TESTING, TESTING ... 1-2-3 ...
Whether standardized physical tests can predict success in sports is debatable
Every spring, the NFL gathers about 300 of football’s top prospects for a comprehensive series of tests designed to show off their physical talents. Players believe scoring well in the tests will result in a greater likelihood of being drafted; team scouts, coaches and general managers add the results to the battery of assessment tools used to determine future success at the pro level.
Despite the importance assigned by players and team administrators to the tests, plenty of data suggests they not only fail to predict success on the field, they fall short of forecasting how high in the draft the player will be drafted.
The idea that standardized physical tests performed in a controlled environment can predict on-field athletic success is highly debatable, despite being part of scouting practices in a variety of professional leagues including the NHL, NBA and MLS. This is particularly challenging in the NFL when the athleticism needed is position-specific, meaning the skills necessary for a quarterback are remarkably different from those required by a lineman.
To be clear, quarterbacks and kickers don’t participate in all physical tests, which are designed to evaluate speed, lower-body strength and power, quickness and agility and upper body strength and endurance. But for wide receivers, running backs and defensive backs, who require superior speed and agility, and linebackers, fullbacks and tight-ends who need short, powerful bursts of speed, the tests can reveal the ability to be first to the ball.
And for linemen, who need more upper and lower body power and agility than speed, the goal is to determine whether they have the strength and endurance to outpower and outmanoeuvre the other big men on the line.
But when test results were compared to the draft position (the more potential the player has, the higher he is chosen in the draft), or on-field success in the years after being drafted, with few exceptions there was little correlation to being the fastest or strongest in the combine.
Among quarterbacks in particular the tests failed to determine future success on the playing field whether measured in terms of draft order, games played or salary.
The same can be said for wide receivers, though a few studies have suggested that higher vertical jump scores allowed for a higher draft position, but its predictability of success seems to disappear once the player graduates to the pros.
Running backs who were clocked the fastest over 10 yards proved to be the most successful once they made it to the NFL. In fact, sprint times in all three measures of speed were good indicators of success, though it’s widely accepted that the three tests show similar results and could be replaced with a single test. All the other measures of athleticism provided little certainty regarding future on field success.
For fullbacks, linebackers, tight ends and defensive ends, demonstrated speed in the 40-yard dash and speed and agility in the three-cone drill predicted draft position, but not a successful pro career.
Among linemen, there’s little data tracking test scores to success on the playing field, but good scores in the 40-yard dash, the bench press and the three-cone drill predicted a higher draft pick.
How does all of this information relate to young athletes trying out for the local soccer rep or any other team sport? It’s wise to keep in mind that proficiency in a
What you show on the field or ice is a better prediction of your playing ability than what you show in the gym.
specific skill is important, but not necessarily predictable of overall playing ability. Instead, the best players demonstrate aptitude in performing multiple sets of tasks, often at the same time, in conditions that are anything but predictable. In other words, what you show on the field or ice is a better prediction of your playing ability than what you show in the gym.
As such, investing time and money developing proficiency in any of the skills associated with combines or similar athletic tests designed to predict game play should be considered only part of what’s necessary to make a team. While speed, agility, strength and power are worthy of development for many team sports, other softer skills like coachability (the ability to learn), confidence and vision also play a part in success.