|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Aug 15, 2014 20:34:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Aug 16, 2014 22:14:19 GMT -6
There is a stats wonk in Austin I know, Jeff Fogle, who does a nice job deriving NFL power ratings from market lines. Also, during the season he adjusts his ratings every week and compares his to the market. If you want to see how one guy makes his numbers, he is worth following. statintelligence.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Aug 18, 2014 16:21:43 GMT -6
Care to guess what % of the time a 3 point favorite wins outright in the NFL? How about in college football? How about favorites of any other point spread and any sport? Get that info here: www.bettingtalk.com/win-probability-percentage-point-spread-nfl-nba/Answer: 3 pt. faves win outright 59.4% in NFL and 57.4% in college. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by Kirkwoodref on Aug 18, 2014 17:09:19 GMT -6
Generally speaking, when you like a dog at 0 to +3 do you find it worthwhile to just go with the money line? Very generally speaking minus details, you're just paying for home field. The way I see it not all home fields are 3 points and not all road teams are 3 dogs. I find the spread so small that if I like a dog I go ahead and jump on the ML.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Aug 18, 2014 17:38:21 GMT -6
Yes, that is solid logic. In the NFL, you would expect to win 40.6% of the time. You need to win an average of +149 on your moneylines to be +EV. So if you really like a 3 pt dog and you can get it at +150 or better, take it. At lower ML #s, it also makes cents, just not as much.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Sept 23, 2014 8:33:24 GMT -6
Before Bears fans run to conclusions about their team, they need to understand a few things about these last two games.This from Jeff Fogle, statintelligence.blogspot.com
.......................
Geno Smith threw a touchdown pass to the Chicago Bears on the second play of the game. Jay Cutler would add two TD passes of his own helping the road dog to its second straight “gift” victory in a prime time TV matchup.
Last Sunday, Chicago upset San Francisco 28-20 despite getting outgained by 145 yards. Monday, Chicago upset the Jets 27-19 despite getting outgained by 157 yards. Turnovers were 4-0 in their favor last week, 3-1 this week.
Chicago 27, NY Jets 19
Chicago: 257 yards, 4.1 per-play, 1 turnover, 50% third downs
NY Jets: 414 yards, 5.9 per-play, 3 turnovers, 40% third downs
You want more? San Francisco won YPP (yards per point) last week 5.6 to 4.2, while the Jets won it tonight 5.9 to 4.1 (based on the initial ESPN boxscore I was using right after the game). Of course, the spacing of everything was different because the Niners didn’t implode until the fourth quarter last week. The Jets stumbled out of the gate, and stumbled periodically through the evening to create some suspense.
Other Stats
Rushing Yardage: Chicago 63, NY Jets 114
Passing Stats: Chicago 23-38-0-197, NY Jets 26-43-2-300
Drive Points: Chicago 10, NY Jets 10
Stat Score: Chicago 14, NY Jets 24
Sloppiness: Chicago 20, NY Jets 32
(For you new visitors, Drive Points are those scored only on drives of 60 yards or more; Stat Score is a calculation of what the final score “should” have been based on the formula: 2 times rushing yards, plus passing yards, times 0.67, divided by 15; and Sloppiness is a quick assessment of sharpness based on 5 times the number of giveaways plus the number of incomplete passes. The lower the number, the better in sloppiness because you want to avoid being sloppy)
Haven’t had much of a chance to talk about sloppiness this year. I’ve seen many writers say something along the lines of “the NFL feels different this year, and it’s not just the off-the-field stuff.” I think that’s very much about the emphasis on conservative swing passes that cut down on incompletions and turnovers. That 32 from the Jets wouldn’t have wowed us last year in sloppiness terms. Sloppy, yes. But, not "Oh my god are you kidding me?!" This week, it was the second worst mark in the league…topping only the 39 posted by Tampa Bay in last Thursday’s debacle. Nobody else was over 30. Jacksonville’s awful game only registered at 28.
Teams with young quarterbacks are playing it very safe. And, really, EVERYBODY is playing it fairly safe because they’re tired of seeing their star receivers get obliterated by headhunters on downfield throws…and their quarterbacks constantly taking shots. When was the last time you saw a quarterback bruise or break a finger banging it on a pass rusher’s helmet? That had become commonplace with more aggressive pass rushes. Doesn’t happen on a wide receiver screen.
Anyway, I think that’s at the heart of what “feels” different to so many people. And, that’s very much an influence on the scoring explosion that DIDN’T happen after the emphasis on officials calling more defensive holding.
...............
So the Bears win two games because of the mistakes made by its opponents, not because of what it did. With the way GB lost to Detroit, the recency effect will surely have Bears fans confident and Packers fans distressed. You can probably figure where I will be -- thinking both groups of fans are over-reacting.
Power ratings are based on a team's overall capabilities, not solely the scores, especially when the scores are unduly influenced by turnovers. I make the Packers pick or -1, so any points would be welcome. Bears cluster injuries, not yet figured into my PRs, also could be a factor vs a QB who can take advantage.
Almost certainly I will be on GB.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Sept 23, 2014 10:34:03 GMT -6
Here are my NFL Power Ratings and lines for week 4 (add 3 points to home team power rating to make the line):
Power Ratings
86 Sea home
85
84 Den, Sea road
83 NO home
82 NO road, GB, NE, Cin,SF
81 Phil, San Diego, Atl
80 Ind, Bal, Ariz, Det, Carolina
79 Pitt, Chicago, Dall, Hou
78 Wash, KC, Buff
77 Tenn, TB, SL
76 NYJ, Cleve, Minn, NYG
75 Miami
74
73 Oak
72 Jax
Projected Lines
Wash -5 vs. NYG (current 3.5)
Pitt -5 vs. TB (-7)
Det -1 @ NYJ (pick)
Indy -6 v. Tenn (-7.5)
Bal -3 vs. Carolina (-3)
Chicago pick vs. GB (GB -1)
Miami -2 vs. Oakland at London, England (- 4.5)
SD -12 vs. Jax (-14)
Hou -4 vs. Buffalo (-3.5)
Atl - 2 @ Minn (-3)
SF -4 vs. Phil (-5.5)
NO pick @ Dall (-3)
NE - 1 @ KC (-3.5)
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Sept 30, 2014 10:12:06 GMT -6
my nfl power ratings sept 30
87: Seattle (at home)
86: Denver (at home), Seattle (on the road)
85: Denver (on the road),
83: New Orleans (at home),
82: GB, Cincinnati, SF
81: Philadelphia, Nawlins (road), San Diego
80: Indianapolis, Detroit, Baltimore
79.5 Dallas, Atlanta, NE
79: Pittsburgh, Houston
78: Buffalo, Miami, Chicago, Arizona, KC
77.5 Carolina
77: Washington, Giants, Jets
76: Minnesota, Tampa,
75: Cleveland, Tenn
74 St Louis
70: Jacksonville, Oakland
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Sept 30, 2014 10:28:23 GMT -6
With home field added to my power ratings, three games pop out for me this week.
Atlanta +4
Phil -7
Denver -7
And it is not a coincidence that the three teams all lost last game. The public perception/recency effect leads to ratings drops after a L. In addition, teams off nice wins tend to get over-valued. That is exactly the situation I like to play in the NFL...take a team with value off a loss or against a team over-valued after a win. We get the undervalue angle this week with Philly. Even better when both angles converge on the same games as we have this week with Atl-NYG and Ariz-Denver.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Oct 7, 2014 22:22:57 GMT -6
nfl power ratings oct 6
87: Seattle (at home)
86: Denver (at home), Seattle (on the road)
85: Denver (on the road),
82: New Orleans (at home), GB, SF
81: Nawlins (road), San Diego, Cin, NE
80: Indianapolis, Detroit, Baltimore, NY Giants, Philly
79: Pittsburgh, Houston,Dallas, Atlanta
78: Buffalo, Miami, Chicago, Arizona, KC, Carolina
77: Washington, Cleve
76: Minnesota, NY Jets, Tampa
75: Tenn, St Louis
70: Jacksonville, Oakland
C2C Lines
Indy -3 @ Houston (My line H-2). BET on Hou
Denver -8 @ NY Jets (6)
Cleve -2 vs Pitt (1)
Tenn @ Jax no line (T-2)
Atl -3 vs Chicago (4). BET on Atl
GB -3 @ Miami (1) Possible BET on Mia
Detroit @ Minn no line (D-2)
Cincy -7 vs. Carolina (6)
NE -3 @ Buffalo (pick) Possible BET on Buff
SD-7 @ Oakland (8)
Seattle -8 vs. Dallas (11). Possible BET on Sea
Arizona vs Wash no line (A-4)
Philly -3 vs. NY Giants (3)
SF -3@ SL (4)
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirkwoodref on Oct 8, 2014 6:27:14 GMT -6
Hate betting relatively large favorites. But Seattle -8 looks mighty tasty. I think Dallas' record is smoke and mirrors.
@ten
@stl
NO
HOU
We're talking about 4 average to below average teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Oct 8, 2014 8:20:51 GMT -6
yes i am waiting to see if we might get a public move or a pro head fake move down to 7.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Oct 14, 2014 12:53:15 GMT -6
Here are my NFL power ratings for this week. It's interesting that my ratings match every game within 1 point (adding 3 points for home field). So I don't see any "value" this week, but there certainly are some situations worth watching....teams coming off unexpected or bad losses, teams coming off big wins, teams coming off byes, strong run defense vs. a running team, etc. The other question you have to ask is whether a team will bounce back to its former rating (Seattle, NY Giants) or whether one game is a regression or a trend. And injury situations are relevant in several games...will a key player affect the outcome. But note, for most NFL players, the injury impact is really small. There are less than 10 players whom I would say are so significant to their teams that their loss would move a line. It's one area that is vastly over-valued by many.
NFL Power Ratings: Sept. 12
86: Seattle, Denver
82: New Orleans (at home) Green Bay, San Francisco, New England
81: New Orleans (road), San Diego, Cincinnati
80: Detroit, Philadelphia
79: Chicago
78: Miami, Arizona, KC, Carolina, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, NY Giants, Houston
77: Atlanta, Buffalo
76: Minnesota, NY Jets, Washington
75: Tenn, St. Louis, Tampa
70: Jacksonville, Oakland
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Oct 21, 2014 11:14:16 GMT -6
NFL Power Ratings for Week 8
Seattle loses again. At what point do you take down the Seahags and no longer make them the highest rated team in the league? In my world, it's now. Losing two in a row, as 7 point home chalk to Dallas and the latest as 6 pt. chalk at St. Lou will do that to a team. And with what the Broncos are doing, at least so far, they are making the case for them being the #1 team. At least this week.
86: Denver
85: Seattle
83: Green Bay, Baltimore
82: New Orleans, Indianapolis, Dallas
81: San Francisco, San Diego, New England
80: Detroit, Philadelphia, Cincinnati
79: Miami, Arizona
78: KC, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, NY Giants, Houston,
77: Atlanta, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago
76: Minnesota, NY Jets, Washington, St. Louis
75: Tenn, Tampa
71: Jacksonville, Oakland
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Oct 21, 2014 11:30:38 GMT -6
This Week's NFL Lines
Current Lines (My Lines based on my PRs).
A few 3 point discrepancies between my lines and the current market lines: I keep taking Atlanta down, and it's not enough. Now the linesmakers are saying Atlanta is = or worse than Tampa. Hmm. That's a big fall in a few weeks. But I have stopped playing Atlanta until we see how far they fall...and other bettors are apparently doing the same. So linesmakers have to lower the price on the Falcons to a point they find equal action. But that's a big drop in a few weeks for any team. So is it real in terms of football, or is this move on Atlanta more market-driven. But one thing is for sure, Atlanta has sucked against good or better teams, so maybe this number is just right. (Correction; game is in London, so my line is Detroit -3)
And though I took Cleveland down 1 and took Oakland up 1 after last week, I make the line on Cleve this week -10. Just writing that is strange..the Browns as double digit chalk? The linesmaker says maybe I have Cleveland too high or Oakland too low...or maybe again they think -7 is the best number to get equal action. Last week notwithstanding, saying Cleve is only 4 better than Oakland on neutral isn't supported by the facts.
San Diego
Denver -7 (-8)
Detroit -3.5 (Pick) (-3)
Atlanta
Baltimore
Cincinnati -1.5 (Pick)
Buffalo
NY Jets -2.5 (-2)
Seattle -5 (-5)
Carolina
Miami -5.5 (-5)
Jacksonville
Houston
Tennessee No Line (Pick)
Chicago
New England -6 (-6)
St. Louis
Kansas City -7 (-5)
Minnesota
Tampa Bay -3 (-2)
Philadelphia
Arizona -2.5 (-2)
Oakland
Cleveland -7 (-10)
Indianapolis -2.5 (-1)
Pittsburgh
Green Bay
New Orleans -2 (-2)
Washington
Dallas -10 (-9)
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirkwoodref on Oct 21, 2014 11:34:17 GMT -6
Coast, are you factoring that Atlanta isn't at "home"? They're playing in London.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Oct 21, 2014 20:02:09 GMT -6
Duh. Thanks Kirkwood. That makes my numbers right on for that game.
Which leaves Cleveland as one I should look at from a PR perspective...but laying a tuddie with the Browns is unknown territory. They sure didn't perform to their number as road chalk last week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Oct 21, 2014 23:09:59 GMT -6
By the way, Cleveland is now rated higher 1 pt. higher than the Bears. First time in a long time for that. Many Bears fans would likely disagree, noting Cleveland lost to Jacksonville and no matter how bad the Bears are, they are not Cleveland bad. Yes they are. Both are solidly in the "miss the playoffs by one or two games" group of several teams. Bears are 3-4, Browns 3-3. Both are headed for 7-9, 8-8 tops.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Nov 1, 2014 9:39:18 GMT -6
My NFL Power Ratings for Week 9
86: Denver
85: Seattle
83: Green Bay, Baltimore
82: New Orleans
81: San Francisco, San Diego, New England, Dallas, Indianapolis
80: Detroit, Philadelphia, Cincinnati
79: Miami, Arizona
78: KC, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, NY Giants, Houston
77: Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Atlanta
76: Minnesota, NY Jets, Washington, St. Louis
75: Tenn, Tampa
71: Jacksonville, Oakland
Trends:
Chicago trending down, but teams often rise after a bye week, so won't take them down yet.
Atlanta trending down, but they did cover last week. But countervailing trends -- the bye week, which normally is a positive, but a horrible loss from which they might not recover, which is a downward trend. If they were not on a bye week, they would be a massive go-against this week.
Miami has had the largest move in my PRs of any team, rising 4 points in 6 weeks. But I'm treading carefully, because their rise has come by winning and covering against teams with lower ratings (Jax, Bears, Raiders). They lost to KC and GB in that stretch. So this is a big week for them (and their rating), getting SD as a small home favorite.
Had to take Indy down 1 after being demolished by Pitt, but still think Indy is a solid 80/81 and still could rise. NFL teams have clunkers like that. Question is how they bounce back from it or whether one week of bad becomes a multi-week thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Nov 9, 2014 9:16:44 GMT -6
Power Ratings Week 10
85: Seattle, Denver
83: Green Bay
82: New Orleans, New England, Baltimore
81: Indianapolis
80: Detroit, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Miami, Arizona, San Francisco, Dallas
79: Pittsburgh, San Diego
78: KC, Cleveland, NY Giants, Houston
77: Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Atlanta
76: Minnesota, Washington, St. Louis
75: Tenn, Tampa, NY Jets
71: Jacksonville, Oakland
Gaps this week:
Maybe I have not taken Jets down enough, but Pitt -3.5 or 4 at Jets seems an over-reaction to the Stillers' play the last few weeks. And after a few great efforts, a flat performance by Pitt on the road against a bad team would not be a surprise. I make that Pitt 01. I may hold my nose and close my eyes and take the J-E-T-S.
I have taken the Falcons down and it will be interesting to see how they bounce back, if they do. I make Tampa -1 at home vs. the Falcons. Getting three there might be a take. As much as I'm not a Lovie fan, his team appears to be getting better. The Falcons? Can't possibly back them in any situation.
FYI, I make the Pack -9, so 1.5 point gap not worth playing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Nov 12, 2014 17:42:58 GMT -6
As we get ready for college hoops season, I'm going to give you a little insight into how I cap totals. it is something I focus on a lot because I think with careful analysis, there are major opportunities to win.
The first step is predicting the pace of a game...that is how many possessions each team has. Over the last five years, the national average for possessions/team has stayed pretty constant at 66.5/team/game. However, what has changed is the efficiency of teams scoring on each possession. In the 2008-2009 season, the average national offensive efficiency (points per possession) was 1.0139...or just slightly more than 1 point per possession. So multiplying the OE by number of possessions gives you the average number of points scored that season. 1.0139 x 66.5274 possessions/game = 67.28 points/game. So in that year, the average number of points scored per game was pretty close to 134.56.
Now let's move ahead five years to last year: Avg. number of possessions was 66.58791026. however, the average points/possession had increased over that five year period to 1.040289. Doesn't seem like much, huh? But when we do the math, that breaks out to 69.39 points/team/game or 138.78.
This means 4+ points per game are being scored in college basketball last year vs. five years ago. Again, to the casual observer, this might mean so what? Well, what it means is that people who are using math models they developed ten years ago are maybe 8-10 points too low. So as in many sports, it's important to update models every year.
In the first two weeks of the season, we are guessing as to how teams are going to play. But generally, we can get a pretty good idea by looking at last year's stats when a team has the same coach and comparable talent. But as time goes on, our models will get tighter as we can use this year's numbers against comparable opponents.
Projecting a total is pretty simple: just take the number of possessions you expect a team to have and multiply by their expected efficiency. But for that, you have to have project how good the opponent's defense is. Each team has an average Defensive efficiency and you can look at the specific DEs against each team. Look at the numbers vs. comparable opponents and project a number. I usually split the expected OE and DE to get an expected score/game.
If you are interested in pursuing this, then you must use kenpom.com. This is the website in which all this data is presented and updated after every game. It is indispensable to college hoops handicapping.
And finally, if you think this is a lot of math, I have a few suggestions: 1) Don't try to do it without excel; and 2) then forget about betting totals....Because if you do, just know you are going against an army of stat geeks who are crunching these numbers every day....and as the year goes on, they will be pretty sharp.
So if a bunch of guys are doing this, where is the edge? Well, that's the art of this. Being able to properly project the style and pace of a game is usually the key factor. And for that, on any given game, handicappers can differ widely. For example, a fast team plays a slow team. What will happen? What would you estimate? Will the fast team get its way? The slow team? Will it be an average? My take is this for this example -- if the slow team is almost as good or better than the fast team, especially defensively, the pace will skew to the slower team. If the fast team is much better than the slow team's defense, then the pace of the slow team won't matter as much, because the better fast team will get their points quickly. And the slow team might have to play faster than it might otherwise in order to catch up.
So that's the art...to go with the math.
Good luck this season! Now pardon me as I work on the 125 games this weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Nov 12, 2014 18:18:00 GMT -6
NFL Power Ratings for Week 11
86: Seattle, Denver
84: Green Bay
82: New Orleans, New England, Baltimore
81: Indianapolis, Philadelphia
80: Detroit, Miami, Arizona, San Francisco, Dallas
79: San Diego, Cincinnati, Cleveland, KC
78: NY Giants, Houston, Pittsburgh
77: Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Atlanta
76: Minnesota, Washington, St. Louis
75: Tenn, Tampa, NY Jets
71: Jacksonville, Oakland
I took Chicago down 1 and took GB up 1, but it's hard to take the Bears down 2 when you consider that would mean Bears are = to Minnesota, Washington and St. Louis. I will keep them 1 point above Minny this week, or a projected line of 4 (line is 3).
And I took Cincy down 1 and Cleveland up 1. The Browns keep performing against the number, so why not? Though they now are getting into the range of playoff teams and who would have thought that ten weeks ago? Basically, 80 and above is where you would expect playoff teams to be.
Gaps this week:
Seattle +1.5 at Kansas City. Seriously? Who made KC a playoff contender all of a sudden. I make this line Seattle -4. Seahawks opened -1 and have now moved to a 1.5 point dog. Why? I need to check out why the move, but if there is no discernible reason other than opinions, then the Seahags will be a definite play for me. In fact, this could be an early week head fake from big bettors betting the wrong way and setting it up for a strong move on Seattle on Sunday.
Carolina should be -3 vs. Atlanta (Actual down to -1.5) but after Monday night, and the obvious questions about Newton's health, who wants to pay fair price to back the Panthers?
I make Nawlins 6 over Cincy, but no surprise after Cincy's pitiful effort last week that the money has pushed that line to 7 and over.
With RG3 back for the Skins, I sense some love for the Skins, but not here. I lost on Tampa last week, but they were in it the whole game until an INT in the end zone at the end of the game. so it wasn't like they didn't play to their number. Getting the Bucs at more than a tuddie vs. the Skin is very tempting. I make that line 4, but clearly there are some books/bettors who are betting on RG3 to take the Skins up a notch or two. Problem is, he didn't do that early in the season, so why would we expect him to do it now?
Giants should be getting 1 at home and they are getting 4 from SF. And it's an early game which has a very high cover rate for east cost teams vs. west coasters. As I have said many times, lines often reflect the last thing we saw and the last thing we saw from the Giants was them getting whacked (in the 4th quarter) at Seattle. And the last we saw from the Niners was them winning at New Orleans. So maybe I should have taken the Niners up 1 and Giants down 1. That would make this line 3. That's probably what the linesmakers did.
Finally, looks like I fade the Stillers again. They were overpriced last week and lost to the Jet and now look ridiculously overpriced again this week. Laying 6 or 7 at Tennessee? I make that game pick em. Even if say I'm off on Tenn and Pitt by a point, it's still 4 points of value. I need to study the Tenn. injury card, but unless their team all has the flu or the clap, I'll likely take the home dawg on Monday night and try to grab 7.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Nov 13, 2014 0:15:42 GMT -6
The number 1 college team in America is Mississippi State. The so-called expert panel that picks the final four has them #1 and so does the media. So this powerhouse #1 team is an 8.5 point underdog this week at Alabama. I'm not sure I can remember when a #1 team this late in the season was a dog like this.
Who would you trust more to identify the comparative strengths of teams and rank them -- media writers and hangers on to the sport...people like athletic directors, Archie Manning and Condi Rice?
Or Vegas, which bases its rankings on a variety of analytics, rather than opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirkwoodref on Nov 13, 2014 6:11:45 GMT -6
NYG are my favorite play of the week. The Giants aren't a great team but neither are the 49ers. And no, adding Aldon Smith and a still recovering (even if he plays) Bowman is not worth 4 points.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2014 8:32:50 GMT -6
The number 1 college team in America is Mississippi State. The so-called expert panel that picks the final four has them #1 and so does the media. So this powerhouse #1 team is an 8.5 point underdog this week at Alabama. I'm not sure I can remember when a #1 team this late in the season was a dog like this. Who would you trust more to identify the comparative strengths of teams and rank them -- media writers and hangers on to the sport...people like athletic directors, Archie Manning and Condi Rice? Or Vegas, which bases its rankings on a variety of analytics, rather than opinions? I can't wait to hear the geniuses in the media talk of how Alabama upset MSU. Last year, John Feinstein admitted that he ranked Appalachian State #25, over more deserving teams, despite never watching a snap of their games. |
|
|
|
Post by November KS on Nov 13, 2014 13:18:51 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2Coast on Nov 22, 2014 8:34:18 GMT -6
NFL Power Ratings for Week 12
85: Denver, Green Bay
84: New England, Seattle
82: Baltimore
81: Indianapolis, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Arizona
80: Detroit, Miami, San Francisco, Dallas, KC
79: San Diego, Cincinnati, Cleveland
78: Houston, Pittsburgh
77: Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Atlanta, NY Giants
76: Minnesota, Washington, St. Louis
75: Tenn, Tampa, NY Jets
71: Jacksonville, Oakland
Cleveland +3 is only for sure so far.
|
|
