If the question isn't just has the best record, but who is playing the best right now, games from week 1 and 2 count a whole lot less than the last two games played.
No question. There's also no question that Arizona appeared to be a much better team in week 2 then they do now, so I'm fully aware that it's not necessarily indicative of how good New England is. On the other hand, I consider St. Louis a MUCH better team than Arizona right now, so San Fran lost to a better team than did New England even if it was week 2. NE also lost to Seattle in Week 6 that SF beat in Week 7 so what does that tell you?
But your record for the last 6 games says a lot more than your record for the first 7.
Depends on your schedule. Who has New England beat in the last 6 weeks? They beat Denver but that was week 5, so if week 2 doesn't count against them, then week 5 doesn't count for them. The fact is that NE has played a fairly soft schedule in the last couple weeks other than Houston. To their credit they've won easily, but I'm still not convinced they are better than SF.
Denver and NE are both playing great football right now. Both started off a bit rocky. With Denver the answer is obvious -- Peyton needed to get on the same page with his recievers. But NE as well has seen improvements in all aspects of its game.
Denver has also played a week schedule lately. They had PIT, ATL, NE and HOU on their schedule in the first 5 weeks, perhaps that had something to do with the rough start and had very little to do with Peyton needing to catch up? I know most of you don't give much credence to strength of schedule, you like to look at wins/losses, but I think you have to look at both. Usually looking at both things together is more indicative of level of play then just the win/loss column.
Author