CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: betarhoalphadelta on April 10, 2025, 06:10:48 PM
-
Something I found really interesting...
It seems that perhaps we actually can. High-level sports requires certain levels of cognitive skills that are unique and additive to mere athleticism.
Sort of cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kapqqCM-4iY
And no, I'm not just posting this because Drew Brees was an off-the-charts test subject :57:
-
Something I found really interesting...
It seems that perhaps we actually can. High-level sports requires certain levels of cognitive skills that are unique and additive to mere athleticism.
Sort of cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kapqqCM-4iY
And no, I'm not just posting this because Drew Brees was an off-the-charts test subject :57:
Well of course he was smart. Good Texan. Good Austin kid.
-
not so sure about Labronnie
-
not so sure about Labronnie
Why not? What about his 20+ year as one of the best players in the NBA would suggest to you that he's not got some level of athletic genius? There are some advantages to his size/athleticism, but I don't think he'd be playing [and excelling] into his late 30s and early 40s if it was purely athleticism.
I'm not saying he's got a high IQ or that he would be what we generally call "smart". I'm saying that he might score EXTREMELY highly on a test like the one discussed in the video, which seems to be correlated to the specific type of mental processing necessary to be a high-level athlete.
-
I never graduated from Iowa, but I was only there for two terms - Truman's and Eisenhower's. - Alex Karras
-
I think a lot of this is initial skill as a child + ALL THE EXPERIENCE AND REPETITIONS.
In football, for QBs and in baseball, for pitchers, I honestly just think it's a combination of the inherent tip of the bell curve of arm strength + growing up throwing wild and hard and not worrying about accuracy. Having that random, natural plus from dumb luck added with physical development that comes from years of use/recovery yields that potential for an extra strong arm (and thus, velocity).
Same with basketball, with height + coordination (uncommon combination) of the tip of the bell curve. You're tall, kid. Play basketball. A lot of basketball. Those tall kids tend to become tall adults, but even if they don't, they have all those repetitions growing up and can just play guard.
None of that is to poo-poo athletic intelligence. I just think it's a combination of natural attributes and due to those, getting tons of reps. It's not like mental IQ, where you could take a random 30 year old and they'd display giftedness in a nonverbal/quantitative test.
-
I think a lot of this is initial skill as a child + ALL THE EXPERIENCE AND REPETITIONS.
In football, for QBs and in baseball, for pitchers, I honestly just think it's a combination of the inherent tip of the bell curve of arm strength + growing up throwing wild and hard and not worrying about accuracy. Having that random, natural plus from dumb luck added with physical development that comes from years of use/recovery yields that potential for an extra strong arm (and thus, velocity).
Same with basketball, with height + coordination (uncommon combination) of the tip of the bell curve. You're tall, kid. Play basketball. A lot of basketball. Those tall kids tend to become tall adults, but even if they don't, they have all those repetitions growing up and can just play guard.
None of that is to poo-poo athletic intelligence. I just think it's a combination of natural attributes and due to those, getting tons of reps. It's not like mental IQ, where you could take a random 30 year old and they'd display giftedness in a nonverbal/quantitative test.
Except that everything you just said is effectively the opposite of what the video presented.
They are able to test specific things that relate to certain areas of cognitive ability. Not "IQ", but still measurable things related to the way your brain can ingress information, effectively process is, and make decisions, within split seconds.
If it was just initial skill and all the experience and repetitions, things like being a QB would be MUCH more correlated to physical ability than it is. And yet... Jamarcus Russell with all the measurable talent in the world flamed out, and Drew Brees, a too-short guy with a too-weak arm, had a potentially HoF career. When I heard in the video that Brees was off the charts on this test, it made perfect sense to me.
They also talked about visual tracking--again a cognitive ability. The average person in a test can track three independent visual things simultaneously. Guys who are successful at the safety position in football? Some of them are capable of tracking 8 or 9. Again that's not "IQ" but it's something unique in their brains that stands out against others.
Obviously the experience and repetitions are critically important. But I think it's quite plausible that what sets some athletes apart isn't the raw talent and the experience/reps, but an additional--measurable--difference in specific cognitive abilities that are particularly important for sport.
-
don't forget, OAM is a teacher - area of expertise = education/learning
you're in his wheelhouse now
-
Makes sense to me. They should start AQ testing at a very young age and direct the high-scorers into appropriate sports.
And if it's football, send them all to Austin!
-
Also interesting is that they tested something like the top 20 Halo players in the world... They scored highly.
Seems like some of the great "E-Sports" guys are probably just like the athletes, cognitively... Just without that whole "athletic ability" thing.
-
maybe I should try halo
whatever that is.........
-
Except that everything you just said is effectively the opposite of what the video presented.
They are able to test specific things that relate to certain areas of cognitive ability. Not "IQ", but still measurable things related to the way your brain can ingress information, effectively process is, and make decisions, within split seconds.
If it was just initial skill and all the experience and repetitions, things like being a QB would be MUCH more correlated to physical ability than it is. And yet... Jamarcus Russell with all the measurable talent in the world flamed out, and Drew Brees, a too-short guy with a too-weak arm, had a potentially HoF career. When I heard in the video that Brees was off the charts on this test, it made perfect sense to me.
They also talked about visual tracking--again a cognitive ability. The average person in a test can track three independent visual things simultaneously. Guys who are successful at the safety position in football? Some of them are capable of tracking 8 or 9. Again that's not "IQ" but it's something unique in their brains that stands out against others.
Obviously the experience and repetitions are critically important. But I think it's quite plausible that what sets some athletes apart isn't the raw talent and the experience/reps, but an additional--measurable--difference in specific cognitive abilities that are particularly important for sport.
But the high volume of repetitions isn't just about the physical. If it seems like that was my meaning, my mistake. The experiences of avoiding a rush, the precision/imprecision of routes being run by receivers, and the throwing of the ball's velocity, trajectory, and touch over and over are going to benefit a guy like Brees more than a guy like Russell.
The top end of the physical gifts guys are going to require less progression/improvement because they're starting nearly at "good enough." I think that it's weird and funny that guys like Milton from UM/UTK still get stars and notoriety and chances because they can throw the ball over a mountain. There are no mountain throws in football. Yet they have a gift almost no one else has.
And I wonder about those great safeties who can track 8-9 things moving compared to 3. What if they play RB and play it poorly? If they're big and grow up playing LB...or never play football to begin with. Those people are out there, able to track better than 99% of others (tip of the bell curve) and don't even know it.
And yes, I may disagree with a link sometimes.
-
Also interesting is that they tested something like the top 20 Halo players in the world... They scored highly.
Seems like some of the great "E-Sports" guys are probably just like the athletes, cognitively... Just without that whole "athletic ability" thing.
They got some thumbs on 'em!!!
-
Makes sense to me. They should start AQ testing at a very young age and direct the high-scorers into appropriate sports.
And if it's football, send them all to Austin!
They should do gifted testing for all students. They can be hard to identify just based on behavior and output in the classroom. Same with these athletic cognition talents.