CFL Power Rankings, after 9 Games

[WestCoastJoe]

http://www.cfl.ca/power-rankings

As of this morning the new power rankings are not posted on cfl.ca.

Power Rankings Week 4, not reflecting the results of Week 4

1 Saskatchewan

2 Calgary

3 Hamilton

4 Winnipeg

5 Montreal

6 British Columbia

7 Toronto

8 Edmonton

Power Rankings ExplainedThe 2010 CFL Power Rankings is an objective measurement of each clubs' performances relative to each other.

The model used for the 2010 rankings are based on information gathered from the 2009 season. This information suggested that the four most statistically significant indicators of team success were the Quarterback Efficiency Rating, the number of Rushing Yards, the number of Field Goals Missed and the number of Sacks Taken.

............

Quarterback Efficiency Rating

Rushing Yards

Field Goals Missed

Sacks Taken

Coaches usually have turnovers as a key ingredient of success/failure.

............

Not trying to anticipate or predict the cfl rankings, as we move into Week 5, I would say something like this:

Calgary

Saskatchewan and Montreal

Toronto

Winnipeg

B.C. and Hamilton

Edmonton

[JohnHenry]

Good list, WCJ, but eliminianing the ties:

Calgary - The Stamps started off slowly and have been fortunate, but take top spot due to dominating the Riders last game.

Saskatchewan - Offence has looked terrific, the defence has given up points. The Als are closing fast...

Montreal - The Als defence has really turned it on, if their offence can get on track...look out!

Toronto - Barker has the team pulling together, with their defence playing inspiring football.

Winnipeg - Superior coaching shining through.

Hamilton - While BC and Ham are in similar funks, I'd put the Ticats over the Leos due to Thigpen at KR and our starting QB injured.

B.C. - Lions have played well at times, but suffering from rookie and mental mistakes.

Edmonton - Seems like a team without character. Isn't it odd their head coach never talks to anybody on the sidelines?

[WestCoastJoe]

Edmonton - Seems like a team without character. Isn't it odd their head coach never talks to anybody on the sidelines?

That is odd, JH.

But, at least he wears a headset, unlike Head(set)less Wally, who looks like he is trying to emulate the sideline style of Vince Lombardi, from the 1960s.

Whatever is going on in Edmonton would seem strange, except when you consider who has the title of GM.

As I have posted before, I cannot help but think the parting shot by Hugh Campbell, to the Schmoes, was his placing of Maciocia in charge. Campbell might have wanted to be President for Life. He certainly earned it, with all his years of service, raising that franchise to prominence.

[D]

Not trying to anticipate or predict the cfl rankings, as we move into Week 5, I would say something like this:

Calgary

Saskatchewan and Montreal

Toronto

Winnipeg

B.C. and Hamilton

Edmonton

Great Minds think alike? Fools never differ? ... but ya that's how I see it

[WestCoastJoe]

Rankings as of July 27, from cfl.ca ...

Calgary

Winnipeg

Montreal

B.C.

Toronto

Saskatchewan

Edmonton

Hamilton
........

Wow. It would seem the Riders defensive failings really drag them down.

[Sir Purrcival]

Sorry, can't figure how a 3 and 1 team is ranked lower than a 1 and 3 team, even if it is a shorted lived bubble of goodness. Toronto has overcome in the latter stages of a couple of games and persevered where the Lions have frittered away opportunities. Does anybody who knows anything about football really rank the Bombers ahead of the Als? The Riders drop 5 spots because of 1 loss? Whack, these rankings are so whack that they can't be considered even the least bit credible.

Here is where I would put things

Als - they usually win even the ugly ones. Their one loss, first game of season at Mosaic, not an easy place to win.
Riders - They fell off the pedestal last weekend but that was bound to happen eventually, they have won ugly too but luck/good, flip a coin.
Bombers - think they have a good core, QB'ing is now a question.
Stamps - little bit up and down, last weekend, up in a big way, not so much previously
Argos - could be a flip for Calgary IMO - inspired defense and like the Riders, this team never seems to give up.
Ticats - underachieving somewhat. running game has been tentative and oline challenges which seem to be straightening out - look for them to start playing better
Lions - lots of potential but have cost themselves badly. Youth aside, mistakes are often the hallmark of a team that isn't properly focused. One of the most penalized teams to this point and fewer touchdowns than most.
Esks - just plain bad which is hard to explain when you look at the talent they seem to have. The smell of Machocia seems alive and well with this squad. What has to happen to get DM gone? I am figuring 1 more loss = coach, another miserable losing season = Machoka.

[notahomer]

Sorry, can't figure how a 3 and 1 team is ranked lower than a 1 and 3 team, ...

X2
I'd put the Argos and Riders above the Lions, IMO. I hope Calgary has found a blueprint (greenprint?) to beating the Riders defence but its gonna take more than one game.

[WestCoastJoe]

http://www.cfl.ca/power-rankings

Power Rankings ExplainedThe 2010 CFL Power Rankings is an objective measurement of each clubs' performances relative to each other.

The model used for the 2010 rankings are based on information gathered from the 2009 season. This information suggested that the four most statistically significant indicators of team success were the Quarterback Efficiency Rating, the number of Rushing Yards, the number of Field Goals Missed and the number of Sacks Taken.

Quarterback Efficiency Rating

Rushing Yards

Field Goals Missed

Sacks Taken

Calgary

Winnipeg

Montreal

B.C.

Toronto

Saskatchewan

Edmonton

Hamilton

So they use QB efficiency, rushing yards, field goals missed, and sacks.

And how about the win/loss record?

How about turnover ratio?

Coaches usually have turnovers as a key ingredient of success/failure.

................

So they get B.C. ahead of the Riders?

And Edmonton ahead of Hamilton?

And Winnipeg second overall?

This seems very skewed. Perhaps the mathematical methods of cfl.ca will sort themselves out with more games, but they are looking strange at this point.

I agree about Calgary at the top, after their huge win over Saskatchewan, exposing some the high-risk aspects of the Rider defence. But most of the teams would still have trouble taking it to the Riders' defence.

I would still have the Riders in the top 3. A bunch beneath those 3. And the Schmos at the bottom, for the time being.

[Lionheart]

I had to do a double take and check to see if this was another Robbie old thread post.

Very interesting indeed.

[B.C.FAN]

So they use QB efficiency, rushing yards, field goals missed, and sacks.

And how about the win/loss record?

How about turnover ratio?

Coaches usually have turnovers as a key ingredient of success/failure.

This suggests the Lions are better than their 1-3 record indicates. Their defence is tied for the league lead in sacks, leads the league in fewest TD passes allowed and lowest average gain per pass and is second in fewest touchdowns allowed and fewest points allowed.

The B.C. offence also has given up the fewest sacks in the league. When was the last time we could say that?

When the Lions reeled off four straight first-place finishes, the biggest stat in their favour was turnover margin. Turnovers determine the outcome of games. The mistakes the Lions have made in their three losses are correctable. As the stats and power rankings show, this team has a lot of good qualities.

[WestCoastJoe]

So they use QB efficiency, rushing yards, field goals missed, and sacks.

And how about the win/loss record?

How about turnover ratio?

Coaches usually have turnovers as a key ingredient of success/failure.

This suggests the Lions are better than their 1-3 record indicates. Their defence is tied for the league lead in sacks, leads the league in fewest TD passes allowed and lowest average gain per pass and is second in fewest touchdowns allowed and fewest points allowed.

The B.C. offence also has given up the fewest sacks in the league. When was the last time we could say that?

When the Lions reeled off four straight first-place finishes, the biggest stat in their favour was turnover margin. Turnovers determine the outcome of games. The mistakes the Lions have made in their three losses are correctable. As the stats and power rankings show, this team has a lot of good qualities.

I find it difficult to predict anything for the Lions right now.

Imagine you are the coach. You look at your roster of players and feel pretty good. Loads of talent everywhere. Excellent NI depth. Flexibility. QB talent and depth. Some star players. Defence has raised the level of their play quite a few notches (Thank you, Rich Stubler). Got a bumper crop of NI running backs the likes of which we have never seen.

Statistically, and by measures of team productivity, we look pretty good.

Are we better than 1 - 3? Dunno. Unlike 2004, or 2006, or any of the other really good years under Buono, the difference now is the level of coaching we face. Hufnagel, Trestman, and Austin-Miller have raised the bar. Barker is no slouch either, it seems. What worked for Wally, as a coach, in his best years might not be good enough anymore. Dunno. This game vs the Schmoos will tell a lot.

[Rammer]

So they use QB efficiency, rushing yards, field goals missed, and sacks.

And how about the win/loss record?

How about turnover ratio?

Coaches usually have turnovers as a key ingredient of success/failure.

This suggests the Lions are better than their 1-3 record indicates. Their defence is tied for the league lead in sacks, leads the league in fewest TD passes allowed and lowest average gain per pass and is second in fewest touchdowns allowed and fewest points allowed.

The B.C. offence also has given up the fewest sacks in the league. When was the last time we could say that?

When the Lions reeled off four straight first-place finishes, the biggest stat in their favour was turnover margin. Turnovers determine the outcome of games. The mistakes the Lions have made in their three losses are correctable. As the stats and power rankings show, this team has a lot of good qualities.

What is that saying about using stats? It seems that the stats are in the Lions favour, but just to counter your positive stats I will offer up a couple of negative retorts.

Opposition O's don't need to compile a ton of TD's against the Lions, mainly due to the inept ability of the Lions O.
Lowest gain per pass means that teams are exploiting underneath on the Lions not having to go deep and a higher risk pass, also maintaining TOP.
Lions still have 3 losses while leading in fewest TD's and points allowed against, again a reflection of the Lions even further limited success on scoring points in their favour.
As for having the fewest sacks against in the league, well I wonder how proportional that is to the number of offensive plays the Lions have had. Way too many 2 and outs plaguing the Lions O to credit the sack total as a positive IMO.

[WestCoastJoe]

http://communities.canada.com/theprovin ... vol-5.aspx

How Lowell Ullrich ranks the teams ...

Power rankings

1. Montreal – Ho-hum; back to being dominant again. Imagine the margin of victory over Hamilton if every FG was a TD. Last week: 2

2. Calgary – Call off the missing person's bulletin for Henry Burris. Last week: 5

3. Saskatchewan – What will opposing teams see in the film of their loss to Calgary? That could be huge this year. Last week: 1

4. Toronto – It may still take awhile, but GTA may wake up to the fact it finally has a team. Last week: 3

5. Winnipeg – Getting a win with your backup QB is always comforting. Last week: 6

6. Hamilton – Start up a missing person's bulletin for the running game. Last week: 4

7. B.C – Can't even count on beating the Argos anymore. Last week: 7

8. Edmonton – No wins and no answers from within as to the nature of their problems. Not a good sign. Last week: 8

Looks about right to me.

Lions' fans have had high hopes this year, and yet we find ourselves at the bottom of the food chain with the Schmoes.

[Rammer]

http://communities.canada.com/theprovince/blogs/fifthquarter/archive/2010/07/28/cfl-this-week-vol-5.aspx

How Lowell Ullrich ranks the teams ...

Power rankings

1. Montreal – Ho-hum; back to being dominant again. Imagine the margin of victory over Hamilton if every FG was a TD. Last week: 2

2. Calgary – Call off the missing person's bulletin for Henry Burris. Last week: 5

3. Saskatchewan – What will opposing teams see in the film of their loss to Calgary? That could be huge this year. Last week: 1

4. Toronto – It may still take awhile, but GTA may wake up to the fact it finally has a team. Last week: 3

5. Winnipeg – Getting a win with your backup QB is always comforting. Last week: 6

6. Hamilton – Start up a missing person's bulletin for the running game. Last week: 4

7. B.C – Can't even count on beating the Argos anymore. Last week: 7

8. Edmonton – No wins and no answers from within as to the nature of their problems. Not a good sign. Last week: 8

Looks about right to me.

Lions' fans have had high hopes this year, and yet we find ourselves at the bottom of the food chain with the Schmoes.

Lions only need to leapfrog Hamilton for a playoff position, but doing that on the PR at the end of the season won't get us there. Nor will a victory over the Edmonton, although much needed. Lions need to start beating teams other than Eskimos sooner than later.

[notahomer]

LU's rankings make more sense. I think he's 10-6 on his picks, so am I. But he has a distinct advantage. I always pick the Lions to win, LU doesn't. Even if my brain says NO, my heart always wins out and picks the Lions to win. IMO, this is the strangest the West has looked in a few seasons. Last week was the best the Stamps have looked. The Riders looked good to start...we'll see. I know the Esks/Lions did have the basement bowl last year too but I can't ever remember wondering if an Eastern team might crossover come playoff time. Never mind, much too early to be wondering that kind of stuff.