[Toupal]

I do love the idea of scratching the rating system and subbing it for combine results. However the idea of replacing those features with "bad, good, great" doesn't give you that great of an idea.

I don't mind the rating system, however I believe that the rating system should not be absolute. I believe a players ratings should reflect what your scout team tells you.

For example, if you have a franchise where you are the 49ers, and it is the 2017 offseason,, and you are looking for a new QB. Your team just brought in a new GM, scouts, coaches, and a Head Coach. Each of those people that are new to the organization, are going to look at the current roster a little bit differently than the previous regime.

Trent Baalke and Chip Kelly may have valued the players differently than John Lynch and Kyle Shanahan. Where the old staff may have viewed Colin Kaepernick as an 85 overall, the new staff may view him as a 65 overall.

Baalke may have viewed Brian Hoyer as a 72 overall, but Lynch views him as an 80 overall, and views him as a good QB replacement in the free agency.

Along with their whole at QB they needed filled, they didn't value QB free agents or draft prospects all that valuable. Where as the Chicago Bears GM and scouts viewed Mike Glennon more valuable and would see his ratings higher than most other teams in the FA.

Additionally, when it comes to the draft, YOUR scout teams' GM's quality to evaluate prospects will show.

If you have a great scout team/ GM, it will show you as close to accurate ratings as possible.
Where if you have a bad GM or ST, ratings will be all over the place.

What it comes down to, is I think the rating system is fine, however I would like to coaches, scouts, and GM's matter in evaluating talent. The better the GM, the more accurate ratings you will see.