They're rated 3rd in the league in the CFL.ca power rankings. Alternately, is Edmonton the worst 2-7 team in CFL history?http://www.cfl.ca/page/power-rankings
Say what???? When I looked last night, Hamilton was ranked 4th, behind the Riders, Als and the Stamps.
More evidence that these "power rankings" are garbage. They're based on only four things: QB efficiency, field goals missed, rushing yards, and sacks taken. A few weeks back, Montreal attempted eight field goals and missed one. That has the same effect on the ranking as a team going 0 for 1. I can't remember how QB efficiency is calculated, but if a QB throws six passes, all complete, for 30 yards total, is that better than a QB who goes 30 for 45 for over 300 yards with one interception? If all a team does is run the ball and gets 200 yards on the ground, how is that better than a team that gets over 400 yards total, but only 50 on the ground? Sacks? At least that one makes sense.
The CFL site says it's based on 2009 results. That's like saying 100% of all TV viewers like watching Days of Our Lives after asking one person. Maybe they should look at the last ten or twenty years worth of stats to see if they can get a better set of indicators.
Or better yet, look at the standings and scores.
Not sure what TSN's power ranking is based on, but it seems to be better.
I guess the CFL thinks Winnipeg needs help selling tickets. There is no other reasonable explanation for those rankings :roll:
Winnipeg is not the best 2 - 7 team, they are horrible. Also any power rankings that has the bombers listed as third is a joke, they should be 7th only in front of Edmonton.
I think you could make a case for BC and Winnipeg being equals, but yes Edmonton is the worst team at the moment
They can be the best 2-7 team in CFL history, but that doesn't change the fact that they are 2-7. Being considered the best 2-7 team is like being voted smartest person on Hamilton city council.
Have you hugged your Alderman today?