We're back with another edition of the #AskLoogs Twitter mailbag. If you missed last week's discussion, check it out here.
This week, we're looking at keys to evaluation, how much difference there is between players in the rankings, what to do about players wanting out of their letters of intent, and what can be done to get Colorado back up and rolling, among other things. No more delaying, let's get right to your questions.
— Tom Luginbill (@TomLuginbill) June 5, 2013
— Marty Matthews (@MartyM10) June 5, 2013
This is where the inexact science of rankings truly comes into play. In all reality, there really isn't any difference between No. 7 and No. 11 or No. 2 and No. 9, let alone No. 35 or No. 51. What we have always tried to do is set up a set of critical factors as a guide to place premiums on how some positions impact the game in comparison to others. While we cannot rely upon this solely and sometimes we must use our gut or base things purely off what we see, it has generally served us well.
You may have noticed over the years that we have placed a premium on four positions -- QB, CB, OL, DE. Pass rushers, cover corners (particularly tall ones) and offensive tackles are all going to be given extra value. Look at how few wide receivers we have had in the top 10 over the years. It's because wide receivers are growing on trees. More supply, less demand. The same can't be said for the Jadeveon Clowneys and Robert Nkemdiches of the world. They are in high demand and limited supply. Unfortunately we have to rank and grade far more players than college programs do at each position, so the inexact science of it becomes even more magnified. We do the best we can with the information we have and then we live with it. I tell our guys all the time that you are going to be wrong on a kid; don't be afraid to be. Believe it, own it and dig your heels in. This is very difficult to do, however, even at the NFL level.