NFL.com Power Rankings 'Hawks 7th

[Sgt. Largent]

When the Cardinals beat us last year, nobody was suggesting they were a better team than us, so why would a narrow loss to the Chargers make people believe we've gone from a team that had one of the most lopsided superbowl victories of all time to having 6 teams in the league better than us?

No chance

The Cardinals beat the team we just lost to, how could you not have them ahead of us.

Again, I think you guys are confused. This is the 2014 power rankings, not the 2013 power rankings. Reputation or what we did last year is for the most part irrelevant.

Sure if two teams are 1-1, we might be ahead because we're perceived as a better team. But sorry, this is the NFL, not college.........2-0 is better than 1-1.

 

[bmorepunk]

Guessing the "perfect season" stuff can come to a merciful end.

I actually appreciate this. Too bad a loss was needed to do this, but if nothing else it brings some of the people on this forum back down from the ionosphere.

 

[themunn]

When the Cardinals beat us last year, nobody was suggesting they were a better team than us, so why would a narrow loss to the Chargers make people believe we've gone from a team that had one of the most lopsided superbowl victories of all time to having 6 teams in the league better than us?

No chance

The Cardinals beat the team we just lost to, how could you not have them ahead of us.

Again, I think you guys are confused. This is the 2014 power rankings, not the 2013 power rankings. Reputation or what we did last year is for the most part irrelevant.

Sure if two teams are 1-1, we might be ahead because we're perceived as a better team. But sorry, this is the NFL, not college.........2-0 is better than 1-1.

In Arizona. If 2-0 is better than 1-1, why are 23 teams ranked ahead of the Texans? Why are the 1-1 Browns behind the 0-2 Saints?

 

[jlwaters1]

You lose to a team that isn't in the top 3 or even top 5. You're going to drop a few spots. You lose by more than a TD, you drop another spot or two.

That losing by more than a TD was a fluke. It was a 6 point game in reality. I'm still trying to figure out how the clock stopped after the first SD kneel down? According to the broadcast Seattle was out of timeouts, yet somehow the clock stopped. I was annoyed that we allowed the streak to break.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

When the Cardinals beat us last year, nobody was suggesting they were a better team than us, so why would a narrow loss to the Chargers make people believe we've gone from a team that had one of the most lopsided superbowl victories of all time to having 6 teams in the league better than us?

No chance

The Cardinals beat the team we just lost to, how could you not have them ahead of us.

Again, I think you guys are confused. This is the 2014 power rankings, not the 2013 power rankings. Reputation or what we did last year is for the most part irrelevant.

Sure if two teams are 1-1, we might be ahead because we're perceived as a better team. But sorry, this is the NFL, not college.........2-0 is better than 1-1.

In Arizona. If 2-0 is better than 1-1, why are 23 teams ranked ahead of the Texans? Why are the 1-1 Browns behind the 0-2 Saints?

We beat the Packers, at home.

If there are equal teams to measure two teams, like the Hawks and Cards who both played the Chargers, then that's why they're ahead of us.

My point is strength of opponent is a slippery slope in the NFL because in week 2 no one really knows who's good or not yet. I would be very offended if I was a Texans fan, because that is a legit defense, so I expect them to content for the AFC South.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Meh, the only power ranking that matters is the one right after the Super Bowl.

 

[ctrcat]

The Panthers beat two teams with losing records - one of those a narrow victory over the Bucs who just lost to the RAMS... AT HOME

The Panthers had a backup QB against the Bucs in a game they dominated throughout until it was prevent time in the 4th. Also had no Hardy against a Lions team that shinned in week 1, the Lions don't have a losing record and are actually favored against the team the Hawks beat (Packers).

 

[BlueTalons]

My rankings are:

#1 Seahawks
#3-29 everyone else
#30 Cardinals
#31 Rams
#32 49ers

That's the only ranking I care about - MINE! :0190l: And what I like best about them is they NEVER change!

 

[Joey13091]

Not really a big deal. Power rankings are based on record and that's it.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Until the NFL decides to go to the College Playoff system, they can rank us 33rd on the list for all I care.

 

[NINEster]

Laughable list all around.

So over-reactionary by wins/losses for many teams not just Seattle.

It begs the question, would Seattle/SF have slipped in the rankings had they barely won their games this weekend?

To me, that would be telling. If you think Seattle losing to SD is worth a 6 spot drop (and same for SF to CHI), then beating them at the final minute after struggling the entire game probably has to make you drop them at least a spot instead of rewarding them with a no gain or slight gain.

Only problem with that is you would be elevating another team, and in Seattle's case rewarding another team merely for not losing.

I think the wise thing to do is give the juggernauts benefit of the doubt, and change the rankings if they lose for two straight weeks in a row. If Denver were to beat Seattle this weekend, then they would definitely deserve a 6 spot drop in the rankings. If they win, they could keep the status quo of #1.

Of course, gotta create controversy and drive traffic to the sites.

That's why you gotta love PFF......no need to drive traffic unnecessarily......just charge for the knowledge and give it to the fans straight. :th2thumbs:

 

[pocketprotector]

Elliott Harrison gets his kicks trolling Seattle fans. He had a video yesterday where he graded Wilson at a C for the Chargers game, saying he had never seen Wilson carry the team to victory outside of Chicago' 12

 

[Jayburd14]

Until the NFL decides to go to the College Playoff system, they can rank us 33rd on the list for all I care.

Exactly I could care less about these stupid power rankings

 

[Sports Hernia]

Elliott Harrison gets his kicks trolling Seattle fans. He had a video yesterday where he graded Wilson at a C for the Chargers game, saying he had never seen Wilson carry the team to victory outside of Chicago' 12

Never heard of him.

 

[Hawks46]

How do you consider a team #1 one week and #7 the next? That's very flavor of the week and a bunch of garbage. Teams don't get that much better or worse week over week. This is just emotional sensationalized crap.

Arizona #4, are you kidding me? Give me a break. Why not just rank the teams by record? That's apparently what they're doing.

Umm, the power rankings are that....WEEKLY power rankings.

The Chargers vaulted up above us. And, well, they beat us last week. Gee, so that makes them better. THIS week.

As for Arizona, well, they beat the Chargers, who just beat us. So, if you were an AZ fan, (or if the positions were reversed and we're talking Seahawks beat Chargers who beat Cards) you'd be pissed that you were being "disrespected" in yet the latest power rankings.

Look at it another way. We were #1, Chargers were middle of the pack starting the season. No one expected the Chargers to beat us, almost all the analysts picked Seattle. SD was a 6 point dog in Vegas. When you lose to that team, for that week, things change.

WEEKLY power rankings basically rate how hot each team is that week. You'll also see them explain some rankings due to key injuries, etc. It's meant to be entertaining because it does change a lot. If the damn thing never changed, no matter wins or losses, it would be boring and what would be the point ?