I think rank is a much purer rating system. A manager who can succeed with a lower salary, and consistently beats teams he shouldn't, is going to have a higher rank long term.
Well, of course you would, it's a measurement reflects favorably on you. I think a better rating system is to rank a league by the number of IV.48 alumni...
Anyway, here's the problem with rank: it doesn't measure the strength of teams. I mean, there's a little bit of transfer of rank between leagues based on promotion and demotion, but most of the rank is going to come from the cup, which is really dependent on matchups and timing. If you have a number of teams in your league that prioritize the cup over league play, then you'll end up with a league with higher ranking members, but that doesn't mean you have a tougher league.
I agree,. The ranking
can be a good way to determine where a team is headed...However, take a look at this team
(http://www.buzzerbeater.com/team/22817/overview.aspx) Ranked #124...If you checked them out at the end of last season, they were still in the top 100...A team facing them in the cup would be scared at first glance...but when you look at their roster, you would see they are in the midst of a rebuilding projects...So rankings can paint a picture...they can also leave out a lot of details.