A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings

[BrudLee]

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.