PDA

View Full Version : Week 7 Power Rankings


diabsoule
10-26-2009, 11:00 PM
Week 7: An unbeaten bites the dust in the Steel City, a powerhouse continues to slip, and a new connection in Big D helps take down one of last weeks top ten teams. All of this and a team that is not who we thought they were in this weeks power rankings.

Bye week teams: Baltimore, Denver, Detroit, Jacksonville, Seattle, Tennessee

1. New Orleans Saints (6-0) – The Saints showed a lot of heart and character in their win against the Dolphins, which is something that Saints teams of the past never showed.

2. Indianapolis Colts (6-0) – The Rams were just a speed bump as Peyton Manning and the Indianapolis offense looks nearly unstoppable.

3. Denver Broncos (6-0) – They needed the bye week since next Sunday they travel to Baltimore to take on a reeling Ravens team that's looking for a win after three straight losses.

4. New England Patriots (4-2) – They were rewarded for their OT loss to Denver by playing the Titans and Buccaneers in back-to-back games and got a trip to London. Now, they get a bye week to get healthy before Miami comes to town.

5. Cincinnati Bengals (5-2) – Hard Knocks curse be damned! This offense is looking great especially with RB Cedric Benson finding new life as a Bengal.

6. Pittsburgh Steelers (5-2) – How badass does Mike Tomlin look in aviator shades? They had a much needed statement win against the Vikings. They get a week to rest before they go to Mile High to take on the Broncos.

7. Minnesota Vikings (6-1) – Pittsburgh's defense roughed up Brett Favre and next week they travel to Lambeau for a huge grudge match.

8. Arizona Cardinals (4-2) – The Cardinals already have an explosive offense but their swarming, aggressive defense stifled the NY Giants.

9. New York Giants (5-2) – The offense just isn't clicking like it can and now the Giants have suddenly lost two games in a row and travel to division rival Philadelphia next week.

10. Atlanta Falcons (4-2) – The lack of a running game is startling and the soft secondary isn't helping things out on the other side of the ball.

11. Philadelphia Eagles (4-2) – Their defense looked great against the Redskins sacking Jason Campbell six times. The problem is that their offense left a ton of points on the field.

12. Baltimore Ravens (3-3) – The Ravens should be pumped for next week's home game against the Broncos. Hopefully they figured out how to close out a game during the bye week.

13. Green Bay Packers (4-2) – Good news: A warm-up game against the Browns helped prepare them for next week when they host Favre and the rival Vikings. Bad news: TE Jermichael Finley, an integral cog in the offense, might miss significant time with a knee injury.

14. Houston Texans (4-3) – Houston has now won two back-to-back games this season. That should continue next week when they go to Buffalo. Texans fans can only hope that Andre Johnson's injury isn't severe.

15. Dallas Cowboys (4-2) – Romo to Austin is becoming a deadly combination.

16. New York Jets (4-3) – The loss of RB Leon Washington might be tempered with the emergence of Shonn Greene.

17. San Diego Chargers (3-3) – Getting over the flu? The cure? Play the Chiefs. A dominating performance in all phases of the game and next week they get the Raiders.

18. San Francisco 49ers (3-3) – They were thisclose to coming back and beating the Texans. Alex Smith looks like he can make this offense more potent than Shaun Hill unfortunately next week they face the buzzsaw that's the Indianapolis Colts next week.

19. Chicago Bears (3-3) – Da Bears are a team in shambles. Cutler keeps making mistakes, their offensive line can't make holes for RB Matt Forte, and their defense keeps getting burned for big plays.

20. Miami Dolphins (2-4) – The 'Fins should be 4-2 and should have beaten two unbeaten teams. Shoulda. Coulda. Woulda. Sparano's time-out miscue was crucial in swinging momentum in favor of the Saints and probably cost them the game. So did going away from the wildcat and making Chad Henne sling it downfield.

21. Jacksonville Jaguars (3-3) – A week of rest to find out what kind of team they are before going to Tennessee and facing the lifeless Titans.

22. Buffalo Bills (3-4) – Don't look now but the Bills have now won two games in a row, both have been ugly, but their wins nonetheless.

23. Seattle Seahawks (2-4) – If Atlanta had a hard time protecting Matt Ryan, Matt Hasselbeck better wear a flak jacket next week when they go to Dallas.

24. Carolina Panthers (2-4) – At Arizona. At New Orleans. Host Atlanta and Miami. Following a home loss to the Bills their schedule doesn't get any easier. Jake Delhomme may have 30 interceptions by week 12.

25. Oakland Raiders (2-4) – They follow up a great victory against Philadelphia by being blanked by the Jets. The Raider should have never cut Jeff Garcia.

26. Detroit Lions (1-5) – Coming off their bye week they host the Rams. That should be Must See TV.

27. Kansas City Chiefs (1-5) – They were playing competitively. They travel to Jacksonville and Oakland in consecutive weeks so they might enter their bye with maybe one more win. Maybe.

28. Washington Redskins (2-5) – They get a week off before the beatings continue. The next five weeks are just brutal.

29. Cleveland Browns (1-6) – Statistically Brady Quinn is more efficient than Derek Anderson. Ya know, for what it's worth.

30. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (0-7) – Next week the Bucs have a bye week and it's favored by 10.

31. St. Louis Rams (0-6) – Stephen Jackson is having a hell of a season. That's about it.

32. Tennessee Titans (0-6) – Not only did they get smacked by the Patriots last week but Jeff Fisher wore a Peyton Manning jersey to introduce Tony Dungy. I think it's safe to say that they will have a new coach next year.

fenikz
10-26-2009, 11:18 PM
I could never put a team below of the Rams but I agree with the rest of it

yo123
10-26-2009, 11:32 PM
I think the fall to seven is a little harsh on the Vikings. Three teams ahead of us with worse records? Maybe I'm being a homer, but I think we're better than the Bengals and I still think we're better than Pittsburgh.

That was a hardfought game against a very good team, the game could have gone either way.

Brown Leader
10-26-2009, 11:43 PM
Browns have a win, but would be hard-pressed to beat any of the winless.

MetSox17
10-26-2009, 11:56 PM
LOL @ Dallas being five spots below the team they completely dominated in every face of the game, who also has the same record they do.

Bengalsrocket
10-27-2009, 12:30 AM
LOL @ Dallas being five spots below the team they completely dominated in every face of the game, who also has the same record they do.

Power rankings don't necessarily work that way. You have to climb the charts, regardless of who you beat and how bad you beat them.

If St. Louis had destroyed Indianapolis this week they wouldn't have all the sudden jumped up to rank 2. Indy would have fallen and St. Louis would have risen, sure, but you don't automatically leap frog the team you just beat.

I think Dallas has had a slightly softer schedule playing the 1-6 chiefs, 0-7 bucs & 2-4 Panthers. Atlanta's bottom 3 are the 2-4 Dolphins, 2-4 Panthers & 3-3 bears (Also playing the 3-3 49ers).

Shiver
10-27-2009, 12:53 AM
Power rankings don't necessarily work that way. You have to climb the charts, regardless of who you beat and how bad you beat them.

If St. Louis had destroyed Indianapolis this week they wouldn't have all the sudden jumped up to rank 2. Indy would have fallen and St. Louis would have risen, sure, but you don't automatically leap frog the team you just beat.

I think Dallas has had a slightly softer schedule playing the 1-6 chiefs, 0-7 bucs & 2-4 Panthers. Atlanta's bottom 3 are the 2-4 Dolphins, 2-4 Panthers & 3-3 bears (Also playing the 3-3 49ers).

There is no shame in losing to Dallas, on the road, coming off of a bye week to iron out their issues and prepare for Atlanta. You better believe Keith Brooking gave them a big edge as well in terms of preparation. Losing to Dallas and New England on the road is hardly indicative of weakness.

vikes_28
10-27-2009, 01:16 AM
I'm not sure the Vikings deserve to be that low after losing one game due to a fluke tripping call. They should be higher than the patriots especially since they have played teams that are in the bottom three of your rankings two weeks in a row. The Patriots being higher than the vikings is just silly. I would have it like this:

4. Pittsburgh
5. Minnesota
6. New England
7. Cincinnati

diabsoule
10-27-2009, 01:40 AM
I'm not sure the Vikings deserve to be that low after losing one game due to a fluke tripping call. They should be higher than the patriots especially since they have played teams that are in the bottom three of your rankings two weeks in a row. The Patriots being higher than the vikings is just silly. I would have it like this:

4. Pittsburgh
5. Minnesota
6. New England
7. Cincinnati

The Vikings didn't lose on a fluke tripping call. I watched the game. They lost because Pittsburgh's defense outplayed the Vikings offense. Favre committed some costly errors and the aggressive, opportunistic Steelers D capitalized on every turnover by bringing two interceptions to the house. The Steelers had a rough time moving the ball against the Vikings D but the deciding factor was turnovers. The Vikings committed more turnovers and more penalties than the Steelers.

I do give you the argument that New England might not deserve to be ranked ahead of Minnesota but they have played lights out the past two weeks and I've come away more impressed with their play than the Vikings. Also, the Bengals are ranked ahead of the Vikings because they beat the Steelers who beat the Vikings. In week 14 when the Bengals go to the Metrodome we'll see which team is better between those two but a lot can happen between then and now.

diabsoule
10-27-2009, 01:43 AM
I could never put a team below of the Rams but I agree with the rest of it

The reason I have the Titans at the bottom of the trash heap was due to their performance against the Patriots. They flat out gave up. If it's noticeable that you quit on the field then you deserve to be ranked dead last until your play proves otherwise.

RaiderNation
10-27-2009, 02:01 AM
There was no point of keeping Garcia. Our offence with Garcia would be better, but I really doubt we would be playoff contenders with him. We drafted Russell #1 overall and we need to see what he can do. So far this year it hasnt worked out for him, but last year I must say he did show some hope. If things keep going the way they are for Russell, I expect Al to go after a vet QB like Sage Rosenfels, Jake Delhomme or David Carr. He is known for signing vet QB that in their later part of their career(Gannon, Plunkett, Collins to name a few) when he thinks we are close to being contenders. It was Cables idea to sign Garcia, when he didnt fit our offence and not out perform Russell he was cut.

diabsoule
10-27-2009, 02:04 AM
There was no point of keeping Garcia. Our offence with Garcia would be better, but I really doubt we would be playoff contenders with him. We drafted Russell #1 overall and we need to see what he can do. So far this year it hasnt worked out for him, but last year I must say he did show some hope. If things keep going the way they are for Russell, I expect Al to go after a vet QB like Sage Rosenfels, Jake Delhomme or David Carr. He is known for signing vet QB that in their later part of their career(Gannon, Plunkett, Collins to name a few) when he thinks we are close to being contenders. It was Cables idea to sign Garcia, when he didnt fit our offence and not out perform Russell he was cut.

I know Garcia fits better with a WCO but he has more leadership skills and makes smarter decisions with the football. It seemed like a poor decision to cut him at the time because he was someone that could have pushed Russell and it seems like a even poorer decision now seeing how anemic the offense is with Russell behind center.

Gay Ork Wang
10-27-2009, 03:27 AM
The bears at #19? more like 25

MetSox17
10-27-2009, 03:34 AM
Power rankings don't necessarily work that way. You have to climb the charts, regardless of who you beat and how bad you beat them.

If St. Louis had destroyed Indianapolis this week they wouldn't have all the sudden jumped up to rank 2. Indy would have fallen and St. Louis would have risen, sure, but you don't automatically leap frog the team you just beat.

I think Dallas has had a slightly softer schedule playing the 1-6 chiefs, 0-7 bucs & 2-4 Panthers. Atlanta's bottom 3 are the 2-4 Dolphins, 2-4 Panthers & 3-3 bears (Also playing the 3-3 49ers).

Dallas dominated in three of their four wins. Their only two losses were to the Giants and the undefeated Broncos, both games were lost in the last seconds.

Everyone was dick riding the Falcons, and they got exposed by the Cowboys. Their defense is suspect at best and the offense is inconsistent. The running game ain't so hot anymore.

I don't care if you have Dallas 31st. You just better make sure Atlanta is 32nd.

Bengalsrocket
10-27-2009, 08:54 AM
Well I already expressed my opinion in disagreeing with you, and you didn't really refute anything I said, so I guess this is just one of those times where you believe power rankings should be one way and I believe power rankings should be another way :P

Iamcanadian
10-27-2009, 09:31 AM
The Vikings didn't lose on a fluke tripping call. I watched the game. They lost because Pittsburgh's defense outplayed the Vikings offense. Favre committed some costly errors and the aggressive, opportunistic Steelers D capitalized on every turnover by bringing two interceptions to the house. The Steelers had a rough time moving the ball against the Vikings D but the deciding factor was turnovers. The Vikings committed more turnovers and more penalties than the Steelers.

I do give you the argument that New England might not deserve to be ranked ahead of Minnesota but they have played lights out the past two weeks and I've come away more impressed with their play than the Vikings. Also, the Bengals are ranked ahead of the Vikings because they beat the Steelers who beat the Vikings. In week 14 when the Bengals go to the Metrodome we'll see which team is better between those two but a lot can happen between then and now.

I don't agree on your assessment of the Vikings. The tripping call was suspect and definitely was a turning point in that Favre doesn't throw an interception if that call wasn't made. It was a 14 point swing. I'm not saying the call was wrong just a bit suspect when you watch the film. Blaming Favre for the second interception is a bit ridiculous, it was a very easy reception for Taylor who simply blew the play and ended any chance for Minny's recovery.
IMO, Minny played a very equal game with Pittsburgh and either team could have won. IMO, Pittsburgh's defense won the game but hardly dominated the Vikings. I thought both teams suffered from poor coaching decisions in basically ignoring the run in favour of the pass. Both RB's were greatly underutilized.

Iamcanadian
10-27-2009, 09:40 AM
There was no point of keeping Garcia. Our offence with Garcia would be better, but I really doubt we would be playoff contenders with him. We drafted Russell #1 overall and we need to see what he can do. So far this year it hasnt worked out for him, but last year I must say he did show some hope. If things keep going the way they are for Russell, I expect Al to go after a vet QB like Sage Rosenfels, Jake Delhomme or David Carr. He is known for signing vet QB that in their later part of their career(Gannon, Plunkett, Collins to name a few) when he thinks we are close to being contenders. It was Cables idea to sign Garcia, when he didnt fit our offence and not out perform Russell he was cut.

I think Al Davis is forcing Cable to continue to play Russell otherwise Cable would have benched him by now. Cable keeps his job by doing what Al wants and right now Davis want Russell playing. We all know that Al makes all the decisions about who plays and who sits for Oakland not the HC. Cable signed Garcia because I suspect he would like to win games and would have started him if he could. Russell's chances for developing in a system where the HC has little authority is a huge question mark IMO. Davis has made this franchise pretty well dead in the water waiting on Al to die. Until then there is little motivation for the players to put out the effort to improve.
Sad end to a great football mind and very tough on Oakland fans.

DexterM
10-27-2009, 10:33 AM
I agree with those saying Minnesota was dropped too far. They were on the road against the defending champs, and still had a great chance of winning the game. There were multiple plays in that game that could have gone either way that happened to go Pitts way. If they played again in Minnesota I would take the Vikings.

As for the penalty, no team ever loses on one play. The Vikings had other chances to win. However, that was an atrocious call, and Pitt should have been down 4 at that point, whether or not they would have lost is a completely different issue that no one knows the answer to.

Still think they (Vikings) are a top 5 team.

Jvig43
10-27-2009, 12:50 PM
I just want to add how much better Pitts D is with # 43 in. Its as if their a completely different team.

General Zod
10-27-2009, 12:54 PM
Yeah, call me a homer idc. The Vikes are too low, and the Pats are to high.
I will never say that one bad call will cost any team a win. But this is one is about as close as you can get. That call was flat out terrible. And on a side note, that pick that got ran back for a TD wasnt Favres fault, it was Chester Taylors. Pitts defense is great, there is no doubt. But they did not dominate us in that game like a lot of "critics" and "analyst" say. And our D matched there offense just as well(even without our top corner). I would argue that the Vikes can play with team in the NFL right now.

TitanHope
10-27-2009, 01:08 PM
The reason I have the Titans at the bottom of the trash heap was due to their performance against the Patriots. They flat out gave up. If it's noticeable that you quit on the field then you deserve to be ranked dead last until your play proves otherwise.

I would agree with this, but the Titans haven't been the only team to play like that in a game this season. I think it'd be unfair to hold it against only them and to make an example out of them when the game they didn't go 100% in was a blowout by halftime, in horrible conditions, where a comeback was near impossible.

To use that lone game and the Jeff Fisher charity event is weak, in my mind. There are reasons to put them last, such as their 0-6 record, their soft defense, or looming QB controvery. Use those as your main points, not these two events.

no bare feet
10-27-2009, 01:09 PM
I think Pittsburgh is a better two loss team than the Patriots.

M.O.T.H.
10-27-2009, 01:11 PM
Yeah, the Rams are far and away the worst team in the league, imo. I dont see how they're going to win a game. Last chance may be against Detroit this week.

CC.SD
10-27-2009, 01:12 PM
Yeah, the Rams are far and away the worst team in the league, imo. I dont see how they're going to win a game.

I think Jackson will eventually power them to a victory.

diabsoule
10-27-2009, 01:18 PM
Yeah, the Rams are far and away the worst team in the league, imo. I dont see how they're going to win a game.

I really think it's a toss up between the Bucs, Browns, Titans, and Rams. Sure, the Titans are a lot more talented than those three other teams but their defense is playing completely different than it did last year. They hardly have any weapons in the passing game and a QB that can't get what weapons they do have the ball. Those reasons, along with others, and the fact that it seems that Jeff Fisher has lost the teams are the reason their dead last. They were dead last the previous week.

Since Titans have moved backwards since Week 3. Their first two games against the Steelers and Texans were very close but since then they have scored fewer and fewer points and keep getting lit up on the scoreboard. I can't say a lot better about the Rams but they seem to show a bit of fight at least. But I really think that you could put the Browns, Titans, Rams, and Bucs in any order from 29th and 32nd.

M.O.T.H.
10-27-2009, 01:24 PM
The Rams average a solid 8.6 points per game. Seriously, they look worse than the Lions ever did last year.

I agree there are a bunch of bad teams worthy but, I still see the Rams being that much worse than them.

What a year. haha.

Jvig43
10-27-2009, 01:28 PM
I think Pittsburgh is a better two loss team than the Patriots.

We lost to the Jets and the 6-0 broncos. Steelers lost to the bengals and ******* I throw a million interceptions every game cutler led bears. On top of which you guys were beating the chargers the other week by a ton and gave up 28 unanswered points in the fourth to get them in the game. I find it hard to believe the steelers are a better two loss team, especially when the Pats are ahead of them in Passing, Rushing, Total offense, Total defense, and Passing yards allowed per game. I understand stats arent everything but you have to back statements up with some kind of evidence, not just state, yeah their better.

HawkeyeFan
10-27-2009, 01:30 PM
We can thank Pat Shurmur for such a great St. Louis offense, the dude deserves to have my nuts in his mouth.

bigbluedefense
10-27-2009, 01:32 PM
The Giants are just not in sync right now. I think our injuries are finally catching up to us.

And our WRs while improved, still are a work in progress. Eli hasn't looked the same since injuring his foot either. He's not stepping into all his throws.

He's missing throws he makes all the time. 3 or 4 throws couldve been the difference in the game against the Cards. So thats going to be an issue all season.

I honestly at this point, don't expect the Giants to do much this year. I can still see the playoffs, but we're not a legit SB contender until we can get consistent on offense, and healthy on defense.

General Zod
10-27-2009, 01:54 PM
We can thank Pat Shurmur for such a great St. Louis offense, the dude deserves to have my nuts in his mouth.

This quote is almost sig worthy.

umphrey
10-27-2009, 02:12 PM
The transitive property doesn't work in the NFL.

Just because this may be true (hypothetically):
Dallas > Philadelphia > Baltimore

Doesn't mean
Dallas > Baltimore

It's all about matchups and that's why you see teams like Arizona in the superbowl sometimes - they got teams they could beat in the playoffs (and played their hearts out).

yodabear
10-27-2009, 07:07 PM
Jeff Fisher is a great coach, his team has given up on him after 16 seasons, and it is time for them to split ways. Unfirtunantly, we just got a new coach, and he deserves more time.