[NoOne]

first, this isn't to convince. keep doing what floats your boat. since you think i am mistaken, i'll explain it.

why would relative ratings be better? they can be false if the talent in the league is an outlier or merely just a normal ebb and flow. some years they could be overrated or underrated and everything in between. this makes it empirically less clear for promotions when compared to scale that doesn't shift on you. that shouldn't keep you from doing what you are comfortable with, but it adds another level of inaccuracy above and beyond the scouting setting.

if i know a 38/100 contact is ready for AAA, i promote at 38 contact. not only is it the exact same concept as what you are doing with relative ratings, it is more precise in nature because it doesn't float.

also about the scale use:

20-80 is just 0-60 (scaled from 0-200 in editor). it is no different than starting at 0 or 1 or 678. it all scales back to the 0-200 in the editor. the benefit of a larger scale, like 20-80, is the greater resolution. i mentioned above that scale needs to be large enough to resolve enough difference between players. promoting at the smallest 7-point scale (2-8) is more difficult than the 1-20 scale. (stars are 1-10, but is there a 1-5 scale? not sure... concept doesn't change)

I don't see all 20's as you do, though. are you talking about the overall rating? you definitely don't want to use overall for promotions. that would be adding yet another layer of inaccuracy to the decision.