1) Coach Ratings (HC, OC, DC): The coach ratings for players are almost spot-on in identifying top-tier talent in the drafts. They often correlate strongly with how good a player actually isf or later rounds too. For instance, even if your scout gives you a mediocre letter grades, but your HC has a standout score compared to others in the same position and projected draft range, there's a high likelihood it's accurate. Moreover, I've noticed that coach grades don't seem to differ much across different coaches. I tested the low accuracy setting with four different teams, and the coach grades were almost identical among them, while individual rating grades (like strength, speed, etc.) varied as one would expect between teams. This discrepancy struck me as odd. (see below image for example)
2) Projected Rounds & Mock Drafts: On the low setting, the projected rounds and the general order in the scouting list (and the in-game mock drafts) correlate strongly with actual talent. The top ten projected picks essentially mirror the rankings of the ten best players. While I understand that a highly-rated player won't be projected as undrafted, the in-game "media" rarely is off by much. It would add a layer of excitement to the draft process if there were occasional surprises of guys projected far later than actual ratings suggest, and GMs had to truly rely on their scouts rather than having certainty that the best players will always be projected in the top 10 or round 1, with decent ones in rounds 2 and 3. Rarely is any standout talent projected for later rounds, unless they play positions like RB, P, K, FB, or other positions that are deemed of lower value. Having more variance between actual talent and media projections would be very helpful to allow teams to actually trust their scouts more than media projections. Right now teams probably trust projected rounds more than own scouts. Could even be cool to set projection order when you import a draft class although I understand that is not as easy as it sounds
To sum it up, while the low accuracy setting is commendable for providing a challenge when it comes to individual rating grades (strength, speed, etc.), it falls short in terms of coach ratings and the overall draft rankings provided by the game's "media". Offering more vague details on projected orders and reducing the accuracy of coach ratings (to align with the other grades) could significantly enhance the gameplay, preventing a scenario where all 32 GMs have virtually identical perspectives on players. These two above notes seem to take away from the benefits elsewhere using the low setting.
Side note: would be awesome to manually edit draft order and manually add extra comp picks to teams if we choose.
