A question about foxsports.com's Power Rankings

BrudLee
10-19-2005, 10:18 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, 10:31 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, 10:33 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, 10:33 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, 11:11 AM
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, 11:12 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, 11:17 AM
Their formula is about as useful as the Sexiest Man Bracket they are pushing lately...

TheMalcolmConnection
10-19-2005, 11:32 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, 11:33 AM
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, 01:18 AM
Don't know what to say about that poll except for the fact that it was generated by FOX.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum