Pats can't be considered better than Colts until...

[FirstAndGoal]

BTW, the Pats are 2 1/2 point favorites right now.

I expect a nailbiter like the championship game. As I stated somewhere else, I think the Pats D and Colts O are what they always were with some adjustments but the matchup I'm looking for is the Pats O vs Colts D. I think that's were the improvements have been the greatest for both teams. I'll be curious to see what Dungy cooks up on this one. I'll be surprised if he keeps Bob in the box like he's done in the past. That's going to be an interesting match up and one that I'm sure both teams are already working on.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

After our SB's, I always felt that we were number one until we got knocked off, so, yes, the Colts are number one until we whup em.

 

[njpatsfan]

Last year was last year. I don't buy it. You can rank them higher in the power rankings because they are defending champs if you like, but I judge how the Pats rank against other teams on how they play on the field at the current point. Not how they matched up in the past. The Pats are very different today than they were even in the AFC Championship last year.

The Pats will need to beat the Colts and several other top teams to prove they are the best in the league when everything is said and done. But from what I have seen from both teams so far, I still think the Pats are the better team.

You are exactly right - this "champs" thing is complete bs. No team is the same team that they were last year. And they all start this season 0-0.

This is not boxing. If you follow this logic to it's logical conclusion, the Colts should sit out the season, with everyone else playing for the right to meet them in the "title" match. It makes no sense.

R

p.s. and by the way .... the colts lost 3 of their 4 preseason games ..... shouldn't that count towards your "rule"

 

[godef]

I half agree with what you have written. In my rankings, the defending champs are #1 until they actually lose a game so, obviously, Indy maintains their hold on the top spot. But if Indy goes out and loses a game or two in October, and the Pats keep winning, then the Pats take over #1... even though NE hasn't played them yet...

Even if the Colts don't lose until then, I don't agree.

Suppose the 8-0 Pats go in and blow out the 7-0 Colts 40-3. Would that mean (a) the Colts were the better team up until the game began, or (b) the Pats really were the better team all along in 2007, only we didn't know it yet? I think (b) would be the obvious answer.

 

[QuiGon]

I don't understand why people put rigid rules on how much they will or won't use their powers of reason and judgment in ranking teams.

For example, did you rank the Broncos #1 in 1999, after Elway retired? What if Manning had retired after the SB last year, would you still rank the Colts #1 because they're "champs."

Well it depends... if you do rankings, are you trying to prognosticate the future, or are you evaluating the past..?

For me, rankings should evaluate the past. They should take what has happened and put the teams in order.

But, as others have pointed out many times in this thread, this is the NFL, not the NCAA. Rankings are nothing more than a website's way of generating hits and stirring up controversy.

 

[workhorse]

You are exactly right - this "champs" thing is complete bs. No team is the same team that they were last year. And they all start this season 0-0.

This is not boxing. If you follow this logic to it's logical conclusion, the Colts should sit out the season, with everyone else playing for the right to meet them in the "title" match. It makes no sense.

R

p.s. and by the way .... the colts lost 3 of their 4 preseason games ..... shouldn't that count towards your "rule"

Seriously? You want to include preseason games? If that's the case, the Colts lost all their preseason games last year. So they must be a better team than last year and we all know how last season ended.

 

[Ring 6]

Its always a good idea to DEFINE an argument before arguing it.
As it is, what should power rankings mean?

If it is used to PREDICT where teams will be at the end of the season, who won last year has nothing to do with it. This years teams are not even the same teams as last years.
If it is a rnaking to be EARNED, then last year has an awful lot to do with it.
It could also simply be a ranking based on how teams have played in their games.

It seems obvious that those saying Colts should be #1 are seeing it from an earning a ranking standpoint, and those saying Patriots are #1 are using one of the other 2 definitions.
I think everyone is right, they just differ in their definition of 'power rankings'.


Mine has always been based on predicting how the season will end. So I would have the Pats #1, because I believe based on everything that has happened this year, the Pats will go to the SB ahead of Indy. I would have Indy #2 and Dallas #3 because I believe the Colts would be a tougher obstacle in us getting to the SB than Dallas would be in us winning it, or in other words, if we fail, I'd expect the Colts to win the SB.

 

[QuiGon]

Even if the Colts don't lose until then, I don't agree.

Suppose the 8-0 Pats go in and blow out the 7-0 Colts 40-3. Would that mean (a) the Colts were the better team up until the game began, or (b) the Pats really were the better team all along in 2007, only we didn't know it yet? I think (b) would be the obvious answer.

This is what I meant about rankings as being an indiciator of the past. Now if you want to make your own list which is based on prognostication, then more power to ya... but when I make such a list, I only look at historical facts and statistics. Period. I don't look at personnel changes and try to guess/predict how that is going to impact a team.

Manning, Addai, Harrison and Wayne could retire today, and Indy remains #1 in my list until such time as they actually lose a game. To do any different would be trying to predict the future, not evaluating the past.

Of course, the one counter to my method is the notion that there should be no carryover from one year to the next, and everyone starts with a perfectly clean slate. And while I would agree there is logic in that statement, I just don't find it terribly practical.

 

[PlattsFan]

Wait, the Colts beat these Patriots? What did I miss?

How did they defend Randy Moss? Did Adalius Thomas not wreak havoc on the middle of the field that was so vulnerable last year?

I would've thought Wes Welker would do well finding holes in the zone of the Colts D, too. Sammy Morris adding some zip over what Corey Dillon could provide last year should've helped, too.

But, jeez, if you say this Colts team beat this Patriots team, they must've figured out those puzzles. Bummer. Can't believe I missed it.

 

[Bo0MeR]

The Colts should remain and are number 1 for several reasons

a) They are the defending champs

b) They are the defending champs and undefeated

c) They have beaten the Patriots 3 times in a row and have won a Superbowl since the last time the Pats have beaten them. The Pats are trying to catch up to the Colts, NOT the other way around. They have to prove they can beat them again

Reasons I'd be okay with the Pats being ranked ahead of the Colts

a) The Colts start losing games up to Nov 4th and the Pats keep winning

b) The Pats beat the Colts Nov 4th

 

[Deus Irae]

Here..... let me solve this problem:


The Patriots are the best team in the NFL right now. And, that includes the Colts. This may change in the upcoming weeks, but I think that even Colts fans would be willing to admit that, as of today, New England is the class of the NFL. They are simply playing that well and the Colts are currently banged up a bit.

 

[Bo0MeR]

Here..... let me solve this problem:


The Patriots are the best team in the NFL right now. And, that includes the Colts. This may change in the upcoming weeks, but I think that even Colts fans would be willing to admit that, as of today, New England is the class of the NFL. They are simply playing that well and the Colts are currently banged up a bit.

No, Indianapolis in the class of the NFL. You know the reigning champs? The team that is undefeated and on a 9 game winning streak. The team with the improved defense and the consistently spectacular offense.

 

[mossdeep]

Here's how the rankings work:

31 teams are evaluated and ranked based the their performance thru four games this season. The #1 is just the team that won the SB last year.

I'm sorry but any argument that the Pats are less than the Colts is very weak. Both offenses are similar but their defense isn't nearly as good and I can't remember any team thats ever made other NFL teams look so pedistrian thru 4 games.

 

[QuiGon]

No, Indianapolis in the class of the NFL. You know the reigning champs? The team that is undefeated and on a 9 game winning streak.

Heh... chest thumping over a 9 game winning streak... that's so cute..!!

 

[PaulNEPats]

Last year was last year. Last I heard, teams change during the offseason. Right now the Pats are #1 IMO. A lot of people here probably think the same, but are too afraid to admit it because they want to be classy, super-duper extroidinaire fans

 

[Bo0MeR]

Heh... chest thumping over a 9 game winning streak... that's so cute..!!

Chest thumping? How, I'm saying they are currently on that streak the point is they HAVENT lost leading up to and since the SB they are still number 1. Nice spin you try to put on it though

 

[goz421]

Let's see indy come to New England in the snow again. I so loved that game. best team gets home advantage.

 

[He Ban Me]

Here's my fear: Pats go 16-0... get to AFCCG vs. Colts... and lose.

My fear is basically that to get to the SB, we most likely have to play twice. To have a chance in game 2, it would be wise to win game 1. Yet, it is difficult to win twice in a season versus a top notch opponent. The nice thing is that even if we lose on the 4th, it won't be the end of the world. The season will go on, I THINK we'll make the playoffs, and at that point, ANYTHING can happen. As you said, maybe you guys are 17-0, flying high, heading into the AFCCG, Colts roll in, presumably outmanned, but rise up and win an epic battle.

This is the greatest thing (and probably better) than Bradshaw/Staubach or Aikman/Young!!

 

[Ring 6]

No, Indianapolis in the class of the NFL. You know the reigning champs? The team that is undefeated and on a 9 game winning streak. The team with the improved defense and the consistently spectacular offense.

Last years wins do nothing for them this year.

Another perspective: How big was the gap between the teams last season? Not very. Obvioulsy the Pats have improved.
Its not about what the 06 teams did. They could be used as a gauge to where the teams were then, but are irrlelevant to what will happen this year. The Colts did not start the season with any advantage, everyone started 0-0.

The Colts were the best team in 2006. That means nothing in 2007.

 

[QuiGon]

Chest thumping? How, I'm saying they are currently on that streak the point is they HAVENT lost leading up to and since the SB they are still number 1. Nice spin you try to put on it though

Heh... chest thumping over a 9 game winning streak... that's so cute..!!