Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dciem.UUCP Path: utzoo!dciem!jeff From: jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) Newsgroups: net.sport.football Subject: Richardson's NFL Rankings (end of week 10) Message-ID: <1192@dciem.UUCP> Date: Tue, 6-Nov-84 12:03:37 EST Article-I.D.: dciem.1192 Posted: Tue Nov 6 12:03:37 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 6-Nov-84 14:18:26 EST Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada Lines: 43 Well, my program had a terrible week picking winners (7-7, counting the tie as a wrong pick); however, several of the teams that were involved in upsets had high totals of both good and bad points (St. Louis, the Giants, the Rams and New Orleans especially) which, as I said two weeks ago, means they had a good chance of being involved in an upset. Anyway, regardless of whether it can predict winners, I still think the program is the best indicator of the true meaning of a team's won/lost record. Here are the revised ratings: Last This Week Week TEAM (DIV) GP W L T PCT GOOD BAD RATING 1 1 MIAMI (AE) 10 10 0 0 1.000 9.0 0.0 0.950 2 2 DENVER (AW) 10 9 1 0 0.900 8.0 0.6 0.870 3 3 SAN FRANCISCO (NW) 10 9 1 0 0.900 7.1 0.9 0.810 8 4 SEATTLE (AW) 10 8 2 0 0.800 6.3 1.1 0.759 5 5 LA RAIDERS (AW) 10 7 3 0 0.700 5.7 1.1 0.727 4 6 NEW ENGLAND (AE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.3 1.0 0.710 6 7 WASHINGTON (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 6.1 2.0 0.705 11 8 CHICAGO (NC) 10 7 3 0 0.700 6.0 2.0 0.701 12 9 NY GIANTS (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.9 2.9 0.646 9 10 DALLAS (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.5 2.8 0.635 7 11 ST. LOUIS (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.9 3.6 0.617 10 12 NY JETS (AE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 4.1 2.1 0.598 15 13 LA RAMS (NW) 10 6 4 0 0.600 4.8 3.5 0.567 13 14 PITTSBURGH (AC) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.1 3.9 0.557 14 15 KANSAS CITY (AW) 10 5 5 0 0.500 3.6 2.9 0.533 17 16 SAN DIEGO (AW) 10 5 5 0 0.500 2.4 3.0 0.469 16 17 PHILADELPHIA (NE) 10 4 5 1 0.450 3.0 3.9 0.452 20 18 GREEN BAY (NC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 2.5 5.2 0.362 19 19 NEW ORLEANS (NW) 10 4 6 0 0.400 2.2 5.3 0.343 18 20 INDIANAPOLIS (AE) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.4 5.1 0.313 21 21 CINCINNATI (AC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 0.5 4.7 0.288 22 22 ATLANTA (NW) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.8 6.4 0.270 25 23 DETROIT (NC) 10 3 6 1 0.350 1.9 6.6 0.267 26 24 CLEVELAND (AC) 10 2 8 0 0.200 1.4 6.7 0.237 27 25 MINNESOTA (NC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.5 6.8 0.237 23 26 TAMPA BAY (NC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.7 7.1 0.229 24 27 BUFFALO (AE) 10 0 10 0 0.000 0.0 7.1 0.146 28 28 HOUSTON (AC) 10 0 10 0 0.000 0.0 10.0 0.002 -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff