ESPN’s Preseason Power Rankings Serve No Purpose
Link here. Common sense here.
I’m planning on using this here space to make power rankings-like arguments, and there’s nothing wrong with doing power rankings in the offseason. Some think preseason power rankings are a waste of time, and I can respect that.
ESPN is trying to prove you correct.
To have a defensible set of power rankings, you have to make them either 1) predictive, or 2) observational. If you do observational power rankings in the offseason, well, the results are going to be heavily based on the results of the prior season.
If you choose to have four men of varying competency create a mean vote style of power rankings, it makes sense to specifically outline the critera. What are you voting on?
ESPN.com’s Power Rankings
The rankings were determined by a poll of four voters on ESPN.com’s NFL staff: writers John Clayton (AFC East, NFC East), Jeffri Chadiha (AFC North, NFC North), Paul Kuharsky (AFC South, AFC West), and Mike Sando (NFC South, NFC West). They voted on all 32 teams, and their last names are logged after their comments about the respective divisional teams.
Why have one person make power rankings based on a single premise, when you could have four people voting on different premises? ESPN’s goal to blur the lines between predictive and observational rankings does nothing except create a great big mess of conventional wisdom. Which is completely useless.
You only have to get one line into the rankings before Jeffery Chadiha proves them completely unreadable:
1. Steelers: They won the Super Bowl. What else do you need to know?