Rankings Thread: Week 7

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:38 am

Sagarin has us back up to #4.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl05.htm

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 12:39 pm

Ever since you've started linking him, JSPB, I like the Sagarin ratings a lot. Not because he's got us pretty high on a consistent basis. . .but because there are reasons for why teams get placed where they are.

Although, maybe the intuition of ESPN analysts count as "reasons." :lol:

What I do know is that the Redskins are consistently ranked as the lowest team with their particular W-L record on ESPN. Last week there was no 3-2 team below us, and before our first loss we were the lowest ranked 3-0 team. Personally, I expect to see us as the lowest ranked 4-2 team, with some 3-3 teams above us. Just a hunch.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:50 pm

Yeah I bet ESPN still has the Cowboys ranked above us this week.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:52 pm

btw I know these rankings meaning nothing. But after years (including early this year) being the butt of everybody's jokes and disdain, I like to see these people giving us some respect.

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:55 pm

Why is the AFC West above the NFC east?

The score is: AFC West 4 against NFC East 5

See:

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... fc5#191380

There is no question that these are the two toughest divisions in the NFL. But victories are victories. Pretty even anyway.

Chargers are also a better team than their record indicates anyway. Still plenty of footbal to be played and the number of injuries are alarminglymounting throughout the NFL. Teams such as Green Bay, Detroit, Seattle, and others have been decimated. It is becoming a season of who has the least number of injuries or who copes with them better.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:57 pm

Eric Allen has us (and the rest of the NFC East) at #5, and Ditka put us at #4 (he also has us beating the G-spots next week).

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 4:04 pm

Peter King has us at #7.

7. Washington (4-2). Yards gained vs. San Francisco: 457. Yards allowed: 194.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/w ... ek7/1.html

He also said

6. I think, very soon, I am going to have officially apologize to Joe Gibbs for saying what an idiot he was to put Mark Brunell back in the lineup after one lousy Patrick Ramsey week. Brunell has looked efficient, decisive and accurate in leading the Redskins to a three-way tie atop the NFC East.

Scottskins · Post by **Scottskins** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 4:07 pm

that makes me sick for some reason....

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 7:08 pm

hkHog wrote:Peter King has us at #7.

7. Washington (4-2). Yards gained vs. San Francisco: 457. Yards allowed: 194.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/w ... ek7/1.html

He also said

6. I think, very soon, I am going to have officially apologize to Joe Gibbs for saying what an idiot he was to put Mark Brunell back in the lineup after one lousy Patrick Ramsey week. Brunell has looked efficient, decisive and accurate in leading the Redskins to a three-way tie atop the NFC East.

Notice how he still gets a dig in, by saying Rasmsey had a lousy week. I believe we won that start, Peter, and that he was removed due to injury. What a Putz.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:51 am

JSPB22 wrote:
hkHog wrote:Peter King has us at #7.

7. Washington (4-2). Yards gained vs. San Francisco: 457. Yards allowed: 194.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/w ... ek7/1.html

He also said

6. I think, very soon, I am going to have officially apologize to Joe Gibbs for saying what an idiot he was to put Mark Brunell back in the lineup after one lousy Patrick Ramsey week. Brunell has looked efficient, decisive and accurate in leading the Redskins to a three-way tie atop the NFC East.

Notice how he still gets a dig in, by saying Rasmsey had a lousy week. I believe we won that start, Peter, and that he was removed due to injury. What a Putz.

yes. additionally, we are not "tied" for 1st in the NFC East, we are in 1st (we have the best record within our division).

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:30 pm

ESPN has us at 14:

Redskins

Ranking: 14
Prev.: (16)

Record: 4-2-0

We'll admit we were doubters, but anyone out there still think Mark Brunell doesn't have anything left?

There is only one 4-2 team ranked below us--the Chiefs. The Patriots are somehow still ranked above us at 3-3, and the Chargers, despite a losing record, are above us.

I think that ESPN has an AFC-happy bias. They are holding onto this year as if the AFC is dominating the NFC, just like they did last year. I think that the reality is that, aside from the Colts themselves, NFC teams are the more dominant force this year. If this holds true to the end of the season, it will be interesting to see how long ESPN sticks with their pre-season analysis.

Punu · Post by **Punu** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 6:21 pm

http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/powerrankings

Well Sportsline has us in the top 10.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:42 pm

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:ESPN has us at 12:
Redskins

Ranking: 14
Prev.: (16)

Record: 4-2-0

We'll admit we were doubters, but anyone out there still think Mark Brunell doesn't have anything left?

There is only one 4-2 team ranked below us--the Chiefs. The Patriots are somehow still ranked above us at 3-3, and the Chargers, despite a losing record, are above us.

I think that ESPN has an AFC-happy bias. They are holding onto this year as if the AFC is dominating the NFC, just like they did last year. I think that the reality is that, aside from the Colts themselves, NFC teams are the more dominant force this year. If this holds true to the end of the season, it will be interesting to see how long ESPN sticks with their pre-season analysis.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:27 am

Redskins2k5 · Post by **Redskins2k5** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:52 pm

everyone still be hating on us.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:35 pm

This one is very similar to Sagarin, but he has us at #3.
http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:51 pm

JSPB22 wrote:This one is very similar to Sagarin, but he has us at #3.
http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/

Notice that in this poll and the Sagarin poll Dallas and NY are only rated in the 10-13 range and yet in the "human" polls they're rated higher than we are. That just shows a lot of hype and bias.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 8:42 pm

I so can't wait till we beat the Gnats...I don't care if they respect us in the Rankings as long as we keep winning. I think 11-5 might be necessary to get into the playoffs this year. There are several good teams in the NFC East and NFC South.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:49 pm

Fox has us up to #7.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5023840

njskinsfan · Post by **njskinsfan** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:56 pm

4th sounds fair. Objectively it makes perfect sense. the skins have the 2nd ranked offense and the 4th ranked defense.

Where else should we be ranked?

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:59 pm

njskinsfan wrote:4th sounds fair. Objectively it makes perfect sense. the skins have the 2nd ranked offense and the 4th ranked defense.

Where else should we be ranked?

I still think 4th is a little high and if we dont start controlling the games like our stats say we should by not self destructing then we'll definately deserve to fall off of the ranks.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:24 am

njskinsfan wrote:4th sounds fair. Objectively it makes perfect sense. the skins have the 2nd ranked offense and the 4th ranked defense.

Where else should we be ranked?

The case for 4th would be a lot stronger if we were 5-1, or if we had blown out some team other than the 49ers. This week is a chance to go 5-2 (not a shabby record for that point in the season), and it's also a chance to blow out a very respectable team.

I'm not predicting a blowout, but I think if we killed the Giants you'd see a lot more respect going to the Skins and Joe Gibbs. ESPN is probably 2 weeks away from ranking us at #4 as long as we keep winning.

Buzz Dog · Post by **Buzz Dog** » Thu Oct 27, 2005 9:59 am

I really don't like power rankings. They are based purely on opinion. That being said, Sagarin uses a quantitative model in his approach, employing any number of statistical measures to come up with his rankings.

His picks this year are 52-47 against the spread. That is a pretty good number considering most "experts" rarely do better than .500.

FYI, he has the Giants beating us but not covering. This not because the Giants are ranked higher but because they get an additional 4.27 points for being the home team.

Personally, I like being the dog in this game. I think the Skins win outright.

njskinsfan · Post by **njskinsfan** » Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:35 pm

The guy from (ny) Newsday has us ranked 13th!!!

With the entire NFC East ahead of us.

The only negative stat against us is TO ratio. No one has mentioned how good we are also in time of posession. Our defense would be ranked #1 if it were not for some of those silly big plays we gave up.

xhadow · Post by **xhadow** » Fri Oct 28, 2005 1:02 am

I know this is on a slightly different subject but isn't this the same problem that the NCAA is having with the BCS.

At least we have a playoff so all we need to do is get there which means we will have to win the division because if things keep going the way they are the Wild Card is going to be a close battle but it definately will come from the East.