The Final Word Power Poll - 2009 - Week 6 - FINAL

**Zeus** · 10-20-2009, 08:43 AM

Here you go, with the results still smoking following a long night's worth of number-crunching.

As always, this is based upon the only stat that matters.

[size=12pt]The Final Word Power Poll - 2009 Week 6 - FINAL[/size]

Place Team Wins Losses Ties
1st (tie) Denver Broncos 6 0 0
1st (tie) Minnesota Vikings 6 0 0
3rd (tie) Indianapolis Colts 5 0 0
3rd (tie) New Orleans Saints 5 0 0
5th New York Giants 5 1 0
6th Atlanta Falcons 4 1 0
7th (tie) Cincinnati Bengals 4 2 0
7th (tie) New England Patriots 4 2 0
7th (tie) Pittsburgh Steelers 4 2 0
10th (tie) Arizona Cardinals 3 2 0
10th (tie) Chicago Bears 3 2 0
10th (tie) Dallas Cowboys 3 2 0
10th (tie) Green Bay Packers 3 2 0
10th (tie) Philadelphia Eagles 3 2 0
10th (tie) San Francisco 49ers 3 2 0
16th (tie) Baltimore Ravens 3 3 0
16th (tie) Houston Texans 3 3 0
16th (tie) Jacksonville Jaguars 3 3 0
16th (tie) New York Jets 3 3 0
21st (tie) Carolina Panthers 2 3 0
21st (tie) Miami Dolphins 2 3 0
21st (tie) San Diego Chargers 2 3 0
23rd (tie) Buffalo Bills 2 4 0
23rd (tie) Oakland Raiders 2 4 0
23rd (tie) Seattle Seahawks 2 4 0
23rd (tie) Washington Redskins 2 4 0
27th (tie) Cleveland Browns 1 5 0
27th (tie) Detroit Lions 1 5 0
27th (tie) Kansas City Chiefs 1 5 0
30th (tie) St. Louis Rams 0 6 0
30th (tie) Tampa Bay Buccaneers 0 6 0
30th (tie) Tennessee Titans 0 6 0

=Z=

**Marrdro** · 10-20-2009, 08:49 AM

Thanks my friend.
If wins and losses are the only thing that counts, does that mean that parity in the league is gone?
:

**Zeus** · 10-20-2009, 08:51 AM

"Marrdro" wrote:

Thanks my friend.
If wins and losses are the only thing that counts, does that mean that parity in the league is gone?

:

Someone has to win and someone has to lose.

Unless there's a tie.

=Z=

**Marrdro** · 10-20-2009, 08:55 AM

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Thanks My Farvish Friend.
If wins and losses are the only thing that counts, does that mean that parity in the league is gone?

:

Someone has to win and someone has to lose.

Unless there's a tie.

=Z=

I hear ya and agree on the most simplicist of levels, however, in the big picture/grander scheme of things, isn't it the NFLs desire to have parity in the league.

Judging by your poll, that seems to be a extinc idea now.

**Zeus** · 10-20-2009, 09:06 AM

"Marrdro" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Thanks My Farvish Friend.
If wins and losses are the only thing that counts, does that mean that parity in the league is gone?

:

Someone has to win and someone has to lose.

Unless there's a tie.

I hear ya and agree on the most simplicist of levels, however, in the big picture/grander scheme of things, isn't it the NFLs desire to have parity in the league.

Judging by your poll, that seems to be a extinc idea now.

2009 appears to be a top and bottom-heavy league.
There are several elite teams and several really crappy teams.
But the middle is still a muddle of parity.
The NFL's goal is not necessarily parity, IMHO, but to make sure that lots of teams are still in the hunt for a playoff spot in December.
Too early to tell, of course, but at this point, there are clear division leaders in 4 of the 8 divisions, but the other 4 are close or ties and there are lots of teams fighting for the wild-card spots.

Lots more football to play.

=Z=

**jmcdon00** · 10-20-2009, 10:30 AM

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Thanks My Farvish Friend.
If wins and losses are the only thing that counts, does that mean that parity in the league is gone?

:

Someone has to win and someone has to lose.

Unless there's a tie.

I hear ya and agree on the most simplicist of levels, however, in the big picture/grander scheme of things, isn't it the NFLs desire to have parity in the league.

Judging by your poll, that seems to be a extinc idea now.

2009 appears to be a top and bottom-heavy league.
There are several elite teams and several really crappy teams.
But the middle is still a muddle of parity.
The NFL's goal is not necessarily parity, IMHO, but to make sure that lots of teams are still in the hunt for a playoff spot in December.
Too early to tell, of course, but at this point, there are clear division leaders in 4 of the 8 divisions, but the other 4 are close or ties and there are lots of teams fighting for the wild-card spots.

Lots more football to play.

=Z=

I think the parity shows more in the year to year standings. Several playoff teams from a year ago(baltimore, miami, Carolina, Tennessee) don't have winning records this year. The saints and Broncos were both 8-8 last year, but were able to quickly move to elite status. Parity still exists and is a great thing.

**i_bleed_purple** · 10-20-2009, 11:33 AM

"Marrdro" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Thanks My Farvish Friend.
If wins and losses are the only thing that counts, does that mean that parity in the league is gone?

:

Someone has to win and someone has to lose.

Unless there's a tie.

=Z=

I hear ya and agree on the most simplicist of levels, however, in the big picture/grander scheme of things, isn't it the NFLs desire to have parity in the league.

Judging by your poll, that seems to be a extinc idea now.

I would say there's still parity.
The point of parity isn't that all teams are equal, but all teams can have a shot at beating any other team.
Look at the Titans, they lost a couple players and are now crap.
If they got maybe one more playmaker, they could be 3-3 at this point, who knows.
The margin between being terrible and alright is very slim.

**gregair13** · 10-20-2009, 10:16 PM

Rams are too high.

**oaklandzoo24** · 10-20-2009, 10:32 PM

"gregair13" wrote:

Rams are too high.

how can you say that...they are tied for last place because they have the same record as those teams.
Its not the power rankings you thinking of...i think.