Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : No, I "right" for myself, you ignoramus. I presented arguments to support my position. Do you have arguments to support yours, or is "hahahaha" the best you can do?
    Posted by unclealfie[/QUOTE]

    Regardless of their validity, you did present arguements.  For that I applaud you.  Now I recommend reading from the correct book.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from IndianaPatsFan. Show IndianaPatsFan's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    I have no problem with the Colts being at number two right now. Power rankings change from week to week. When the Colts, Patriots, and other teams start hitting the serious competition, the rankings will most certainly be different.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from IndianaPatsFan. Show IndianaPatsFan's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    To add to my previous post, I think you have to base these things on prior performance, not predictions of how you think a team will do in the future.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    Again, I think we lost 2 games by a few points because our offense was not producing, and most of that was Tom Brady hitting guys on the foot, or mistimed routes.  So I expect that to continue to improve.  I think we are in a great position versus Indy, in that we are capable of challenging their receivers a bit and maybe knocking peyton on his keister.  We all know he does not do well once to rough him up.  For me, that is, was and always will be the key to Manning. Hit him smack in the mouth, and he folds right up nicely.  We just havent been about to do it lately.  My Manning indicator is how much he raises his arms and puts his hands on his helmet with that stupid look on his face.  Haven't seen anywhere NEAR enough of that lately.  Oh, and for the Power rankings...sure.  Whatever makes those other teams happy.  Put us in at 32, it doesnt matter.  You win, or you don't.  I think we will.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from JulesWinfield. Show JulesWinfield's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    "As I said earlier in this thread, look at their record; colts most recent victories are against the titans, seahawks and rams, maybe the three worst teams in the NFL.  They barely beat two mediocre teams in the jags and fins and beat arizona when they were slumping."

    You're going back pretty far there.  That was game 1 & 2 for the Colts.  If we wanted to do that, wouldn't we have to talk about how the Pats needed a miracle to "barely beat" a whiz-poor Bills team?  Let's see how the Pats fare against Miami - for a half, they embarrassed your #1 team on both sides of the ball.  At least they only embarrassed the Colts' D with a gimmicky wildcat...

    BTW, you guys notice that both espn and cbs put the Colts #1?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    Jules - Not even Alfie believes the pats should be where he puts them.  He's just looking for takers. 

    Interesting article on 18-88 re: passer ratings and bad teams this year.  Now this will certainly raise the hair on pmikes back (since it involves passer rating), but here it is for board to chew on.

    http://www.18to88.com/2009-archives/october/hyper-inflation.html
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    that was a good read udogg
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    Well, Power rankings are interesting fodder for a slow day so here is my take on who should be where...
    Saints @ #1 pretty easy to defend that selection
    Broncos @ #2 I think they earned this slot and if we played them 10 times we would likely beat them 7 but the one time we did we didn't. 
    Patriots @ #3 If Brady hadn't had the injury and taken him a few games to get back to what he needed to be then they might have just the one loss to Denver (Defense lost that game) 
    Colts @ #4 Strength of Schedule is horrible thus their slotting behind Patriots at this point.
    Steelers @ #5 strength of schedule is mickey mouse and this might be too high but they get benefit of doubt a little off their SB championship.
    Bengals @ #6 suprising but I think their schedule and performance merits it
    Giants @ #7 slipping and best be careful or might fall out of my top 10
    Ravens @ #8 very good team
    Falcons @ #9 Very solid team
    Eagles @ #10... might be a stretch but I don't think so

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    game by game

    Pats                            Colts

    Buf (2-4) W               Jax (3-3) W
    @ NYJ (3-3) L            @ Mia (2-4) W
    Atl (4-2) W                @ Ari (4-2) W
    Bal (3-3) W                Sea (2-4) W
    @ Den (6-0) L            @ Ten (0-6) W 
    Ten (0-6) W               Bye
    @ TB (0-7) W -neut    @ STL (0-7) W


    It's not that I care so much where people see indy in the rankings, but I do have a difficult time with those who would honestly suggest that the pats should be ranked higher than the colts at this time.  

    Each of us has beaten 2 teams without a win.
    Each of us has beaten a 4-2 team, a 3-3 team, and a 2-4 team.
    Indy has additionally beaten another 2-4 team.  
    NE has lost to a 6-0 team and a 3-3 team.  

    I am not about to suggest that Indy has had an equal schedule, but NE has beaten no teams with a better record AND lost 2 games while indy won its other game.  Maybe if NE had beaten the Jets (and if so they would have been 2-4 like Miami or Seattle), then an arguement could be made that NE is better on strength of schedule alone and not dinged for their loss at Denver.  The loss vs. the Jets takes the pats down a notch.  

    Just my opinion    
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sam-Adams. Show Sam-Adams's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    UD, that was an interesting article. Like the power rankings the one factor that isn't being captured is TB/Welker coming back off the injuries and being way off the first 3-4 games. I'm not making excuses, it is what it is but doesn't reflect the real numbers this team will put up consistently.
    Now with that said the Pats have beat up on a couple of the SS teams the last two weeks and to be fair those numbers won't be accurate either but you can rest assured that they'll be closer than the first 3-4 weeks. 

    It's all going to wash out soon enough when they go head to head. I'm not worried, are you?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    One of the things I'm hearing a lot about this season when it comes to power rankings (here, and elsewhere) is strength of schedule. The Colts don't play anybody. The Vikings don't play anybody. The Steelers don't play anybody . . .

    Bleah!

    The schedule is whatever it is, and while there are some teams that are performing notably worse than expected (and probably just as many performing better), I find it amusing -- and I believe I've stated this elsewhere on this forum -- that strength of schedule is being used as an argument for devaluing certain teams in favor of another team (the Pats) that just beat two of the three worst teams in the leage.

    Granted, it's all just speculation and means nothing in the greater scheme of things. I like to think that when Power Rankings gets lonely out there in the Department of Meaningless Drivel, at least it will always have Quarterback Rating to talk to. But there is simply no realistic basis for ranking a two-loss team ahead of an undefeated team at this point (or any point) in the season.

    It's one thing to be a homer, and to be optimistic for no apparent reason -- but blind delusion is another thing entirely.

    There's a guy a couple posts up who doesn't even have the Vikings or the Broncos in his top 10.

    Which leaves me with the obvious question:

    Where can I get some of what that guy is smoking?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]Like the power rankings the one factor that isn't being captured is TB/Welker coming back off the injuries and being way off the first 3-4 games. I'm not making excuses, it is what it is but doesn't reflect the real numbers this team will put up consistently.
    Posted by Sam-Adams[/QUOTE]

    The Patriots have tons of positive factors that should all bump up their power ratings.  The free agents are all getting on the same page now, except for Galloway who was deep-sixed.  The rookies are getting good as they learn more and they're getting on the field, and each one makes a difference.  Butler is fast.  Chung will learn to hit better.  Vollmer is a strong, athletic rook.  Maybe Brace will contribute.  Tate just hit the field as a WR with one 11 yard run from scrimmage with the first team--yes he's fast.  LeVoir is loose.  Edelman will mend and learn to catch the football better.  Myron Pryor is out there.  Then we have two running backs on the mend.  Finally, Brady will continue to get his mojo back.  He'll want to fix this week's mistakes by next week.  Oh, and QB Brian Hoyer (who?) just got a bunch of reps in, for a just in case.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]UD, that was an interesting article. Like the power rankings the one factor that isn't being captured is TB/Welker coming back off the injuries and being way off the first 3-4 games. I'm not making excuses, it is what it is but doesn't reflect the real numbers this team will put up consistently. Now with that said the Pats have beat up on a couple of the SS teams the last two weeks and to be fair those numbers won't be accurate either but you can rest assured that they'll be closer than the first 3-4 weeks.  It's all going to wash out soon enough when they go head to head. I'm not worried, are you?
    Posted by Sam-Adams[/QUOTE]
    Sam -

    I do understand the Brady Welker thing, and that should benefit the pats in the future, but Power rankings are really (IMO) a snapshot of ytd performance and injuries can never be an excuse.  They are frequently a contributing factor for team not winning, but every team faces the same uncertainty. 

    So, Power rankings really can't project the future unless, of course, they are preseason rankings.  So with 2 losses (one in the last 3 games), I just don't know how someone puts the pats above the colts at this time. 

    I think the pats playing a couple of creampuffs has really helped the team, because it has helped Brady with timing and comfort throwing.  I think it has set them up for a really strong run going forward.  On the other hand, if the pats had faced the likes of the saints the week after Denver, it might have been a different story.

    As for being worried.  Absolutely, how can you not worry about your team playing another good team, or any team for that matter.  Anything can happen.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : The Patriots have tons of positive factors that should all bump up their power ratings.  The free agents are all getting on the same page now, except for Galloway who was deep-sixed.  The rookies are getting good as they learn more and they're getting on the field, and each one makes a difference.  Butler is fast.  Chung will learn to hit better.  Vollmer is a strong, athletic rook.  Maybe Brace will contribute.  Tate just hit the field as a WR with one 11 yard run from scrimmage with the first team--yes he's fast.  LeVoir is loose.  Edelman will mend and learn to catch the football better.  Myron Pryor is out there.  Then we have two running backs on the mend.  Finally, Brady will continue to get his mojo back.  He'll want to fix this week's mistakes by next week.  Oh, and QB Brian Hoyer (who?) just got a bunch of reps in, for a just in case.
    Posted by Paul_K[/QUOTE]

    Are you suggesting that these kinds of positives apply only to the pats?  Aren't other teams also jelling together more as a result of playing with one another in game conditions?  

    Aren't most rookies (other than busts) getting better with more time working within their new system?  

    Why would the pats benefit from this in a way that other teams would not? 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 19andNo. Show 19andNo's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    I guess a 5-2 record playing teams that have a combined record of 10-22 gives you the number 5 ranking.  Wow!  Soon as the Patriots play a team with a win they will be exposed again.  

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : Regardless of their validity, you did present arguements.  For that I applaud you.  Now I recommend reading from the correct book.
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

    What book would that be, "Confessions of a manning rumpswab"?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]"As I said earlier in this thread, look at their record; colts most recent victories are against the titans, seahawks and rams, maybe the three worst teams in the NFL.  They barely beat two mediocre teams in the jags and fins and beat arizona when they were slumping." You're going back pretty far there.  That was game 1 & 2 for the Colts.  If we wanted to do that, wouldn't we have to talk about how the Pats needed a miracle to "barely beat" a whiz-poor Bills team?  Let's see how the Pats fare against Miami - for a half, they embarrassed your #1 team on both sides of the ball.  At least they only embarrassed the Colts' D with a gimmicky wildcat... BTW, you guys notice that both espn and cbs put the Colts #1?
    Posted by JulesWinfield[/QUOTE]

    "Going back pretty far"? Like 6 weeks?  I wasn't making any comparisons with the Pats so what does our buffalo win have to do with anything?

    The fact remains just as  I stated earlier, the colts have most recently beaten the three biggest NFL cupcakes and barely squeaked by 2 very average teams. The total records of colts opponents this year is 11-26. That means the 6 teams the colts have beaten have an average of 1.8 wins each.

    Does the colts cheering section have any actual facts to dispute this evidence of the colts averageness besides the network's slobbering love affair with saint manning? 

    Please let's not start with the "well, the pats this and the pats that" line. 
    I'm talking about your colts. How do you people refute their very average accomplishments this year and defend your position that the colts should be ranked #1 in the entire NFL?

    Let's stick to facts regarding the colts record, not name-calling, obfuscating or "cheater" accusations, OK?

    Go.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    Asking underdogg to respond without obfuscating or "cheater" innuendo is like inviting Chuck Connors to attend the gunfight without his rifle.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : "Going back pretty far"? Like 6 weeks?  I'm wasn't comparing them to the Pats so what does buffalo have to do with anything? The fact remains just as  I stated earlier, the colts have most recently beaten the three biggest NFL cupcakes and barely squeaked by 2 very average teams. The total records of colts opponents this year is 11-26. Does the colts cheering section have any actual facts to dispute that evidence of the colts averageness besides the network's slobbering love affair with saint manning?  Please let's start with "well, the pats this and the pats that".  I'm talking about your colts. How do you people refute that very average record and defend your position that the colts should be ranked #1?
    Posted by unclealfie[/QUOTE]

    Actually as a power ranking thread comparing the colts to the pats is relevant, especially since within the thread you put your pats above the colts.  

    As for a number one ranking, I have never said the colts should be #1.  Without a doubt the saints should be there.  I'd put the colts at 3 and if you want the vikes there and the colts 4, thats fine, but not the pats above the colts.   

    As for comparing the colts and pats, the record of the opponents that the pats have beaten is 10-22.  Is that really a better record than the record of the colt opponents. 

    As far as Seattle being one of the worst three worst teams in the league, I disagree.  Detroit, Tampa (one of your opponents that is certainly worse than seattle and may be worse than St. Louis), Cleveland, Oakland, and KC are all worse and you could argue Washington and Carolina may be worse.  

    So, first, by indicating that Seattle was worse than Tampa is only homerism.  

    Then, you went on to say that the colts beat a slumping Arizona team.  Now I don't know how that could be the case when Arizona won on the road by 14 the prior week, but then you've shown that your mind works in mysterious and not always accurate ways.  Additionally, the Cards had all of their playmakers, and they have not lost a game since.  Homerism

    Then suggesting that Baltimore is very good when they struggled at home to beat only defeated KC (The teams were tied with 5 minutes to go in the 4th), and barely beat a mediocre San Diego team, and have lost 3 straight is only attempting to make NE look better. 

    I don't care where you put Indy in your (and yours alone) rankings.  Put Indy 31 if you like, but if you do that, in your rankings NE better be 32.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    jeeez

    this whole power rankings is a little bit silly, but if you are going to do it then please, please, put the colts ahead of the pats. there's just no rational argument around it.

    in fact, steelers should also be ahead of the pats: defending champions, didn't have polamalu for a while -BIG difference-, and they beat the vikings.
    and denver HAS to be ranked higher too: undefeated, + head to head win. nobody believes in them yet, thats ok. but so far they are the better team.

    1-2) NO/INDY
    3-5) PIT/MIN/DEN/
    6)    NE




     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    well...
    i didn't mean to bump the thread, but it turns out there is a rational argument to rank the pats above the colts!!

    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2009/10/the_power_index.html

    the pats are #2 on that ranking, slightly higher thatn indy. i think that's really interesting.

    is this team THAT good??. i still don't trust the offense. i'm also eager to watch them play indy and new orleans.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from jbolted. Show jbolted's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : Actually as a power ranking thread comparing the colts to the pats is relevant, especially since within the thread you put your pats above the colts.   As for a number one ranking, I have never said the colts should be #1.  Without a doubt the saints should be there.  I'd put the colts at 3 and if you want the vikes there and the colts 4, thats fine, but not the pats above the colts.    As for comparing the colts and pats, the record of the opponents that the pats have beaten is 10-22.  Is that really a better record than the record of the colt opponents.  As far as Seattle being one of the worst three worst teams in the league, I disagree.  Detroit, Tampa (one of your opponents that is certainly worse than seattle and may be worse than St. Louis), Cleveland, Oakland, and KC are all worse and you could argue Washington and Carolina may be worse.   So, first, by indicating that Seattle was worse than Tampa is only homerism.   Then, you went on to say that the colts beat a slumping Arizona team.  Now I don't know how that could be the case when Arizona won on the road by 14 the prior week, but then you've shown that your mind works in mysterious and not always accurate ways.  Additionally, the Cards had all of their playmakers, and they have not lost a game since.  Homerism Then suggesting that Baltimore is very good when they struggled at home to beat only defeated KC (The teams were tied with 5 minutes to go in the 4th), and barely beat a mediocre San Diego team, and have lost 3 straight is only attempting to make NE look better.  I don't care where you put Indy in your (and yours alone) rankings.  Put Indy 31 if you like, but if you do that, in your rankings NE better be 32.
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

    Medicore huh? What does that say about your Colts. If the Chargers played the Colts this Sunday at Indy, they would win. Take your mediocre and shove it. Both the Chargers & Ravens could beat the Colts, right now.   
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : Medicore huh? What does that say about your Colts. If the Chargers played the Colts this Sunday at Indy, they would win. Take your mediocre and shove it. Both the Chargers & Ravens could beat the Colts, right now.   
    Posted by jbolted[/QUOTE]

    Nice.  I nominate JBolt for the best visitor prize. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : Medicore huh? What does that say about your Colts. If the Chargers played the Colts this Sunday at Indy, they would win. Take your mediocre and shove it. Both the Chargers & Ravens could beat the Colts, right now.   
    Posted by jbolted[/QUOTE]

    Strong words from the fan of a 3-3 team.  Please explain the excellence of 3-3.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8

    In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : Strong words from the fan of a 3-3 team.  Please explain the excellence of 3-3.
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

         Bolt does have a point. For some reason, the Colts have not been able to handle his Chargers over the past several years.
     

Share