A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings

BrudLee · 10-19-2005, 09:18 AM

As a purely impartial observer, I can't help but wonder why Fox's Power Rankings take into account the 2004 performance. While it may be interesting, the amount of turnover on NFL rosters makes the statistics almost useless. Last year, the Redskins had a completely different WR corps, an injured QB for most of the season, and (most importantly) a losing record. Yet last year's offensive numbers (and they were offensive) are part of this year's ranking.

We also had the #3 overall defense last year (and were yards from #1), and currently have the #5 defense. Somehow, Fox has translated that into 14th place.

I'm all for meaningless statistics as a rule. I can give you twenty factoids that will "guarantee" a victory on Sunday. None of them will involve last year's roster, since I can't fathom how Coles, Gardner, Smoot, Pierce, or an inured reserve roster with Jansen, Bowen, and Barrow will affect our chances.

TheMalcolmConnection · 10-19-2005, 09:31 AM

I would think that most people have now stopped taking them seriously. That formula they use is completely crazy. Just as with people's opinions, there's no "formula" that is going to explain who's going to be the best. I would take people's opinions over that formula.

firstdown · 10-19-2005, 09:33 AM

They go back so many games making some of the 2004 games part of their current formula. As we get deeper into the season it will be based on just 2005. Who knows who came up with the formula but it sounds a little bit of how the BCS works in college football.

56FAN · 10-19-2005, 09:33 AM

anyone have some toilet paper ? that's about what i think of the power rankings. they make come out the way they want.

Paintrain · 10-19-2005, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 56FAN

anyone have some toilet paper ? that's about what i think of the power rankings. they make come out the way they want.

Exactly... Until Power Rankings=BCS standings and they effect the Redskins playoff chances I could care less where we are ranked..

MTK · 10-19-2005, 10:12 AM

Because of roster turnover last year is totally irrelevant. They made a nice attempt at coming up with an unbiased power poll, but including last season in the equation doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

jbcjr14 · 10-19-2005, 10:17 AM

Their formula is about as useful as the Sexiest Man Bracket they are pushing lately...

TheMalcolmConnection · 10-19-2005, 10:32 AM

Yeah, I can't get enough of "football's sexiest man". SERIOUSLY now, how many women actually watch football?

Well, the answer to that is "only the good ones".

But seriously though, they should be having a cheerleader poll, NOT a man-crush poll.

BrudLee · 10-19-2005, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbcjr14

Their formula is about as useful as the Sexiest Man Bracket they are pushing lately...

That curiously doesn't include me.

The fix is on!!!

skinsfan0201 · 10-20-2005, 12:18 AM

Don't know what to say about that poll except for the fact that it was generated by FOX.

10-19-2005, 09:31 AM	#2
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings I would think that most people have now stopped taking them seriously. That formula they use is completely crazy. Just as with people's opinions, there's no "formula" that is going to explain who's going to be the best. I would take people's opinions over that formula. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

10-19-2005, 09:33 AM	#4
56FAN Special Teams Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: MANASSAS VA Age: 63 Posts: 323	Re: A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings anyone have some toilet paper ? that's about what i think of the power rankings. they make come out the way they want.

10-19-2005, 10:12 AM	#6
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,832	Re: A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings Because of roster turnover last year is totally irrelevant. They made a nice attempt at coming up with an unbiased power poll, but including last season in the equation doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

10-19-2005, 10:17 AM	#7
jbcjr14 The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Austin, Texas Age: 55 Posts: 2,015	Re: A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings Their formula is about as useful as the Sexiest Man Bracket they are pushing lately... __________________ "Work Harder: millions on welfare are counting on you" - Obama 2009 address to Congress.

10-19-2005, 10:32 AM	#8
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings Yeah, I can't get enough of "football's sexiest man". SERIOUSLY now, how many women actually watch football? Well, the answer to that is "only the good ones". But seriously though, they should be having a cheerleader poll, NOT a man-crush poll. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

10-19-2005, 09:18 AM	#1
BrudLee Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE Posts: 3,494	A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings As a purely impartial observer, I can't help but wonder why Fox's Power Rankings take into account the 2004 performance. While it may be interesting, the amount of turnover on NFL rosters makes the statistics almost useless. Last year, the Redskins had a completely different WR corps, an injured QB for most of the season, and (most importantly) a losing record. Yet last year's offensive numbers (and they were offensive) are part of this year's ranking. We also had the #3 overall defense last year (and were yards from #1), and currently have the #5 defense. Somehow, Fox has translated that into 14th place. I'm all for meaningless statistics as a rule. I can give you twenty factoids that will "guarantee" a victory on Sunday. None of them will involve last year's roster, since I can't fathom how Coles, Gardner, Smoot, Pierce, or an inured reserve roster with Jansen, Bowen, and Barrow will affect our chances. __________________ There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.

10-19-2005, 09:33 AM	#3
firstdown Living Legend Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: chesapeake, va Age: 61 Posts: 15,817	Re: A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings They go back so many games making some of the 2004 games part of their current formula. As we get deeper into the season it will be based on just 2005. Who knows who came up with the formula but it sounds a little bit of how the BCS works in college football.

10-20-2005, 12:18 AM	#10
skinsfan0201 Special Teams Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Falls Church, VA Age: 46 Posts: 234	Re: A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings Don't know what to say about that poll except for the fact that it was generated by FOX.

A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings

Locker Room Main Forum