference is receivers most often get tackled by Dbs and safeties maybe a linebacker. They all are around 30 - 40 lbs of each other. That is different from Qbs who get blindsided by guys weighing 100 lbs or more they they do all the time.

Byrd is the word.....

Are the arrows a smoke screen or are we really taking him?

The draft isn't here yet and most trades get done at the draft. Let's see what happens as the draft gets close and we say definitely we are going with Young.

Just the opposite. They want Young and hope we love Stroud. I wonder if some of the young love is an attempt to get Houston to move up to take him for fear we are going to take him as well.

It was two weeks ago when supposed Texas insiders said if they don't draft Young they may skip QB in the first round. Of course it is hard to separate the wheat from the chaff these days. I have read other things including they would be fine with Young or Stroud.

I have read they only want Young and if we take him Houston may decide on someone other than a qb.

I think everyone can benefit from a change to a 3-4 if it is aggressive in style. Being in a 3-4 or a 4-3 as a base defense only 30% of the time means that most of the time they will be in something else. So the way they play and various coverages will determine who shines more than the base defense we employ. Fanzio's version is very aggressive with frequent blitzing through the A gaps which benefits ILB sack stats as much as OLBs. Coverages matter. Press man coverage might benefit Horn more than a cover 3 shell in terms of his effectiveness. And if Chinn is playing safety in press man on a TE he stays closer to the line than if they were in cover 4 for example.

Everyone of these QBs is going to have a learning curve to get ready to play in the pros. Young looks the most ready but he had the better coaches and he appears to be quite smart. One question is whether his size and good but not great measurables give him the highest floor but limit his ceiling given there are some throws he isn't good at and his size and the need to protect him limit his value in the run game. The fact that CJ played so much better against the best team he faced could be because his game is still evolving. Most of his games this year they won because they were the better team and CJ didn't have to do that much to win. He had his best game on the biggest stage playing against a better team. Perhaps his ceiling is a little higher as he keeps figuring out more elements to his game like running and being elusive. I am sure you could argue that Young has a higher floor and ceiling but I cant shake the image of Tua (who is bigger than Young) getting ragdolled and potentially ending his career. After seeing all of our quarterbacks get hurt this year, people saying size and durability aren't correlated are ignoring how many qbs get hurt each year. And Young would be one of the smaller qbs ever to play the game. And I will say one thing about Richardson. If we pick him expect a lot of losses if he starts his rookie year or get excited about Dalton starting until Richardson is ready if we plan on actually being competitive next year.

No we don't have to . Contracts are backloaded and signing bonuses are prorated so the cap hit can be as little or as large as we want. Last year the number one pick had a 4 year deal 37 million. So if we gave him a 16 million dollar signing bonus and a 1 million salary for 2023 our cap hit would be 5 million. Or with 27 million in cap space we could make the hit bigger this year. But the cap isn't a limiter to what we can do. If we signed Burns to a huge 5 year deal for 125 million our cap hit could be as small as 8 mil this year if we give him a 40 million dollar signing bonus and a 2 million dollar salary for 2023. The guaranteed money is the biggest thing.

Like many I lean toward Stroud with his bigger frame and quick accurate passes which fits the offense I think we will be running. That doesn't mean Young won't be a good choice as well. Just that you may have to adapt the gameplan to account for his size and height more than you do Stroud who is more prototypical in size.

Darnold is playing for the team he grew up rooting for as a child. What a dream to actually play for them with this loaded offense. Unless we play them at which time they all are dead to me, I will root for CMC and Darnold. They don't play in our division but are in our conference so I am fan unless we are vying for a playoff spot.

Even more reason to have a versatile guy like Chinn who is tough in coverage on the back end yet is great blitzing off the edge.