ESPN power rankings after week 5

[Billy Flynt]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings/_/year/2010/week/6

Not that we necessarily deserve respect but the lowest ranked team with a winning record by 6 spots and two teams that are 1-3 (Cowboys and Vikes ) 4 and 5 spots ahead of us... wow.

 

[AzStevenCal]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings/_/year/2010/week/6

Not that we necessarily deserve respect but the lowest ranked team with a winning record by 6 spots and two teams that are 1-3 (Cowboys and Vikes ) 4 and 5 spots ahead of us... wow.

If that bothers you, you should take a listen to the ESPN NFL Today podcast. In their power rankings we have moved from 31st all the way up to 30th after beating the Saints. Only Buffalo and (I think) Carolina trail us.

Steve

 

[jmt]

Yeah, the Vikings are looking good.

 

[Osbern61]

If that bothers you, you should take a listen to the ESPN NFL Today podcast. In their power rankings we have moved from 31st all the way up to 30th after beating the Saints. Only Buffalo and (I think) Carolina trail us.

Steve

Man, thats absurd.

 

[daves]

Man, thats absurd.

I think the Cardinals should be ranked higher than that - their 3-2 record is what it is - but just to put things into perspective:

They are ranked 29th in point differential (-50, 25th in points scored, 31st in points allowed), 31st in total offense (26th rushing, 29th passing), 27th in defense (28th vs. the rush, 26th vs. the pass), and tied for 7th worst in the league in turnover differential (-3).

Those rankings are historically bad; some teams are below the Cardinals in each category, but only Buffalo is close to the Cardinals in almost every ranking, with even Carolina being far ahead on defense.

And the Cardinals are starting an UDFA rookie at QB. Ugh.

So, one can certainly argue that the Cardinals should be higher than 30th in a "Power Ranking", but i'm not sure that the ranking is "absurd".

...dave

 

[Vermont Maverick]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings/_/year/2010/week/6

Not that we necessarily deserve respect but the lowest ranked team with a winning record by 6 spots and two teams that are 1-3 (Cowboys and Vikes ) 4 and 5 spots ahead of us... wow.

The only beef I have with the rankings is that after a win over the Superbowl Champs, we only move up one spot. And that is a small beef. We still have a lot to prove, though I remain optomistic that we can win our pathetic division. They do rank us first in our division.

Let me ask you something. If you were forced to bet $10,000 on Arizona vs. Dallas or Minnesota right now on a neutral site, who would you bet on?

 

[AzStevenCal]

I think the Cardinals should be ranked higher than that - their 3-2 record is what it is - but just to put things into perspective:

They are ranked 29th in point differential (-50, 25th in points scored, 31st in points allowed), 31st in total offense (26th rushing, 29th passing), 27th in defense (28th vs. the rush, 26th vs. the pass), and tied for 7th worst in the league in turnover differential (-3).

Those rankings are historically bad; some teams are below the Cardinals in each category, but only Buffalo is close to the Cardinals in almost every ranking, with even Carolina being far ahead on defense.

And the Cardinals are starting an UDFA rookie at QB. Ugh.

So, one can certainly argue that the Cardinals should be higher than 30th in a "Power Ranking", but i'm not sure that the ranking is "absurd".

...dave

Everybody does power rankings differently but at some point you do have to pay attention to the most important stat. We are 3 - 2. Also, we have played more road games than home games. And, although we play in the weakest division in the NFL, only one of our first 5 games have been against these inferior foes and that was a road game to boot.

We may not be as good as our record and in the end we may actually turn out to be the 30th best team but rating us there now is absurd, IMO.

Steve