Patriots RANK #7 in Mike Florio's PFT's preseason power rankings

[Joker]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

 

[Sciz]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Is this Latin for "Florio is an idiot"?

 

[Joker]

could be...what came first ..the moron or the Florio?

 

[Brady2Moss]

yeah?..well...don't try to bet Brady2Moss because he ain't with us anymore...SOMEBODY..*cough*Brady...to..Moss*cough*..did him in...a tragic story to be sure ....:help:

calling me out after I've taken a break from posting here. Nice job.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

could be...what came first ..the moron or the Florio?

That's easy! The Tomass.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Patriots RANK #7 IN preseason power rankings

I have a hard time seeing this team as not top 4. With a better D and Brady, bb and mcdaniels at the helm we will score points on O. The pats are severely underrated, and that's better.

Denver
SF
Sea
GB
Falcons


Easy to picture the Patriots finishing behind 4 of that group.....

 

[JMC00]

And it isn't far fetched to think they'll be ahead of all of them.

Unless of course you don't think Brady is one of the greatest QB ever.

Remember that "rebuilding" 2010 team? Averaged 32.4 points a game which was 4.8 points more a game than the 2nd best offense in the NFL.

 

[Oswlek]

Re: Patriots RANK #7 IN preseason power rankings

Denver
SF
Sea
GB
Falcons


Easy to picture the Patriots finishing behind 4 of that group.....

Just as easy seeing them score within that group. :confused2:

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Patriots RANK #7 IN preseason power rankings

Just as easy seeing them score within that group. :confused2:

Read the post I was responding to.

 

[mgteich]

I wasn't aware that Power Rating reflected only offensive production.

And it isn't far fetched to think they'll be ahead of all of them.

Unless of course you don't think Brady is one of the greatest QB ever.

Remember that "rebuilding" 2010 team? Averaged 32.4 points a game which was 4.8 points more a game than the 2nd best offense in the NFL.

 

[Deus Irae]

I wasn't aware that Power Rating reelected only offensive production.

The Patriots finished tied for 3rd/4th last regular season, were one game away from being tied at 11-5 with a group of teams, and lost a great deal on offense in the offseason. We don't know what the offensive replacements will do, and we don't know if any of the defensive players will be worth a damn, but it's apparently still sacrilige to think it even possible that a few teams might catch the Patriots regular season numbers.



Welcome to Patsfans.com.

 

[Danger Zone]

Re: Re: Patriots RANK #7 in Mike Florio's PFT's preseason power rankings

The Patriots finished tied for 3rd/4th last regular season, were one game away from being tied at 11-5 with a group of teams, and lost a great deal on offense in the offseason. We don't know what the offensive replacements will do, and we don't know if any of the defensive players will be worth a damn, but it's apparently still sacrilige to think it even possible that a few teams might catch the Patriots regular season numbers.



Welcome to Patsfans.com.

Oh noes someone showed some optimism again and Deus is playing the persecution card.. again.

Sorry but I dont see any outrage or anything approaching sacrilege.

I just see people disagreeing with you about how bad the Patriots are going to be... oh wait, thats the sacrilege part isnt it?

Being a pessimist doesnt make you objective.

Just as showing some optimism over the outcome of things we have absolutely no control over doesnt make us homers, sheep, clones or stupid.

Sorry, I like Patsfan.com just fine and I see as much negativity here (objective or not) as I do sheepish fandom.


Personally, I feel our defense will be improved enough, especially in the second half of the season that our offense wont need to be putting up 32 points a game to win.

7th in power rankings sounds about right to me.. though I have a lot of respect for the brains in Los Vegas that has us as best odds to win it all (but I also know they take betting trends into consideration when determining odds and that has nothing to do with the football side of thing).

 

[mgteich]

I find no conflict between a ranking of 7th best team and bettors favoring Denver and New England. BTW, as reported by a poster yesterday, the current odds have Denver as the favorite with NE, SF and Seattle tied for the next best chance to win the Super Bowl.

There is vast difference between being the best team and the team that is favored to win the Super Bowl. There are many factors that might account for differences. One is schedule. Another is division. A third is schedule. A fourth is competition within the division.

For example, I MIGHT believe that SF, Seattle, Green Bay and Atlanta are the "best" teams in football. They would be favored on a neutral field against all others. I might also, at the same time, believe that both Denver and New England have the best chance of winning the Super Bowl. After all, in this scenario, there are FOUR top teams competing to represent the NFC and only TWO top teams competing to represent the AFC. Of course, other teams also have their lesser probability of winning the division and the Super Bowl.

7th in power rankings sounds about right to me.. though I have a lot of respect for the brains in Los Vegas that has us as best odds to win it all (but I also know they take betting trends into consideration when determining odds and that has nothing to do with the football side of thing).

 

[Claremonster]

Here is what I think of PFT and its "power rankings": pppfffffffffftttt!!!

You're a nicer man than I...

 

[Danger Zone]

Re: Re: Patriots RANK #7 in Mike Florio's PFT's preseason power rankings

I find no conflict between a ranking of 7th best team and bettors favoring Denver and New England. BTW, as reported by a poster yesterday, the current odds have Denver as the favorite with NE, SF and Seattle tied for the next best chance to win the Super Bowl.

Just for clarification, I dont see a conflict between the two either.

And second best odds to win, not the best. Gotcha. Thanks for the heads up on that.

7th in power rankings with our turn-over in (carcerated) offense is not an insult imo.

 

[fnordcircle]

...Just visited Caesars Palace the other day. They have Pats 7-1 to win in Feb 14' behind only Denver at 9-2, and tied with SF and Sea (also 7-1).

Those LV folks seem to know what's what from time to time...

Vegas cares about setting lines and limiting exposure and they do this by keeping the numbers on either side of the line as even as possible so they can make their money on the juice.

They aren't in the business of trying to pick the winners, they're in the business of making money off of the act of betting. Anything else will invariably lead to the book going bankrupt when a wildcard team ends up beating an undefeated team in the Super Bowl.

Lines have no place in a discussion of actual football.

 

[Off The Grid]

Oh no someone showed some optimism again and Deus is playing the persecution card...again.

Sorry but I don't see any outrage or anything approaching sacrilege.

I just see people disagreeing with you about how bad the Patriots are going to be... oh wait, that's the sacrilege part isn't it?

***

1 ~ Being a pessimist doesnt make you objective.

2 ~ Just as showing some optimism over the outcome of things we have absolutely no control over doesnt make us homers, sheep, clones or stupid.

3 ~ Sorry, I like Patsfan.com just fine and I see as much negativity here (objective or not) as I do sheepish fandom.

Nothing against Deuce ~ although he's got you nailed, Baby!! ~ but this is an outstanding Post!! :rocker:

 

[Froob]

7th? Really? Top 5 at least. Apparently bengals haven't been ranked yet. Noway Bengals should be ranked better than Patriots and Packers going into next season. When was the last time the Bengals won a big time game against an elite team?

 

[Salva135]

7th? Really? Top 5 at least. Apparently bengals haven't been ranked yet. Noway Bengals should be ranked better than Patriots and Packers going into next season. When was the last time the Bengals won a big time game against an elite team?

The Bengals were ranked 6th.

 

[Salva135]

Vegas cares about setting lines and limiting exposure and they do this by keeping the numbers on either side of the line as even as possible so they can make their money on the juice.

They aren't in the business of trying to pick the winners, they're in the business of making money off of the act of betting. Anything else will invariably lead to the book going bankrupt when a wildcard team ends up beating an undefeated team in the Super Bowl.

Lines have no place in a discussion of actual football.

Yes and no. The initial lines come from the big Vegas sports books and they derive those lines from consulting companies that utilize a ton of quantitative data to attempt to accurately predict the discrepancy between teams in any given match up. Significant action from any one side can cause those initial lines to move, but given how big the Vegas books are, it won't come from any one or small group of bettors, so they aren't worried about a random outlier outcome. Usually the lines move based on injuries or other pertinent game-related information.

Sports lines are incredibly efficient when predicting outcomes of games over a large enough sample size... if they weren't, you'd have a lot more people making a living betting them (and there are very few).