to break down players' meaningful minutes (i.e., non-special teams and non-mop up time -- with the note that special teams minutes are meaningful for the game, but not particularly telling of a player's ability at their offensive or defensive position) by weighting whether the minutes were played in front of or behind a more mature scholarship player on the depth chart.

Overly simplistic Examples:
Player A is a 4th (or 5th) year senior with 0 starts, lots of special teams time but has rarely seen the field in meaningful minutes. Player A hovered around 3rd or 2nd on the depth chart for 3 years. Is now penciled in as starter, although he has "paid his dues" behind experienced upperclassmen for 3 (or 4) years.

Player B is a 3rd year (junior) with 0 starts, lots of special teams time and has yet to see the field in meaningful minutes. Player B is now penciled in as starter and beat out a 4th year player.

Player C is a 3rd year (junior) with 8 starts. Player C remains penciled in as the starter, and his 8 starts came as a sophomore where he beat out 3rd and 4th year players.

Player D is a 3rd year (junior) with 12 starts, all of which came out of necessity in sophomore year due to injury of the expected starter during pre-season camp. Player D was not expected to be a starter as a sophomore. Player D is still penciled in as starter, although there are freshmen and sophomores behind him.

Given that all the players and all of their teammates are scholarship players and were deservedly recruited (i.e., not a special circumstances scholarship), which would you be most excited about? I think my order would go: C, B, A, D

By counting starts only, I'd have ended up with D as the best choice.
By counting age only, I'd have ended up with A.
By thinking that starts early on means something, I'd also have ended up with D.

Ideally, I think I'd want a whole bunch of As and Bs with the occasional C on my depth chart. And, this is all to say nothing of how any of the players graded while on the field (which very well could make D the best choice afterall).

In and of itself it doesnt exactly tell us a whole lot. Teams like Florida, Texas, LSU, USC, etc, can insert a stud upperclassmen with zero starts who is going to be better than a guy that has started at Purdue for four years.

Talent by itself isn't going to get you there.

Experience by itself isn't going to get you there.

Coaching by itself isn't going to get you there.

Etc.