2008 NFL Week 1 Beatpaths Rankings

I turned on an old vanilla tiebreaker: if all else fails, refer to last week’s rankings. We’re using that this week for the Beatpaths Rankings.

We have a 16-way tie for #1. We defer to the highest ranking team last week (end of last season). That’s New England. Then, we have a 16-way tie for #2 – last week’s fifteen winners, plus Kansas City. And again, we pick the highest ranking team from last week.

And here’s how the rankings turned out:

Rank Team Notes Last Week BeatPower

1

(Beat KC)Whither Patriots?

1

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

2

(Beat CLE) San Diego goes down! And Dallas moves up.

3

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

3

(Beat WAS) Three teams that were ahead of the Giants at the end of last season all lost. The Giants might actually see their #1 ranking this season… they might have just been ahead of their time a bit.

6

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

4

(Beat JAC) People forget that Tennessee ended the season fairly highly ranked.

7

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

5

(Lost to TEN) Jacksonville’s loss wasn’t as much of an upset as it appeared.

5

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

6

(Beat MIN) I did like seeing that Lambeau Leap.

8

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

7

(Beat OAK) What was really fun was listening to those announcers freaking out about Royal’s route-running abilities. I don’t have a lot of perspective, but they sure seemed to know what they were talking about. And I saw Royal’s interview later – a completely genuine, affable guy. I’ve seen a lot of Broncos games, but that was pretty amazing watching a storyline of new potential emerge like that.

10

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

8

(Beat STL) A huge victory…. over St. Louis. We’ll see.

12

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

9

(Beat HOU) These teams were fairly closely ranked…

13

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

10

(Lost to PIT) … but it was a surprising blowout.

11

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

11

(Beat SD) The graph movements here seem appropriate to me, considering the last couple of seasons. The Panthers always seemed like a solidly mediocre-to-good team that would underperform at times…

14

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

12

(Lost to CAR) … while San Diego has always struck me as a supremely talented but undisciplined team – capable of streaking into the stratosphere at times, but with its home a little further down.

2

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

13

(Lost to DAL) It was to Dallas, keep in mind…

15

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

14

(Beat IND) Boy, the media sure does fall in love with Chicago quickly again, doesn’t it?

16

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

15

(Lost to CHI) I don’t think Indianapolis will be down here for long. And I think a beatloop containing CHI->IND will be created fairly soon.

4

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

16

(Beat SEA) Buffalo has got to be climbing soon. Or am I just sucked into the same vortex that Buffalo fans usually get sucked into?

17

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

17

(Lost to BUF) This team, who I’m regionally supposed to be a fan of, just seems to be lacking in personality.

19

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

18

(Beat TB) New Orleans… a poor man’s San Diego?

20

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

19

(Lost to NO) Tampa Bay is one of those teams that has this mystique of being better than it really is. Then I look at the rankings and remember that they haven’t been very good for a while.

18

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

20

(Lost to NYG) The whole idea of Washington seemed to fizzle out, even Clinton Portis seems a bit conceptually shabby to me at this point. NFC guys, do they have anything good going for them right now?

21

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

21

(Lost to NE) No real penalty for losing to New England. This team is an empty slate to me so far this season. They definitely seem better than Oakland, though.

22

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

22

(Lost to GB) Is Minnesota much improved over last year? How’s their quarterback coming along?

23

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

23

(Beat CIN) Baltimore leapfrogs Cincinnati… and lands around where they started.

25

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

24

(Lost to BAL) Cincinnati holds steady.

24

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

25

(Beat MIA) That’ll be a heck of a story if Favre beats New England. And I saw one columnist muse about how if Favre had retired properly… he might be suiting up for New England this week. That reminds me of the comic book where Superman’s infanthood spaceship got diverted and he grew up as Batman.

26

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

26

(Lost to DEN) The thing is, Jamarcus Russell actually played pretty well. He didn’t stink. And their running backs looked good too. It looked like their problem was more… subpar receivers and a completely torched pass defense, which would normally be a strength of theirs. I’m thinking the reality was either that Denver is extremely improved this season, or it was just a matchup blowout. A coach’s victory.

28

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

27

(Beat SF) Seriously, why did Leinart get benched? Is it just me or does Whisenhunt just seem like a big blowhard all full of himself and his apparent wisdom?

29

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

28

(Lost to ARI) I just really want this team to start being good again. I miss the storylines. I also want Arizona to be good again. And Seattle. … Apparently not St Louis, though. They seem stuck in the 90’s.

27

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

29

(Beat DET) Really, this seems more like Atlanta should be rising a lot and Detroit sinking a little…

30

100.0

(1/1 – 0/1)

30

(Lost to ATL) …rather than the other way around.

9

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

31

(Lost to NYJ) Any improvements for Miami this year? I heard Parcell’s #1 pick got called out a couple of times this last week.

31

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

32

(Lost to PHI) St. Louis lost! Wow. Seriously, what’s their potential this year? Any high points?

32

0.0

(0/1 – 1/1)

4 Responses to 2008 NFL Week 1 Beatpaths Rankings

  1. Kenneth says:

    Since I pay a lot more attention to the NFC than the AFC, maybe I can help.

    – I am a homer, but the Bears looked like they did when they were good. And let’s not confuse Indy with a bad team, here.
    – Washington is really spinning its wheels right now, it seems. A lot of people thought they would be good this season, but I don’t see it. They played over their heads last year, I thought. Campbell is looking like he’s just had too many offenses thrown at him, and can’t handle it.
    – Minnesota basically improved every part of their game that they were already pretty good at, and decided to hold steady with their QB (Tavaris Jackson). It seems like a horrible decision; I didn’t see the game Monday, but he’s been a horrible quarterback as long as he’s been in the league. Still, they had the same problem the Bears did–there weren’t really any clear upgrades out there, especially since Green Bay wasn’t dealing with them. Although Pennington might look good in purple right now.
    -Apparently, Leinart got benched because Warner is better right now. It seems short-sighted…Kurt can be good in short stretches, but you can’t lean on him for a whole season anymore.
    -Detroit was/is not as good as you had them ranked. I would give no benefit to anyone beating them or the Rams.
    -St. Louis…well, the Cardinals are still playing, and the Blues might be okay.

  2. Leinart had some off-season issues (do a search on ‘Leinart party pictures’ if you missed it) that, at the very least, call into question his decision-making capabilities.

    Since it’s almost inevitable that Warner will get injured and/or struggle, Leinart will get his chance to start soon enough.

    D∈T

  3. Lee says:

    Hi,

    Love the site. I have written in before, so forgive me if you already explained it. I can’t quite figure out the power rankings. Why is it that teams that are 0-1 are higher than teams who are 1-0? Is this truly an “automatic” ranking, or is it somewhat subjective? If it is based on a formula, can you shed some light on it?

    Thanks,
    Lee

  4. ThunderThumbs says:

    Because otherwise after week 1 you would have had atlanta ranked ahead of indianapolis. After a winner is ranked it removes that loss from the loser. All a win means is that the loser has to be ranked behind the winner.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *