That would be a good system if posters who laud themselves for their obscure two year old takes that turned out to be correct conscientiously reported all the times they were wrong.
For example, a poster who claimed he knew all along that Player X was the next big thing would be burdened by the fact that he's sung the praises of, oh, I don't know, Malik Stith; or said that Cedric Jackson was the worst player he'd ever seen. That would give us a batting average.
Consider myself, universally beloved poster emeritus. On the one hand, I was probably the first fan to sour on Iron Mike Anderson, dubbing him coach third choice, having soured on him before he was hired. On the other I was excited when Jarhead was hired, and forget about Mullin, I thought he was a sure thing. On the one hand I thought Yawke and Burrell were studs in the making, which they weren't; on the other I was an early fan of Quincy Roberts and Tyshawn E.
Or leaving me out of it consider my boon companion WEARESJU: he's been often wrong about players with whom he's become inexplicably enamored (e.g. Larry Wright), but then he's also wrong about the virtues of players like Mike Moses and Gene Lawrence. But on the third hand he must be right about something every once in a while, it's the law of averages.
Let's face it: other than fun (RIP) very few posters have been right about most things most of the time and to the contrary: most posters are wrong about most things most of the time. The best you can hope for regarding this fan base is (considering that most of them graduated from St John's) is that they can sometimes occasionally express themselves somewhat semi-coherently and that they sporadically display a modicum of self-awareness and or a vague sense of humor.
