Week 4 power rankings - it burns

by 3k on Sep 27, 2011 2:26 PM CDT in 2011 NFL regular season

Dropping like flies, people. Let's skip the intro and just get our conventional wisdom on.

For reference, here's last week's ranking summary.

Average ranking (# of rankings)	29.10 (10)
Average change from last week	-4.70
Highest ranking (source)	26th (Sports Illustrated)
Lowest ranking (source)	32nd (Sporting News)
Biggest positive change (source)	0 (Fox Sports)
Biggest negative change (source)	-9 (ESPN)

SB Nation: 28th (22nd last week)

I'm still not totally convinced this is one of the worst teams in the league but the results show I'm on my way to being wrong.

The rest of the major power rankings after the jump.

ESPN: 31st (22nd)

A disappointing start is becoming discouraging after the Baltimore beatdown.

NFL.com: 30th (27th)

The Rams made Ravens rookie Torrey Smith look like Randy Moss. What a terrible rebound game for a team most people thought were the favorite in the NFC West. Playing without Danny Amendola and Steven Jackson hurt the offense, no doubt. Still, Steve Spagnuolo has to find ways to create a pass rush and mix coverages effectively, or this team goes 5-11.

CBS Sports: 28th (25th)

They hardly look like a team headed for a division title. The schedule is downright brutal.

Pro Football Talk: 30th (26th)

If they can’t beat the Redskins with Washington is coming off a short week, the Rams may not win a game until November.

National Football Post: 31st (24th)

We expected to see more production from McDaniels’ and Sam Bradford in the new offensive system.

Sporting News: 32nd (27th)

"Wow" factor: RB Steven Jackson
It's a shame Jackson has been limited since his first carry of the season in the opener against the Eagles. They need him to be able to take on a load to be a respectable offense.

Pro Football Weekly: 28th (24th)

Once thought to be the division favorites, Rams dig early hole.

Fox Sports: 27th (27th)

Injuries and a brutal schedule have shown that the Rams just don't yet have the talent to compete. Giving up better than 500+ yards to the Ravens at home is a concern.

Sports Illustrated: 26th (20th)

I'm trying to figure out whether I've totally over-sold myself on the Rams, or if they're just in an early season funk against some quality opponents? Even at 0-3, I still think St. Louis wins the weak NFC West this season, but seven or eight wins is probably the ceiling for the Rams. The facts aren't pretty in St. Loo: The Rams have lost six of their past seven games since reaching a hopeful 6-6 early last December, and this year's club has been trounced by a combined score of 96-36 in three games (a 20-point margin of defeat per week).

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Can't really blame any of them for the lower rankings. I put us at 28 for the TST Power ranking post for tomorrow...

Washington is the weakest of our first 8 foes. We lose this one and it’s hide your head time… here’s to breaking this losing cycle!

by Douglas M on Sep 27, 2011 2:54 PM CDT reply actions

by Douglas M on Sep 27, 2011 2:55 PM CDT reply actions

Oops! Vid didn't quite post the way I wanted????

by Douglas M on Sep 27, 2011 2:56 PM CDT reply actions

It's Bradfords fault

we should have taken Jimmy Clausen or Colt McCoy.

Who cares about these rankings? Most of the people who put these up don’t even watch the games, they watch highlights dictated by some douche like Chris Berman. This isn’t college football.

by DaFranchiZe on Sep 27, 2011 3:19 PM CDT reply actions

The point is that they’re done by people who don’t pay attention to the bottom half of the league and that conventional wisdom creates economic opportunity or limits it therein. It’s why we got two Monday Night Football games this year. It’s why Dallas gets multiple primetime games year in, year out despite have just one playoff win in more than a dozen years. It’s why teams like the Jaguars, Bills, Chargers and Rams are marginalized while the Eagles, Giants, Redskins, Cowboys and Bears will always get pull. CW matters, whether is completely off base or not.

Turf Show Times editor, Mocking the Draft writer, and I gots that Twitter too, yo.
"my keyboard won't corporate, neighter will my smell check." - Knoxfan

by 3k on Sep 27, 2011 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't understand

Why the NFL is actually really pushing Sam as one of the possible future faces of the NFL, giving him three primetime games, being one of the faces in their preseason promos, but then give the Rams a schedule that felt designed to destroy the team.

Why wouldn’t we start with, say, Seattle at home, at SFran, then start one or two of our tough games, when we are likely 2-0? “Sam Bradford leads the 2-0 Ramsinto Green Bay to face the world champions”. Almost writes itself

by Rick Siegel on Sep 27, 2011 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions

This team can't be worse than last year.

I don’t disagree with the rankings, but I believe we’ll end up in the middle of the pack again. We just need to play like we’re capable of playing.

So far, we certainly look like the 32nd best team in the league …

I can take a beating ... I'm a Rams fan.

by Midasknight on Sep 27, 2011 4:49 PM CDT reply actions

they not worse

last year schedule looks like a piece of cake compared too this year. we mit be undefeated if we had last years, we might be losing but i like the schedule cuz its measures us on how close we are to being an elite team. not lookin good so far but hopefully we get there

by Cmoney243 on Sep 27, 2011 9:23 PM CDT up reply actions