Seems like this thread was generated by a simple misunderstanding. (though some decent conversation has ensued).
CaCo, for reasons based on who knows what, somehow got it in her mind that only grades 9 and 10 from PG were intended to be indicative of "college level talent."
Then when she read (old versions of) the accompanying descriptions of what the grades are intended to mean which suggested otherwise, she somehow had the feeling that maybe deluded people were letting themselves be sold a bill of goods by PG. Not that she necessarily thought that PG actively intended to be peddling false hope. But you know how people are. It's so easy to take advantage of them. And there seemed to be an undercurrent that that was what PG was doing somehow. I mean think of all those deluded people who were taken in by those descriptions and so had the misfortune of letting themselves believe that guys who score 8 or 7 or heaven forbid 6 on this particular scale were maybe good enough to play in college at some level or other. Surely, she seems to have thought, PG need to change how it tells people to interpret the numbers to protect people from themselves.
Where she got all that who knows, really? There never seemed to be any real basis for her initial belief, except her hunch as far as I could tell, that only a 9 or a 10 could possibly indicate college level talent on any reasonable rating scale.
She can stick to that hunch if that suits her for some reason. Or she can adjust her belief. Seems pretty simple, though. Plus I doubt the descriptions are going to change to match up with her prior beliefs.