Agency Advises NFL Prospects to Skip Intelligence Tests to Protect Privacy and Dignity – Details Here

Houston, Texas- Houston Texans quarterback C.J. Stroud has defied warnings about his pre-NFL Draft cognition test results and is now making waves with his agency, Athletes First. The agency, representing 2024 prospects, has directed them to skip all intelligence testing following the leak of Stroud’s low results. This decision could potentially influence other firms to take a similar stance with their clients.

Athletes First sent a message to NFL clubs, obtained by The Athletic, explaining their decision to forego cognitive or psychological testing during the pre-draft process. The agency expressed concern over the lack of confidentiality with these tests, citing the public leak of certain results from the previous year. They emphasized the need to protect a player’s intelligence, aptitude or mental processing from public discussion and ridicule.

Despite skipping intelligence testing, the agency’s prospects will continue with standard pre-draft physical activities and football-based interviews, as reported by The Athletic.

This controversy surrounds Stroud’s test results, particularly his score of 18 out of 100 on the S2 test. This has led to speculation about his mental aptitude for the sport, prompting the agency’s drastic decision. However, Stroud remains unfazed by the criticism, emphasizing that he’s a football player and does not need to prove himself to anyone.

Stroud’s performance on the field speaks for itself, as he led the Texans to the playoffs and was ultimately named Offensive Rookie for the Year. In contrast, other quarterbacks who scored higher on the test, such as Bryce Young and Anthony Richardson, have faced their own challenges in the league, demonstrating that test scores do not necessarily correlate with on-field performance.

Ultimately, the decision made by Athletes First sheds light on the complex relationship between intelligence testing and professional sports, raising questions about the validity and implications of such evaluations. This controversy serves as a reminder of the scrutiny and pressure faced by aspiring athletes as they navigate the path to professional success.