What's Your Week #1 Power Rankings?

#1 - - BC - - Defending champs started off just as they finished last season...by crushing the Bombers.

#2 - - Calgary - - What a statement to crush Montreal like they did. First game without Chris Jones and the defence had its most dominant performance in two years.

#3 - - Riders - - Sign two of the best OLinemen in the league and Durant hangs 400yds and 4TDs on the TiCats. Any correlation there?

#4 - - Montreal - - Seems like everyone has written the Als off after the disaster in Calgary, but the core nucleus is still in place. Age is catching up, but they're not in the bottom half just yet.

#5 - - Edmonton - - Defence looked top notch but Jyles did nothing to suggest he's a championship calibre QB.

#6 - - Toronto - - Special teams was a complete disaster...missed FGs, illegal punts, too many men on the field. Offence looked confused and badly out of synch.

#7 - - Winnipeg - - Can't lose the talent they did and not expect to take a step backwards...or in Winnipeg's case, a few steps backwards.

#8 - - Hamilton - - TiCats keep making big name free agent signings but can't get above mediocrity.

Riders: Only team to win on the road this week, and did so in convincing fashion.
BC: Defending champs. Beat a Winnipeg team that, IMO, has digressed from last season.
Calgary: Won big, but not totally sure about this team. Drew Tate is still unproven, and Montreal is no longer the power house of the league.
Hamilton: Saw glimpses in the game against the Riders on what this team will be able to accomplish this season. Look for them to play well in BC next week, and move up in the rankings.
Winnipeg: Lost alot of talent, and have likely gone back to being a mediocre talent. They will not win many games with the current state of their offensive line.
Montreal: Aging team, and looked aweful in the game against the stamps.
Edmonton: Even though they won, trading for Stephen Jyles will only hurt this football club. They need a proven quarterback, or they will not score more than 20 points per game this season.
Toronto: Even with trading for Ray, they still have several glaring holes.

not a huge fan of power ranking until 3 games in, but...

8 - Toronto - They showed glimpses of good things, but I think this quick read playbook is going to take several games before Ray is comfortable. He also needs some protection. 2 missed FGs, and a drop in the endzone really killed them. Tidy up a few things like that and they will be a solid team.

7 - Montreal - Coordinators... I know they have been 'the team' for years, but AC did not look comfortable with the new package. I think the transition to a new OC could hurt AC. The Defense never seemed to adjust at all. I think the D has talent, I just don't know if the have the right guy there. D has not been their strength (in comparison to their O) in the past few years, but it looked rather weak this year. I by no means believe Montreal will stay at the bottom of the rankings, but believe they have a hill to climb. I was also concerned...I know Montreal has a core of calm and collected guys, but they seemed to be lacking urgency.

6 - Winnipeg - No doubt their D is top notch...I can not deny that...it is going to keep them in most games, but they need to get the ball moving. 2 years ago Buck looked like he was going to shatter some records out of the gate...the O looked amazing, but has struggled ever since, and IMO did not improve in the off-season.

5 - Edmonton - though they won, it was not a reassuring performance for Esks fans. Their D played pretty good, but Ray was passing all underneath, off the mark on a few longer ones, had a key drop in the endzone, and 2 missed FGs that were on the short end. This game could have went either way. I liked the D, but the O was a little lackluster. They have also downgraded at RB with the loss of Messam, and I think that is going to hurt them more than anything.

4 - Hamilton - I do believe their O will be one of the best of the season. Henry played his first game with the club, with all new receivers and a new playbook, and still pushed 300 yards. Yeah, not a lot of points from it, but not as bad of an outing as everyone is making it to be. The D looked horrid. couldn't stop the swing pass, and when they did they got burned deep. Their D is either going to need to step up, or the O will need to average 30+ points a game. Even with being beaten pretty badly, I thought their O played well enough to move them up in the rankings.

3 - Saskatchewan - Yes, the won handily, and on the road, but Hamilton also played a bad game, especially on D. There were a few plays that the Riders almost had Pick 6s going against them, And there are still some concerns in the secondary, especially on the McKenzie/Graham side. They played well, but got burned hard on one that came back. there were so many changes in Saskatchewan this year I don't think Hamilton was prepared as to what to expect. The Riders could be ranked higher, but lets face it, they were the shocker of the week...even most who picked them to win did not predict such a point spread. See how they play over the next game or 2 and go from there.

2 - Calgary - Calgary had a really good game. Their D reminded me of 2 seasons ago when the Stamps were crushing a lot of teams. I was rather surprised that Calgary looked this good. New QB, new RB, new DC...they looked sharp.

1 - BC - While BC did not look as good as I thought they would out of the gate, they are still the team to beat. They played a D that was pretty sharp, and still pulled out the win. I questioned ranking BC as 3rd, because IMO they did have the 3rd best overall week 1 performance, but they are still the champs so get the benefit of doubt. I thought the loss of Solomon Elimimian would be more of a factor, but the LB core looked pretty good, DL was a beast, and the secondary should be the best in the league this year. The looked good, and Lulay is probably the best QB in the league right now. While I don't believe they played their best game, I do believe they will improve on what was already a good overall game.

Like I said, hard to go off of 1 game.

oh, and just looked, and CFL's power rankings are up

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/sports/football/opinion/2012/07/cfl-power-rankings-week-1.html]http://www.cbc.ca/sports/football/opini ... eek-1.html[/url]

Power rankings mean nothing at all.

not really no, but they are fun to look at

argos will climb to the top!!11 :rockin:

The Argos will climb into the top 11? I guess 11th is pretty good in an eight team league.

No, but you gotta pass the time in the week between the games somehow! :smiley:

1 - BC - No explanation needed!
2 - Stamps - These guys looked pretty scary!
3 - Sask. - Not gonna put too much stock in one win, but it looks they are headed in the right direction.
4 - Esks - Their ugly win gets them as many points in the standings as the rest of thee west got for dominating.
5 - Winnipeg - Well, they one the East last year and had the toughest opponent this week.
6 - Toronto - Managed to stay close at least...
7 - Montreal - Poor showing in week 1, but I expect them to bounce back.
8 - TiCats - After taking a beating like they did in week 1, seeing the 2012 juggernaught next on the schedule cant be good!

At least its a short week to endure!

No team looked worse than the bombers, IMO. They had so many 2-and-outs, only 11 yards of offence in the 1st half, and buck got hurt (again ).

Toronto and Hamilton were, atleast, in their games at half time. The als, on the other hand, we're never in the game with Calgary.

So, I'd have to say;

Toronto was in the game until the end, and would have won had prefontaine not sucked so bad, so I put them ahead of all the other 'losers'.

That’s a good point - - rankings should be based on what the actual results were, not what people think future results might be. And Winnipeg looked pretty feeble, but I gave them the benefit of doubt since getting beat on the road in BC is not nearly as bad as getting crushed at home by the Riders.

....you mean like 'standings', that simple W versus L fact-based system of sorting the teams already used for decades?

...power rankings allow the use of non-logical factors, thereby opening the door to all sort and manner of crazy internet arguing and debate...it's a good system, leave it be...

Not really, despite missing 5 starters on offence and probably playing the best defence in the league at home, they still managed to put up more points than the other losing teams, in fact, it's not a point at all, lol.

You want to use a "non-logical" evaluation? Sorta like saying "Hamilton gave up 500yds and 40+ points, but I think they're going to have the best defence in the league". That's a prognostication my friend - - not a power ranking. That's based on what you think might happen instead of what we know actually happened.

Or sorta like saying "Hamilton gave up 500yds and 40+ points, but the Riders have the greatest offence in the history of football and would score 100+ points against a normal defence so Hamilton's defence is actually the best in the league". That would be non-logical.

So until Hamilton actually shuts a team down with a dominating defensive performance, you can't say the TiCats have a great defence.

I am always amazed when I read,about the Als, "age is catching up","aging team",etc..etc... It seems that only the Als are aging; yes,Calvillo will be 40 in August but there are 45 other players on the active roster. A? re they the same team as last year? Definitely not. We are all aging as are the veterans of all other CFL teams.

The average age of the 46 players on the Als active roster,when they played Hamilton last November, was 27.8 years old; there were 11 players 30 years old and more,24 players between 26 and 29 years old and 11 players 25 years old or less.

The average age of the 46 players on the Als active roster,when they played Calgary last Sunday,was 27.4 years old; there were 11 players 30 years old and more, 21 players between 26 and 26 years old and 14 players 25 years old or less.

Contrary to general belief,the Als have a younger team than last year. In their current 46 players active roster, they have 10 rookies-never played professional football in CFL or NFL- and 2 who played a few games in the NFL. The average age of these 12 players is 24.3 years. These new players are:
Non-imports:Bo Adebayo-DE-24,Patrick Lavoie-FB-24,Lance Melton-CB- 25 and Bryn Roy-LB- 24.
Imports: Victor Anderson-RB- 23,Noel Devine-RB-,Ed Gainey-DB- 22,Trent Guy-WR- 24, Josh Neiswander-QB- 25 and Michael Ola -T- 24.
New imports who played a few games in NFL:Kenny Ingram-LB- 26 and Marques Murrell-DE- 27.

I challenge any one of you,particularly the ones who writes that the Als are aging, to name me a CFL Team that has added as many rookies-no professional experience- as the Als, in 2012. The Als have added 4 non-imports rookies drafted this year; how many can you name from other Teams. They also added 6 rookies-no professional experience- from the States. How many other Teams.

With regards to power ranking,it is difficult after just 1 game; this being said,here how I see it:



...I dont' want to use anything because I think power rankings is the dumbest thing ever created by sports fans to waste time between weekends, but that dumbness sure results in some great comedy so keep ranking them boys by whatever means necessary!!!...

Not that it really matters, but Winnipeg did not put up the most points... they tied with Hamilton, who also put up 16 points.

If you believe it's a dumb waste of time...what does it say about you when not only are you reading the thread you're also responding to it?

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

To stir the pot with vague ingredients :cowboy: On that note; still waiting for a vogue performance by R&W :stuck_out_tongue: