Week 10 Rankings

With the Bears losing and now facing three straight road games, the still-unbeaten Colts take over the top spot. They've lapped the field after winning in Denver and New England in consecutive weeks, but they're still not the same overwhelming team they were at this time last season. The Giants are the class of the NFC but have injury issues. David Garrard gets the Jaguars back into the top 10, and the inconsistent Falcons fall to 11th. The Seahawks move up and await the return of Shaun Alexander and Matt Hasselbeck. At the bottom, it gets ever more embarrassing for the Steelers.

1. Colts (8-0)... 2*
2. Giants (6-2)... 4
3. Chargers (6-2)... 6
4. Broncos (6-2)... 7
5. Bears (7-1)... 1
6. Patriots (6-2)... 3
7. Ravens (6-2)... 8
8. Saints (6-2)... 9
9. Chiefs (5-3)... 10
10. Jaguars (5-3)... 12
11. Falcons (5-3)... 5
12. Seahawks (5-3)... 18
13. Panthers (4-4)... 14
14. Bengals (4-4)... 13
15. Rams (4-4)... 15
16. Cowboys (4-4)... 11
17. Vikings (4-4)... 16
18. Eagles (4-4)... 19
19. Jets (4-4)... 20
20. Redskins (3-5)... 27
21. Bills (3-5)... 26
22. 49ers (3-5)... 28
23. Dolphins (2-6)... 31
24. Packers (3-5)... 17
25. Lions (2-6)... 30
26. Titans (2-6)... 21
27. Browns (2-6)... 22
28. Raiders (2-6)... 23
29. Buccaneers (2-6)... 24
30. Texans (2-6)... 25
31. Steelers (2-6)... 29
32. Cardinals (1-7)... 32

*Last Week's Rank

By Mark Maske |  November 7, 2006; 12:10 PM ET  | Category:  Rankings
Previous: CB Jones Rejoins Titans | Next: Raiders' Brayton Facing Likely League Discipline

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Prepare to move the Browns on up. They will win a close one against the Falcons this weekend.

Thank you Steelers for showing up for a couple weeks this season. It sure would be nice if someone in the AFC North would expose Baltimore for mediocre team it is (Cincy I'm looking in your direction.

Posted by: Glass half full | November 7, 2006 1:56 PM

Giants at #2, after they barely get by the lowly Texans? You really think they could beat the Broncos?

Titans/Browns/Texams above the Steelers? Dude, get a grip on reality.

Posted by: Um | November 7, 2006 1:59 PM

The Cards are who we THOUGHT they were!

Posted by: dennygreen | November 7, 2006 2:22 PM

The Raiders aren't the worst team in football? Sure, the Cardinals have more losses, and who knows how the Raiders won 2, but Walter holds on to the ball longer than Britney Spears holds onto a boyfriend, Randy Moss suddenly discovered that he can't hold onto the ball when he's using his hands to hold onto all the money he has, and their #1 draft pick offensive tackle/guard/is there another position I can't play? can't block anybody so Lamont Jordan can't run. The Cards might get better, but the Raiders won't. Chargers are gonna have a tough time without Merriman sometime...I think.

Posted by: The Soos | November 7, 2006 2:29 PM

Steelers #31? That is ridiculous and a joke. If you had to put the mortgage on a game with the Steelers and any other team with a losing record would you really only take the Steelers against the Cardinals. Let's at least try to be reasonable! Sure it's not looking good for the Super Bowl Champs but #31 is excesssive.

Posted by: DB | November 7, 2006 3:25 PM

Why is that Colts-Patriots games are shceduled only at Foxboro and not alternatively at Indy. It looks like NFL including the Referee's are biased towards Patriots as we have noticed in the last game in which the referee gives 1st down on 4th and inches.

Posted by: Foster Edwards | November 7, 2006 3:38 PM

Mark,
You actually think the Browns are better then the Steelers? If you do you should be writing obit's because you obvioulsy know NOTHING about sports.

Posted by: JR | November 7, 2006 3:46 PM

No one was willing to predict that Ravens 'll go all the way in 2001 and same thing going to happen again. But the unit at Baltimore is committed, determined and focused. They have some issues with their secondary but not short in talent as soon as they fixed those issues Ravens will be tough to beat.

Posted by: Moodi | November 7, 2006 3:51 PM

Didn't the Cowboys just trounce the Panthers in Charlotte? Can I have one order of logic, please?

Posted by: SMACK | November 7, 2006 4:00 PM

Another Steeler fan very surprised to see them ranked 31st. Thats much to generous, they should be ranked 33rd. I realize there are only 32 teams, but I'm convinced the Steelers could find a way to lose on their bye week. They are that bad.

The Steelers have learned that the key to losing is to give the game away. In their last 3 games, with their backs against the wall, the Steelers have turned the ball over 16 times. 16 frickin times in pivotal can't-lose games. Thats unbelievable!

Tell me, can the Raiders, Cardinals, or Browns do that? I think not.

We're number 33!
We're number 33!
We're number 33!
We're number 33!

Posted by: GoSteelersWinThatNumberOneDraftPick | November 7, 2006 4:03 PM

Steelers at 31.....what a joke!!!

Yes the Steelers have been terrible, but largely as a result of turnovers and a very tough schedule.

I would think that they beat 8 out of 10 of the bottom teams on a neutral field.

Posted by: Crazy | November 7, 2006 4:11 PM

Steelers - 31st? Clearly, the Steelers are sucking hard this year. Their problems are primarily due to turnovers, not an inept offense or a lack of talented players or coaches. They deserve to be at least as high as the Redskins based on the quality of opponents (except the Raiders) and their overall offensive stats.

In fact, the Steelers would beat the Redskins 8 out of 10 times on either field, but what does it matter, neither one is going to the playoffs.


Posted by: MaskeIsAnIdiot | November 7, 2006 4:23 PM

It's not last season any more. You don't get carryover points for that. At the moment, the Steelers are terrible. It stopped being about what a tough schedule they have when they lost to the Raiders.
As for the Cowboys, they didn't JUST beat the Panthers. What they JUST did was find the most ridiculous way possible to lose a game they never should have lost.

Posted by: Mark Maske | November 7, 2006 4:39 PM

Well my last comment must've been censored, but to the steelers fans out there: They deserve to be at the bottom.

I'm afraid Mark is jinxing the Giants by making them #2.

Posted by: Jints fan | November 7, 2006 4:53 PM

MaskeIsAnIdiot writes: Their problems are primarily due to turnovers, not an inept offense or a lack of talented players or coaches.

That would be like Pee Wee Herman saying his bodybuilding problems are primarily due to lack of muscle, not do to an inept body.

Turnovers are a reflection of ineptivity. Its a natural result of being a bad team.

The offensive line can't protect Ben. Hartings is old. Starks stinks. The receivers drop too many passes, and fumble the few passes they catch. SanTURDio Holmes makes too many mistakes. The team has no discipline, continually committing celebration and taunting fouls. The cornerbacks give too much cushion to the opposing wide receivers, yet still give away large passes as they lose every jump ball. Joey Porter is overrated. Ben has a confidence problem. Willie Parker gets -5 yards or 30+ yards, so the Steelers will have many more 3rd and longs then they did in prior years. Staley is the TJ Duckett of the Steelers. And I haven't mentioned how bad special teams stink.

Posted by: realistic Steelers fan | November 7, 2006 5:07 PM

All you guys seem like idoits to me, if you think the Steelers shouldn't be #31. I mean, the lost to the STINKIN RAIDERS! The Raiders have been shut out both of their MNF games. Rotheslberger Stinks! And its finally showing. The team is just not having the right Karma at the moment.

Anyway, Cheers to Maske for making the Redskins the BEAT 3-5 team in the league!! Did you know we are only one game out of the playoff race????

Stay tuned.....

Posted by: 4th Floor | November 7, 2006 5:44 PM

I meant BEST 3-5 Team..

Posted by: 4th | November 7, 2006 5:46 PM

I suspect the Steelers are better then a few of the teams in front of them and I know they will play us (Baltimore) tough. In fact they have played everybody reasonably well, they just haven't won and it is about winning.

Now having said that, the Ravens beat the Bolts convincingly. They have the same basic standings 6-2 and yet Maske's West Coast leanings have the Bolts at 3?? and Baltimore just bearly ahead of NO!

Posted by: D~ | November 7, 2006 5:48 PM

I gotta agree with The Soos, right now the Raiders, at least the offense, is the worst team in the league. They are pathetic. The Silver and Black turnstyle, LJ can't block, Walter is going to be buried soon. But above all their OC needs to go back to Idaho.

I guess maybe you get the Raiders ranked 28th because their O is about 12 steps below the bottom of the league and the D is about 14th.

Posted by: Raider51 | November 7, 2006 5:54 PM

TO D~

"Now having said that, the Ravens beat the Bolts convincingly." What game were you watching?

Winning 16-13 on a TD with 34 seconds left IN BALTIMORE is not exactly a convincing win. They made ONE more play than SD, at home, where they SHOULD have dominated.

Your east coast bias is showing.

Posted by: Excuse me? | November 8, 2006 8:30 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2010 The Washington Post Company