Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

REPORT: Bryce Young scored 98 out of 99 on his S2 cognitive test


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, panthers55 said:

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. 

Fair point but getting hundreds of thousands of NFL QB's would take several hundred years, so you have to keep in mind the data pool is always going to be relatively small in that regard. 

Without being able to peek behind the curtain and see everything, it's hard to make too much of a positive or negative judgment. 

However, a lot of this is certainly successful marketing by this company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Fair point but getting hundreds of thousands of NFL QB's would take several hundred years, so you have to keep in mind the data pool is always going to be relatively small in that regard. 

Without being able to peek behind the curtain and see everything, it's hard to make too much of a positive or negative judgment. 

However, a lot of this is certainly successful marketing by this company.

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.

Edited by panthers55
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, panthers55 said:

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.

I am sure it ends up being a tool that largely confirms what is seen on film or shows something they can go back to the film to take a closer look at.

TBH, most of these metrics end up being that anyway. It's just putting a number to what you should be able to see by watching film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, panthers55 said:

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.


Sometimes systems and situations can hide major flaws. That’s why so many QBs are busts.  
 

Baker and Darnold looked great in college after all. 

It’s hard to know if a guy has ‘it’ or not. The IT we are basically looking for is (outside of arm strength and accuracy) is processing speed, object tracking (seeing the field), competitiveness, and desire to be great/get better.

S2 helps with a few of those things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, TANTRIC-NINJA said:

Does Will Levis scoring high with a 93 invalidate this test or does it make Will Levis an All Pro? At least with Bryce he played with a high level of success most of his career.  

It's the S2 test (processing) along with the ability to make good decisions and ability throw the football. Bryce makes good decisions and can make all the throws. I'm sure there are average people walking around that can achieve 99% scores on this test, but they aren't NFL QB's.

Levis can be a great QB if he limits the bad decisions. He actually might go 4th ahead of Stroud, that's what the insiders are thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2023 at 1:12 AM, kungfoodude said:

In fairness, this has existed for 8 straight NFL drafts and has been used by the NFL. For whatever reason this just because a hot issue this NFL draft cycle.

My guess is that they have a large enough pool of players to make this a decent tool. It should get better with time.

Well said.  For some reason, we now live in a generation in which facts and data are challenged if they are not what the individual wants to hear.  The same thing about size--you present data, you give an example (Doug Flutie, 12 year NFL career--before they protected QBs like they do now--and he was 5'10" 180.) but they do not want to consider that.  They use their "common sense" to make decisions and then, even if they are wrong and proven to be so, fight tooth and nail to defend their faulty logic.  Why?  These people are not seeking truth or fairness-they are seeking to validate their biases.  True here, true in politics--closed minds are ignorant minds.  I wanted Stroud, but I made it known that I was going to "argue both sides"--I got accused of switching loyalties--("I thought you were a Stroud supporter--now you are posting good stuff about Young?"  It is amazing how loyalty is more of an issue than truth.  If I liked Stroud and found reasons to like Young more, I would never have acknowledged these facts and made the wisest decision--I would have started deleting the unfavorable articles--maybe even mocking them as being unreliable or propaganda.  However, this is not a new test, and it has been used for years. 

 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, panthers55 said:

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.

Yeah think of how many qb's that have taken this test have even had a chance to start for an NFL team with proper playbook time and game prep. So probably like 90% of the testers won't even make it onto an NFL with a full playbook and full legit game plan/practice time as the starter to even really be able to evaluate them post test

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Tbe said:


Sometimes systems and situations can hide major flaws. That’s why so many QBs are busts.  
 

Baker and Darnold looked great in college after all. 

It’s hard to know if a guy has ‘it’ or not. The IT we are basically looking for is (outside of arm strength and accuracy) is processing speed, object tracking (seeing the field), competitiveness, and desire to be great/get better.

S2 helps with a few of those things.

Actually it just confirms what you see on the field. Which is what is interesting with Stroud. He demonstrated good processing on the field and not the test. And the S2 doesnt measure competitiveness or desire to be great. So what do you believe? What you see on the field in real time against opponents. Or a computer test you take for one hour purporting to measure the things on the field you just witnessed he could do.  Seems results on the field far outweigh a test supposedly able to tell these things which is new and largely untested. They used a pool of 117 quarterbacks which they narrowed down to 27 starting qbs  and did their analysis with those 27. And you wonder why I say the test is useless until you get more data since it takes years after a qb actually plays to be able to analyze the data. And 27 qb comparisons is a way too small sample to make definitive decisions. Again the test may prove great but until it is valid and reliable it causes more harm than good if people take it too seriously and think it does something it doesnt.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Actually it just confirms what you see on the field. Which is what is interesting with Stroud. He demonstrated good processing on the field and not the test. And the S2 doesnt measure competitiveness or desire to be great. So what do you believe? What you see on the field in real time against opponents. Or a computer test you take for one hour purporting to measure the things on the field you just witnessed he could do.  Seems results on the field far outweigh a test supposedly able to tell these things which is new and largely untested. They used a pool of 117 quarterbacks which they narrowed down to 27 starting qbs  and did their analysis with those 27. And you wonder why I say the test is useless until you get more data since it takes years after a qb actually plays to be able to analyze the data. And 27 qb comparisons is a way too small sample to make definitive decisions. Again the test may prove great but until it is valid and reliable it causes more harm than good if people take it too seriously and think it does something it doesnt.

 


But obviously there are very real limitations to what you can ‘see on the field’. If that was a perfect tool, we wouldnt have as many busts as we do. 
 

Regardless of what you think, NFL GM’s and scouts are clearly aware of this and looking for new tools to help them. S2 is just one test they are using. Bryce said he was made to take several different tests outside of the S2. Probably personality tests etc. it’s not just the Panthers doing this btw.

Im glad we are looking at more data points because the eye test has failed so many times before. The tape can lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MHS831 said:

Well said.  For some reason, we now live in a generation in which facts and data are challenged if they are not what the individual wants to hear.  The same thing about size--you present data, you give an example (Doug Flutie, 12 year NFL career--before they protected QBs like they do now--and he was 5'10" 180.) but they do not want to consider that.  They use their "common sense" to make decisions and then, even if they are wrong and proven to be so, fight tooth and nail to defend their faulty logic.  Why?  These people are not seeking truth or fairness-they are seeking to validate their biases.  True here, true in politics--closed minds are ignorant minds.  I wanted Stroud, but I made it known that I was going to "argue both sides"--I got accused of switching loyalties--("I thought you were a Stroud supporter--now you are posting good stuff about Young?"  It is amazing how loyalty is more of an issue than truth.  If I liked Stroud and found reasons to like Young more, I would never have acknowledged these facts and made the wisest decision--I would have started deleting the unfavorable articles--maybe even mocking them as being unreliable or propaganda.  However, this is not a new test, and it has been used for years. 

 

Did you see what the total N on the analysis used to determine the cutoff of 80?  27 quarterbacks over 8 years and a few others that took it voluntarily like Brees.  In testing terms if a test is new or old but was normed with thousands  of  subjects it is obviously more useful to make conclusions. And if you are trying to predict something you need data backward and forward  to make comparisons.

Let's be clear I am behind Young  100% if he is our choice. I didn't say anything the test because Stroud tested poorly. In fact I am looking forward to seeing how they do over the next several years. It is a great comparison because their scores were on the extremes. 

I think the concept behind the test is solid. I am sure processing speed and spatial visualization among others is necessary to be a qb at this level. I think the hype is overblown with the designer over stating their results based on very few comparisons.  So in testing terms it has not been around long and the results since they take years to assess are enough to say things like nobody who has scored low have been successful.  As if you score low you won't be successful and this test is a big factor which 100% can predict that according to the test designers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Tbe said:


But obviously there are very real limitations to what you can ‘see on the field’. If that was a perfect tool, we wouldnt have as many busts as we do. 
 

Regardless of what you think, NFL GM’s and scouts are clearly aware of this and looking for new tools to help them. S2 is just one test they are using. Bryce said he was made to take several different tests outside of the S2. Probably personality tests etc. it’s not just the Panthers doing this btw.

Im glad we are looking at more data points because the eye test has failed so many times before. The tape can lie.

With coaches tape in hand and having the ability to ask the candidate what was he thinking, what was the call, take me through your progressions, etc. What exactly can't you see or know?

And again if the S2 were not overvalued than why did Stroud just take a nose dive based in the results. If we saw good results on the field and a poor test score why should we believe a test over what we see. If the test were used like the wonderlic as a very small factor it is one thing. But when the developers say no one who scores low is successful it seems more than just one factor and way over blown.  As someone who administers tests like these I have real problems when tests are purported to do more than they do. They become more counterproductive than helpful when it could help you make the wrong decision because you thought the results are ironclad and highly.ptedictive and they werent.

And the reason so many bust is because there are so many factors which influence success or can derail it. Should you gather as much info as possible ? Sure as long as you know how important each factor is. And you don't let one factor or test determine your decision.

Edited by panthers55
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
    • Won’t stop until people stop buying overpriced poo.
×
×
  • Create New...