The last one of these for the year brings a predictable nosedive to eighth by the Cowboys, after their unsightly showing in D.C. last weekend. Also, I've gone back and done the rankings for a few years prior to this one, and I'll reveal those over the weekend, so I can analyze the accuracy of this, for better or worse.
One more time, for those who haven't grasped it yet: This is 100 percent objective. I'm punching numbers into a formula, which was taught to me by college football coaches and has been tested and proven effective over not years, but decades. The caveat is that it was built to measure offensive efficiency, and I took the formula and reversed it to measure defense, then subtracted the defensive number from the offensive number to get the total BPI. We'll do it a little different this week, by showing you the rankings on offense and defense (follow the jump), standing on their own.
Here you go:
1. Patriots -- 29.9 (16-0) LW: 1*
2. Colts -- 20.7 (13-3) LW: 2*
3. Steelers -- 11.4 (10-6) LW: 3*
4. Chargers -- 11.3 (11-5) LW: 7*
5. Seahawks -- 11.1 (10-6) LW: 6*
6. Jaguars -- 11.0 (11-5) LW: 5*
7. Packers -- 10.4 (13-3) LW: 9*
8. Cowboys -- 10.2 (13-3) LW: 4*
9. Buccaneers -- 8.3 (9-7) LW: 8*
10. Eagles -- 3.5 (8-8) LW: 11
11. Vikings -- 2.9 (8-8) LW: 10
12. Titans -- 2.6 (10-6) LW: 13*
13. Giants -- 1.8 (10-6) LW: 12*
14. Redskins -- 1.6 (9-7) LW: 16*
15. Bengals -- 1.1 (7-9) LW: 15
16. Cardinals -- minus-0.4 (8-8) LW: 19
17. Browns -- minus-0.4 (10-6) LW: 17
18. Bears -- minus-3.5 (7-9) LW: 18
19. Saints -- minus-4.5 (7-9) LW: 14
20. Texans -- minus-4.6 (8-8) LW: 20
21. Broncos -- minus-5.1 (7-9) LW: 21
22. Rams -- minus-5.2 (3-13) LW: 29
23. Panthers -- minus-7.8 (7-9) LW: 22
24. Ravens -- minus-7.9 (5-11) LW: 26
25. Jets -- minus-9.1 (4-12) LW: 25
26. Bills -- minus-9.3 (7-9) LW: 24
27. Lions -- minus-10.1 (7-9) LW: 23
28. Chiefs -- minus-10.3 (4-12) LW: 28
29. Raiders -- minus-10.8 (4-12) LW: 27
30. Falcons -- minus-13.4 (4-12) LW: 31
31. Dolphins -- minus-14.1 (1-15) LW: 30
32. 49ers -- minus-16.9 (5-11) LW: 32
* Playoff qualifier
OFFENSE
1. Patriots 58.6
2. Colts 46.9
3. Cowboys 44.1
4. Jaguars 42.3
5. Packers 41.9
6. Seahawks 40.3
7. Saints 39.7
8. Browns 39.4
9. Steelers 39.1
10. Chargers 38.6
11. Bengals 38.1
12. Cardinals 37.8
13. Giants 37.0
14. Rams 36.9
15. Eagles 36.1
16. Vikings 35.6
17. Texans 35.0
18. Buccaneers 34.7
19. Redskins 34.6
20. Broncos 34.0
21. Lions 33.8
22. Titans 31.6
23. Bears 31.1
24. Jets 29.7
25. Dolphins 28.9
26. Ravens 27.9
27. Raiders 27.4
28. Bills 27.3
29. Panthers 27.2
30. Falcons 27.2
31. Chiefs 23.9
32. 49ers 20.9
DEFENSE
1. Colts 26.2
2. Buccaneers 26.4
3. Chargers 27.3
4. Steelers 27.7
5. Patriots 28.7
6. Titans 28.9
7. Seahawks 29.2
8. Jaguars 31.3
9. Packers 31.5
10. Eagles 32.6
11. Vikings 32.7
12. Redskins 33.1
13. Cowboys 33.9
14. Chiefs 34.2
15. Bears 34.6
16. Panthers 34.9
17. Giants 35.3
18. Ravens 35.8
19. Bills 36.6
20. Bengals 37.1
21. 49ers 37.9
22. Cardinals 38.1
23. Raiders 38.3
24. Jets 38.9
25. Broncos 39.1
26. Texans 39.6
27. Browns 39.8
28. Falcons 40.6
29. Rams 42.1
30. Dolphins 43.1
31. Lions 43.9
32. Saints 44.2
And here's the Cowboys game-by-game offensive power index numbers. Remember, this formula is meant to measure offensive efficiency, and the barometer for assuring victory is 40. Know what? The index worked to near perfection. When posting a number of 40 or higher, the Cowboys were 12-0. When it was lower than that, they were 1-3. So there.
COWBOYS OFFENSE GAME-BY-GAME
9/9 vs. Giants: 60 (W)
9/16 at Miami: 56 (W)
9/23 at Chicago: 52 (W)
9/30 vs. St. Louis: 60 (W)
10/8 at Buffalo: 31 (W)
10/14 vs. New England: 37 (L)
10/21 vs. Minnesota: 40 (W)
11/4 at Philadelphia: 59 (W)
11/11 at Giants: 47 (W)
11/18 vs. Redskins 44 (W)
11/22 vs. Jets 52 (W)
11/29 vs. Packers 57 (W)
12/9 at Lions 50 (W)
12/16 vs. Eagles 8 (L)
12/22 at Panthers 42 (W)
12/30 at Redskins 10 (L)
Newsletter sign-up: 
Get Dallas Cowboys news on your cell
E-mail 
Comments
Posted by Billy Fred @ 11:39 PM Wed, Jan 02, 2008
Interesting.
Wondering if anyone here has read "The Hidden Game of Football."
Posted by Texman @ 12:25 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Give it up Breer, this makes no sense. Your formula is just - off. Dolphins beat the San Fran??? Eagles beat 3 playoff teams? Nope...
Posted by craigw @ 3:50 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Seeing the Eagles come at #10 and well ahead of the Giants (in the same conference and playing many similar teams) as an 8-8 team just boggles the mind.
I present to you the Naive Power Index Based entirely on net points:
Patriots 315
Colts 188
Packers 144
Cowboys 130
Chargers 128
Steelers 124
Jaguars 107
Seahawks 102
Buccaneers 64
I think most would agree it makes more sense and it's easier to calculate than the BPI.
Posted by Greybeard @ 4:23 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Any sort of power ranking is flawed, regardless of how "tried and true" it may be. Numbers don't account for intangibles. Gameplanning, weather, how one team matches up with another, injuries, either before or during the game, the way the ball bounces even has an effect on the game when a 15 yard punt gains an extra 25 yards on a roll.
On Sunday, the Cowboys defense gave up more points than normal but that was partially a consequence of the offense being unable to sustain drives and of course, score points. As the game wears on and the defense tires it becomes more vulnerable. That doesn't necessarily show up in statistics though.
If numbers were an absolute, then no lower ranked team would beat a higher ranked team. Statistics may not lie, but they never tell the whole story.
A football game can be changed by one player tripping over another while trying to make a tackle, whether a pro bowl player or a back up. It can be changed by a wet field where a player is ready to break a run but slips. It can be changed by one poorly called penalty. It can be changed by a lucky bounce or the wind blowing a ball inside of or beyond the uprights.
Power rankings are silly, period. I don't care if they use statistical anaylsis or they're just some schmoe saying this team is better than that team.
Posted by ntouch4u2 @ 7:04 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Breer, I always thought that you were a joke, this only confirms it. Formula or no Formula, somethings are just common sense and in this case, the sense of the Formula is not common.
DUDE Loose the Formula and use a little common sense because the Formula makes you sound Delusional.
LOL LOL LOL
Go Cowboys....
Posted by John Smith @ 7:19 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
I have my own tested and proven effective formula too. I read Breer's columns and come to a determination that Breer is an idiot.
Posted by ntouch4u2 @ 7:21 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
The Dallas Cowboys finished at 13-3, the third ranked offense, they "Scorched" the majority of their schedule, "Coasted into the playoffs, clinched their division, send 11 players to the Pro Bowl, finish in the top 5 in just about every statistic, have every team and their mother trying to steal coaches, front office personnel etc, LOL LOL LOL, and you weak delusional Formula has The Cowboys finishing that low.
Breer, Give me a Break, scrap the Formula please because it makes you not only sound Delusional, but look Foolish...
Go Cowboys despite a Crazy Formula....
Posted by Tim Burns @ 8:06 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Power Rankings are like opinions, which are like ...holes. The only rankings I ever consider are the Aikman Efficiency Ratings. Troy petitioned the league to change how they rank teams, (pure yardage stats). There is a 13-14 year base of AER's out there. Here's the cool part...In '07, through 17 weeks, the team with the higher combined AER won the game almost 87% of the time. (85% since '05) No other system gives a more accurate picture of where teams are at week-to-week, and those W-L numbers don't lie. The funny thing is, nobody ever talks about them, (especially on the Fox broadcast), and they're kinda hard to find if you don't know they're out there. Google it if you're interested.
Posted by Nic @ 8:28 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
The Seahawks lost to the Matt Moore-led Carolina Panthers.
Stop trying to defend this ranking system every week. No one hear is buying what you are selling.
Posted by Jay @ 8:29 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Get off Breer's back, If the cowboys were #1 in his formula you would talking about how accurate it is. Face facts - the cowboys have fallen off the map the last 4 games. Historically it is a bad sign for a team to go 2-2 in their last 4 games and lose their last game of the season. Cowboys will not make the superbowl face it. the facts are staring us right in the face.
No running game, Romo's thumb, TO is hurt, Glenn is hurt, Roy and Brady can't cover TE's and RB's, and our next opponent will have swagger-NY Giants or Washington.
Posted by DBAR @ 9:03 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Since you are so into rankings and formulas, maybe you should start doing a blog on college football. In the NFL they play the games on the field and the team that wins is the champion. GO 13-3 COWBOYS.
Posted by Hap @ 9:24 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Al,
Your formula is tainted. You can throw out most teams last game of the season, and the last 2 games in some instances (TB).
Now, how about a formula for the playoff teams ?
Something that doesn't require a MIT grad to figure out. Make it elementary for folks like Reammed Fan & BTT, unless he figures out his "Caps Lock" button and grows a brain.
Posted by Rusty G. @ 9:35 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Numerical systems are fine, and objectivity is great, but your assumption that there is applicability in the offense score in reverse, and that you can simply "subtract" to come up with a net score, doesn't seem to have been borne out in past data with any rigor. In other words, unless you bear out the caveats with some semblance of rigor, your entire exercise is just nonsense, which is what it appears to be. The offensive rankings, on the other hand, seem just fine.
Curious.
Posted by BoysFanInDC @ 9:36 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Breer is right, you bunch of morons. Haven't you watched the rapid decline in Romo's numbers over the past four games? You are the ones who are delusional, or maybe just blind. This is definitely not the same Cowboys team that was playing in October and November. Something has happened to the offense, and the defense has shown some pretty bad weaknesses!
Posted by Alex @ 10:09 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Seriously, what's up with the Breer hate? The only response a few of you seem to have is "these numbers can't be right cause...uh, Go Cowboys!" On the contrary, they look pretty fair and accurate to me. Anyway it should be remembered that formulas are only an indicator of PAST success or failure, and at best can only be used to indicate the tendency of a team to play well or poorly. So don't get so hung up about the Cowboys not being ranked ahead of everybody else; a turnaround in the playoffs would not only get a win, but bring the numbers up as well which I guess would make some of you naysayers happier.
Posted by Tony D @ 10:13 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
The concept is flawed. It doesn't mean a thing. This ranks as high as the FIFA standings for Soccer as a misconstrued idea that you can qualify which team is better than the other. Just go by their records and then factor in injuries and how the coaching staff overcomes them and then you may be on to something.
Posted by JL @ 10:17 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
"these numbers can't be right cause...uh, Go Cowboys!"
Alex-that's one of the funniest things I've read on this forum! Thanks for the laugh.
Posted by Vox Veritas @ 10:21 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
"Historically it is a bad sign for a team to go 2-2 in their last 4 games and lose their last game of the season."
The Steelers are 1-3 in their last four games and lost their last game, yet they're ranked #4. It's nobody's fault but Breer's that his rankings are inconsistent.
Posted by Totcs @ 10:23 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Full disclosure - I am a Cowboys homer and have been since I was in 1st grade, but the majority of Cowboys funs are ignorant rednecks. Just look at all the spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors on some of these comments! If it's not something they can eat or kill, they fear it, a la the Breer Power Index. Heaven forbid you say anything negative about the Cowboys. A month ago I thought we were going to the Super Bowl. Now I'm not so sure. And yes, all formulas are flawed, but it gives us another way to look at and analyze the data. There are more than two sides to every story and there is more to our team than a 13-3 record. Hopefully we will find our early to mid-season form and start rolling again and end up in Glendale!
In the meantime, if you don't understand the concept of something, that is no reason to ridicule it.
Posted by Rodney in Atlanta @ 11:25 AM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
It's so ironic because this is exactly the same kinds of responses to some statistical rankings before the Mavericks got bounced last year in the playoffs.
There's a certain writer at ESPN who has his own formula for ranking teams. His number one team was San Antonio going into the playoffs last year, who eventually won the championship.
Albert tells you minions that it's a tried and true formula used for decades and you still don't listen. In fact everything that you minions perceive to be even slightly anti-Cowboy, then you ridicule the guy.
In case some of you don't understand, journalism is supposed to be unbiased. It's amazing how many times that I've seen alot of you criticize this team, but when someone else points out something, you jump all over them and call them anti-Cowboy. You are the same people who live in a fantasy bubble and can't handle the truth in your personal lives.
The only reason why I keep up with this blog is because I no longer live in Texas and I need a local perspective on what's going on with my team. If I was still living in the D/FW area, then I wouldn't waste my time on here because this blog is a crazy ship of fools. I'm not speaking to everyone, just the fools, and we all know you are.
Albert, I would like to take the time to tell you that I think that you've provided a refreshing insight to this blog since you came aboard. I love the Cowboys, but I'm not a "rose colored glasses" blind homer. Thanks for your insightful hard work. Keep it up.
And I am so sick of this CAPTCHA code crap!!!
Posted by David @ 12:42 PM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
We may be rednecks but we are fans so go blow your mouth somewhere else. This ranking is a Joke and the 13-3 record is real. The good thing is we dont have to justify anything with a formula as we have to win games just like we did. If we would have not pounded teams early and barely got by and wound up with the same record these people would be loving the cowboys for winning and playing with fight. No one beats up the cheaters in New England for almost losing to the Eagles or the horrible Ravens. We only lost two meaningful games this year and our QB was hurt most of the Eagles game. The great thing about statistics is you can make them say any thing you want and these are simply silly statistics being we are behind a team that we beat soundly.
Posted by HittinMachine @ 2:44 PM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Wow. You SuperHomers are a bunch of twitchy whiners. Al is just plugging in numbers to a pre-determined formula and sharing the results. He's not giving an opinion of any kind. But you neurotic cheerleaders freak out if anyone makes reference to somebody having better stats than the Cowboys.
Cowboys have not played well since the Packers were in town, and I'm worried about their ability to "turn it on" next week. Having said that, I've been a Cowboys fan for 25 years, and will be rooting for a return to the Super Bowl!
Keep sharing your stats, info, and anything else Cowboy related Al! You've definitely made a contribution to this site, IMO.
Posted by Matt @ 4:24 PM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
Steelers at 3.............whens the last time you watched a football game.......they are not better than....
Chargers
Jags
Packers
or Cowboys
Posted by Vox Veritas @ 9:11 PM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
"Albert tells you minions that it's a tried and true formula used for decades and you still don't listen."
Yeah, he said that about the offensive numbers. But then he takes it upon himself to use the formula in reverse to rank defenses, and this huge point escaped your scrutiny exactly how, Rodney? The formula that was taught to Breer may be "tried and true" and "used for decades", but the rest isn't. That means that Breer's power index isn't "tried and true" and hasn't been "used for decades", Rodney.
"In fact everything that you minions perceive to be even slightly anti-Cowboy, then you ridicule the guy."
Yeah, and now I'm going to ridicule you. You should read closer next time and save yourself some embarassment.
Posted by Vox Veritas @ 9:13 PM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
"Al is just plugging in numbers to a pre-determined formula and sharing the results. He's not giving an opinion of any kind. But you neurotic cheerleaders freak out if anyone makes reference to somebody having better stats than the Cowboys."
Read my comments to Rodney, dunce. Anybody else that thinks that the "Breer Power Index" is "tried and true" and has been "used for decades" should do the same.
Posted by Vox Veritas @ 9:26 PM Thu, Jan 03, 2008
"I'm punching numbers into a formula, which was taught to me by college football coaches and has been tested and proven effective over not years, but decades."
You should be ashamed, misleading these idiots like that, Breer. That's obviously as far as some of them were able to read. Don't you think these learned college coaches might have a different formula for measuring defensive efficiency, if they felt that one could be formulated at all? What you've done is taken a perfectly good recipe for carrot cake, added some nutmeg, now you're gonna call it roast beef.
Posted by Rodney in Atlanta @ 8:05 AM Fri, Jan 04, 2008
Vox Veritas, since you attacked me directly, then you must be one of those idiot minions that I speak of. Anyone with common sense and a little knowledge of statistical analysis can figure out how to get defensive numbers out of that formula. Besides, it's just that, a formula, yet stupid people like you have to take it so seriously.
Embarrassed? Hardly. You should be embarrassed for taking references about a sports team so seriously and then attacking particular postings because they speak the truth about people like you.
Get a life, or better yet, go sharpen your skills on your music because it sucks!
Posted by Rodney in Atlanta @ 8:11 AM Fri, Jan 04, 2008
"What you've done is taken a perfectly good recipe for carrot cake, added some nutmeg, now you're gonna call it roast beef."
The most ridiculous analogy ever. So, you're admitting that his offensive numbers are correct, right?
Forget what I told you before about getting better with your music. Please go get an education you moron.
Posted by PCC @ 11:33 AM Fri, Jan 04, 2008
I've been a cowboy fan for almost forty years,and quite frankly this team reminds me of the danny white years not the roger or troy years. Yeah romo has some impressive stats but look at the entire team and if any of you are old enough to remember you will likely notice the similarities. They were good but not good enough