BigDave's Power Rankings, Week 7

I'm surprised there are no Power Rankings threads. I've come up with my own rankings, based on wins and opponents' combined records.

  1. Edmonton (5 wins x 23 combined opponents' wins = 115)
  2. Winnipeg (6 x 18 = 108)
  3. Hamilton (4 x 24 = 96)
  4. Calgary (5 x 19 = 95)
  5. Montreal (5 x 14 = 70)
  6. Toronto (1 x 36 = 36)
  7. B.C. (1 x 32 = 32)
  8. Saskatchewan (1 x 30 = 30)

People will probably think putting Hamilton at #3 was a homer decision, but it was pure mathematics. Calgary and Montreal each have one more win than Hamilton, but they were playing weaker opponents. Montreal has only played two of their seven games against teams better than 1-6.

except the fact that you convieniently decided to base your rankings on opponents records has absolutely nothing with wanting to rank the cats high :roll:

  1. Winnipeg
  2. Montreal
  3. Calgary
  4. Hamilton
  5. Edmonton
  6. Toronto
  7. B.C.
  8. Sackscratchewan

and except in the real world.. regardless of what way you slice it to skew it for the team you favor over others..

winnipeg is 6-1 and the best team in the REAL CFL where they play actual football.

6-1 says it all.

logically how u even put edmonton over winnipeg when the bombers embarassed the esks a few weeks back is just.. WRONG.

teams dont pick their schedules so.. the vs opponent with best record stuff really is wrong on all fronts.

last years records may be a better indication if you want to go that route.

I love how it's the Winnipeg fans complaining. No respect, eh, guys? :lol:

In light of lastnights game:

Winnipeg: Bombers stay here until someone hands it to them. Could very well have been 7-0 if not for a timely fumble and missed FG
Montreal/Calgary: The battle for second starts next week
Hamilton: Cats have some tough games coming up, we'll see what they are made of
BC/Toronto: Argo's with a big win, BC with 2 wins in their last 3 games, the battle for the last playoff spot also starts after their bye weeks.
Edmonton: How did this team start 5-0? Outscored 81-21 in their last 3 games looking absolutly terrible.
Saskatchewan: Starting over after canning Marshall and Berry, but Miller will have his work cut out for him with B2B against Swaggerville.

http://www.ezfootballrankings.com/cfl-1.php

The correct order this week for a ranking (not the same thing as a rating … as in a Massey rating):

  1. Winnipeg
  2. Calgary
  3. Edmonton
  4. Hamilton
  5. Montreal
  6. BC
  7. Toronto
  8. Saskatchewan

Big Dave needs to rename his process as ‘Big Dave’s Power Ratings’. There’s one, and only one way to rank teams within a round-robin simulated format – Ernst Zermelo (a German) and Bradley-Terry (two Americans who jointly rediscovered what Ernst already discovered).

Ernst Zermelo
Defensive End
Saskatchewan, 1932

LOL!

Ok, I'm done posting for the day! :stuck_out_tongue:

The way i see it...

1.Wpg, MTL

2.CGY,HAM

3.EDM

4.B.C, TOR

5.SSK

I'm not gonna be too quick to crown the bombers just yet as much as i'd like to, still got big challenges ahead in Mtl, amd Hamilton.

so who is in 6th, 7th and 8th??

First of all, these are Power Rankings. If you want the standings, they're posted on the CFL web site and are not subject to discussion.

After Week 7, Winnipeg had only one more win than Edmonton. Edmonton has had more games against tough opponents than Winnipeg had.

You can't base power rankings on the outcome of one game. Team A can beat Team B, Team B can beat Team C, and Team C can beat Team A. Which do you rank higher?

Last year when Hamilton beat Winnipeg 3 times in the first seven weeks of the season, people said that Hamilton's record was misleading because they hadn't beaten any good teams. So here are some rankings, based on simple math, not based on any favouritism. If you think you can come up with better rankings, you're welcome to do so, but if you want to discredit mine, you'd better be able to explain yours the way I did mine.

As far as calling them "Power Ratings", they're my RANKINGS and I'll call them whatever I want.

I have to side with BigDave on this one. Power Rankings give us a qualification for a given team's place in the actual standings. If you rank based on statistical ratings including combined opponents records, you can see if a team is for real in the long run or if their wins came of fluky results (i.e. the 9-9, 2010 Argos).

Statistically based rankings are more a gauge for the early and middle of the season. The real standings for me take a greater precedence once the season matures and is finally complete. Even then, how do you measure some of the Alouettes' season records against those of their western counterparts over most of the 2000s? You can measure offensive and defensive statistical potency and you can compare their opponents combined records. The Als had more of the Ti-Cats and Renegades in the 2000s than any of the western champs through the same time period. Looking at this fact gives us a little more insight to the true capability of the team than simple wins and losses.

Balance the schedule when we get to 10 teams, and by season's end there should be no debate as to who's best. The record will speak for itself.

power rankings as of, mean today, this week.

edmontons 5 win have passed. Its how strong are they today. With depleted receiving ranks and other issues, I would not rank them number 1 today. The mighty have fallen and I would not put them in the top 4 until they turn things around, get receivers back, whatever. Cheering for tor, sask and ham as well as bc. Edmonton is the team I wish they all could play over the next 4-6 weeks.

Wpg is the team I least like my teams to play right now.

I agree with FYB. For me power rankings should be which teams are currently playing at the highest level. Which is why in mine I have both BC and Toronto ahead of Edmonton. Every team in the league would be licking thier chops right now to play Edmonton, while both BC and Toronto can compete.

If you wish to use this type of system that's fine, but unless you factor in a teams losses in the same way it is not an accurate reflection of the teams. Wins are fine but if you lose to weak sisters and your opponent is only losing to top tier teams that should affect your rankings.

....I think Dave's point is he could rank the teams by uniform colour in accordance with the light spectrum and it would still be his ranking system, as in the one he wanted to use and saw fit to create...

...for arguments sake, using ROY G BIV as a basis of ranking, the stampeders come out on top!! :twisted: :cowboy:

Over the rainbow.....the very top of this rainbow is the color red. Thus in essense; Calgary holds top spot in the West.

yeah, but ROY G BIV always was a bit whacked out.

isnt he the guy that picked the raiders to win the SB last year?