The Hill's Week 10 Power Rankings

by The Hill on Nov 10, 2009 12:58 AM EST Comment 4 comments

There were some minor shuffles this past week in the latest rankings update. The Chargers win over the Giants shot them 7 ranks up into a very reasonable position this week. The biggest losers were the Broncos, Eagles, and Lions who all dropped 3 places. At this point in the season, it's becoming very clear who the contenders are and who the pretenders are. There are some very basic bench marks with this points system.

100+ points: Elite team who will contend in the playoffs.

75-100 points: Solid teams with shots at the wild card, they're a few players away from being elite.

50-75 points: The mediocre teams. They're all floating around .500, but they're generally able to play good games against the solid teams and even the elites.

25-50 points: Not a very good team. Could be a down year, could be due to injuries. They'll be competitive, but they're not expected to win anything.

25- points: Horrible. They're trying to lose games. I see the Titans leaving this group very soon.

Playoff Picture

It's halfway through the season so it isn't too late to start picturing some playoff standings. As of these rankings:

AFC

1. Colts

2. Bengals

3. Broncos

4. Patriots

5. Steelers

6. Texans

Looking in: Chargers

Falling Behind: Ravens, Jets

NFC

1. Saints

2. Vikings

3. Cowboys

4. Cardinals

5. Falcons

6. Eagles

Looking in: Giants

Falling Behind: Bears, Packers

Rank	Team	QA Score	Change from Last Week
1	New Orleans Saints	156.13	0
2	Indianapolis Colts	133.63	2
3	Cincinnati Bengals	130.63	2
4	Minnesota Vikings	126.25	-1
5	Denver Broncos	118.25	-3
6	New England Patriots	108.75	0
7	Dallas Cowboys	103.13	0
8	Pittsburgh Steelers	102.00	0
9	Atlanta Falcons	87.00	2
10	Arizona Cardinals	86.75	2
11	Houston Texans	78.60	-2
12	San Diego Chargers	75.88	7
13	Philadelphia Eagles	75.75	-3
14	New York Giants	68.71	-1
15	Baltimore Ravens	66.50	-1
16	New York Jets	65.38	0
17	Chicago Bears	58.63	-2
18	Miami Dolphins	56.13	0
19	Green Bay Packers	50.38	-2
20	Jacksonville Jaguars	44.88	2
21	San Francisco 49ers	42.50	-1
22	Carolina Panthers	41.50	-1
23	Seattle Seahawks	37.50	1
24	Buffalo Bills	31.75	-1
25	Oakland Raiders	19.63	0
26	Tennessee Titans	13.75	3
27	Washington Redskins	9.88	-1
28	Kansas City Chiefs	2.63	-1
29	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	0.38	3
30	Cleveland Browns	(3.88)	0
31	Detroit Lions	(5.50)	-3
32	St. Louis Rams	(5.50)	-1

The views expressed in these FanPosts are not necessarily those of the writers or SBNation.

0 recs | Comment 4 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Is this the year of the worst football teams, ever?

The Raiders, who don’t have a guy in the offensive backfield that I’d trust to peel potatoes without fumbling or throwing an incompletion, are better that seven other teams.

The Bills call their own QB “Captain check-down,” their top receiver has less catches than some teams’ secondaries, and they haven’t had a linebacker that was healthy since 2008, and they’re only the ninth worst team?

Jake Delhomme is currently running a secret season-long charity for opposition CBs that only he knows about, and the Panthers are a princely 11th from bottom. What’s going on?

It isn’t just that there are a lot of teams with bad records – that’s bound to happen every year in a win/loss system – but that there are so many teams playing such awful football. Is this worse than last year, with the hapless Lions shining an awful light? Can anyone remember a year with more ineptitude in the modern NFL?

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.

by Comedic.Sans on Nov 10, 2009 2:12 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Alot of coach used to take what they learned along the way and build on it

Alot of the new crew didn’t have much to build on to begin with and they’re losing what they have.

Add to that the Snyder’s and Davis’ and Lerner’s who gladly dig their own graves with their ineptitude.

Kraft could definitely teach some owners and Bill could hold coaching classes, but then the league might get top heavy. The worse the other teams are, the more likely Pats games get televised here. It’s selfish motivation, but it’s all mine.

My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 10, 2009 8:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The raiders

actually are a good defensive team, and a good running team…

They lose because Russell just hands the ball over.

"These players, a lot of other people didn't believe in them, but they believe in themselves. And that is all that matters."- Bill Belichick

by Mainiac on Nov 10, 2009 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure about a good running team...

McFadden’s creeping up the fumble stakes – he has 4 fumbles and 2 fumbles lost out of 47 rush attempts. I repeat – 47 rush attempts.

That’s hideous, and statistically worse than Steve Slaton – Slaton has 7 fumbles, but spread over 116 carries. McFadden fumbles it once every twelve times he touches it. That’d be awful for an undrafted free agent rookie, but this guy was drafted fourth overall in 2008 . On any other team, a first-round, top-five pick fumbling it almost 10% of the time would be news; on the Raiders, it’s not even a side-note.

He might come right, but on a team that is purely incapable of passing the ball, it can only get worse for a fumble-prone guy – opposition defences can load the box at will knowing he’s likely to cough it up. And 10% of the time, he will.

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.

by Comedic.Sans on Nov 10, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs