Quote Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp View Post
wouldnt this be accomplished by making the ratings more spread out? i think that once you get into the elite players in ncaa, everyone sort of turns into a god, where every rating they need to have is at least 80+. if the ratings scale were changed to 0-100 instead of 40 or 50-100, i think you'd see more situational players, and automatically see the gap between the bad, average, good, and elite players.
Two things work against you there. First, it's clear they don't really want a spread out roster, because even though we have 40-100, how many players are in the 50s and 60s? Not too many, even on the lowest level teams. Every few years the spread gets tighter and tighter.

Second, being realistic, how likely would we be to see a 7 OVR player, or a 15 OVR? I don't think anyone would actually be willing to rate someone that low, so the artificial floor is probably semi-realistic.

I believe actual ratings can go from 0-100 now, I know I see recruits come in with 15 in TAK or whatever from time to time. OVR is just a number anyway.