NFL power rankings - after seven weeks

Home Archive Pro Sports NFL power rankings - after seven weeks
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Oct 26, 2010 1:05 AM









1. N.Y. Jets 5-1 (1)
2. Pittsburgh 5-1 (2)...We'll see. They were probably one of the favorites heading into last week but I'm not sure if they can contend after losing Aaron Smith. They weren't the same team in 2007 or 2009 when he went down.
3. New England 5-1 (3)
4. Baltimore 5-2 (4)
5. Tennessee 5-2 (6)...Looking more and more dangerous. Explosive offensive players. Defense has been getting sacks and interceptions.
6. Indianapolis 4-2 (5)
7. N.Y. Giants 5-2 (7)...Tempted to put them ahead of Indy. They're a lot better than they were in that game but Peyton would probably still beat Eli if they played again today.
8. Atlanta 5-2 (10)
9. Houston 4-2 (11)
10. Kansas City 4-2 (12)

11. New Orleans 4-3 (8)
12. Washington 4-3 (14)
13. Philadelphia 4-3 (9)
14. Miami 3-3 (15)
15. Green Bay 4-3 (18)
16. Chicago 4-3 (13)
17. Minnesota 2-4 (17)
18. Seattle 4-2 (23)
19. Arizona 3-3 (16)
20. Tampa Bay 4-2 (22)
21. Oakland 3-4 (26)

22. Dallas 1-5 (19)
23. Cleveland 2-5 (28)
24. St. Louis 3-4 (24)
25. Cincinnati 2-4 (25)
26. San Diego 2-5 (27)
27. Jacksonville 3-4 (20)
...All these teams from 22 to 27 could be debated and switched up a little. Jacksonville has some solid wins but they seem to get crushed every loss and the QB situation has set them back even more. Dallas only has one win but I think their losses are mostly against above average teams. Cleveland moved up five spots, perhaps a little high.

28. Denver 2-5 (21)...Broncos gave the NFL fans in London a lot to be excited about this week.
29. Detroit 1-5 (29)
30. Carolina 1-5 (31)
31. San Francisco 1-6 (30)
32. Buffalo 0-6 (32)
Oct 26, 2010 1:05am
bigdaddy2003's avatar

bigdaddy2003

Senior Member

7,384 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:00 AM
I can handle that.
Oct 26, 2010 10:00am
justincredible's avatar

justincredible

Nick Mangold

32,056 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:07 AM
8 of the top 10 in the AFC. Sounds about right.
Oct 26, 2010 10:07am
justincredible's avatar

justincredible

Nick Mangold

32,056 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:08 AM
I think you might have Seattle a bit low. Other than that it looks good.
Oct 26, 2010 10:08am
bigdaddy2003's avatar

bigdaddy2003

Senior Member

7,384 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:11 AM
justincredible;533159 wrote:I think you might have Seattle a bit low. Other than that it looks good.

That is what I was thinking also. Tampa should be higher than 20th and Arizona should be pushed into the 20's.
Oct 26, 2010 10:11am
B

buck

Senior Member

140 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:12 AM
i would switch the browns and the cowboys
Oct 26, 2010 10:12am
thedynasty1998's avatar

thedynasty1998

Senior Member

6,844 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:16 AM
Dallas, without Romo, might be too high. But it looks pretty good.
Oct 26, 2010 10:16am
Heretic's avatar

Heretic

Son of the Sun

18,820 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:27 AM
thedynasty1998;533168 wrote:Dallas, without Romo, might be too high. But it looks pretty good.

That's what I was thinking. With Romo, it'd be possible to say that they've been losing to tough competition and at least could turn things around and be an average team. Without him, and with retread Kitna "leading" the way, they're more bottom-group than where they're currently at. Like, I have trouble justifying them as being ranked higher than any of the other 22-27 teams. They're underachieving at least as bad as Cincinnati and San Diego...and lost a key offensive component.
Oct 26, 2010 10:27am
thedynasty1998's avatar

thedynasty1998

Senior Member

6,844 posts
Oct 26, 2010 10:34 AM
Heretic;533173 wrote:That's what I was thinking. With Romo, it'd be possible to say that they've been losing to tough competition and at least could turn things around and be an average team. Without him, and with retread Kitna "leading" the way, they're more bottom-group than where they're currently at. Like, I have trouble justifying them as being ranked higher than any of the other 22-27 teams. They're underachieving at least as bad as Cincinnati and San Diego...and lost a key offensive component.

Yea the whole, "playing teams tough" argument is BS. The Browns played Atlanta and Baltimore "tough", but what did that get them? 2 L's.

They beat Houston, well the Browns beat New Orleans,
Oct 26, 2010 10:34am