Week 8 Rankings Code: Rank Team Sum Win Loss % H-W H-L H-% R-W R-L R-% PF PA PD S.O.S. 1 TEN 17.29 7 0 1.000 4 0 1.000 3 0 1.000 25.7 12.4 13.3 0.407 2 CHI 9.97 4 3 0.571 2 1 0.667 2 2 0.500 28.0 21.4 6.6 0.478 3 NYG 9.15 6 1 0.857 4 0 1.000 2 1 0.667 27.3 16.4 10.9 0.513 4 TB 8.36 5 3 0.625 4 0 1.000 1 3 0.250 21.3 15.0 6.3 0.475 5 PIT 7.88 5 2 0.714 2 1 0.667 3 1 0.750 22.1 15.7 6.4 0.504 6 PHI 7.86 4 3 0.571 3 1 0.750 1 2 0.333 27.7 19.6 8.1 0.542 7 CAR 6.70 6 2 0.750 5 0 1.000 1 2 0.333 21.8 15.9 5.9 0.487 8 WAS 5.88 6 2 0.750 3 1 0.750 3 1 0.750 20.6 18.1 2.5 0.479 9 ARI 5.85 4 3 0.571 3 0 1.000 1 3 0.250 28.6 24.4 4.1 0.504 10 GB 5.07 4 3 0.571 2 2 0.500 2 1 0.667 27.7 22.7 5.0 0.483 11 BAL 4.46 4 3 0.571 3 1 0.750 1 2 0.333 19.1 15.7 3.4 0.500 12 CLE 4.32 3 4 0.429 1 2 0.333 2 2 0.500 16.4 17.6 -1.1 0.552 13 DAL 4.30 5 3 0.625 3 1 0.750 2 2 0.500 25.3 23.0 2.3 0.538 14 SD 3.85 3 5 0.375 2 1 0.667 1 4 0.200 28.0 24.9 3.1 0.504 15 BUF 3.19 5 2 0.714 3 0 1.000 2 2 0.500 23.6 20.4 3.1 0.439 16 NO 2.16 4 4 0.500 4 1 0.800 0 3 0.000 27.0 24.4 2.6 0.496 17 NE 1.76 5 2 0.714 3 1 0.750 2 1 0.667 21.9 18.9 3.0 0.456 18 NYJ 1.54 4 3 0.571 3 1 0.750 1 2 0.333 26.0 24.3 1.7 0.461 19 MIA 1.37 3 4 0.429 2 2 0.500 1 2 0.333 20.7 20.9 -0.1 0.482 20 ATL -0.39 4 3 0.571 3 0 1.000 1 3 0.250 21.9 22.0 -0.1 0.479 21 HOU -1.57 3 4 0.429 3 1 0.750 0 3 0.000 25.0 26.4 -1.4 0.478 22 MIN -1.61 3 4 0.429 2 1 0.667 1 3 0.250 22.0 23.9 -1.9 0.530 23 JAX -1.61 3 4 0.429 1 3 0.250 2 1 0.667 20.1 21.6 -1.4 0.513 24 IND -2.46 3 4 0.429 1 2 0.333 2 2 0.500 21.3 23.1 -1.9 0.500 25 DEN -2.87 4 3 0.571 3 1 0.750 1 2 0.333 24.7 27.9 -3.1 0.462 26 SEA -4.32 2 5 0.286 1 2 0.333 1 3 0.250 20.6 26.3 -5.7 0.538 27 OAK -11.49 2 5 0.286 1 2 0.333 1 3 0.250 15.3 25.3 -10.0 0.504 28 SF -13.64 2 6 0.250 1 4 0.200 1 2 0.333 21.4 28.8 -7.4 0.504 29 STL -14.37 2 5 0.286 1 2 0.333 1 3 0.250 16.0 28.7 -12.7 0.534 30 KC -16.04 1 6 0.143 1 2 0.333 0 4 0.000 14.1 27.6 -13.4 0.517 31 DET -19.45 0 7 0.000 0 3 0.000 0 4 0.000 16.3 30.3 -14.0 0.556 32 CIN -21.14 0 8 0.000 0 3 0.000 0 5 0.000 13.0 27.1 -14.1 0.579
How exactly are you being "cognizant" of the fact that New England themselves are playing with a backup QB and 3rd string RB???? How exactly are you considering the "where & how these point are scored" without being consistant on both sides of the same issue???
I acknowledged the issue with short term injuries when Arizona beat Buffalo after knocking Trent Edwards out (among other instanceS). I am open to suggestions on overcoming this issue. However, for long term injuries such as those with Brady and Maroney, the team is what the team is. It is meaningless to alter the rankings if the players won't have a meaningful impact on the season in my opinion.
There are five teams where are rankings are significantly different(more than 3 places.) Lets look at them in the order you ranked them. Chicago - You ranked them 2nd. I have them 9th. 2nd seems to me to be a bit too high, their defense does not look like it will carry them to the top of the NFC. In looking at their record when they lose they lose by just a few. Baltimore - You rank them 11th, I have them 5th. In my rankings their very strong defense is giving them a huge advantage, offsetting an average offense. Cleveland - You rank them 12th, I have them 25th. Their offense is almost as bad as the Rams. On the flip side their defense is quite average. Cleveland pasting the Gints plus a recent win appears to have them ranked too high. Cheaters - You have them 17th, I have them 12th. Their offensive stats are slightly above average with an average defense. For a five win team being in the lower half is confusing. I guess they just don't have convincing wins in your method. Overall, given their statistical performance, they appear to be a decent team. Fish - You have them 19th, I have them 15th. The fish have a very average offense and a very slightly above average defense. They seem a tad too low in your ranking. Overall the difference in ranks may not be important. I'm most confused by the ranks for Chicago and Cleveland.
Let me reiterate (to everyone) these are not necessarily my opinion of which team is the best, etc. It is my attempt to remove all bias and rank teams based purely on the numbers. As a result some odd effects have occurred which not everyone, including myself, will agree on. As such I encourage dissension and evolving the model to spit out the best possible results. Chicago ? This is the classic case of not shooting themselves in the foot. Are they the second best team? Probably not. Have they been predictable? Absolutely. They received a significant amount of there points (~2/3) from the Detroit win which seems excessive except that it appears that this is a season of mediocrity in which every team is F-ing up. Chicago has lost on average by only 2.7 points which makes their negative modifiers essentially negligible. Of the few games I?ve watched of them I?ve been pretty impressed with their Offense (keeping in mind it is Chicago) so I don?t think they need to rely on their defense to get it done. I?m not sure exactly what their stats say that you use so I might be way off. I think a logical place would be somewhere in between 2 and 9. Baltimore ? I think you have them grossly over-ranked. Their 4 wins have been against Cleveland, Cincinnati, Oakland and Miami. Their 3 losses were against Tennessee, Indianapolis, and Pittsburgh. Also of their 4 wins, 3 have been at home which is worth significantly less to me than a road win. The only thing they have proven is that they are in the middle tier. I think they have the potential to be good but they need to step it up against good competition. If you check your stats, I would not be surprised to see a large amount of positives coming against the 4 crappy teams they played which can skew the rankings. Cleveland ? They were absolutely ranked this high based almost entirely on their Giant win. Your data averages it out I assume and mine will also eventually average it out if they regress back to their original play. However they have won 3 out of their last 4 with 2 coming on the road (although against mediocre competition) and the one loss against a strong Washington team. I don?t believe they are the 12th best team, but they are on somewhat of a roll and a lot of other teams that would jump them have been average lately. New England ? According to my rankings, the best team they beat was the Jets by only 9 (below average margin of victory). Unfortunately for them they got hammered by the Miami loss in my rankings because it was by 25 at home to the #25 team. If not for that game they would be in the top 5. This one could go either way. Miami ? As mentioned above they received a significant amount of ?points? from the New England victory. I think it skews the rankings slightly but they have backed it up somewhat lately with wins over San Diego and Buffalo. At this point in the rankings you are looking at some pretty putrid performances so I think a lot of the differences can be swayed by several spots in the matter of one game so I agree with your sentiment. Overall, I?m most likely to agree with you on Chicago and Cleveland but strongly disagree on Baltimore. I?m actually pleasantly surprised they were this correlated if these are the only major discrepancies. Also they are not surprising to me as they were mostly teams I have been eyeing skeptically as far as potential tweaks go. I?d love to hear everyone else?s opinion on these teams.
My suspicion is that your model is undervaluing wins earlier in the season and overvaluing week 3+ wins. This is due to the fact that early on teams were not ranked. Substituting in some ranking to seed your calculation might make some of the numbers better. As for Baltimore, 5th is probably too high and they are probably my biggest outlier. However, they have a top 5 rushing game matched with top 3 rankings in points allowed, rushing and passing yards allowed. They have a good 45% third down completion percentage. Granted this comes against a weak schedule. The generic team would hate to face the Ravens as we head into the bad weather portion of the schedule. As for how the rest of the teams ranks match up, I had 7 other teams with 3 places difference in ranking. The funny thing is both of our models have the same bottom 7 but the top differs a good bit.
The only week that teams weren't ranked for was week 1. Moving forward, I will use the rankings from the previous season in week 1 so it won't matter. The teams "rank" is based on the previous weeks rank and not the current rank. Home/Away modifier and margin of victory modifier may change historical ranks because they are ranked based the average over the season but it is unlikely that would change enought to shift ranks more than 1-2 spots.
Week 9 Rankings Code: Rank Team Sum Win Loss % H-W H-L H-% R-W R-L R-% PF PA PD S.O.S. 1 TEN 17.55 8 0 1.000 5 0 1.000 3 0 1.000 24.9 12.9 12.0 0.419 2 PHI 12.37 5 3 0.625 3 1 0.750 2 2 0.500 27.5 18.0 9.5 0.541 3 NYG 11.95 7 1 0.875 5 0 1.000 2 1 0.667 28.3 16.1 12.1 0.511 4 PIT 11.94 6 2 0.750 2 1 0.667 4 1 0.800 22.3 14.5 7.8 0.508 5 ARI 11.84 5 3 0.625 3 0 1.000 2 3 0.400 29.3 23.0 6.3 0.492 6 CHI 10.14 5 3 0.625 3 1 0.750 2 2 0.500 27.9 21.6 6.3 0.481 7 TB 9.34 6 3 0.667 4 0 1.000 2 3 0.400 22.2 16.3 5.9 0.465 8 CAR 7.04 6 2 0.750 5 0 1.000 1 2 0.333 21.8 15.9 5.9 0.500 9 BAL 6.83 5 3 0.625 3 1 0.750 2 2 0.500 21.4 17.1 4.3 0.508 10 ATL 5.09 5 3 0.625 3 0 1.000 2 3 0.400 22.1 19.3 2.9 0.477 11 GB 4.66 4 4 0.500 2 2 0.500 2 2 0.500 26.3 22.3 4.0 0.492 12 NYJ 3.90 5 3 0.625 3 1 0.750 2 2 0.500 26.0 23.4 2.6 0.450 13 SD 3.81 3 5 0.375 2 1 0.667 1 4 0.200 28.0 24.9 3.1 0.496 14 MIA 3.38 4 4 0.500 2 2 0.500 2 2 0.500 21.4 20.4 1.0 0.461 15 NO 2.35 4 4 0.500 4 1 0.800 0 3 0.000 27.0 24.4 2.6 0.496 16 CLE 2.13 3 5 0.375 1 3 0.250 2 2 0.500 17.8 20.0 -2.3 0.561 17 NE 1.61 5 3 0.625 3 1 0.750 2 2 0.500 21.0 18.8 2.3 0.461 18 WAS 1.41 6 3 0.667 3 2 0.600 3 1 0.750 19.0 18.7 0.3 0.489 19 DAL 1.20 5 4 0.556 3 1 0.750 2 3 0.400 24.0 24.3 -0.3 0.545 20 BUF -0.36 5 3 0.625 3 1 0.750 2 2 0.500 22.8 21.1 1.6 0.430 21 MIN -0.64 4 4 0.500 3 1 0.750 1 3 0.250 22.8 23.5 -0.8 0.535 22 IND -1.91 4 4 0.500 2 2 0.500 2 2 0.500 20.9 22.1 -1.3 0.496 23 JAX -1.98 3 5 0.375 1 3 0.250 2 2 0.500 20.0 21.5 -1.5 0.519 24 HOU -2.60 3 5 0.375 3 1 0.750 0 4 0.000 24.5 26.6 -2.1 0.496 25 DEN -5.41 4 4 0.500 3 2 0.600 1 2 0.333 23.8 27.6 -3.9 0.450 26 SEA -9.11 2 6 0.250 1 3 0.250 1 3 0.250 18.9 26.3 -7.4 0.534 27 SF -13.11 2 6 0.250 1 4 0.200 1 2 0.333 21.4 28.8 -7.4 0.492 28 KC -16.60 1 7 0.125 1 3 0.250 0 4 0.000 15.8 27.9 -12.1 0.515 29 OAK -17.18 2 6 0.250 1 3 0.250 1 3 0.250 13.4 25.1 -11.8 0.496 30 STL -19.42 2 6 0.250 1 3 0.250 1 3 0.250 15.6 29.4 -13.8 0.538 31 DET -19.61 0 8 0.000 0 3 0.000 0 5 0.000 17.1 29.9 -12.8 0.562 32 CIN -20.62 1 8 0.111 1 3 0.250 0 5 0.000 13.9 26.2 -12.3 0.577
I think this week shows a very good representation of where we are at. I have an issue with the #2/#3 seeds (as I'm sure most every does as well). It should not be the case that a 19 point win over Seattle is worth more than a 21 point win against Dallas even if Philly won on the road. In my model, the home/away split seems to be slightly overweighted. As of now I am using a simple calculation to determine the multiplier for the location of the game. Home wins are worth 1/(NFL home team winning percentage) and Road wins are therefore worth 1/(NFL away team winning percentage). The home team winning percentage is about 61.5% and thus a road win is worth ~60% more. I do believe that a long road trip to Seattle should be worth considerably more than a home game but how much more is the question. Both Dallas and Seattle are mediocre teams with their current injuries but I'm not sure than Dallas is as bad as Seattle at this point and therefore it would seem that New York should bemore highly rated than Philly after their last games. On the other hand the difference between the two teams ratings is very small and New York is still working off that Cleveland loss. Also, keep in mind I use the home WP% for the whole season so these historical rankings are likely to change when looking back at the end of the season due to shifting home WP% and average margins of victory.
The Eagles/Giants comparison is a very interesting one in general. I know of no one who thinks that Philly is better, yet the Eagles are favored in this Sunday night's game by 3 points. Since home field is typically worth about 3 points, that says that the bettors view the two teams as pretty much dead even, which surprises me. To be honest, I find your rating of Arizona as almost identical to Pittsburgh and the Giants more suprising - I guess it comes from blowing out Buffalo and beating Dallas, but it now looks like neither of those teams are necessarily any good. Have you evaluated the predictive power of the rankings week to week? That is, how often does the higher ranked team win the game (if you include a home field correction)? If you do about as well as the bettors do that's a strong endorsement for the rankings, since nobody is able to beat the betting odds consistently.
I wasn?t aware of the Eagles Giants spread until you pointed it out. Maybe I was wrong about being wrong? My head is spinning. I think Philly is a good team, top 5, but maybe not #2. Either way I think the difference between 2-5 seeds are so miniscule that it is largely irrelevant. Arizona has had a very good season thus far. Yes, they haven?t really beaten anyone in retrospect, but Buffalo and Dallas were ranked #2 and #4 respectively when they lost to Arizona. If you throw out the Jets loss Arizona has been as impressive as anyone in the league save the Titans. The Jets loss also helped counter the Bills win so that is not the only thing inflating them. It was one of the largest single week inflations this season but they have done enough to stay up there instead of sinking back down like some other teams (Miami, Cleveland, etc.). Unfortunately the rankings are all based on what the opponents were ranked when they played. I?d prefer current rankings but couldn?t get around the circularity of the formulas. The Rankings aren?t meant to be predictive but I?ll check it out. What are your thoughts on a home field correction? Also, I would be careful to say that no one beats the betting odds consistently.
I am in Tampa tonight, took the last 9 hours travelling, eating, unpacking and such. I'll update my rankings a bit later. I just wanted to touch on my results briefly. I have Arizona ranked fourth. Frankly I was surprised by this. Arizona's offensive statistics are very, very good. I have some quite different teams in the top. Giants, Tenn, Phi, Ari are my top 4. After that we start to diverge. I'll come back with more comparison later.
No one is obviously a slight overstatement, but I'll bet that you would have a lot of trouble finding any published touts who beat the spread consistently from one season to the next, either against the spread or win/loss. There's no way to handle home field without some sort of calibration, since you're not defining your ratings in terms of points. You would need to look at past predictive power, and find the adjustment value for home field that maximizes the winning percentage of higher-ranked teams.
OK, here we go. Again, the teams that are 4 or more places different. Let us start at closest then work towards the most different. Baltimore - You have them at 9 I have them at 5. This is closer than it was last week. They really have been beating up on the blind sisters of the week so your system seems to give them less credit than mine does. At the same time, no one has really done anything against that defense. If someone manages to rack up a bunch of yards they will plummet in my system. Carolina - You have them at 8, I have them at 13. A bit of ths for my rating system has to do with their lack of takeaways and sacks. I'm really becoming unhappy with the effects of the sacks rating this week as it seems to be skewing a few teams pretty badly. Minnesota - You have them at 21, I have them at 15. My stats show they are playing a pretty average game of football. Cleveland - You have them at 16, I have them at 25. That win against the Gints is giving them a great deal of credit. If their defense wasn't playing at an average level they would be fighting it out in the bottom five in my rankings. San Diego - You have them at 13, I have them at 23. In my system, their horrendous 265.1 passing yards allowed per game are killing them. Not to mention the 23 fumbles+ints they've given. Overall their defense is below average. Washington - You have them at 18, I have them at 7. In my system their rushing game(144.7ypg), rushing defense(80.7) plus lack of turnovers (11) are their big strengths. Their biggest weaknesses are on offense with points scored and on defense with turnovers and sacks and those aren't even big deficits. Again, we pretty much agree on the bottom eight (24-32). Our top three agree in teams, if not order. NYG, Tenn, Phi.
Week 10 Rankings Code: Rank Team Sum Win Loss % H-W H-L H-% R-W R-L R-% PF PA PD S.O.S. 1 TEN 19.22 9 0 1.000 5 0 1.000 4 0 1.000 24.4 13.0 11.4 0.424 2 NYG 13.62 8 1 0.889 5 0 1.000 3 1 0.750 29.1 17.8 11.3 0.500 3 BAL 13.03 6 3 0.667 3 1 0.750 3 2 0.600 23.6 16.7 6.9 0.500 4 ARI 12.63 6 3 0.667 4 0 1.000 2 3 0.400 29.2 23.1 6.1 0.486 5 PIT 10.53 6 3 0.667 2 2 0.500 4 1 0.800 22.0 15.6 6.4 0.521 6 PHI 10.51 5 4 0.556 3 2 0.600 2 2 0.500 27.9 20.0 7.9 0.535 7 NYJ 10.39 6 3 0.667 4 1 0.800 2 2 0.500 28.3 21.1 7.2 0.458 8 CAR 9.67 7 2 0.778 5 0 1.000 2 2 0.500 21.2 14.8 6.4 0.500 9 TB 9.36 6 3 0.667 4 0 1.000 2 3 0.400 22.2 16.3 5.9 0.465 10 CHI 8.28 5 4 0.556 3 2 0.600 2 2 0.500 26.3 21.6 4.8 0.479 11 ATL 7.03 6 3 0.667 4 0 1.000 2 3 0.400 23.4 19.3 4.1 0.465 12 GB 4.47 4 5 0.444 2 2 0.500 2 3 0.400 26.3 22.9 3.4 0.493 13 SD 4.00 4 5 0.444 3 1 0.750 1 4 0.200 27.1 24.2 2.9 0.500 14 MIA 3.56 5 4 0.556 3 2 0.600 2 2 0.500 21.3 20.2 1.1 0.465 15 JAX 3.44 4 5 0.444 1 3 0.250 3 2 0.600 22.0 20.7 1.3 0.514 16 NE 3.28 6 3 0.667 4 1 0.800 2 2 0.500 20.9 17.8 3.1 0.465 17 WAS 1.51 6 3 0.667 3 2 0.600 3 1 0.750 19.0 18.7 0.3 0.472 18 CLE 1.41 3 6 0.333 1 4 0.200 2 2 0.500 19.1 21.6 -2.4 0.563 19 DAL 1.19 5 4 0.556 3 1 0.750 2 3 0.400 24.0 24.3 -0.3 0.528 20 NO 0.27 4 5 0.444 4 1 0.800 0 4 0.000 26.2 25.4 0.8 0.500 21 MIN -0.49 5 4 0.556 4 1 0.800 1 3 0.250 23.3 23.9 -0.6 0.528 22 IND -0.64 5 4 0.556 2 2 0.500 3 2 0.600 21.2 21.9 -0.7 0.500 23 BUF -2.00 5 4 0.556 3 1 0.750 2 3 0.400 21.3 21.0 0.3 0.451 24 DEN -4.62 5 4 0.556 3 2 0.600 2 2 0.500 24.9 27.9 -3.0 0.458 25 HOU -8.96 3 6 0.333 3 2 0.600 0 4 0.000 23.2 28.2 -5.0 0.507 26 SEA -9.50 2 7 0.222 1 3 0.250 1 4 0.200 18.9 25.7 -6.8 0.528 27 SF -13.59 2 7 0.222 1 4 0.200 1 3 0.250 21.7 28.8 -7.1 0.486 28 KC -16.67 1 8 0.111 1 3 0.250 0 5 0.000 16.1 27.0 -10.9 0.535 29 OAK -19.55 2 7 0.222 1 4 0.200 1 3 0.250 12.6 24.2 -11.7 0.514 30 CIN -20.52 1 8 0.111 1 3 0.250 0 5 0.000 13.9 26.2 -12.3 0.569 31 DET -24.89 0 9 0.000 0 4 0.000 0 5 0.000 16.8 30.8 -14.0 0.556 32 STL -25.97 2 7 0.222 1 3 0.250 1 4 0.200 14.2 31.3 -17.1 0.535
Well your theory on Baltimore looks to be spot on. I still don't think they are that good but both systems point to them being an elite team.
Eight differences of more than three places this week. Again, I'll start at closest and go toward most different. Miami - Rambo 14, Me 18: In reality there is very little difference between 15 and 18 in my system. I'll just chalk this one up to different sorting. I might want to drop the +/-4s next week from the discussion. Cheats - Rambo 16, Me 11: It looks like NE's high third down conversion percentage is really helping them in my system. Chicago - Rambo 10, Me 16: Chicago's weak pass defense leaves them susceptible to a good team in my system. Indy - Rambo 16, Me 10: Indy is really winning the turnover battle in my system. They also do well on third down conversions and pass defense. I have a theory that teams that have good passing yardage ratings and poor rushing defense ratings are lesser teams due to the idea that the opposing team will spend most of their plays rushing. This may be making teams like Indy look better than they are. San Diego - Rambo 13, Me 20 - San Diego's worst in the league pass defense really hurts them in my system. Overall their defense appears to be very weak in my analysis. Washington - Rambo 17, Me 10 - I still have them rated higher, although we both have them a bit lower than last week (you by 1 place, me by 3). My analysis of Washington hasn't changed much, they are still strong in the same areas. Cleveland - Rambo 18, Me 26 - You dropped them 2 places and I dropped them 1. Cleveland is clearly underperforming in every offensive category except give aways. Their rushing defense is bottom 5 and allow a roughly average number of points per game (21.6 ppg) with no other category above average. Minnesota - Rambo 21, Me 13 - Minnesota has a strong rushing game but gives the ball away quite a bit. Their defense is strong against the run and gets a good number of sacks with the rest of the defense slightly above average. They should continue to be competitive as the season progresses. Other observations: We both have the Jets in the top 7. Our bottom 7 match to within a place for each team. Our top 9 are within three games, the further being Philadelphia (you have them at 6th, I have them at 3rd). My system does not penalize a team as heavily for a loss, nor reward as much for a win. I think Cleveland is a good example of the too much reward side of that equation. Our numbers 23 and 24 match. We differ on Houston by three with with your rating being 25 and mine 22. In other words our ratings from 23-32 are off by at most three spots. The biggest disagreements are in the 10-22 range. That remains the "any give Sunday set."
Week 11 Rankings Code: Rank Team Sum Win Loss % H-W H-L H-% R-W R-L R-% PF PA PD S.O.S. 1 TEN 21.82 10 0 1.000 5 0 1.000 5 0 1.000 24.4 13.1 11.3 0.421 2 NYG 17.79 9 1 0.900 6 0 1.000 3 1 0.750 29.2 17.0 12.2 0.503 3 ARI 14.26 7 3 0.700 4 0 1.000 3 3 0.500 28.9 22.8 6.1 0.484 4 NYJ 11.45 7 3 0.700 4 1 0.800 3 2 0.600 28.9 22.1 6.8 0.453 5 CAR 11.24 8 2 0.800 6 0 1.000 2 2 0.500 22.2 15.5 6.7 0.500 6 PIT 10.81 7 3 0.700 3 2 0.600 4 1 0.800 20.9 15.0 5.9 0.516 7 PHI 10.78 5 4 0.556 3 2 0.600 2 2 0.500 29.3 21.4 7.9 0.535 8 TB 10.57 7 3 0.700 5 0 1.000 2 3 0.400 21.9 16.0 5.9 0.463 9 GB 10.33 5 5 0.500 3 2 0.600 2 3 0.400 27.4 20.9 6.5 0.481 10 BAL 9.15 6 4 0.600 3 1 0.750 3 3 0.500 22.2 18.0 4.2 0.516 11 ATL 6.05 6 4 0.600 4 1 0.800 2 3 0.400 23.1 19.8 3.3 0.472 12 SD 3.92 4 6 0.400 3 1 0.750 1 5 0.167 25.4 22.9 2.5 0.506 13 MIA 3.87 6 4 0.600 4 2 0.667 2 2 0.500 20.9 19.7 1.2 0.450 14 NE 2.68 6 4 0.600 4 2 0.667 2 2 0.500 21.9 19.4 2.5 0.475 15 CHI 2.63 5 5 0.500 3 2 0.600 2 3 0.400 24.0 23.1 0.9 0.478 16 NO 2.60 5 5 0.500 4 1 0.800 1 4 0.200 26.6 24.9 1.7 0.494 17 CLE 2.04 4 6 0.400 1 4 0.200 3 2 0.600 20.1 22.1 -2.0 0.561 18 DAL 2.00 6 4 0.600 3 1 0.750 3 3 0.500 23.0 22.9 0.1 0.535 19 JAX 1.18 4 6 0.400 1 4 0.200 3 2 0.600 21.2 21.0 0.2 0.516 20 WAS 0.62 6 4 0.600 3 3 0.500 3 1 0.750 18.1 18.2 -0.1 0.490 21 IND 0.30 6 4 0.600 3 2 0.600 3 2 0.600 22.4 22.4 0.0 0.484 22 MIN -1.44 5 5 0.500 4 1 0.800 1 4 0.200 22.3 23.4 -1.1 0.531 23 BUF -2.65 5 5 0.500 3 2 0.600 2 3 0.400 21.9 21.8 0.1 0.456 24 DEN -3.79 6 4 0.600 3 2 0.600 3 2 0.600 24.8 27.1 -2.3 0.450 25 HOU -10.00 3 7 0.300 3 2 0.600 0 5 0.000 23.6 28.7 -5.1 0.509 26 SF -10.83 3 7 0.300 2 4 0.333 1 3 0.250 23.0 27.5 -4.5 0.484 27 SEA -11.11 2 8 0.200 1 4 0.200 1 4 0.200 19.0 25.7 -6.7 0.541 28 KC -19.27 1 9 0.100 1 4 0.200 0 5 0.000 16.5 27.3 -10.8 0.535 29 OAK -20.18 2 8 0.200 1 4 0.200 1 4 0.200 12.8 23.5 -10.7 0.506 30 CIN -20.89 1 8 0.111 1 3 0.250 0 5 0.000 15.3 27.7 -12.3 0.572 31 DET -26.59 0 10 0.000 0 4 0.000 0 6 0.000 17.3 30.8 -13.5 0.550 32 STL -29.37 2 8 0.200 1 3 0.250 1 5 0.167 14.4 31.7 -17.3 0.535
Out top 10 and bottom 10 match within three places. However, I remain mystified how Detriot isn't in last place in your rankings. I guess STL is just losing by alot, but STL will win more games than Detroit. There are 5 teams we have differences of 5 or more rankings. From closest to furthest: Chicago - 5 places - You 15, Me 20 - Their pass defense is a liability. The offense is not putting up yardage. Washington - 5 places - You 20, Me 15 - If Portis can remain healthy and they don't turn the ball over, they are a wild card contender. The defense is strong enough to help prevent losses. Cleveland - 8 places - You 17, Me 25 - We continue to disagree on this one. Cleveland has some poor overall numbers. San Diego - 9 places - You 12, Me 21 - San Diego's pass defense is a huge hole. They also are way behind the league in takeaways. Indy - 10 places - You 21, Me 11 - This difference is huge. Indy is a wild card contender. Manning has been the key to their performance. Now that Addai is back they should win more.
