Newsletter sign-up: 
Get Dallas Cowboys news on your cellPower Index Ranking
10:45 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007 | Permalink
E-mail News tips
 |
 |
 
|
|
February 2008
Categories
Movers and Shakers Pre-season Texas Stadium dallasnews.com
Sports Blogs |
So I gave you the offense and the defense power index numbers last night -- and remember, I never said this was flawless, just an experiment on my part -- and now, I'll give you the overall rankings. Remember, this isn't my opinion (I think you all know when those are mine), but rather a statistical measure of a team's efficiency all the way around. I know from an offensive standpoint, this index has held up for decades for certain coaches, and that's why I feel comfortable using it. Defensively, it's a bit more problematic. One flaw in it is that I did include special teams points and turnovers in the equation. So that skewed offensive and defensive numbers, but should give a better overall depiction of teams as a whole when going to do this end-to-end ranking. Here's the list I came up with (on the jump). And a special thanks to Michael from Philly. He suggested a formula he had, which I didn't use. But it motivated me to dig up the old formula I had, to see what I'd get. The results, I think, paint a pretty good picture. BREER POWER INDEX RANKING What I'm hoping this does is ferret out the overrateds as the season goes from here. The Browns would be an example. And maybe it will forecast a late riser -- Perhaps the in-turmoil Bengals? I really don't know how this will turn out. But I thought I'd give it a shot, anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
Comments
Posted by gpaq @ 10:59 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
i think all 'power rankings' are for those idiots who don't understand football. is it so hard to look at W-L, offensive & defense rank, turnover differential etc. to have a good idea why a team is good or bad? oh, and maybe watch a few games.
Posted by gfunk @ 11:05 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
Word gpaq! Al's stupid "power rankings" are nothing but BS bunk. Hey Al, let's get the blog readers to all chip in on a one way ticket back to the Northeast for you. Deal????
Posted by Dave @ 11:06 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
You have the Steelers at #2 and you say you are removing the overrateds. Thats an oxymoron my friend.
The Steelers have played nobody and lost to two nobodys in the process. The Steelers have one of the lowest (if not the lowest) strength of schedules in the league and you are giving them way to much credit. Maybe you're just listening to the *other* media way to much to make your decision.
Posted by Daniel @ 11:32 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
First of all, I hate power rankings, but gfunk: you're an idiot.
Breer is the best contributor to this blog and consistently gives the best x's and o's cowboys breakdowns each week (online or in print). Go eat some more paste and make sure you check with mommy before posting next time.
Posted by Michael @ 11:34 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
I posted this in another area of the blog, but its rightful place is here.
I actually sent Albert an email yesterday asking him to post his 'Breer' Power Rankings. He may have been independently contemplating doing so, but the results are the same nonetheless.
I also actually sent him my own power rankings. Mine take into account yards gained, yards allowed, points forced, points against, avg. starting field position (which is mostly an indicator of special teams prowess, but will concede that turnovers contribute to success here as well), W/L differential, and strength of schedule.
The statistics behind it are pretty basic: For each statistic cited, a team's score is just the difference between a team's performance in the statistic and the average of the league's performance in the statistic, divided by the standard deviation of the league's performance.
Here's what we get:
Rank TEAM Total Score
1 New England 15.433
2 Indianapolis 12.509
3 Dallas 10.415
4 Green Bay 8.387
5 Pittsburgh 8.011
6 Tennessee 3.802
7 NY Giants 3.724
8 Jacksonville 3.390
9 Tampa Bay 2.724
10 Denver 2.514
11 Philadelphia 2.264
12 San Diego 1.811
13 Washington 1.391
14 Detroit 0.391
15 Minnesota -0.123
16 Chicago -0.185
17 Cleveland -0.731
18 Arizona -1.261
19 New Orleans -1.436
20 Cincinnati -1.776
21 Houston -1.884
22 Kansas City -3.639
23 Seattle -3.778
24 Buffalo -3.846
25 Carolina -4.112
26 Atlanta -5.501
27 Baltimore -5.761
28 Oakland -7.596
29 Miami -7.684
30 St. Louis -8.562
31 San Francisco -9.171
32 NY Jets -9.718
Understand that the statistics used are not predictive in nature, only an indication of how well the teams have played thus far.
The method confirms what we all think: The Pats have played far and away better than the rest of the league and that there's 5 very good teams right now and 5 very bad ones.
Thoughts?
Posted by Teddy @ 11:37 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
Nice try. But statistics are for losers. By the way, Jaguars have a 6-3 record, not a 4-5 record.
Posted by Michael @ 11:50 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
Dave - Pittsburgh's strength of schedule isn't all that bad (opponents record is 37-44). Just for good measure, Dallas' is 38-43.
What's odd about Albert's and my own power rankings is the disposition of Denver. Are they that low (as in Albert's) or high (as in mine)? Probably some place in between. Their strength of schedule is just brutal (opponents are 50-31) matched only by Minnesota. Since Week 2 when they played the Raiders, their opponents have been Jax, Indy, SD, Pitt, GB, Detroit, and KC (and Tennessee is up next).
For a team that's not great but decent, their record is pretty good against that competition.
Posted by Scott @ 12:10 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
Nice try at the ratings but they don't mean too much without knowing how they are calculated. I'd be more interested if you used an existing non-traditional ranking method and commented on it.
One that I've followed for years and seems to be a good indication of how teams really measure is DVOA at http://www.footballoutsiders.com/. They look at every play rather than just math with overall game numbers.
Posted by craigw @ 12:41 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
I like most of Albert's work, but I suspect he tweaked things until the Steelers came out ahead of the 'Boys. :P
If I was to make up a system like this, I would want to see some kind of indication of how they're playing NOW. Maybe weighting the last 3 games more heavily than the first ones.
Posted by CowboyFanInPA @ 4:44 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
Lighten up on Albert, guys! He's the best thing to happen to the DMN in years. He may not always be right, but he IS a fairly objective Cowboys fan, is analytical, articulate, and a damned good reporter who tries to give you a variety of perspectives. It ain't always been that way with the DMN staff.
Read the Washongton Post Redskins stories and compare, if you don't believe it. TERRIBLE, unfocused, with blinders on. Pennsylvania media are the same with the Eagles and the Steelers. We got a good thing going; stop being narrow-minded!
Posted by Ken in Irvine @ 5:30 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
Oh no! Someone is suggesting a new view of things. Quick, let's all hate on him!!!
Posted by Brandon B @ 9:08 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007
Without seeing the formula, it is pointless arguing the list. Obviously it over-rates a team that has lost to 2 not-so-good teams and almost lost at home to another not-so-good team.
Posted by John @ 9:46 AM Fri, Nov 16, 2007
Don't worry about the idiots on here Al. You have been the best writer on here in a long time! I'm glad you're here and please stay.