PDA

View Full Version : Fox Sports: Week 4 Power Rankings


bloodsunday
09-28-2005, 06:32 AM
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/4910694

1. STEELERS 2-1 1 2 1 8 21
Pittsburgh's drive to tie the game was just as impressive as New England's comeback to take the lead. Coming off a 15-1 season, they dominated their first two opponents and then lost a close game to the defending Super Bowl champions. Since they've been more consistent than the Patriots this year, I think it's fair for them to stay at number one. NEXT: Bye week, then at SD

2. EAGLES 2-1 2 4 4 5 27
Eagles are this high for two reasons: First, our pre-season projections had them as the best team in the NFL, and second, they stomped all over the 49ers. But they haven't looked impressive in two out of three games. The Akers injury is killing them on both field goals and kickoffs. Do you really want a subpar kicker to face Dante Hall? NEXT: at KC

3. BENGALS 3-0 3 1 5 1 9
The best team in the NFL through three games. Really. See extended commentary below. NEXT: vs. HOU — Houston? Man, you have got to be kidding me.

4. COLTS 3-0 6 6 9 6 22
Us hate beauty. Us love ugliness. Is big crime for Peyton Manning to throw touchdown pass on Bizarro World. NEXT: at TEN

5. BUCS 3-0 5 3 15 2 12
For two years, the Football Outsiders DVOA ratings have said that the Bucs were better than their record. Two years ago, they went 7-9 and ranked 8th. Last year, they went 5-11 but ranked 16th. Our preseason projection had them winning the NFC South, but our brains simply couldn't believe it. In the battle of cold, heartless stats vs. human scouting, this is a win for cold, heartless stats. NEXT: vs. DET

6. PATRIOTS 2-1 7 14 13 12 16
This was one of the all-time great New England regular season wins: they came from behind on the road, against one of the best teams in the NFL, after losing two of their most important players to injury early in the contest. But that doesn't change the fact that they lost to Carolina, and not by a slim margin either. Thus, the lower ranking. The bad news, of course, is the loss of Rodney Harrison for the season, and Matt Light for most of it. The good news is that they may have just put their two hardest games of the season behind them, and as important as Harrison was -- dare I disrespect him? -- he wasn't as important to the Patriots as Takeo Spikes and Chad Pennington were to the Bills and Jets. NEXT: vs. SD

7. BILLS 1-2 4 15 21 10 4
The Bills had the NFL's best defense for the second half of last year, and looked pretty good coming into this season, which is why they get ranked this high in a formula that isn't entirely based on 2005. But the defense hasn't been close to last year's level, giving up a lot of yards on second and third down, and it is going to get even worse without Spikes. Are the Saints the cure for J.P. Losman's woes? NEXT: vs. NO in San Antonio

8. CHARGERS 1-2 14 11 3 25 7
Very impressive offensive performance as your Super Bowl XLI Champion San Diego Chargers get off the schneid. NEXT: at NE

9. SEAHAWKS 2-1 18 9 2 20 23
First week loss to Jacksonville looks like a bit of a fluke, as the Seahawks have put up two straight games with big offense and slightly above-average defense. See extended commentary below. NEXT: at WAS

10. PANTHERS 1-2 8 18 19 11 11
People are going to get whiplash jumping on and off the Carolina bandwagon. See extended commentary below. NEXT: vs GB in the renewal of that annual tradition, the "Wow, that's not such a great matchup after all" Monday night game.

11. CHIEFS 2-1 10 13 8 21 15
Monday loss was like watching the words we wrote in Pro Football Prospectus 2005 come to life. Without Willie Roaf, the Chiefs offensive line looked bad. If the offense is hitting on all cylinders, this team is extremely dangerous, but too many of those cylinders are old. Old players get injured more often, and the only Kansas City star with a trustworthy backup is Priest Holmes. By the way, the book also noted that Tony Gonzalez is 29, the age when the greatest tight ends all started to decline. Gonzalez is averaging 41 yards per game this year (with no touchdowns) after 79 yards per game in 2004. NEXT: vs. PHI

12. BRONCOS 2-1 15 19 18 16 19
Game-by-game ratings for this season: -54%, -5%, 48%. The offense has improved each game, the defense has improved each game, and the special teams have improved each game. If they lose this week, they'll be 2-0 in Colorado, 0-2 in Florida, and 0-0 in the other 48 states. NEXT: at JAC

13. JAGUARS 2-1 12 10 17 7 3
Story of the season has been Byron Leftwich pulling the offense out of the fire on third-and-long, making up for another stuff-a-riffic year from the aging Fred Taylor. Offensive DVOA ranks 20th on first down, 22nd on second down, 8th on third down. If that can continue, the defense is good enough for this team to get into the playoffs. NEXT: vs. DEN

14. DOLPHINS 2-1 16 8 16 4 10
The league's top run defense DVOA after three games, and it didn't exactly come against cupcake opponents. They stopped the Denver running factory, last year's rushing leader Curtis Martin, and now the Carolina committee. Offense has been delightfully mediocre instead of the train wreck we all expected going into the season. How happy are people who bet the Miami over right now? NEXT: Bye week, then at BUF

15. GIANTS 2-1 9 5 6 22 1
The greatly improved, playoff caliber defense of the New York Giants -- Wow, I remember it like it was yesterday. Well, three days ago, actually. Jumping to the conclusion that the Giants are overrated based on one game against LaDainian Tomlinson is as rash as jumping to the conclusion that the Giants have a good defense based on games against Arizona and New Orleans. For now, Giants fans should just be happy that Eli Manning, after a terrible rookie year, has put together two very nice games. NEXT: vs. STL

16. COWBOYS 2-1 13 12 10 17 17
Dallas' secondary looks awful, even though Anthony Henry has played reasonably well most of the time, and Roy Williams is a great linebacker. Or would be, if he played linebacker. If Dallas doesn't get a pass rush, they're sunk. NEXT: at OAK — Randy Moss is licking his chops (but only because he has the munchies).

17. FALCONS 2-1 20 17 11 19 20
This one needs explanation. Football Outsiders stats are notoriously down on the Falcons in general and Michael Vick in particular. Last year, the Falcons played like an 8-8 team and lucked into an 11-5 record. They don't rank very high based on 2005 performance either because both wins have been close. That being said, the biggest reason why our projections were so down on Atlanta was their schedule. With all the injuries in the AFC East, Carolina looking schizo, and New Orleans perpetually on the road, that schedule doesn't look so tough anymore. NEXT: vs. MIN

18. JETS 1-2 11 24 28 13 18
This elevator is headed straight down, but at least they have a good field goal kicker. It's hard to figure out what caused the sudden disintegration of the offensive line and Curtis Martin did in fact get worn down by all those carries last year. Where are they hiding Derrick Blaylock? The worst problem, of course, is the quarterback situation, at least until Vinny plays himself back into shape. This is what we wrote about Brooks Bollinger in Pro Football Prospectus 2005: "If your team ends up with him under center, it's time to turn off the TV." Click. NEXT: at BAL

19. REDSKINS 2-0 19 22 23 9 31
Done with mirrors. Every year some team jumps out to a good start based on close victories even though our numbers say that team is getting outplayed by opponents. Two years ago it was Carolina, but the Panthers turned it on in the playoffs and went all the way to the Super Bowl. Last year it was Jacksonville, which crashed and burned in the second half. This year, Washington. I have a feeling that Joe Gibbs is going to get what's behind door number two, not door number one. But it will be fun to see just how big a cushion the Seattle cornerbacks give Santana Moss. Has any cornerback ever played 20 yards off the line? NEXT: vs. SEA

20. RAMS 2-1 21 16 12 14 24
The defense has looked surprisingly average so far, but remember that the three offenses they have faced are ranked 22nd, 27th and 29th. NEXT: at NYG

21. BEARS 1-2 17 7 26 3 6
The winner of the "team that most confuses the rating system early" award, because their Week 2 win against Detroit was so absurdly one-sided. The defensive rating for the game against Cincinnati is actually above-average, because Kyle Orton's interceptions put them in bad field position on drive after drive. Cincinnati's first two scoring drives started at the Chicago 18-yard line and the Chicago 36-yard line. NEXT: Bye week, then at CLE

22. RAIDERS 0-3 24 21 7 30 28
Oakland is ranked this low because it is too early to have strong adjustments for strength of schedule. But Oakland did draw the short straw in the early schedule lottery, with both defending conference champions and 2-1 Kansas City, and the Raiders weren't blown off the field in any of those games. NEXT: vs. DAL, and don't be surprised by an Oakland upset.

23. VIKINGS 1-2 31 27 29 15 13
Well, those were the Vikings we've all come to know and love. Considering the fact that both of their losses came to teams that are now 3-0, maybe the issue was not that the Vikings are bad, but rather that the Bucs and Bengals are good. They still have six games left against the terrible teams in their own division, so they should still be the favorites to win the NFC North. As for this week, the interior of the Atlanta offensive line has looked really good this season, so this is an important week for the Williams brothers, Kevin and Pat. Minnesota might not pull off the upset on the road, but given Atlanta's tendency to play close games, they make quite the attractive underdog. NEXT: at ATL

24. SAINTS 1-2 23 26 20 28 25
That first win was a nice story, but they've been hideous on both offense and defense for two weeks. I said before the season that this was a mediocre team of fantasy football stars who specialize in gaining yardage rather than playing good situational football, and I'm sticking to it. NEXT: vs. BUF in San Antonio

25. TITANS 1-2 27 23 25 23 5
They're really better than this, considering that their big blowout loss came to the team at number one. Check out the schedule from Week 7 on: Tennessee is the most likely team to make a surprising playoff push in the second half and become a sleeper pick for 2006. NEXT: vs. IND

26. RAVENS 0-2 22 31 30 26 30
The offensive struggles were expected. That defensive rating is bad because the Ravens have played only two games and one of them was against Indianapolis, back before they replaced Peyton Manning with Trent Dilfer. This defense has had a week off to prepare to take on Brooks Bollinger. At home. You do the math. NEXT: vs. NYJ

27. BROWNS 1-2 25 20 14 27 8
For what it is worth, they are better than Green Bay. NEXT: Bye week, then vs. CHI

28. PACKERS 0-3 26 25 24 26 26
According to DVOA, Green Bay has been the league's most consistent team. Unfortunately, they've been consistently bad, with single-game ratings of -47%, -40% and -44%. Next: at CAR
Rk Team W-L Last Wk 2005 Only Offense Rk Defense Rk Sp. Tms Rk

29. CARDINALS 0-3 28 29 22 29 29
Our book Pro Football Prospectus 2005 predicted: "(Kurt) Warner hasn't played a full season since 2001 so (Josh) McCown will see starts in 2005." Score that one correct. Next prediction to get tested: "On October 2 in Mexico City, (Neil) Rackers will set a new NFL record by kicking a 65-yard field goal against San Francisco." NEXT: vs. SF in Mexico City
30. LIONS 1-1 29 30 31 18 32

That's your first place Detroit Lions. Their first two games were so different from each other that it is hard to tell what will happen over the course of the season. This week, at least, they are going to lose. NEXT: at TB

31. TEXANS 0-2 30 32 32 32 14
Have you ever heard that old football adage, "You build a team from the lines out?" Well, then, you're one up on the Texans. Next: at CIN

32. 49ERS 1-2 32 28 27 31 2
Continuing their steady climb from league doormat to 2006 NFC West champion. NEXT: vs. ARI in Mexico City

bloodsunday
09-28-2005, 06:33 AM
Both the Broncos and Chiefs below the Chargers???? Bye-bye credibility.

Rohirrim
09-28-2005, 06:59 AM
I guess the only reason the Broncos slapped down the Chefs is because Roaf didn't play? Yeah, right.

Snakebit
09-28-2005, 07:07 AM
Bills at #7 WTF!

bronco militia
09-28-2005, 07:11 AM
and the steelers still #1?!?!?!?

bwhahaha

DarkHorse30
09-28-2005, 07:46 AM
I guess the only reason the Broncos slapped down the Chefs is because Roaf didn't play? Yeah, right.

....yet, somehow NE beat the Steelers in Pittsburgh starting two rookies on the left side of the o-line, and losing their Probowl safety in the first quarter.

But old roaf is the key to KC. Apparently they missed the footage of Pryce swimming by Shields right and left forcing Trent to aquire a new nickname..."Dirtball".

Rulon Velvet Jones
09-28-2005, 07:55 AM
Again, I know these are just one guy's (but he probably sleeps with his sister) opinion.

But these are terrible and so off the mark, it's ridiculous. If anything, just rank the teams by their win/loss record - you'd be a little closer to what could be considered accurate.

epicSocialism4tw
09-28-2005, 07:56 AM
This guy has some serious 'splainin to do...
Bills#7, Steelers #1, Pats #6, KC and SD ahead of Denver...
Sheesh.

Tombstone RJ
09-28-2005, 07:57 AM
I respect power rankings that don't shift too dramatically from week to week. I think this power ranking is trying to ride out the highs and the lows of each team during the first half of the season. Once week eight rolls around, they'll have a pretty good idea of which teams are for real, and which teams are not.

Merlin
09-28-2005, 09:42 AM
They beat the #2 and #7 team in your rankings, and how do you reward them? Well, by ranking them 17th of course. This guy must really dislike MV. (Although I don't think the Falcons are as strong as some people make them out to be, this guy is about as inconsistent as they come).

RhymesayersDU
09-28-2005, 09:50 AM
I respect power rankings that don't shift too dramatically from week to week. I think this power ranking is trying to ride out the highs and the lows of each team during the first half of the season. Once week eight rolls around, they'll have a pretty good idea of which teams are for real, and which teams are not.
I agree. I don't see Buffalo as a top-10 team, but I agree that some teams are better than their records might indicate, and some are worse. Hell, another power ranking had Washington in the top-10 purely based on the fact that they're undefeated still, which is laughable.

24champ
09-28-2005, 10:01 AM
Is this a joke? Because this is some funny sh!t....

Rock Chalk
09-28-2005, 10:02 AM
Everyone has an opinion.

Sadly enough, most of them are crap opinions.

Kaylore
09-28-2005, 10:03 AM
It makes sense that the last two teams we beat are above us - especially one we beat down like a little girl. Our D line couldn't possibly be good, since we all agreed that the Browncos suck back in January. Since Roaf also plays safety the Chiefs looked worse than they really are. :yep:

ludo21
09-28-2005, 10:09 AM
I love it! Queefs, and Dolts ahead of us? Based on what, Roaf out? Home field?

These rankings are funny! Gotta love the under dog role! I do agree that they are just trying to whether the storm tho, by week 8, i too believe all teams will prob be in their right place.

24champ
09-28-2005, 10:12 AM
Dolphins are at #14, they are 2-1 and they beat us and the panthers ( both of whom are ranked ahead of them.) This poll is pathetic.

Needa Pass Rush
09-28-2005, 10:43 AM
Both the Broncos and Chiefs below the Chargers???? Bye-bye credibility.

Rather amusing that we are behind the two teams we beat and ahead of the one that took us to the woodshed. :kubiak:

freak6
09-28-2005, 10:44 AM
So the Falcons are a pretend team, and Dolphins aren't?

Worst power rankings ever!!

What is even more sad is that they actually tried to do that. My son would put together a better one.

What do you expect from FOX though.

Maybe there is a new FOX NEWS ALERT

"Bush says 'Stay the Course' in response to Global Warming trend"

Needa Pass Rush
09-28-2005, 10:47 AM
This looks at least a little better.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/dr_z/09/28/ranks.week3/index.html



Cincinnati Bengals (3-0)
I watched them against the Bears. I was really taken by the speed and savvy of their rookie MLB Odell Thurman. Felt the same way about K.C.'s Derrick Johnson, but on Monday night, unfortunately, he was swallowing every fake Jake Plummer fed him.

24champ
09-28-2005, 10:50 AM
NPR That sounds about right.

Rock Chalk
09-28-2005, 10:50 AM
Dr Z is still a tool.

24champ
09-28-2005, 10:52 AM
Dr Z is still a tool.

yeah and fox sports makes him look like a genius.

Needa Pass Rush
09-28-2005, 10:52 AM
Dr Z is still a tool.


That may be, but his rankings seem more realistic then FOX's this week, Alec. We all know that Z in the Snap-On of the sportswriting world.

Kaylore
09-28-2005, 10:52 AM
This looks at least a little better.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/dr_z/09/28/ranks.week3/index.html



Cincinnati Bengals (3-0)
I watched them against the Bears. I was really taken by the speed and savvy of their rookie MLB Odell Thurman. Felt the same way about K.C.'s Derrick Johnson, but on Monday night, unfortunately, he was swallowing every fake Jake Plummer fed him.
I think its funny that everyone thinks that the problem was LT wasn't getting the ball. If they watched the game, they would see they gave it to him quite a bit and we had him eating turf the whole game.

Needa Pass Rush
09-28-2005, 10:52 AM
yeah and fox sports makes him look like a genius.

They did this week, 24cha! :pity:

Jason in LA
09-28-2005, 11:02 AM
I call on BS on this list. How are the Broncos lower than the two teams they've already beaten? And they blew KC out.

Why are the Bills in the top 20? They had a very good week one, but sucked the past two weeks.

As much as I dislike the Pats, why aren't they #1? Why are they lower than a team that they best on the road? I want somebody to knock the Pats off really bad, but one loss doesn't mean they have been knocked off. The Steelers had a chance to do it but blew it.

24champ
09-28-2005, 11:02 AM
They did this week, 24cha! :pity:

yeah but i dont think any of these experts have cred. Honestly what is educational background for these tools? Did they graduate from Hall's pre-school too?

philiptr2
09-28-2005, 11:25 AM
The guy who wrote this Power Ranking is the guy who wrote the 2005 Pro Football Prospectus. He came up with a way to analyze stats based on situations. The rankings are solely based on situational stats and will become more accurate as the season progresses. In his book he describes how the DVOA is derived and shows how the rankings are formed.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p>

The Book is cheep, and gives you a new prospective to statistical football. As the season progresses the stats will show a more accurate portrayal of each team. Its kind of ridiculous to rank teams using that system after week 3.

brncs_fan
09-28-2005, 11:36 AM
No team, I repeat no team, from the NFC West should ever be ranked higher than 15th on that poll.

watermock
09-28-2005, 12:17 PM
It's not a poll or opinion, it's just a formula that goes into a computer. Garbage in, Garbage out.

Lidderer
09-28-2005, 12:35 PM
Ya, you know, it's not really fair to jump all over this power ranking as of yet, as it is accompanied by a lengthy disclaimer about its methods.

"The FOXSports.com NFL Power Ratings look a little different this week. In fact, they look a little different from everything else on the Web. That's because instead of being based on our gut feeling, they are now based on the innovative DVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average) ratings that we've been using to rank teams at FootballOutsiders.com for two seasons.


Weekly Schedule
# Mon: Quick Reads
# Tues: Power Rankings
# Tues: Any Given Sunday
# Wed: Week 4 rundown

About Football Outsiders
Football Outsiders.com tackles the NFL with a mix of innovative statistics, game tape analysis and good old-fashioned fan debate. They are the authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2005.

For further in-depth coverage, click here.
The DVOA system breaks down every single play of the season and compares each one to the NFL average based on situation and opponent. Conventional NFL rankings measure teams by adding up all their yards no matter what situations they came in or how many plays it took to get them. Now why would they do that? Football has one objective — to get to the end zone — and two ways to achieve that, by gaining yards and getting first downs. These two goals need to be balanced to determine a player's value or a team's performance. All the yards in the world aren't useful if they all come in eight-yard chunks on third-and-tens.

Remember, of course, that any statistical formula is not a replacement for your own judgment, just a tool to use. The numbers say Chicago has been the seventh-best team this season based on available data. That doesn't mean we actually believe that the Bears are the seventh-best team in the NFL, because we know that they just had one huge performance in a season that's only three weeks old.

With that in mind, these power ratings are not based solely on the three games played so far this year. When we look at just 2005, New England ends up 14th because they lost to Carolina. Does anyone really think New England is not a top ten team? Early in the season, with just a couple of games to go on, ratings are going to fluctuate wildly. And of course, they are very dependent on strength of schedule — except that we don't really know how strong any opponent is yet, because those teams only have three games to go on.

As a result, we're ranking teams with a formula that combines the team's rating at the end of 2004, our 2005 pre-season projections, and 2005 actual performance. Each week, the first two items will become less important, and the last item more important. By Week 8, we'll only be basing the ratings on this year's games, and starting the next week, we'll start using a formula that makes early games less important so that we can account for teams that are heating up at the end of the year."


Given the DVOA formula, the rankings themselves should really only start to reflect accurately by around week 7-8.

Jason in LA
09-28-2005, 12:39 PM
If that's the case, then they shouldn't put out a ranking until mid-season. That way they won't look like a bunch of fools.

Lidderer
09-28-2005, 12:43 PM
If that's the case, then they shouldn't put out a ranking until mid-season. That way they won't look like a bunch of fools.

This is true, and they even expressed some reservation about this, but they just signed-on with FoxSports and so I imagine they were pressured into putting something out there that really grabs fan attention...which is just what these type of lists do.

That said, this list is still largely based on empirical data, where Dr. Z et al. are mostly going with gutwork, and at this early juncture, their rankings suffer from that same "preseason polls matter" problem that the ncaa has still yet to rectify.