Grading scale isn’t based on how they have performed in the past, grading scale is based on my interpretation of what I would grade the player today as far as what they bring to the table compared to the rest of the starters at their position. Heyward-Bey is a top 10 pick that brings a shitload of speed and has not shown to be a bust I give him a C and I think that is fair.

Russel did after all produce a late fourth quarter comeback in Arrowhead so he is not completely horrible as you all claim. He also misses easy passes. He does turn it up at the end of the game. A D is a fair grade.

Dorsey being a C is generous, some could grade him a D. If I saw dominance from Jackson I’d grade him a B, he doesn’t get a B based on draft position, he is a C just like Heyward Bay. A high draft pick showing neither real dominance or poor play. A rookie.

Flowers missed an easy pick 6 last week. Giving him a B is generous. He is better than Carr who is starting caliber but I don’t consider Carr a dominant corner, a B for Flowers is generous and a C for Carr is fair IMO.

I didn’t grade Clancy or Todd b/c I’m judging talent on players not coaches. I do think our coaches are better than Raiders just not players. In the future I do think our players will be better based upon cap room and future drafts ahead of us vs. the Raiders.

But this is a “what have you done for me lately” league. And while Dorsey may be a C right now and was last year in his rookie season, I don’t think that will be his grade further into the season. Likewise grading Jackson as a C I feel is low based on the criteria. His draft spot then should garner him a B.

Giving Flowers a B and Carr a C isn’t right as I see it. They should both be a B. So while I am now in more agreement with your grading, I still see it slightly differently.

Now having said that, you still didn’t grade Todd or Clancy. Both were coordinators that performed in the last Superbowl. Does that give them As? And if Clancy gets an A for being in the Superbowl, he sure gets at least a D for calling the last defended drive by the Raiders.

Bobby Wade has had a couple 600 yard seasons but was also recently cut on a team carrying 5 WR’s so thats the reason for a D for him.

Washington the rookie corner could be a D but wouldn’t rate him higher as an unproven 4th rounder.

Cassel gets a B because of his performance last year, he had a bad game after installing a brand new offense after mini camp and firing Gailey. To be expected, he is a good QB and I possibly could be rated a C or possibly not, I think he’s pretty good and will get a lot better provided time in the system and a better o-line.

Seymour is a top of the food chain lineman and will be in the pro bowl this year, definitely an A.

*note at bottom of raiders it should say
RAIDERS
53/24 = 2.21 gpa
GPA counting QB position as 3 times more important than other positions – 55/26 = 2.12
CHIEFS
GPA – 43/24 = 1.79gpa
GPA counting QB position as 3 times more important than other positions – 51/26 = 1.96

Even if you shuffle some of these scores and change them by a point or two the Raiders have the higher GPA, even when factoring 3X the importance of the QB position they have more talent. Plus like I said they will have pro bowlers and I don’t anticipate the Chiefs having a pro bowler. Their is a lot more to football than talent but….their talent is better…….for now

Good points. I also would question Cassel getting a ‘B’ considering the 2 int’s, the non-points at the end of the 66.3 QB rating. If he gets a 76 QB rating, does he get an ‘A’? What do you give Brodie for his 116.1 QB rating? An A++++++++++++++++++++++?