A few quick thoughts before I get to my Natural Power Rankings, now abbreviated NAPOs, to appease those who couldn't get images of Ana Gasteyer and Molly Shannon doing "Delicious Dish" out of their heads every time I said "NPR." 

First, a rant.  I am sick to death of hearing the word "Spygate."  Not because of anything to do with the Patriots, Bill Belichick (although "Belicheat" is also getting old), or video cameras.  It's simply the name.  Thanks a lot, Richard Nixon.  Now every scandal on the face of the earth gets "gate" as a suffix, even though it makes no sense.  "Watergate" was a hotel, not a scandal involving water.  Second, the fact that someone was spying on the defensive signals wasn't the rulebreaker; it was the fact that they were using video cameras. If someone were sitting there with binoculars trained on the defensive signals, dictating notes to a person next to them holding a clipboard, it would not have been illegal.  "Videogate" was used a couple of times to describe the scandal, which is at least a bit more accurate.  But I still hate the "gate." 

Second, I find it amusing that two players were fined for violent hits - LaRon Landry and LaJuan Ramsey.  Doesn't "LaJuan Ramsey" sound like the cheap knockoff version of the original?  Sadly, the similarities end with the names and affinity for hard hits; Ramsey's a defensive tackle, Landry's a safety.  Otherwise I'd start calling Landry "Dr. Pepper" and Ramsey "Dr. Thunder."  I also think it's pretty impressive that Ramsey has yet to register an official stat on the 2007 season, yet he's been fined twice for hits.

All right, here are the NAPOs.  Regular readers, you can skip the next paragraph; here's the part where I explain what the Natural Power Rankings are.

The NAPOs are a ranking of the NFL teams, 1-32, based on purely mathematical criteria.  No opinion of my own is involved in making these; it's all based on the final scores of games; who beat whom, and who beat a common opponent better or played a common opponent closer.  If there's no common opponent, I look at their common opponents' common opponents, basically going by degrees of separation, which I explained in further detail in previous blogs.  I've composed a formula to measure Strength Of Victory, which I abbreviate SOV.  I only consider the past four weeks of NFL action; the rest is old news.  That's all you really need to know.  1) Direct game results, 2) Strength Of Victory, 3) Degrees of separation, 4) Last 4 weeks only.  Got it?  Good.

Philadelphia, Minnesota, and Chicago are caught up in a logjam, since P beat M, M beat C, and C beat P.  The Eagles get the highest ranking, because the strength of their win minus the strength of their loss is the highest.  Chicago is next, and Minnesota gets third. 

So, here are the rankings, with each team's record over the past 4 weeks in parentheses:

• 1) New England (4-0)
• 2) Indianapolis (2-1)
• 3) Dallas (2-1)
• 4) New Orleans (4-0)
• 5) Detroit (3-0)
• 6) Philadelphia (2-2)
• 7) Chicago (1-2)
• 8) Minnesota (2-2)
• 9) San Diego (2-1)
• 10) Jacksonville (2-2)
• 11) Tampa Bay (2-2)
• 12) Green Bay (3-0)
• 13) Tennessee (3-1)
• 14) Houston (1-3)
• 15) Denver (1-2)
• 16) Pittsburgh (2-1)
• 17) Buffalo (3-0)
• 18) Kansas City (2-1)
• 19) Oakland (0-4)
• 20) Cincinnati (1-3)
• 21) Carolina (1-2)
• 22) Washington (2-2)
• 23) Baltimore (1-2)
• 24) Cleveland (3-0)
• 25) Seattle (1-2)
• 26) NY Jets (0-4)
• 27) NY Giants (3-0)
• 28) Arizona (0-3)
• 29) St. Louis (0-3)
• 30) Miami (0-3)
• 31) Atlanta (1-2)
• 32) San Francisco (0-3)

So, anticipating some of the issues you'll have with the rankings, here are some explanations. 

Why are the Giants amidst a bunch of winless teams when they're undefeated?  First, their win over the Jets is no longer on the books, so they don't have to be ranked higher.  Second, their wins have been against Atlanta, San Francisco, and Miami, all of whom are in the bottom 5.  Third, they have to be ranked below Cleveland, because Cleveland beat Miami better than the Giants did.  Cleveland has to be below Baltimore, because Baltimore beat St. Louis better than Cleveland did.  And so on, bringing us to Green Bay.

Why are the Packers so low?  Green Bay was hard to rank, as the degrees of separation got a little screwy.  They definitely had to be above Kansas City, Denver and Washington.  That's step 1.  At the first degree, they had to be below Detroit, because their SOV over Denver was worse.  Still a huge range.  At the 1.5 degree (two degrees for one team, one for the other), they have Tampa Bay beating Arizona by a better SOV than Green Bay's win over Washington and Washington's win over Arizona combined.  So they have to be below Tampa Bay.  Also at 1.5, Green Bay's SOV over Kansas City and Kansas City's over Oakland totaled a higher SOV than Tennessee's over Oakland. 

How is Chicago above Minnesota when Minnesota beat Chicago?  Hey, moron.  Read the paragraph right before the rankings.

Fine, you got me, but why are Minnesota, Philladelphia, and Chicago so high? You spelled Philadelphia wrong, but whatever.  Those three teams have only lost to New England, Dallas, and Detroit; all top teams.  Also, Minnesota beat San Diego, whose win over Houston had a higher SOV than Jacksonville's, so San Diego has to be higher than the Jags.

Why is Denver ranked above Pittsburgh?  If you can't figure that one out, the NAPOs are lost on you.  Not trying to be snooty; it's just... well, reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is all.  I'm sure you have many other fascinating talents that I'd envy.

You're a snob, and you have way too much time on your hands.  That's not really a question.

So here's who the NAPOs say is going to win this week:

Carolina beats Atlanta

Buffalo beats Miami

Pittsburgh beats Cleveland

Denver beats Kansas City

Jacksonville beats Tennessee

Minnesota beats Green Bay

Philadelphia beats Washington

New Orleans beats St. Louis

Cincinnati beats Baltimore

Chicago beats Oakland

Dallas beats NY Giants

Detroit beats Arizona

Indianapolis beats San Diego

San Francisco beats Seattle