Sent this to Mike Brown a little bit ago:
Been a big fan of your profit/power rankings for years, but your biases are very clear in them. (Both positive and negative). It is almost certainly your BIASES that are causing your pick percentage to remain a little on the low side!
Case in point...your ranking and attitude toward the Eagles. You have consistantly doubted and/or put them down over the years, regardless of what they were doing. Even when they have had long win streaks, you only grudgingly move them up your rankings, and drop them MUCH QUICKER then you do other teams after a loss.
Now, the Eagles are certainly not deserving of a high rank this year, but 22???? Ummm...you do realize they should actually be 7-3, right? I mean, we could always pull out games a team should have won or lost, but the 9-1 Packers needed a muffed punt by Philly to beat them (AT HOME!), and the Bears pulled something out of thin air for their last second comeback at Philly. (In contrast, I can't think of a game they won, but shouldn't have).
While they probably are not worthy of a 7-3 mark, to put them behind so many mediocre 5-5 and a couple 4-6 teams is laughable, and a clear indication of bias.
O...what happened to posting a few of your e-mails every week? That was fun last year.
Thanks for the fun article every week!
Renesauz (footballguy)
Now, I like his articles...I really do. I just think somethings wong with them. Am I being fair in my assessment here?
Been a big fan of your profit/power rankings for years, but your biases are very clear in them. (Both positive and negative). It is almost certainly your BIASES that are causing your pick percentage to remain a little on the low side!
Case in point...your ranking and attitude toward the Eagles. You have consistantly doubted and/or put them down over the years, regardless of what they were doing. Even when they have had long win streaks, you only grudgingly move them up your rankings, and drop them MUCH QUICKER then you do other teams after a loss.
Now, the Eagles are certainly not deserving of a high rank this year, but 22???? Ummm...you do realize they should actually be 7-3, right? I mean, we could always pull out games a team should have won or lost, but the 9-1 Packers needed a muffed punt by Philly to beat them (AT HOME!), and the Bears pulled something out of thin air for their last second comeback at Philly. (In contrast, I can't think of a game they won, but shouldn't have).
While they probably are not worthy of a 7-3 mark, to put them behind so many mediocre 5-5 and a couple 4-6 teams is laughable, and a clear indication of bias.
O...what happened to posting a few of your e-mails every week? That was fun last year.
Thanks for the fun article every week!
Renesauz (footballguy)
Now, I like his articles...I really do. I just think somethings wong with them. Am I being fair in my assessment here?
