There's no question that Justin Fields has the physical tools to become a brilliant professional quarterback. If you couldn't pick this up from his Ohio State career, or if you're just an NFL fan that doesn't pay too much attention to college football, his pro day showing was a good way to become familiar with what he brings to the table.
Related
But the latest talk about Fields has been less about whether or not he has the athletic gifts needed from a quarterback and more about the intangibles that separate certain players from the rest of the pack. The leadership, the desire, the work ethic, the adaptability... you can't argue that all of these traits are seen in the top tier of players and, alternatively, missing in some of those who don't pan out.
Most notably, Dan Orlovsky created a stir when he said that he talked to some people from teams who questioned Fields' work ethic, which originated from an appearance on the "Pat McAfee Show" and led to some ESPN drama, several responses from others, and a good handful of angry Ohio State fans. He later told Peter King that he regrets not having more "clarity and specificity" in making it known that those were just the opinions of people he spoke to.
There wasn't really a lack of clarity or specificity, however, in another recent guest appearance on the "Pat McAfee Show." Former quarterback and current analyst Mark Sanchez dropped a very interesting factoid about Fields and his intangibles that might help to clear up any doubt about whether or not he's mentally cut out for an NFL career (start at the 42:58 mark of this video).
"This guy, Dr. Goldman, he's a sports psychologist," Sanchez said (h/t Reddit user herbertstan). "I talked to him yesterday. He has some interesting information on how he evaluates players — all players from all different sports, okay? Since 2012, this guy's interviewed and given basically a mental aptitude test on an iPad [to] 6,500 athletes. Professional athletes, not just this average Joe walking down the street.
"They have a learning efficiency rating on there, so it's basically [about] acquisition — like, how many reps does it take until you get it, until you understand something — and then your recall. Like, once you have it, can you bring it back and use it, right? That's basically what they're trying to figure out in that part of this test."
6,500 professional athletes across all different sports. And out of all this guys, guess how highly Fields scored on this very test. Take a stab at it.
"Justin Fields — the guy who supposedly can't go through his reads, doesn't have great work ethic, all this bogus stuff — he scored the highest. Ever. He scored the highest that they can rank him," Sanchez said. "He scored a 130 on it. Mahomes was like a 108. Josh Allen was like a 108. Over 100 is good.
"Bro, he was a 130. Okay? This kid can learn. Essentially, it would equate to like an average playbook that's not that complicated, he'd learn it faster than anybody. A very complicated playbook, to him it would be like an average playbook. This kid was in the top one percent of 6,500 pro athletes, okay? This kid is bright."
As our Reddit friend herbertstan additionally noted, the section of the test that Sanchez refers to — learning efficiency — does not represent the full test, so it's unclear if Fields' 130 score was just for that segment or for the whole thing. Here are some samples of said test and the various parts to it.
The sample tests linked above are examples of the Athletic Intelligence Quotient, or A.I.Q., developed by Scott Goldman, with full-scale scores that likely "fall between 70 at the low end and 130 at the high end," (via Devin Gordon of the New York Times). And there's data to suggest that it works; for instance, Goldman says that the Seahawks are an A.I.Q. client, and their selection of then-polarizing wide receiver D.K Metcalf turned out to work pretty well. You can look at Mekhi Becton as another example, whose "A.I.Q. results helped reaffirm (Adam) Gase's confidence" in selecting him, according to Gordon. Becton went on to score the second-highest grade among tackles in the 2020 draft class, trailing only Tristan Wirfs (via New York Jets website).
So does a high A.I.Q. score mean anything conclusive about a player's future in a professional environment? Absolutely not — nothing does. But, all things considered, it certainly can't hurt, especially with so much talk about how Fields' intangibles are the facets of his game that might hurt him most.
Want Fields on your team? You might want to check out more about the A.I.Q. and what Fields' extremely impressive score might mean on the gridiron. Check out this video from Goldman and Mike Tannenbaum for more.
LISTEN NOW on the Audacy App
Sign Up and Follow Audacy Sports
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram