2010 NFL Week 6 Beatpaths Power Rankings

Hey folks! Lots of interesting things this week, but I’m running short on time so let’s get right to it!

You can find the graph for this week here.

Rank Team Notes Last Week EdgePower

1

(Lost to NE) The loss to the Patriots causes a 3 team beatloop with the Jets, so the Ravens lose a beatpath to those Jets. But though that costs them some edgepower, it’s not enough for them to lose the number 1 spot.

1

84.62

(36 – 0) / 52

#1 – #10

2

(Beat CLE) A big reason why the Ravens are so resilient is that they still have a beatwin over the Steelers, who have quite the resume themselves. The Steelers are pretty much propping up the Ravens at this point.

2

79.81

(32 – 1) / 52

#2 – #14

3

(Beat DEN) Getting out from under the Ravens helps, but the big factor here is their win over the Dolphins, who really jumped this week (FORESHADOWING!).

7

76.92

(28 – 0) / 52

#1 – #14

4

(Beat JAC) “Surely beating the Jaguars couldn’t have mattered”, you say. Well, you’re wrong–the win caused a 3 team beatloop with the Broncos, so the Titans are just under the Steelers now.

5

75.00

(28 – 2) / 52

#3 – #15

5

(Beat BAL) As mentioned, beating the Ravens sheds a loss to the Jets, which leaves the Patriots with no beatlosses. This BAL=>NYJ=>NE=>BAL beatloop is a pretty high-level loop (team ranking-wise). Be interesting to see that resolve further when the Patriots and Jets meet again.

8

74.04

(25 – 0) / 52

#1 – #17

6

(Beat DET) So, why are the Giants moving up? Well, they’re being boosted by the Bears. Bet you can’t wait to hear how the Bears are moving up.

10

71.15

(25 – 3) / 52

#4 – #17

7

(Beat GB) The Dolphins are a big mover this week, and it’s due to their win over the Pack. If you look at the graph, you’ll see that this week produced a real vertical aligning of teams, and the Pack are the linchpin for that for many teams.

18

69.23

(22 – 2) / 52

#3 – #18

8

(Lost to SEA) This is how the Bears jumped up the charts–they still have a win over the Packers, and the Packers are holding strong. Their loss to the Seahawks, meanwhile, disappears in a 4 team beatloop of CHI=>DET=>STL=>SEA=>CHI, which only costs the Bears a win over the Lions–no big loss at this point.

13

67.31

(22 – 4) / 52

#5 – #18

9

(Lost to MIA) So, you know that the Packers are now under the Bears and Dolphins, and that’s giving a big boost to those teams and every team on top of them. But who’s boosting the Packers? That would be the Eagles, who have a big move of their own this week.

19

60.58

(19 – 8) / 52

#9 – #19

10

(Beat ATL) OK, so what happened here? The Eagles beat DOWN the Falcons, that’s what. OK, so the magnitude of victory doesn’t matter but the win still has a huge effect. You see, last week there were basically two parallel towers in the graph (it’s hard to see it, but trust me it’s there). What the Eagles’ win this week did was basically put one of those towers on top of the other. And that, my friend, generates some massive edgepower for the teams in the top tower. The Eagles are the base of that tower, though, so they only get a small benefit.

23

57.69

(17 – 9) / 52

#10 – #21

11

(Lost to PHI) So now you know the Beatpaths story. Now you can tell me a story. I didn’t see this game. What happened? I thought the Falcons were better than that.

6

53.85

(15 – 11) / 52

#11 – #22

12

(Beat KC) Beating KC is basically meaningless for the Texans, as they tread water.

11

53.85

(4 – 0) / 52

#1 – #28

13

(Beat WAS) What happened to the Colts? Basically, they didn’t get in on this two towers action, and their main support–the Broncos–dropped a lot. Bonus points if you can guess why before I get to the Broncos section. Meanwhile, the win over the Redskins is looped away in a 4 team loop of IND=>WAS=>PHI=>JAC=>IND, so they don’t get the win. The loss to Jacksonville was already looped away in a 4 team beatloop of IND=>KC=>SD=>JAC=>IND.

3

52.88

(3 – 0) / 52

#1 – #29

14

(Lost to HOU) Losing to the Texans doesn’t really hurt much. The Chiefs are just suffering from a lack of quality wins.

12

50.96

(2 – 1) / 52

#2 – #30

15

(Lost to TEN) As mentioned, the loss creates a 3 team beatloop with the Broncos (hint hint). Also, the previously mentioned 4 team beatloop involving Indianapolis wipes away their loss to the Eagles, and that’s how this team ends up with no beatlosses. Barely any beatwins, too, but still. Amazing. I was watching this game intensely because I had MJD and Chris Johnson in my fantasy league and needed 15 points. I didn’t get it until the Johnson scored that TD at the end.

24

50.96

(1 – 0) / 52

#1 – #31

16

(Lost to IND) The first of the anomaly teams this week–the Redskins have no links to anyone They are floating out in the air. Who knows what will happen in Chicago this week? Should definitely have an effect.

16

50.00

(0 – 0) / 52

#1 – #32

17

(Beat SD) Naturally, you would expect floating teams to be ranked next to each other. And so they are. Yes, the Rams have managed to be completely unrelated to any other team this week. There are lots of beatloops causing this. One is the previously mentioned 4 team beatloop coming from SEA=>CHI, which loops away their win over the Seahawks and their loss to Detroit. Another is a new 4 team beatloop coming from San Francisco beating the Raiders, creating STL=>SEA=>SF=>OAK=>STL, which also takes away the Rams’ win over the Seahawks, and loops away their loss to the Raiders. Finally, the Rams helped their own cause by beating the Chargers, creating a 3 team beatloop with the Cardinals, looping away that loss (and win). So, they now float alone. This cannot stand.

26

50.00

(0 – 0) / 52

#1 – #32

18

(Lost to NYJ) Did you guess it? Here’s the reason for the Broncos’ collapse: they lost their beatwin over the Titans, which cost them most of their beatpaths. Now, they just have paths to Seahawks and Chargers. That won’t do much.

4

49.04

(2 – 3) / 52

#4 – #30

19

(Bye) Cardinals don’t do anything on the bye, but get buried down the charts due to the tower stacking effect.

9

49.04

(11 – 12) / 52

#12 – #23

20

(Beat CHI) Getting out from under the Rams (see the Bears’ comment) helps, but this team still doesn’t have much support. I just can’t believe this team beat the Bears. They’re not that good, but they worked the field position battle all day. It’s one of the first times in awhile I’ve seen a team use special teams to an advantage over the Bears, record-breaking punt return TD nonwithstanding.

27

47.12

(1 – 4) / 52

#5 – #31

21

(Beat TB) Saints get back on track by beating my sleeper team, Tampa Bay.

17

46.15

(10 – 14) / 52

#13 – #24

22

(Lost to SF) The loss costs the Raiders their only remaining beatwin, over the Rams. I really thought the Raiders were going to pull this out. If you’ve heard me talk about the Raiders last year, you know that’s quite a turnaround.

20

46.15

(0 – 4) / 52

#5 – #32

23

(Lost to STL) Of course, I thought the Chargers were going to finally take care of business on the road and beat up the Rams. That didn’t happen. Which raises the question: what do the Lions have that this team doesn’t?

15

45.19

(0 – 5) / 52

#6 – #32

24

(Lost to NO) More two tower trauma theater here, as the Buccaneers get put under the Saints, and thus stacked upon.

14

38.46

(4 – 16) / 52

#14 – #29

25

(Bye) I was about to write about how the Bills have losses to impressive teams, but then I checked last week’s rankings and that’s what I wrote about them there. But when you have no weeks and you’re on the bye, what is there to write about?

29

37.50

(0 – 13) / 52

#11 – #32

26

(Beat DAL) Congratlations on the win, Vikings. But there still isn’t a win against an impressive team here.

28

35.58

(2 – 17) / 52

#14 – #30

27

(Bye) Same problem for the Bills applies to the Bengals. They’ve dropped some due to the tower effect, but they were towards the bottom already anyway.

21

33.65

(1 – 18) / 52

#15 – #31

28

(Lost to NYG) I was optimistic about the Jim Schwartz era, but they way they keep finding ways to lose close games is very disturbing. This team should have more than a win against the Rams (which got looped away, BTW–see the Chicago comment).

30

31.73

(0 – 19) / 52

#15 – #32

29

(Beat OAK) Of course, it’s less a praise of Oakland and more a condemnation of the 49ers that I expected the Raiders to win that game. Good luck Iron Mike.

32

31.73

(0 – 19) / 52

#16 – #32

30

(Lost to MIN) I admit I didn’t follow this game too much, but did that excessive celebration penalty really affect the game that much? To hear the commentators talk about it, you’d think it directly led to the winning Minnesota score.

25

30.77

(0 – 20) / 52

#15 – #32

31

(Lost to PIT) One of the earlier memes I had going was that there was no shame to losing to Pittsburgh, because the Bucs and Falcons did it and remained highly ranked. Well, it’s still true, but that’s okay for the Browns because they have plenty of shame to throw around. They dropped, BTW, because they’re under the Bucs, who are now at the bottom of the tower.

22

29.81

(0 – 21) / 52

#17 – #32

32

(Bye) And of course, the Panthers are at the very bottom of the bottom of the tower. The bonus for teams in the bottom of the tower is that long paths like that are fertile ground for creating loops. Meet me back here next week; I’ll bet we see a much different graph.

31

27.88

(0 – 23) / 52

#16 – #32

7 Responses to 2010 NFL Week 6 Beatpaths Power Rankings

  1. The MOOSE says:

    “Surely beating the Jaguars couldn’t have mattered”, you say.

    No way, that game was huge for a reason you didn’t even mention. If JAC had won that game instead, there would be four teams outside the graph instead of just 2. SD and SEA would join WAS and STL. But with TEN beating JAC, it caused a short loop to break a longer loop, restoring SD and SEA to the graph.

  2. Kenneth says:

    Well, true. I was just considering the effect of adding TEN=>JAC, not the effect of adding TEN=>JAC instead of adding JAC=>TEN.

  3. Thurhame says:

    It’s an interesting graph this week, with a GB->PHI->ATL->ARI->NO pillar dividing the top teams from the bottom feeders.

    The most interesting game coming up is, in my opinion, CIN@ATL. If the Bengals manage to defeat the Falcons, then in the standard graph there would be no significant change (CIN would remain at the bottom), but with the iterative method CLE->CIN would break first, CIN->BAL would be restored, and the Bengals would jump to the top of the graph! (Although, with ATL->NO broken, the pillar they’d be on top of would be much shorter.)

    PHI->TEN, on the other hand, would break the pillar in the standard method but have little effect on the iterative graph.

    I haven’t found any other potentially interesting effects among this weeks games individually, but with 14 games who knows how they might interact?

  4. Thurhame says:

    “Although, with ATL->NO broken, the pillar they’d be on top of would be much shorter.”

    My mistake. The graph’s link there is ATL->ARI->NO, so it would survive. Only NO->TB->CIN would be removed. The height of the pillar would not be affected (aside from adding CIN at the top).

  5. Thurhame says:

    My mistake again. Cincinnati winning at Atlanta wouldn’t quite put them at the top of the graph; they’d be on top of DEN but underneath NE.

  6. Thurhame says:

    I mean, “…on top of *BAL* but underneath NE.”

    I really need to catch up on sleep if I’m making these sorts of typos.

  7. The MOOSE says:

    Hah, yeah it’s difficult to keep track of all of the different threads.

    –Watching the MIA/PIT game right now. PIT 20, MIA 22, PIT at MIA’s goal line. I see on ESPN a bunch of people saying MIA should let PIT score. That’s ridiculous. If you hold PIT to a field goal, MIA only needs a field goal. Giving up the TD forces MIA to get a TD.

Leave a Reply

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

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>