Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by BoTown, Nov 14, 2007.
Looks pretty flawed to me.
Well just to give you one example which should pretty much say it all:
Their offense is in the top 10 and their defense is middle of the pack. Probably why they're ranked so high.
Dunno. The games the Eagles have won, they have dominated. And any offense with Westbrook and Mcnabb in it is gonna be pretty efficient.
Efficient...except late in a 4th quarter in the Super Bowl!
Can you point to a team beneath them that you would call a prohibitive favorite on a neutral field?
That is the point of this season. Other than the top 5-6 teams, the rest of them are bunched into the mediocre group of the terrible group. If you are in the mediocre group and havea few impressive victories, you are going to float to the top.
Sagarin Ratings also have Eagles up there.
Every single analytical ranking does. They are a medicore team that killed another medicore team. It is just the way it works.
If you want to just rank teams by their record, why do it in the first place?
The Giants, who have already beaten Philly.
Do you think the Panthers would be favored over the Browns? No.
Would the Vikings be favored over the Saints? No.
Cincy has beaten the Ravens twice.
I don't see how anyone could see these rankings as good.
Have no idea what these rankings mean, or how he got them, but #1 is #1.
Did you see how closely they are in numerical results were? You are reading too much into the "ranking" and ignoring the fact that the seperation from #5 (Green Bay) to #6 is nearly the same as #6 to #14. Like I said, when you base things on numerical analysis, this type of thing will happen.
With regard to your game specific comments. Philly lost to NY when they were down two OLs and Westbrook. The Saints just lost to StL and the numbers don't realize that Peterson isn't there now. Cincy may have beaten the Ravens twice, but they are 1-6 in their other games while Balt is 4-3 in their other games. Should we completely ignore those games?
I do think Carolina sucks, though and can't see any credible reason why they come out the way that they do.
But, again, you are treating this like it is based on opinion. It is not. Frankly, the only thing that I would take issue with is that NFC teams would be naturally skewed upwards. When you face junky teams, your stats will look better than they would otherwise. Other than that, there is no real reason to contest much of this.
Take a look at who Baltimore has beaten. They have beaten nobodies. The other games shouldn't be ignored but Baltimore looks to be worse than Cincy and two loses to them pretty much cement that. Meh both teams suck so who really cares.
And no I'm not treating it like it's based on opinion. I'm treating it like the formula is flawed.
Separate names with a comma.