Update: Power ranking columns now sortable, too! I also fixed a bug in the associated JavaScript code. I didn't see it causing a problem on the Strength-of-Schedule table, but maybe someone else did? Anyway, please feel free to comment if this doesn't seem to work right for you.
| Rank | Team | Power Index | W-L | This Week |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (↑2) | Patriots | 1.0176 (LW × 0.9892) | 8-2 | Won by 3 vs Colts |
| 2 (-) | Ravens | 1.0159 (LW × 0.9819) | 7-3 | Won by 24 @ Panthers |
| 3 (↑2) | Eagles | 1.0115 (LW × 1.0206) | 7-3 | Won by 10 vs Giants |
| 4 (↑2) | Packers | 1.0093 (LW × 1.0206) | 7-3 | Won by 28 @ Vikings |
| 5 (↓4) | Jets | 1.0036 (LW × 0.9669) | 8-2 | Won by 3 vs Texans |
| 6 (↓2) | Steelers | 0.9978 (LW × 0.9899) | 7-3 | Won by 32 vs Raiders |
| 7 (↑1) | Falcons | 0.9945 (LW × 1.0082) | 8-2 | Won by 17 @ Rams |
| 8 (↑1) | Colts | 0.9835 (LW × 1.0041) | 6-4 | Lost by 3 @ Patriots |
| 9 (↓2) | Titans | 0.9525 (LW × 0.9651) | 5-5 | Lost by 3 vs Redskins |
| 10 (↑5) | Bears | 0.9382 (LW × 1.0403) | 7-3 | Won by 16 @ Dolphins |
| 11 (-) | Giants | 0.9263 (LW × 1.0045) | 6-4 | Lost by 10 @ Eagles |
| 12 (↑2) | Saints | 0.9145 (LW × 1.0072) | 7-3 | Won by 15 vs Seahawks |
| 13 (-) | Chargers | 0.9140 (LW × 1.0023) | 5-5 | Won by 21 vs Broncos |
| 14 (↓2) | Browns | 0.9060 (LW × 0.9870) | 3-7 | Lost by 4 @ Jaguars |
| 15 (↑1) | Chiefs | 0.9002 (LW × 0.9983) | 6-4 | Won by 18 vs Cardinals |
| 16 (↑8) | Redskins | 0.8853 (LW × 1.0452) | 5-5 | Won by 3 @ Titans |
| 17 (↑5) | Jaguars | 0.8816 (LW × 1.0257) | 6-4 | Won by 4 vs Browns |
| 18 (↓8) | Dolphins | 0.8791 (LW × 0.9410) | 5-5 | Lost by 16 vs Bears |
| 19 (↑1) | Buccaneers | 0.8778 (LW × 1.0177) | 7-3 | Won by 21 @ 49ers |
| 20 (↓3) | Raiders | 0.8649 (LW × 0.9649) | 5-5 | Lost by 32 @ Steelers |
| 21 (↑8) | Cowboys | 0.8540 (LW × 1.0416) | 3-7 | Won by 16 vs Lions |
| 22 (↓4) | Lions | 0.8508 (LW × 0.9720) | 2-8 | Lost by 16 @ Cowboys |
| 23 (↑7) | Bills | 0.8445 (LW × 1.0421) | 2-8 | Won by 18 @ Bengals |
| 24 (↑4) | Texans | 0.8444 (LW × 1.0193) | 4-6 | Lost by 3 @ Jets |
| 25 (↓6) | Vikings | 0.8402 (LW × 0.9634) | 3-7 | Lost by 28 vs Packers |
| 26 (↓5) | Rams | 0.8269 (LW × 0.9601) | 4-6 | Lost by 17 vs Falcons |
| 27 (↓4) | Bengals | 0.8062 (LW × 0.9418) | 2-8 | Lost by 18 vs Bills |
| 28 (↓3) | Broncos | 0.8044 (LW × 0.9562) | 3-7 | Lost by 21 @ Chargers |
| 29 (↓2) | Seahawks | 0.8041 (LW × 0.9586) | 5-5 | Lost by 15 @ Saints |
| 30 (↓4) | 49ers | 0.8007 (LW × 0.9544) | 3-7 | Lost by 21 vs Buccaneers |
| 31 (-) | Cardinals | 0.7565 (LW × 0.9622) | 3-7 | Lost by 18 @ Chiefs |
| 32 (-) | Panthers | 0.6992 (LW × 0.9884) | 1-9 | Lost by 24 vs Ravens |
Comments:
The top 8 ranked teams are all very close together by their power index value; there's a pretty steep drop from the Colts to #9 Titans.
The teams from #9 down to #30 (49ers) are clustered fairly close together. The #32 Panthers are way down in a hole.
And here come the Chargers, who have clawed their way back to 0.500, after being 2-5 after week 7. After next week's game at the Colts, they have a very soft schedule—the Chiefs may need to win their week 14 rematch to win the AFC West.
Every team in the NFC West lost this week, and APR now has all of them in the bottom 7 teams. There's been some really weak divisions in the history of the NFL, but I'll be surprised if the 2010 NFC West doesn't make the All-Time short list.
The Titans have joined a growing list of teams with a gaping void at the quarterback position. I have a feeling it's going to be a very good offseason to be a free agent QB this spring.
