Originally Posted by
dejavoodoo44
The ability to see and process options is an interesting topic and one that gives me a bit more appreciation of the task faced by the recruiting staff. In that, they're skills that are probably hard to pick up by testing and data, but are more likely to be noticed through plenty of observation.
On observation: seeing which players have a higher level of mental processing ability, is probably easiest when they're compared to players that have less than average ability to see the game. For instance, there wouldn't be that much difference in the fitness level, athletic prowess and attitude of Gulden, Franklin and Papley, compared to the group of Clarke, Bell and Ronke. But time and time again, the first three would have successfully completed an onfield task, in the time that the other group were still assessing what the task was. So, it's fairly easy to conclude, that there's a difference in processing ability between group A and group B. However, assessing the difference between very good mental processors and elite processors, would be more difficult. And for recruiting staff observing juniors, that could involve going to an awful lot of games and watching even more footage.
And I'm not sure how footy IQ could be tested at draft camp, in a similar way that athletic ability is tested through beep tests, time trials, etc. Maybe you could test reaction time, but that tends to just measure speed of response to a stimulus, rather than a talent for assessing a range of stimuli. Possibly more useful would be something like distracting a participant in the foreground, then quizzing them on what they observed in the background? Although, a confound there, is that might be more of a test of memory rather than observation? That is, on a football field, someone might see a range of options and pick the right option, without actually committing any of those options to memory.
And there'd be problems with data as well. Disposal efficiency stats could be helpful, but they're likely to be affected by a range of influences: how well team mates run into space; how much shepherding they do to protect the ball carrier; how often a player gets possession in heavy traffic, etc. So stats may not be that much use for assessing footy IQ?
One thing that may be handy is networking? That is, since recruiters have limits on how many games they can get to, they do have networks of contacts, who report back to them on likely prospects. And I suspect that a few of those reports, will involve something like, "I don't really know what it is about this kid, but he seems to use the ball really well, so I think you should come down and have a look at him".
So, the recruiter would then come down, to process just how well the prospect processes the game.
Bookmarks