Week 2 Power Rankings

[HTown2ATX]

Please note this is a FWIW type thread, please keep the "oh our BCS hopes" comments tightly tucked in your...well....you know We know none of this matters, but it's fun to look at IMO....

Looks like we are between 4 and 2 in the rankings depending on who you look at...

NFL.com

ESPN

CBS

FOXSports

[Thorn]

Originally Posted by HTown2ATX

Please note this is a FWIW type thread, please keep the "oh our BCS hopes" comments tightly tucked in your...well....you know We know none of this matters, but it's fun to look at IMO....
Looks like we are between 4 and 2 in the rankings depending on who you look at...

100% correct on that. These ratings are silly, but when your team is getting the love, you can't help but read them. LOL

[BeerTastesLikeVictory]

If you notice on NFL.com each team has their logo then team name right next to them...except the Jets where they have the logo followed by the team name "Tebow". Fantastic.

[HTown2ATX]

Originally Posted by BeerTastesLikeVictory

If you notice on NFL.com each team has their logo then team name right next to them...except the Jets where they have the logo followed by the team name "Tebow". Fantastic.

Hahahaa.....effing hilarious....I didn't even notice that!! Classic!!

MSR

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by BeerTastesLikeVictory

If you notice on NFL.com each team has their logo then team name right next to them...except the Jets where they have the logo followed by the team name "Tebow". Fantastic.

You should have used the term Fan-Tebow-astic!

[Corrosion]

I was going to make a similar thread .... but not really about the Texans ....


Was thinking to myself after watching SF handle GB at home .... Man they look tough. They are a complete team built much like ours , nasty defense and an offense that can beat you into submission on the ground and beat you thru the air while making very few mistakes.

Houston and SF .... the two most complete teams in the NFL ? (Might have to put the Ravens in the conversation).

[b0ng]

Originally Posted by Corrosion

I was going to make a similar thread .... but not really about the Texans ....


Was thinking to myself after watching SF handle GB at home .... Man they look tough. They are a complete team built much like ours , nasty defense and an offense that can beat you into submission on the ground and beat you thru the air while making very few mistakes.

Houston and SF .... the two most complete teams in the NFL ? (Might have to put the Ravens in the conversation).

I don't think Alex Smith or Joe Flacco are as good of QB's as Matt Schaub.

[gtexan02]

Here's how I would rank the teams after watching week 1:

1. Baltimore Ravens
2. SF 49ers
3. Houston Texans
4. Denver Broncos
5. NE Patriots

Falcons would be in there somewhere as well

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by b0ng

I don't think Alex Smith or Joe Flacco are as good of QB's as Matt Schaub.

No, and our defense isn't as good as SF. Their run defense is simply a thing to behold.

I'd include NE in this group, also.

[Corrosion]

Originally Posted by b0ng

I don't think Alex Smith or Joe Flacco are as good of QB's as Matt Schaub.

Its not about a single position , its about the ability of these teams to dominate rushing , passing and with their defenses.

Honestly , Smith reminds me a lot of Schaub .... as does that offense tho they get vertical a bit more often but the basic premise is the same , to run the ball and use play action to create opportunities for big plays while not making any mistakes. Smith threw a grand total of 4 INT's last season tying an NFL record. Thats pretty darn impressive over 16 games.

There are a lot of similarities between the 49ers and Texans philosophy .... wonder how much that has to do with their head coaches being former QB's.
Both have developed pretty darn good QB's for their teams - Smith was about as close to a bust as you can get before Harbaugh got there and Schaub was on the bench behind Vick until Kubiak said that a QB I can win with.

All three of these teams have weapons at RB , TE and WR .... and all three have defenses that can stifle an opponent. Knock Flacco if you want .... But I think they are all three pretty comparable and in that second tier of QB's behind only Brady , Brees , Manning and Rodgers ....

[Corrosion]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

No, and our defense isn't as good as SF. Their run defense is simply a thing to behold.

I'd include NE in this group, also.

Yeah , that run defense is unbelievable .....


I cant put the Pats in on a list of the most complete teams .... their defense just doesnt compare to any of the above three , same goes for the Packers.

The other AFC team I would consider is the Bronco's ..... that defense carried Tebow to a playoff win last year and they replaced him with arguably the best QB in the history of the NFL.


NFC candidates - Maybe Atlanta and Detriot .... but Im not sold on either at this point. Those other three teams have a track record these dont.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Thorn

100% correct on that. These ratings are silly, but when your team is getting the love, you can't help but read them. LOL

I never thought that. I think they are very useful. It may not be the exact same system, but I'm sure the Vegas odds are based on a similar system & fantasy projections.

While those may be useless or silly to some, for me it's a basis for how good/bad your team is. If the power rankings mean nothing, then the Washington win over New Orleans at home isn't really an upset, or even news worthy for that matter. Philly's struggle in Cleveland isn't anything to "worry" about.

The Jets not making the play-offs last year is a bigger story than the Rams not making the play-offs, because of Power Rankings (on some level).

The Cowboys beat the Giants Wednesday night, was that really an upset? Not according to 2011's week 17 power rankings. which have them more evenly ranked than not. The Giants winning the Super Bowl, that's a shock.... because of the Power Rankings, whether you admit it or not. There's no way you can tell me (even though I called it way before week 17) that you thought the Giants were the best team in football before the play-offs started.

These are experts, using whatever method they've devised to let us know who the best teams are, who the worst teams are, and how the middle falls out. Little bit of stats, little bit of snake-oil...

We all do it in our own minds though we may not call it a "power ranking" We should beat the Jags. We should beat the Colts. The Titans might compete for the AFC South. We may be 9-7 or 12-5 in 2012. All based on a power ranking of some sort.

Some people say S.O.S. doesn't matter because teams change so much year to year, & week to week. The Power Rankings pretty much takes that into account in a real-time basis.

Ω

[DX-TEX]

I did not know the AP started a new power ranking this year. They have a panel of 12 people picked from the 60 media members who choose the after season awards and use a point system.

http://pro32.ap.org/poll

[k2djspike]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

I never thought that. I think they are very useful. It may not be the exact same system, but I'm sure the Vegas odds are based on a similar system & fantasy projections.

While those may be useless or silly to some, for me it's a basis for how good/bad your team is. If the power rankings mean nothing, then the Washington win over New Orleans at home isn't really an upset, or even news worthy for that matter. Philly's struggle in Cleveland isn't anything to "worry" about.

The Jets not making the play-offs last year is a bigger story than the Rams not making the play-offs, because of Power Rankings (on some level).

The Cowboys beat the Giants Wednesday night, was that really an upset? Not according to 2011's week 17 power rankings. which have them more evenly ranked than not. The Giants winning the Super Bowl, that's a shock.... because of the Power Rankings, whether you admit it or not. There's no way you can tell me (even though I called it way before week 17) that you thought the Giants were the best team in football before the play-offs started.

These are experts, using whatever method they've devised to let us know who the best teams are, who the worst teams are, and how the middle falls out. Little bit of stats, little bit of snake-oil...

We all do it in our own minds though we may not call it a "power ranking" We should beat the Jags. We should beat the Colts. The Titans might compete for the AFC South. We may be 9-7 or 12-5 in 2012. All based on a power ranking of some sort.

Some people say S.O.S. doesn't matter because teams change so much year to year, & week to week. The Power Rankings pretty much takes that into account in a real-time basis.

Ω

I couldn't agree with you more. Although opinions vary but there is still some sort of agreement on who the top teams should be. Repped

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Corrosion

I cant put the Pats in on a list of the most complete teams .... their defense just doesnt compare to any of the above three , same goes for the Packers.

Agreed, but their offenses are more likely to score 30 than not & most teams have trouble keeping up. It puts them in the top 10 power rankings, but I don't see that Patriots that high.

[TexanSam]

Man, I remember before the season reading about how much tougher the NFC is this year than the AFC this year, but I'm not so sure. You can't make any definitive judgments after just one game, but Denver looked like they can be right up there with the teams who were predicted to be the class of the AFC (Baltimore, Houston, NE). Add in an always good Pittsburgh team and that's five teams who could all be the #1 seed come playoff time.

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by DX-TEX

I did not know the AP started a new power ranking this year. They have a panel of 12 people picked from the 60 media members who choose the after season awards and use a point system.

http://pro32.ap.org/poll

I don't get their point system. How in the world do the Colts or Dolphins get any first place votes?

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

I don't get their point system. How in the world do the Colts or Dolphins get any first place votes?

They didn't.

The 1st place votes are in parenthesis beside the name of the team.

So the Pats got 8, the Niners got 1, the Ravens got 2, and the Texans got 1.

[Corrosion]

Originally Posted by TexanSam

Man, I remember before the season reading about how much tougher the NFC is this year than the AFC this year, but I'm not so sure. You can't make any definitive judgments after just one game, but Denver looked like they can be right up there with the teams who were predicted to be the class of the AFC (Baltimore, Houston, NE). Add in an always good Pittsburgh team and that's five teams who could all be the #1 seed come playoff time.

Yeah , the AFC looks to be the tougher conference .... and you are spot on looking at Denver being able to play with the big boys. As Ive stated in a couple other threads , their defense and running game were able to carry Tim Tebow to a playoff win .... Then they replace Tebow with Peyton Manning.

Im not so sure Pittsburgh or NE deserve to be in the class that Houston , Baltimore and Denver do .... their defenses are suspect in comparison - although its hard to bet against Tom Brady. I believe they are in the next tier below those three more complete teams.


In the NFC I think the 49ers are in a class by themselves with everybody else a step below. Green Bay is much like NE .... very suspect defense. Maybe the Bears move up on my list if they continue to play well on both sides of the ball.

[The Pencil Neck]

And to pile on, the way the voting works is that the strongest team gets 32 points, the next strongest team gets 31 points, the next strongest, etc. Until you get all the way down to the weakest team, which only gets 1 point.

We got 336 points total. The Dolphins got 21.

The maximum score is 12 voters by 32 points equals 384. The minimum score is 12.