jjflr's Week 14 Power Rankings [Archive] - Pigskin Heaven

View Full Version : jjflr's Week 14 Power Rankings

jjflr

12-13-2005, 08:52 PM

http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/NFL3.png

JJFLR's POWER RANKINGS--Week 14

Theme This Week: "Teams Staying In The Hunt"

Biggest Movers:

Up:http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20051212/thumb.sea12012120047.49ers_seahawks_sea120.jpg (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/photo?slug=sea12012120047.49ers_seahawks_sea120&prov=ap)
The Bucs, Pats, and Dolphins all moved up 3 spots with victories and the Packers moved up 4 spots.

Down: http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20051212/thumb.sea13412120213.49ers_seahawks_sea134.jpg (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/photo?slug=sea13412120213.49ers_seahawks_sea134&prov=ap)
The Bears and Jaguars both dropped out of the top 10 (4 spots each) while the Raiders dropped a FULL 7 SPOTS after another bad loss.

1) INDIANAPOLIS COLTS (13-0) :indy: 34.7157 The game at Seattle will be the last chance, in my opinion, for this team to get beat.
2) SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (11-2) :seahawk: 28.8806 The Hawks are really starting to roll now and are clearly the favorite in the NFC.
3) DENVER BRONCOS (10-3) :broncos: 26.6409 Tough game with........the Ravens ?
4) NEW YORK GIANTS (9-4) :giant: 24.6369 Are they continuing to win despite Eli and his 15 INT's?
5) SAN DIEGO CHARGERS (8-5) :chargers: 23.5171 They'll have to win out to make the playoffs now and they still have the Colts and Chiefs.
6) CAROLINA PANTHERS (9-4) :-panther: 22.6919 This offense has not been the same since the Bears game.
7) KANSAS CITY CHIEFS (8-5) :kc: 22.4561 Their defense is still not where it needs to be.
8) DALLAS COWBOYS (8-5) :cowboy: 22.1025 Keep themselves in the playoff hunt with a scrappy win against KC
9) TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS (9-4) :bucs: 21.9846 Watch out but Simms is 4-1 in his last 5 starts
10) CINCINNATI BENGALS (10-3) :bengal: 21.3952 Can we write that close victory against the Browns off to an 'in-state' rivalry?
11) CHICAGO BEARS (9-4) :bear: 20.9826 Their weak offensive punch finally caught up with them
12) JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS (9-4) :jags: 20.9767 They were out-matched and out-classed on Sunday
13) PITTSBURGH STEELERS (8-5) :steeler: 20.6290 Good rebound win against a tough Bears team
14) NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS (8-5) :-pat: 18.1535 Are they starting to roll? Is it 'too little too late'?
15) ATLANTA FALCONS (8-5) :falcon: 17.6820 Staying in the hunt
16) WASHINGTON REDSKINS (7-6) :redskin: 17.2812 Hanging in there
17) MINNESOTA VIKINGS (8-5) :viking: 17.2694 Continue to roll. Now the North favorite?
18) MIAMI DOLPHINS (6-7) :-phin: 11.4933 I am thoroughly impressed with Saban's coaching job of this team.
19) GREEN BAY PACKERS (3-10) :-pack: 8.6129 They WON a close one ?
20) PHILADELPHIA EAGLES (5-8) :eagle: 8.6052 Anyone know any of these guys?
21) ST. LOUIS RAMS (5-8) :ram: 8.4874 The 'Harvard Hurler' is not the savior after all.
22) ARIZONA CARDINALS (4-9) :cards: 8.4284 VERY disappointing team. What's the problem here?
23) TENNESSEE TITANS (4-9) :titan: 8.3695 Fisher will keep them playing tough.
24) CLEVELAND BROWNS (4-9) :dawg: 8.0748 Crennel is keeping them in every ball game.
25) BALTIMORE RAVENS (4-9) :raven 7.8390 Almost upset the Broncos. THAT would have been bigger than the Dolphins over Chargers.
26) BUFFALO BILLS (4-9) :bill: 7.0139 Losman was mis-evaluated by the Bills organization. He's just another Todd Marinovich.
27) OAKLAND RAIDERS (4-9) :raider: 6.7781 Did benching K and going with Tui help?
28) DETROIT LIONS (4-9) :lion: 5.5993 Did this team play any better with Mooch gone? I didn't see much difference.
29) NEW YORK JETS (3-10) :jet: 5.1867 I bet that win on Sunday felt good. They needed that.
30) NEW ORLEANS SAINTS (3-10) :saint: 2.7702 The poor Saints.
31) SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS (2-11) :niner: 2.2397 Is Nolan going to make it to season #2?
32) HOUSTON TEXANS (1-12) :texan: 0.3536 Have a stranglehold on the first pick in the draft.

Bruschibabe

12-13-2005, 10:09 PM

Are they starting to roll? Is it 'too little too late'

Too late for what? Last I knew the East was still up for grabs..;)

Denver should have fallen a couple spots more IMO, they don't seem to be at the strength they were before.

Why do the Bears drop that much with one loss? It was against a pretty tough Pitt team...

San Diego still top five even though they lost to a 5-7 team at home??..

Bengals deserve to be higher...even Palmer is allowed to have a bad day IMO..

Jacksonville..
They were out-matched and out-classed on Sunday

C'mon JJ give me a break...Garrards' second start and he has over 250 yards on offense just himself? Not outclassed...sorry but from what I have seen, it was a pretty decent showing for the Jags to keep the game within 8 points and keep the Colts to 26, Their D alone had three sacks, Hayward had two of them himself and Garrard had almost 50 rushing yards...They might have lost but give them a little credit..WHO was the last team to hold Indy under 30 points??...Maybe outmatched but not outclassed IMO..

As usual nice job all around even if I don't tend to agree JJ..:D

RaiderZord

12-13-2005, 10:28 PM

The too little to late comment doesn't make much sense. The Patriots are getting stronger just in time IMO. The way I look at it is that they have done just enough so far this season to still maintain the division lead while breaking the NFL record for the most starters used in one single season. Now they are getting back some key peices to the team, the defense if getting stronger and they are playing like the defending champs. Its not how you start, its how you finish.

Tomlinson4MVP

12-13-2005, 10:34 PM

How are the Chiefs in front of the Cowboys when Dallas just beat them? Same with Carolina over Tampa Bay.

Sway29

12-13-2005, 11:00 PM

Bruschibabe

12-13-2005, 11:12 PM

Tiki Tiger

12-13-2005, 11:22 PM

Parrish

12-13-2005, 11:24 PM

I looked at the 49ers comment and then decided it wasn't worth looking at the rest, that is just plain idiotic.

Bruschibabe

12-13-2005, 11:27 PM

Are you serious!!! You have the chargers and chiefs ahead of the jags again! Please explain.

Are you a charger fan because you have them in the top 5 every week, even after losing to miami at home

And if you are gonna put an 8-5 team in the top 5 it's the pats

I agree about the Jags Tiki..I think even though they lost to Indy they definitely had a good showing IMO, especially on their D...

gedd32

12-13-2005, 11:37 PM

somebody gimme a hand. I recognize a pile of you fans, but I don't know how to shoot the bull with y'all. Please help me out.

GatorsRock

12-13-2005, 11:39 PM

somebody gimme a hand. I recognize a pile of you fans, but I don't know how to shoot the bull with y'all. Please help me out.

What do you need to know? I would suggest going to the Welcoming Forum and introducing yourself. All of us are very helpful and we can help you out.

Blackmallard

12-14-2005, 12:02 AM

JungleKing

12-14-2005, 07:40 AM

How are the Chiefs in front of the Cowboys when Dallas just beat them? Same with Carolina over Tampa Bay.
This is a formulated rankings. Other things count than wins. Also the Bucs and Panthers split the series so we would be tied anyway.

XPetey

12-14-2005, 07:43 AM

10) CINCINNATI BENGALS (10-3) 21.3952 Can we write that close victory against the Browns off to an 'in-state' rivalry?

Another worthless comment after another winning game. I'm suprised we didn't drop in your rankings. The Chargers lost, yet are still in the top 10?? No way.

jjflr

12-14-2005, 08:37 AM

How are the Chiefs in front of the Cowboys when Dallas just beat them? Same with Carolina over Tampa Bay.

Welcome to the board Tomlinson. Good to have you here.

Dallas and Tampa Bay both made up ground on the teams they beat. However, they both had LARGE gaps to make up in one week and at this point in the season, the 'swings' aren't THAT drastic. Keep in mind that the formula doesn't just measure one game. It's measuring an entire season.

Under your theory, since the Redskins beat the Seahawks earlier this year, the Redskins should be ranked higher. That's not how it works.

jjflr

12-14-2005, 08:47 AM

Now i might be a pats fan, but i really dont see how you can put them as 14th... most rankings have them top 10. Brady is leading in passing yeards, yes there defence has been shakey, but rly, how many teams do u think fear haveing to play the pats in playoffs. I dont think there are 13 other teams that look better then the pats, and obvisouly some teams ahead on the rankings wont see the playoffs. Brady has never lost a playoff game, many qbs ahead there haven;t won one. I think a top 10 placement would be more correct.

Hi Sway, welcome to the board.

Just to clarify, these are not 'my' rankings according to opinion. These rankings are based off of a mathematical formula that calculates wins, losses, margin of victory, strength of opponent, it factors home-field advantage, D-ranking, O-ranking, and evolves as the season progresses.

There is no opinion in these rankings.

The reason the Patriots are not the 'best' 8-5 team under this formula is because they are getting DESTROYED by the top 10 teams they have played this year.

They are 0-5 against the top 10 teams losing by an average of 14.2 points a game in these 5 contests.

jjflr

12-14-2005, 09:02 AM

Are you serious!!! You have the chargers and chiefs ahead of the jags again! Please explain.

Are you a charger fan because you have them in the top 5 every week, even after losing to miami at home

And if you are gonna put an 8-5 team in the top 5 it's the pats

Hi Tiki,

Just to clarify, these are not 'my' rankings according to opinion. These rankings are based off of a mathematical formula that calculates wins, losses, margin of victory, strength of opponent, it factors home-field advantage, D-ranking, O-ranking, and evolves as the season progresses.

There is no opinion in these rankings.

As far as 'why' the Jags are slightly behind the Chiefs and Chargers, here' s the explanation. Let's look at recent play (since October 16th, for sake of this discussion).

Chiefs are 6-3 in that time. They have victories against 4 top 20 teams in that time and 2 of their losses came to top 10 teams on the road, which they shouldn't be expected to win as the #7 team. In addition, they kept these 2 tough games close, losing the 2 by a total of 11 points.

Jaguars are 6-2 in that time period. They have 1 victory against a top 20 team. In addition, many of their victories against the bottom feeders have been close (3-7 points) and margin of victory IS a factor in the formula.

The Chargers are also 6-2 during that time period. They have 2 wins against top 20 teams and this team also ranks much better according to the NFL in 'yards'. They are picking up around a point over the Jags just because the Jags offense ranks so badly on offense, according to the NFL.

jjflr

12-14-2005, 09:04 AM

If you start with #1 there is an AFC south team every eleven teams. Houston is tacked on at the end since there are only 32 teams total, but this leads me to believe that a ranking of 34th would be more accurate for them at this point.

;) true, mallard, if there was any way to rank them lower, I would..........they are a mess.............:nono:

jjflr

12-14-2005, 09:43 AM

This is a formulated rankings. Other things count than wins. Also the Bucs and Panthers split the series so we would be tied anyway.

Sounds like you've got it figured out JungleKing..........:cooldude:

I love how guys think that I've got a h*rd-on for THEIR team so I'm putting their teams lower..............:chuckle:

If these people want to look at where some of these teams are with other rankings, check out Sagarin's computer rankings also:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin.htm

Sagarin ALSO has the Patriots outside of the top 10.

Sagarin ALSO has the Chargers at #5.

Sagarin ALSO has the Chiefs ahead of the Cowboys.

Sagarin ALSO has the Panthers ahead of the Bucs.

However, Sagarin has the Panthers and Buccaneers at #14 and #15, respectively. His formula says they are worse than the Redskins and Bears and barely ahead of the Falcons even though both teams are better against HIS 'top 16' than most of the teams ahead of them. :confused: His formula is factoring the OVERALL strength of schedule too much and is dragging the Panthers and Bucs down. My formula looks at each individual opponent and individual game results.

The Panthers and Bucs should be higher.

He does have the Jaguars and Steelers in the top 10 and I know exactly why .........

Sagarin's model gives points to a team JUST FOR PLAYING A TOUGH SCHEDULE. They don't necessarily have to win these games and they don't necessarily have to even play well against those better teams. His formula simply gives credit to the team for HAVING a tough schedule.

Therefore, even though the Jaguars and Steelers both have worse records against HIS top 16 than the Panthers and Bucs, they get major points just for PLAYING a tougher schedule. I think that's wrong.

My formula looks at each individual opponent and each individual game result and puts it all together.

His formula is HIGH on the Bengals right now because it factors their 10th win so highly (there are only 3 other teams with 10 or more wins). Therefore, their ELO_Chess is 4th but in pure points they are 9th, which he claims himself is better 'predictor' of future games.

kcangel

12-14-2005, 09:56 AM

7) KANSAS CITY CHIEFS (8-5) 22.4561 Their defense is still not where it needs to be.

Hard to argue that one when it was the defense who really lost that game to Dallas. :)

jjflr

12-14-2005, 10:19 AM

Hard to argue that one when it was the defense who really lost that game to Dallas. :)

Wow, I got one right !!

Thanks for that angel..............

chiefzilla

12-14-2005, 11:06 AM

The Chargers/Chiefs/anybody in the AFC West will probably end up in the top 5 in terms of difficulty in schedules.

That's probably why they continue to be fairly high on the charts.

Jacksonville looked very impressive to begin the season. BUt they've pulled off a bunch of marginal victories against bottom-feeder teams. That's probably why they're still somewhat low on the power rankings.

A fair system? I don't know. But I am glad to see that this is one of the few that puts a heavy weight on strength of schedule and recent successes. Despite the losses, given the tough schedule, you'd have to say that KC/San Diego have looked tougher. I could say the same for New England too, though, the teams they have beaten of late aren't exactly all-world. In fact, they haven't beaten an over .500 team in quite some time.

So no ranking system is flawed, but I think jjflr's got a pretty decent one. At least it's based on numbers more so than opinion.

chiefzilla

12-14-2005, 11:11 AM

Wow, just read jjflr's comment.

I swear I didn't read it before I made that comment. Guess we both agree on the reasoning behind all the rankings. Interesting.

The Chargers/Chiefs/anybody in the AFC West will probably end up in the top 5 in terms of difficulty in schedules.

That's probably why they continue to be fairly high on the charts.

Jacksonville looked very impressive to begin the season. BUt they've pulled off a bunch of marginal victories against bottom-feeder teams. That's probably why they're still somewhat low on the power rankings.

A fair system? I don't know. But I am glad to see that this is one of the few that puts a heavy weight on strength of schedule and recent successes. Despite the losses, given the tough schedule, you'd have to say that KC/San Diego have looked tougher. I could say the same for New England too, though, the teams they have beaten of late aren't exactly all-world. In fact, they haven't beaten an over .500 team in quite some time.

So no ranking system is flawed, but I think jjflr's got a pretty decent one. At least it's based on numbers more so than opinion.

Azazel

12-14-2005, 03:10 PM

Are you serious!!! You have the chargers and chiefs ahead of the jags again! Please explain.

Are you a charger fan because you have them in the top 5 every week, even after losing to miami at home

And if you are gonna put an 8-5 team in the top 5 it's the pats

ok, look do you guys know the formula here?? jj has to explain it every week....it includes every thing wins, losses, strength of sched, and the strength and weakness of the teams you won or lost too. he puts the stats in the comp, and it spits out the stats he gives here....

do the eagles still belong in the top20? IMO...no......but they beat some tough teams in the beginning of the year, so i get it...not really agree, but i GET it.

tiki, i get, we all get the jag homer thing, but look at the stats

jags are like 3-6 against teams that below .500...that could be they are lower than you think should be. and they are not the best in their division, and in the afc, you have the colts, broncos, chargers, at LEAST ahead of them.

Azazel

12-14-2005, 03:12 PM

Wow, I got one right !!

Thanks for that angel..............

oh.....YOU ROCK! jj :rockon:

now you have 2!

i think these are pretty accurate, i would switch the chargers and the chiefs, but taht is about it.

allstardude12

12-14-2005, 03:39 PM

5) SAN DIEGO CHARGERS (8-5) :chargers: 23.5171 They'll have to win out to make the playoffs now and they still have the Colts and Chiefs.

I don't get this. They'll have to win out to make the playoffs, but are still top 5????? Six teams make the playoffs in the AFC alone and twelve total.

Yes, I know you use your formula and all, but this is really weird. After putting them at 5, I thought you would make some good comment about them. This one threw me off.

gcomella34

12-14-2005, 03:59 PM

Shoey

12-14-2005, 04:09 PM

Losman was mis-evaluated by the Bills organization.

wait wait... I'm calling BS on that one man, explain to me why anyone should be concerned with JP. He's been what is to be expected of a young QB, Nothing more nothing less.

First Year Starters:

2 names from the past, 2 from the present enjoying success in the NFL

Steve Young (2nd season in career) Tampa Bay:
195/363 (53.7%), 2,282 passing yards, 8TD's 13INT's

John Elway (1st season) Broncos:
123/259 (47.5%), 1663 passing yards, 7TD's 14INT's

Eli Manning (1st season) Giants:
95/197 (48.2%), 1,043 passing yards, 6TD's 9INT's

Byron Leftwhich (1st season) Jaguars:
239/418 (57.3%), 2,819 passing yards, 14 TD's 16 INT's

J.P. Losman (2nd season) Bills:
114/229 (49.8%) 1,340 passing yards, 8TD's 8INT's

seriously, I want to know... what sticks out, Why is JP Todd Marinovich? I don't appreciate you naming him a bust without any substantial fact to prove it.

jjflr

12-14-2005, 05:38 PM

So no ranking system is flawed, but I think jjflr's got a pretty decent one. At least it's based on numbers more so than opinion.

Thank you Zilla ! It definitely gives us something else to talk about.:)

I don't get this. They'll have to win out to make the playoffs, but are still top 5????? Six teams make the playoffs in the AFC alone and twelve total.

Yes, I know you use your formula and all, but this is really weird. After putting them at 5, I thought you would make some good comment about them. This one threw me off.

Have you ever heard of the phrase, "the best team doesn't always win.........".

All the formula is saying is that the Chargers are the best 8-5 team in the NFL and, in fact, it thinks they are better than some 9-4 and 10-3 teams.

jjflr

12-14-2005, 05:46 PM

Is this graded on a weekly basis or is it a cummulative formula that judges by stats compiled by the team across a season? I mean to have the Chargers ranked that high on a weekly rating is odd, but if it's overall by the season I completly understand.

My other question is about the strength of schedule. Certain teams, for example my favorite the Giants, their defense has really stepped up lately and played well. However teams that played them earlier in the year were able to move the ball at will. Does their current play reflect in how strong the team is? I realize this could add a layer of complication to your formula and think for a "generic" rating, if you will, this is outstanding and something you've put alot of time in, great job man. I agree with just about everything you say.

Most people miss the point that if you manipulate data enough, you could get just about any result you want, but you seem to be working the kinks out of this quite well, and are making some pretty non biased conclusions.

gcomella, yes, the formula is cumulative and is a rating for the team 'overall' for the season although recent play factors more than play 2 or 3 months ago.

As far as your question about strength of schedule. My model determines a strength of someone's opponent reflected on their more recent play (as does the model overall for each team).

Therefore, (and as you stated), it more accurately reflects the strength of the team they are playing TODAY, not the team they would have played 2 months ago.

And thank you for the compliment.

I think it's a good formula. Not everyone agrees but I like it. :)

First Year Starters:

2 names from the past, 2 from the present enjoying success in the NFL

Steve Young (2nd season in career) Tampa Bay:
195/363 (53.7%), 2,282 passing yards, 8TD's 13INT's

John Elway (1st season) Broncos:
123/259 (47.5%), 1663 passing yards, 7TD's 14INT's

Eli Manning (1st season) Giants:
95/197 (48.2%), 1,043 passing yards, 6TD's 9INT's

Byron Leftwhich (1st season) Jaguars:
239/418 (57.3%), 2,819 passing yards, 14 TD's 16 INT's

J.P. Losman (2nd season) Bills:
114/229 (49.8%) 1,340 passing yards, 8TD's 8INT's

Great information Shoey. Well done.

Here is my response and the reason that I had been questioning JP before the season even started.

All of the comments and statements I had been hearing from JP before the season were very un-easy and unconfident. One sportswriter asked him in an interview, "Are you ready to be a starter?" His response went something like this, "Well, um, I guess so........the coaches think I'm ready I guess.......I just don't want to let my teammates down........"

Huh ? I have NEVER in my life heard such a significant lack of leadership out of a QB since................ Jeff George...........and before that............Todd Marinovich..........

I decided at that time (in the pre-season) that the Bills had mis-evaluated J.P. However, after seeing his impressive pre-season and talking to you and some other Bills fans, I was convinced that I was wrong. Now I know I should have gone with my original thought (which is usually the correct one).

I don't recall Elway or Young EVER saying, "well, I guess I'm ready.........I just don't want to let my teammates down..."

Those 2 were the most obnoxious, red-*sses about 'starting' and being with teams that they could lead to championships..............

As far as Eli Manning and Byron Leftwich............isn't the jury still out on these 2 ??

My belief is that the Giants are winning DESPITE Eli. He's thrown 15 INT's this season and is completing barely 50% of his passes.

Have the Jaguars really suffered having Garrard in there instead of Leftwich ? I don't see that their team is very different with a back-up QB..........in fact, Garrard has a higher completion percentage and a lower INT %...............

Shoey

12-14-2005, 08:29 PM

I guess you could certainly say the jury is out on Leftwich and Eli for sure, The point is both of those guys are making strides, and more importantly, both of them are winning.

chiefzilla

12-14-2005, 08:42 PM

It might be because the AFC West has 3 teams that legitimately deserve a playoff spot. How many divisions can brag that they have three? NONE. How many can brag two? Only a handful.

You shouldn't be punished for having a tough record. San Diego's a solid team. They are much tougher than a lot of teams that have a better record than them.

It just doesn't help when you get Denver and KC for 4 of your games. And then the NFC East for another 4 of your games.

I don't get this. They'll have to win out to make the playoffs, but are still top 5????? Six teams make the playoffs in the AFC alone and twelve total.

Yes, I know you use your formula and all, but this is really weird. After putting them at 5, I thought you would make some good comment about them. This one threw me off.

Azazel

12-14-2005, 11:59 PM

wait wait... I'm calling BS on that one man, explain to me why anyone should be concerned with JP. He's been what is to be expected of a young QB, Nothing more nothing less.

First Year Starters:

2 names from the past, 2 from the present enjoying success in the NFL

Steve Young (2nd season in career) Tampa Bay:
195/363 (53.7%), 2,282 passing yards, 8TD's 13INT's

John Elway (1st season) Broncos:
123/259 (47.5%), 1663 passing yards, 7TD's 14INT's

Eli Manning (1st season) Giants:
95/197 (48.2%), 1,043 passing yards, 6TD's 9INT's

Byron Leftwhich (1st season) Jaguars:
239/418 (57.3%), 2,819 passing yards, 14 TD's 16 INT's

J.P. Losman (2nd season) Bills:
114/229 (49.8%) 1,340 passing yards, 8TD's 8INT's

seriously, I want to know... what sticks out, Why is JP Todd Marinovich? I don't appreciate you naming him a bust without any substantial fact to prove it.

i am with you shoey....i see and hope for a bright future for jp!

Azazel

12-15-2005, 12:01 AM

I guess you could certainly say the jury is out on Leftwich and Eli for sure, The point is both of those guys are making strides, and more importantly, both of them are winning.

well, everyone is so high on eli this year because he did well in a few games, but look, he is terrible on the road, and hasnt diced up any great defenses yet.

if his last name wasnt manning, he wouldnt have been the first pick , and we wouldnt be talking about him so much.

get byron some wr help and a stronger oline, and i think he would be great. same for brooks in NO while i am at it...

jjflr

12-15-2005, 05:28 AM

I guess you could certainly say the jury is out on Leftwich and Eli for sure, The point is both of those guys are making strides, and more importantly, both of them are winning.

I'm rooting for your Bills and Losman. :) This league needs good, young talent at QB. So much of what we've been getting recently are recycled QB's (Brad Johnson, Gus Frerotte, Bledsoe, etc.)................we need some new faces..............I hope he turns out to be another Elway (but I'm not betting on it at this point).........

Sascha

12-15-2005, 05:42 AM

It might be because the AFC West has 3 teams that legitimately deserve a playoff spot. How many divisions can brag that they have three? NONE. How many can brag two? Only a handful.

You shouldn't be punished for having a tough record. San Diego's a solid team. They are much tougher than a lot of teams that have a better record than them.

It just doesn't help when you get Denver and KC for 4 of your games. And then the NFC East for another 4 of your games.

Uhmmm, the NFC South does have the 9-4 Panthers and Bucs as well as the 8-5 Falcons, so that makes three legitimate playoff contenders. But, I still agree that the AFC West is the best division in football this year.

chiefzilla

12-15-2005, 06:37 PM

Uhmmm, the NFC South does have the 9-4 Panthers and Bucs as well as the 8-5 Falcons, so that makes three legitimate playoff contenders. But, I still agree that the AFC West is the best division in football this year.

Yeah, the NFC South deserves some recognition too.

Granted, you can credit a lot of that to playing the two worst divisions in the NFL: the NFC North and the AFC East.

Sascha

12-15-2005, 07:17 PM

Yeah, the NFC South deserves some recognition too.

Granted, you can credit a lot of that to playing the two worst divisions in the NFL: the NFC North and the AFC East.

And I do, that's why I gave the AFCW props for being the best division in football, and the NFCE, in my opinion, is also slightly better. I just wanted to reply cause you said no other division has three playoff contenders, and the South clearly does.

Tomlinson4MVP

12-16-2005, 07:10 AM

Welcome to the board Tomlinson. Good to have you here.

Dallas and Tampa Bay both made up ground on the teams they beat. However, they both had LARGE gaps to make up in one week and at this point in the season, the 'swings' aren't THAT drastic. Keep in mind that the formula doesn't just measure one game. It's measuring an entire season.

Under your theory, since the Redskins beat the Seahawks earlier this year, the Redskins should be ranked higher. That's not how it works.

I'm sort of new here, so I wasn't aware these were formulated rankings. My mistake.

Blackmallard

12-16-2005, 10:51 AM

I'm sort of new here, so I wasn't aware these were formulated rankings. My mistake.

Don't worry, knowing that these are formulated rankings has never really stopped anyone from saying that they are wrong before.

jjflr

12-16-2005, 07:44 PM

Don't worry, knowing that these are formulated rankings has never really stopped anyone from saying that they are wrong before.

LOL........true mallard true

Also, it doesn't stop some from STILL claiming that I am biased against 'their' team............THAT'S the funniest part...........*sarcasm* yes, I have been plotting against YOUR team for years and FINALLY I have the opportunity to put them lower in my rankings just to p*ss you off! Hoommmaaawwwaaahaaahaaa (In my best Dr. Evil laugh)*sarcasm*