- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
My Power Rankings After Week 3
Posted on 9/29/09 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 9/29/09 at 1:22 pm
measure 6 things to develop my rankings. A perfect team
would have 6 power points. The weakest team would have
192. It usually starts off wacky but the cream seems to
rise to the top as we move from week to week. They are bunched
up in groups right now. That's because the cream hasn't had
enough games to rise to the top yet.I have every confidence that
it will as we move along. It has for years.
These are the new rankings after week 3
1. ravens.........39
2. broncos........43
3. saints.........49
4. giants.........50
5. pats...........59
6. jets...........63
7. eagles.........65
8. vikings........68
9. colts..........70
10 cowboys........81
11 seahawks.......83
12 steelers.......87
13 49ers..........90
14 bengals........94
14 chargers.......94
16 packers........96
17 bears..........98
18 titans.........99
19 redskins......101
20 dolphins......109
21 jaguars.......112
22 falcons.......114
23 cardinals.....115
23 bills.........115
25 texans........127
26 lions.........134
27 panthers......138
28 raiders.......139
29 chiefs........140
30 bucs..........152
30 rams..........152
32 browns........169
don't give me any flak about my system being flawed because the broncos are above the saints. That proves it isn't flawed. The broncos had games against two weak teams to get some gaudy numbers. That will fix itself in a couple of weeks and they will find their true level.
would have 6 power points. The weakest team would have
192. It usually starts off wacky but the cream seems to
rise to the top as we move from week to week. They are bunched
up in groups right now. That's because the cream hasn't had
enough games to rise to the top yet.I have every confidence that
it will as we move along. It has for years.
These are the new rankings after week 3
1. ravens.........39
2. broncos........43
3. saints.........49
4. giants.........50
5. pats...........59
6. jets...........63
7. eagles.........65
8. vikings........68
9. colts..........70
10 cowboys........81
11 seahawks.......83
12 steelers.......87
13 49ers..........90
14 bengals........94
14 chargers.......94
16 packers........96
17 bears..........98
18 titans.........99
19 redskins......101
20 dolphins......109
21 jaguars.......112
22 falcons.......114
23 cardinals.....115
23 bills.........115
25 texans........127
26 lions.........134
27 panthers......138
28 raiders.......139
29 chiefs........140
30 bucs..........152
30 rams..........152
32 browns........169
don't give me any flak about my system being flawed because the broncos are above the saints. That proves it isn't flawed. The broncos had games against two weak teams to get some gaudy numbers. That will fix itself in a couple of weeks and they will find their true level.
10
Posted on 9/29/09 at 1:24 pm to gettingold
ohhhh boy
Posted on 9/29/09 at 1:25 pm to gettingold
quote:
2. broncos........43
3. saints.........49
FALSE
You really need to incorporate point differential rather than just emphasizing points against.
I dont care if your system will work itself out. Denver is not a top ten team, much less the 2nd best.
This post was edited on 9/29/09 at 1:27 pm
Posted on 9/29/09 at 1:27 pm to rondo
quote:
FALSE
he said no flak, so no flak
Posted on 9/29/09 at 1:40 pm to gettingold
So, I haven't checked every team (Saints and Ravens mainly thus far), but your "power rankings" are just adding up the Rushing Offense, Rushing Defense, Passing Offense, Passing Defense, Points For, and Points Against rankings of a team and slapping the label "power rankings!" on it?
Posted on 9/29/09 at 1:44 pm to gettingold
fine then ill give you flak about the falcons being 22nd. i dont care if this is a system or what but that's shite
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:11 pm to gettingold
Redskins @ 19 
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:12 pm to rondo
quote:
FALSE
You really need to incorporate point differential rather than just emphasizing points against.
I dont care if your system will work itself out. Denver is not a top ten team, much less the 2nd best.
I have told you before- THOSE ARE NOT POINTS
those are the difference in team measurement units
the broncos are in the top 2 right now because they graded very good against the weak teams they played. the numbers are what they are- want me to change the way I measure teams just because you don't like who is on top
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:17 pm to gettingold
very good, what did your power rankings for week 17 show last year?
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:17 pm to Eternalmajin
quote:
So, I haven't checked every team (Saints and Ravens mainly thus far), but your "power rankings" are just adding up the Rushing Offense, Rushing Defense, Passing Offense, Passing Defense, Points For, and Points Against rankings of a team and slapping the label "power rankings!" on it?
you are right- and that is just one way to rank teams which works very well. You have a problem with the term power ranking? you would feel better if I called it the royal order of additive mathematics based on 6 parameters ?
There are other things to measure too but the ones I tried haven't added to the accuracy of the rankings each week
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:20 pm to PBnJ
quote:
Redskins @ 19
give it a break- they did just play the 30th and 31st ranked teams- got some good numbers
I keep telling everyone that the first few weeks will have some silly numbers till the cream rises
some just have no patience
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:23 pm to rondo
quote:
I dont care if your system will work itself out. Denver is not a top ten team, much less the 2nd best.
They'll be 4-0 after next week.
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:25 pm to gettingold
You need to figure out a way to account for the fact that a team has played shitty opponents.
I think having a power ranking that doesnt seem accurate until week 9 is for the birds.
I think having a power ranking that doesnt seem accurate until week 9 is for the birds.
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:27 pm to gettingold
quote:
keep telling everyone that the first few weeks will have some silly numbers till the cream rises some just have no patience
well can u post your week 16 or 17 rankings from last year then?
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:39 pm to gettingold
quote:
32. Browns 169
No way we should be this high right now. What is the perfect lowest possible number? Thats where we should be.
Mangini sucks
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:45 pm to LSU-MNCBABY
quote:
My Power Rankings After Week 3
very good, what did your power rankings for week 17 show last year?
Here are the results of 2007 and 2008 after the 16th week
of each year.Week 17 skews my numbers when teams already in
are resting before the playoffs, and teams already out may
be playing the waterboy.
you can see 2007 was almost a perfect example of the cream
rising to the top.The 12 playoff teams were within my top
13 teams.
2007 results
1. pats 28 division winner
2. steelers 45 division winner
3. colts 46 division winner
4. cowboys 47 division winner
5. jaguars 57 wildcard
6. bucs 61 division winner
7. packers 68 division winner
8. giants 72 wildcard
9. chargers 73 division winner
10 eagles 74
11 seahawks 76 division winner
12 titans 80 wildcard
13 redskins 84 wildcard
13 vikings 84
15 saints 106
16 cardinals109
16 broncos 109
18 bengals 112
19 ravens 113
20 texans 114
21 browns 115
22 jets 124
23 panthers 125
24 raiders 126
25 chiefs 129
26 bears 130
27 rams 133
28 lions 136
29 dolphins 141
30 bills 144
30 falcons 144
32 49ers 158
2008 Results
Not as good as 2007 but that's because of the fight I have
with the nfl.They keep letting weak sisters in because they
won a weak division, and that eliminates stronger teams.I
still think my top 12 has 11 of the strongest teams. Then add
the colts. In my opinion, the pats were stronger than the dolphins,
the chargers and cardinals didn't belong in the playoffs based on
a whole season performance.
1 giants........42 division winner
2 eagles........52 wildcard
2 ravens........52 wildcard
4 titans........53 division winner
5 pats..........59
6 panthers......66 division winner
7 steelers......67 division winner
8 cowboys.......74
8 vikings.......74 division winner
10 bucs..........75
11 redskins......76
12 falcons.......81 wildcard
13 jets..........86
14 saints........87
15 dolphins......91 division winner
16 colts.........92 wildcard
17 broncos.......96
18 packers.......97
19 chargers.....101 division winner
20 cardinals....104 division winner
21 bears........105
22 texans.......106
23 jaguars......108
23 bills........108
25 49ers........124
26 raiders......137
27 browns.......140
28 seahawks.....145
28 chiefs.......145
30 bengals......152
31 rams.........165
32 lions........173
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:47 pm to bomber77
quote:
quote:
32. Browns 169
No way we should be this high right now. What is the perfect lowest possible number? Thats where we should be.
Mangini sucks
192
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:49 pm to rondo
Point differential isn't as good a predictor in the NFL though as it is in the NBA. The last team to lead the league in differential and win was the 2004 Patriots. I suppose that comments on the superior parity of the league though, along with best of 1 leading to more luck than best of 7.
I guess if we're judging quality of play though, point differential should be considered.
I guess if we're judging quality of play though, point differential should be considered.
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:51 pm to rondo
quote:
My Power Rankings After Week 3
You need to figure out a way to account for the fact that a team has played shitty opponents.
I think having a power ranking that doesnt seem accurate until week 9 is for the birds.
my earlier post gave the results for the week
I don't call 12-4 a total waste for the week
and if you have any knowledge of how good the teams are after 2-3 weeks with new coaches, new players, new systems, new coordinators, please tell me
and does it work on horses at the 1/8th mile post?
This post was edited on 9/29/09 at 2:54 pm
Posted on 9/29/09 at 2:59 pm to Ghazi
quote:
Point differential isn't as good a predictor in the NFL though as it is in the NBA. The last team to lead the league in differential and win was the 2004 Patriots. I suppose that comments on the superior parity of the league though, along with best of 1 leading to more luck than best of 7.
I guess if we're judging quality of play though, point differential should be considered.
I never use point differentials. I never use the scores of any games
the numbers are measurement units to show how much separation there is between teams out of a possible 192 total units. Points are not even mentioned.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News