An Interesting Conundrum

by Brian Shrout on Sep 29, 2009 11:07 PM MDT

There are currently seven undefeated teams in the NFL. They are: New York Giants, Indianapolis, New Orleans, Baltimore, New York Jets, Minnesota and Denver. If you go to the various sports sites, they are mostly ranked in the top ten. But an interesting thought occurred to me, so, let's play "What if" after the jump.

    As I mentioned, if you go the various sports websites where their "experts" have ranked the NFL teams in order of how good they supposedly are, you will find all but one of the seven undefeated teams in the top ten (care to guess who was left out?). For example, CBS sportsline.com has the following Power Rankings:

1)New York Giants
2)Indianapolis
3)New Orleans
4)Baltimore
5)New York Jets
6)Minnesota
15)Denver

   What if the incomprehensible should happen? What if there is a bizarre, freak of nature weekend in which the most improbable streak of unimaginable upsets should occur? What if Ed Hochuli is accidentally cloned and put in charge of five separate games and blows a crucial call in each? What if some "poor" teams play so far above themselves that it seems as if they've been replaced by space aliens? Well . . . you get the idea. What if the following unthinkable results should happen to occur?

The Giants lose to Kansas City.
Indianapolis loses to Seattle.
The Saints beat the Jets. (okay, this one may not be so far-fetched)
Baltimore loses to New England. (ditto the previous parenthetical comment)
The Jets lose to New Orleans.
Minnesota loses to Green Bay. (see not on New Orleans/NY Jets and Baltimore/New England)
Denver beats Dallas. (I'm anticipating this one happening)

   This would mean that there would be only two undefeated teams in the league: New Orleans and Denver. Now for the conundrum:

How will the so-called "experts" rank the teams after such a disastrous weekend?

Any takers on the notion that we'd simply see the top six shuffled a bit while the #15 team remains more or less in the same spot?

Just an oddball thought.

Poll

If the unthinkable were to happen leaving New Orleans and Denver as the only undefeated teams:

Absolutely nothing would change in the rankings

5 votes

Pittsburgh could lose to San Diego to go 1-3 and still be ranked above Denver

38 votes

Denver will get respect, but still be low in the rankings

19 votes

Denver will get respect

2 votes

It doesn't really matter because the rankings are a joke

31 votes

I'd rather play "When we win" than "What if"

5 votes

13-3 until we aren't

19 votes

119 votes | Poll has closed

This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 2 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

these power rankings are really a joke anyway...

It all really boils down to peoples opinions based on nothing more then.. well… their opinions!!! I voted for Pitt being 1-3 and rated higher than Denver at 4-0 but then it all depends on whose opinion your reading!!!

"even a stopped clock is right twice a day" Yosemite Sam

by lovewatchinthegame on Sep 29, 2009 11:28 PM MDT reply actions

no argument there

I just think it would be a hoot to have a scenario in which Denver and New Orleans are the only undefeated teams and watch the MSM experts squirm as they try to figure out what to do with that mess.

"The best defense is a good offense. Or is it the other way around." Wolverine
Pray for the best, prepare for the worst, and know you will come down somewhere between the two.
Livin' in La La Land and Lovin' It

by Brian Shrout on Sep 29, 2009 11:31 PM MDT up reply actions

wow I just had a visual...

MSM “experts” squirming…. poof and just like that the visual is gone…. they don’t know what it is like to squirm or the feeling of remorse, or what it is like to retract a statement…heck I don’t even think they even read the comments on their articles… same goes for the power ranking “experts” they wouldn’t know power if it slapped them in the face!!! I would love to go back and do some research on just how wrong they are week after week but it just would be a waste of time!!!!

"even a stopped clock is right twice a day" Yosemite Sam

by lovewatchinthegame on Sep 29, 2009 11:40 PM MDT up reply actions

It's kind of funny that USA Today has us ranked #1

Some of these sports sites with their biased opinion of the "Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda Teams crack me up B.

by bfree2bronc on Sep 30, 2009 12:01 AM MDT reply actions

If that is any consolation for any of you...heh heh heh...13-3 Baby!!!

by bfree2bronc on Sep 30, 2009 12:03 AM MDT up reply actions

OK try 16th... nice try Bfree... you got me!!!!!!!!!!! I went and checked it...

(http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2009-power-rankings.htm)

Still 16 out of 32 ain’t too bad when they had us at..what 18 at the beginning of the season… wow the MSM is really catchin’ up!!!

"even a stopped clock is right twice a day" Yosemite Sam

by lovewatchinthegame on Sep 30, 2009 12:30 AM MDT up reply actions

Let's try this again. Jeff Segarin rated us at:

Updated: 9/28/2009 11:54:49 PM

Jeff Sagarin NFL ratings

• Sagarin ratings index

NFL 2009 Ratings through results of 2009 SEPTEMBER 28 MONDAY – Week 3

this output has three parts: (1) teams listed by RATING top-to-bottom
                             (2) DIVISION AVERAGES
                                 (listed top-to-bottom & by conference)
                             (3) teams listed by DIVISION
                                 (listed in order within divisions)

The SCHEDULE ratings represent the average schedule difficulty faced
by each team in the games that it’s played so far. The schedule
difficulty of a given game takes into account the rating of the
opponent and the location of the game.

To make predictions for upcoming games, simply compare the RATINGS of
the teams in question and allow an ADDITIONAL 3 points for the home
team. Thus, for example, a HOME team with a rating of 27 would be
favored by 5 points over a VISITING team having a rating of 25.
Or a VISITING team with a rating of 24 would be favored by 7 points
over a HOME team having a rating of 14.

NOTE: Use whatever home advantage is listed in the output below.
In the example just above, a home edge of 3 was shown for
illustrative purposes. The home edge will vary during the season.

The numbers to the right of a team’s schedule strength are its rank of
schedule – (in parentheses) – and its record versus teams in these
rating’s CURRENT top 10 and CURRENT top 16 respectively.

In ELO CHESS, only winning and losing matters; the score margin is of no consequence,
which makes it very “politically correct”. However it is less accurate in its predictions for
upcoming games than is the PURE POINTS, in which the score margin is the only thing that matters.
PURE POINTS is also known as PREDICTOR, BALLANTINE, RHEINGOLD, WHITE OWL and is the best single PREDICTOR
of future games.
-——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
The overall RATING is a synthesis of the two diametrical opposites, ELO CHESS and PURE POINTS (PREDICTOR).
NFL ratings will be updated after games of Sunday and again after the Monday night game.
-——————————————————————————————————————-

NFL 2009 through games of HOME ADVANTAGE= 3.18 1 Denver Broncos 2 New Orleans Saints 3 Indianapolis Colts 4 Baltimore Ravens 5 Minnesota Vikings 6 New York Giants 7 New York Jets 8 New England Patriots 9 San Francisco 49ers 10 Philadelphia Eagles NFL 2009 through games of HOME ADVANTAGE= 3.18 11 Cincinnati Bengals 12 San Diego Chargers 13 Chicago Bears 14 Dallas Cowboys 15 Green Bay Packers 16 Pittsburgh Steelers 17 Arizona Cardinals 18 Jacksonville Jaguars 19 Atlanta Falcons 20 Seattle Seahawks NFL 2009 through games of HOME ADVANTAGE= 3.18 21 Detroit Lions 22 Buffalo Bills 23 Cleveland Browns 24 Washington Redskins 25 Tennessee Titans 26 Miami Dolphins 27 Houston Texans 28 Oakland Raiders 29 Carolina Panthers 30 Kansas City Chiefs NFL 2009 through games of HOME ADVANTAGE= 3.18 31 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 32 St. Louis Rams _________________________________ September 28 Monday – Week 3
RATING W L T SCHEDL VS top 10 | VS top 16 | ELO_CHESS | PURE POINTS
= 27.37 3 0 0 19.15( 19) 0 0 0 | 1 0 0 | 27.76 4 | 27.06 2
= 27.36 3 0 0 20.20( 16) 1 0 0 | 1 0 0 | 26.14 6 | 29.25 1
= 26.87 3 0 0 18.89( 21) 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 28.41 2 | 25.79 5
= 26.85 3 0 0 16.30( 32) 0 0 0 | 1 0 0 | 27.88 3 | 26.07 4
= 26.74 3 0 0 20.46( 14) 1 0 0 | 1 0 0 | 28.84 1 | 25.40 6
= 26.52 3 0 0 18.09( 24) 0 0 0 | 1 0 0 | 26.33 5 | 26.77 3
= 24.58 3 0 0 17.72( 26) 1 0 0 | 1 0 0 | 24.26 8 | 24.97 7
= 24.49 2 1 0 18.88( 22) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 25.55 7 | 23.63 10
= 23.86 2 1 0 22.47( 5) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 23.71 10 | 24.06 9
= 22.92 2 1 0 16.77( 28) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 21.50 12 | 24.65 8
September 28 Monday – Week 3
RATING W L T SCHEDL VS top 10 | VS top 16 | ELO_CHESS | PURE POINTS
= 22.58 2 1 0 22.04( 7) 0 1 0 | 2 1 0 | 23.11 11 | 22.13 14
= 22.44 2 1 0 17.88( 25) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 23.75 9 | 21.31 16
= 21.94 2 1 0 21.02( 12) 0 0 0 | 1 1 0 | 20.85 13 | 23.17 11
= 21.68 2 1 0 16.49( 31) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 20.51 15 | 22.99 13
= 21.25 2 1 0 16.71( 29) 0 0 0 | 1 1 0 | 20.66 14 | 21.91 15
= 20.68 1 2 0 21.47( 10) 0 0 0 | 0 2 0 | 18.39 21 | 23.16 12
= 19.54 1 2 0 22.07( 6) 0 2 0 | 0 2 0 | 20.42 16 | 18.70 19
= 18.67 1 2 0 21.57( 9) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 19.02 18 | 18.36 20
= 18.07 2 1 0 16.70( 30) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 18.86 19 | 17.28 21
= 17.94 1 2 0 17.13( 27) 0 1 0 | 0 2 0 | 14.06 28 | 20.94 17
September 28 Monday – Week 3
RATING W L T SCHEDL VS top 10 | VS top 16 | ELO_CHESS | PURE POINTS
= 17.34 1 2 0 22.57( 3) 0 2 0 | 0 2 0 | 18.60 20 | 15.97 24
= 17.16 1 2 0 20.44( 15) 0 2 0 | 0 2 0 | 17.10 22 | 17.27 22
= 17.00 0 3 0 28.05( 1) 0 3 0 | 0 3 0 | 19.57 17 | 13.42 27
= 16.79 1 2 0 18.60( 23) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 16.78 23 | 16.85 23
= 16.71 0 3 0 21.19( 11) 0 1 0 | 0 2 0 | 12.71 30 | 19.39 18
= 15.27 0 3 0 23.52( 2) 0 1 0 | 0 2 0 | 15.71 25 | 14.86 26
= 15.12 1 2 0 18.93( 20) 0 1 0 | 0 1 0 | 15.32 26 | 14.96 25
= 14.69 1 2 0 19.76( 17) 0 1 0 | 0 2 0 | 15.90 24 | 13.17 29
= 13.49 0 3 0 21.95( 8) 0 1 0 | 0 2 0 | 14.16 27 | 12.76 30
= 12.64 0 3 0 22.54( 4) 0 2 0 | 0 2 0 | 11.79 31 | 13.37 28
September 28 Monday – Week 3
RATING W L T SCHEDL VS top 10 | VS top 16 | ELO_CHESS | PURE POINTS
= 12.64 0 3 0 20.73( 13) 0 1 0 | 0 2 0 | 13.37 29 | 11.79 31
= 8.77 0 3 0 19.72( 18) 0 0 0 | 0 1 0 | 8.97 32 | 8.60 32
____________________________________________________________________________________

by bfree2bronc on Sep 30, 2009 9:29 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs

Schedule ranking has us at 19th.

Ravens is 32nd, Dolphins is 2nd, Pittsburg 10th, San Diego 25th and so on. The team with the worst schedule is Cleveland, yikes.

by bfree2bronc on Sep 30, 2009 9:40 AM MDT up reply actions

YIKES!!!! this will take me until November....

to decipher… I am so glad I don’t gamble… I would probably take way too much time to figure this whole thing out and then spend… er I mean lose… all my mad money on bad bets. Thanks for the update!!!! U da man!!!!

"even a stopped clock is right twice a day" Yosemite Sam

by lovewatchinthegame on Sep 30, 2009 5:01 PM MDT up reply actions

My thoughts...

the mindset of the MSM is as follows: hope that Denver folds during their upcoming stretch of better opponents. If that happens, then they can celebrate that they were right and that Denver is a pretender. I think the real issue for us fans, is that we’re evaluating the Broncos in the short-term and long-term, whereas the MSM is only looking for their next sound byte.

For us, the short-term is this: wow! our team is playing sound, fundemental football. We’re, in my opinion, ahead of schedule as far as implementing two news schemes (offensive and defense) and our team culture is already apparant (team first, aggressive, and tougher). This bodes well for us in the short-term, as it gives us fans the belief that we can truly compete for the division crown and get into the playoffs this year. The long-term, though, is what I’m even more excited for (it looks phenomenal) and this is what the MSM fails to see the most. McD and company are building something on par with the elite franchises (NE, Pitt, Indy, NYG) where we can compete for the playoffs/Super Bowl every year. In a lot of ways, this season is all FUN for me, because I don’t have grand visions of Super Bowl this season. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll be thrilled if we put together a Cinderella run, but for me, this year is all about improvement and building a new culture. Next year and the years that follow are when I started getting jacked up as we should be able to field perinial playoff teams!

But back to your post, I really don’t care where they rank us. I care where we stand in our division and conference. I care about us staying healthy and winning the turn-over battle, and I care about Kyle Orton’s neckbeard and the superpowers therein!

Go Broncos!

"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity."

Unknown, Hanlon's Razor

by bcfunk on Sep 30, 2009 7:06 AM MDT reply actions 3 recs

I couldn't have said it better myself. This was spot on.

Bringing Bronco love from 1,112 miles away

by Troy Hufford on Sep 30, 2009 7:23 AM MDT up reply actions

Wow

Great comments stated very well.

I’d urge you to cut & paste this into it’s own post — I think a lot of our members would like to see it.

by Brian Shrout on Sep 30, 2009 7:59 AM MDT up reply actions

thanks for the kind words BShrout and KYBronco...

"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity."

Unknown, Hanlon's Razor

by bcfunk on Sep 30, 2009 9:17 AM MDT up reply actions

I think you've discovered the hidden story

of the Broncos Renaissance. The building of the “team”, more than the sum of its parts.

I’ve always been fascinated by the concept of the team without (overt) stars, like the Steelers in 05 or the Patriots in ‘01. THAT’S the way to win in this game, and both those teams have turned into perennial powerhouses.

Here’s hoping we can repeat this technique.

"Remember, it's only a game."

by robswenson on Sep 30, 2009 1:29 PM MDT up reply actions

WELL PUT...

and very true from the stand point that the MSM will never really GET IT,,,The building thing…until next year. You go man!

It is better to keep silent, and appear to be wise, then to ramble on and remove all doubt! The Wisest Man, Solomon.

by metalman5050 on Sep 30, 2009 8:17 PM MDT up reply actions

Like bfree said

13-3 Baby!

"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough, in the second half you give what's left." – Yogi Berra
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; We grow old because we stop playing." -- George Bernard Shaw
Breaking jaws or the NFL in Oakland who cares? Fall on your pirate’s sword - Ponderosa

by KaptainKirk on Sep 30, 2009 7:47 AM MDT reply actions

I'll take that as an order from the Kapt'n.

by Brian Shrout on Sep 30, 2009 8:00 AM MDT up reply actions

The way I see it.

Denver wins against a good Cincy team in Cincy. How they won is a matter for discussion but I’ll say the obvious they played good enough to be in a position for 1 play no matter how it happened could win the game.
The other two teams were poor teams but good teams dominate poor teams and both these teams were defeated midway through the third quarter. How many teams so far has really played as well as Denver?
13-3…13-3…13-3

"Sanity is the realization that everyone is insane to some degree." Me

by 3nS on Sep 30, 2009 9:43 AM MDT reply actions

The same goes for Farve's last throw of the game to win.

If the pass rusher has an eyelash to slap his arm, the 9ers win. If the receiver is 4 inches to his left the pass would be caught out of bounds. Football is a game of inches and when players make good decisions great things happen.

by bfree2bronc on Sep 30, 2009 10:47 AM MDT up reply actions

Vikes were lucky

The Vikes were “lucky” that Bly didn’t catch the sure INT on the last drive to end the game. No wait. That was skill.

by ocbroncomaniac on Oct 1, 2009 3:08 PM MDT up reply actions

I'd rather just focus on "We win"

and let the rankers sit back and wonder, which they won’t do.

Like your conundrum though B.

by bchiper on Sep 30, 2009 12:07 PM MDT reply actions

When, not if, we win...

The Cowboys will be ranked 31, and the Broncos will be ranked 32.

How in the world would we be ranked below the Cowboys after beating them, you ask?

Aww come on. It’s the Cowboys. It’s America’s team. And when they lose to the Broncos, they must be the second worst team in football.

All you get from drafting the "best player available" is a team full of good football players.

Cotton McKnight: I'm being told that Average Joe's does not have enough players and will be forfeiting the championship match.
Pepper Brooks: It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for 'em.

by orangeblood on Sep 30, 2009 1:50 PM MDT reply actions

Rankings vs Matchups

Consider this: Where someone decides to ‘rank’ us has no particular meaning. It is entirely subjective, based in personal thoughts, history, prejudice and personal preference. None of which ever won a football game.

If we take that same energy and turn it to matchups, we get a very different story. The matchups between Woodyard and Witten, perhaps, between the DEs and Clady, the CBs, safeties and our WRs, their O line and our D line – these are things with tangible meaning that will have a bearing on how we do this weekend. Depending on a host of factors, any two people can disagree on ’who’s going to win’. If you go a little deeper, you get into the meat of the matter, the things that will give the game more interest and more depth. I find that a lot more interesting than a bunch of folks sitting around and deciding who will or won’t win based on a few stats or beliefs and a couple of simplistic statements.

Let’s keep in mind – many of us don’t have all that much deeper insight into a lot of other teams in the league. If they don’t know what’s happening at the Broncos end of the world, that’s not a surprise – but it doesn’t really affect anything, either. We won’t lose a single yard because of it.

Hillis/Moreno in '09

by Doc Bear on Oct 1, 2009 1:39 PM MDT reply actions