RolandDeschain":3ad41kdi said:
hawknation2015":3ad41kdi said:
Saying someone is an "87.5" means nothing. Just like saying someone was a +4.4 meant very little on its own. It was the premium stats that gave the site value. Without those, I certainly won't be subscribing to them.
You're saying any and all rating systems are automatically worthless. Plenty are, but I simply cannot unilaterally agree.
It depends on what they are rating . . . the more specific the better.
But if the grade is based on "general performance," then yes, I would say it is totally worthless and always suspect.
Hopefully, a competitor will seize on this opportunity to create a similar site in terms of usefulness with more disclosure on a per-play basis. All you would need to get started is the apparatus to recruit and train a team of 8 or so people with enough knowledge of the game to breakdown two games a week. Then add people and more training from there as you gain subscribers. I imagine you would get many applicants willing to get paid to watch football over a one or two day period.