NFL Power Rankings
Week 7, 2026 · as of 2026-10-27 · all 32 teams rated
Every team rated in points on a neutral field— a rating gap is the spread. Movement, strength of schedule, and Earl's take, re-cut each week. How it works · RSS
latest snapshot
| # | Team | Rec | Rating | Inj | Earl's Take |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Δ – | 4-2 | +9.0 | — | Jacksonville sits at No. 1 with a neutral-field rating of 8.957 points, up 0.452 from last week, and the market is still 6.22 points behind that number — a real buy signal, since this rating implies they should be laying roughly nine in a neutral spot. The profile backs it up: a 5.2 point differential over the last five with a positive 0.152 EPA per play, though the 24.0 points per game on offense is the soft spot that keeps them from being a true blowout machine. No key players are docked, so the rating is clean, and with a strength of schedule of 1.209 they've earned it. |
| 2 | Δ – | 6-0 | +6.3 | -0.2 | Minnesota grades as the No. 2 team in the league at 6.25 points better than average on a neutral field, up half a point from last week, and the 6-0 record is backed by a plus-6.8 point differential over the last five despite a modest 0.10 EPA edge per play. The market is still catching up — the rating sits 5.11 points clear of where the number is priced, so this is a clear buy on the Vikings against the spread. The soft schedule (-0.28) and a thin 17.2 points per game over the last five are the caution flags, and the dock for Harrison Smith's limited practice and Jordan Mason's questionable tag is already baked into the rating. |
| 3 | Δ ▲5 | 4-2 | +5.3 | -1.5 | Cincinnati grades out as the No. 3 team in the league at 5.33 points better than average on a neutral field, a massive 2.35-point jump from last week, and the underlying form backs it up with a plus-0.16 EPA differential per play and a 7.0 point differential over the last five. The 4-2 record and 26.0 points per game over that stretch came against a schedule 1.5 points tougher than average, so this rating is legitimate rather than a soft-schedule artifact. The market sits at just 1.18 points above this number, meaning the spread is still catching up to a team that's a clear buy, though the 1.5-point injury dock for three unavailable defensive tackles is worth monitoring before laying the full rating. |
| 4 | Δ ▼1 | 4-3 | +4.0 | -1.4 | New England's rating has slid 1.46 points in a week to 4.0, and the underlying numbers explain why: a -0.0035 EPA differential per play and a defense allowing 25.4 points over the last five don't support a top-five ranking. With Carlton Davis out and Byard and Elliss questionable, this secondary is thin, so I'm selling the Patriots at a market rating 4.39 points above their neutral-field number. |
| 5 | Δ ▲5 | 4-3 | +3.8 | -2.8 | Seattle sits 5th with a 3.845 neutral-field rating that jumped 1.425 this week, but that number already eats a 2.8-point injury dock for Charbonnet, Lock, and Drake Thomas, so the roster is thinner than the rank suggests. The underlying profile is shaky: a -0.0068 EPA diff per play and -0.989 strength of schedule mean the 4-3 record is propped up by soft opponents, and the market's -1.82 vs_market confirms books have been shading them. Sell high on any spread that prices Seattle near its inflated rank rather than its prior-season 12.856 rating and thin depth. |
| 6 | Δ ▲7 | 5-2 | +3.8 | -1.3 | Chicago grades out at 3.78 points better than average on a neutral field, a massive 4.15-point jump from last week, and the 4.93 vs-market gap says the books are still a step behind this rating. The profile holds up: 23.6 points scored against 19.4 allowed over the last five with a positive 0.044 EPA per play, and even after docking 1.3 points for Kyle Monangai (out) and T.J. Edwards (doubtful), this is a buy — the rating implies roughly a field goal edge on a neutral field, so any shorter number is value. |
| 7 | Δ ▼2 | 5-1 | +3.6 | — | Buffalo sits 7th with a 3.578 neutral-field rating, up 0.269 from last week, but that number is well below last season's 4.503 and the market still prices them about 2 points better than this rating implies, so they're a sell at current spreads. The offense is scoring 32.2 per game over the last five, yet a 28.0 defensive allowance and just 0.0628 EPA per play explain the thin 4.2 point differential, and with no key players unavailable the rating is clean rather than inflated. |
| 8 | Δ ▲8 | 5-2 | +2.4 | -0.7 | Pittsburgh sits at 8th with a +2.39 neutral-field rating, but the real story is a massive 4.17-point jump in a single week — that's the market catching up to a team whose prior-season rating of 0.25 says it was being priced as average. The +2.87 vs. market gap means books are still shading this team short of its rating, so this is a buy: a healthy rating edge plus a soft 1.22 strength of schedule and 26 points per game over the last five. The 0.7-point injury dock for Joseph-Day and the questionable tags on Dowdle and Elliott are baked into that number already, so don't double-count them. |
| 9 | Δ ▲3 | 3-4 | +1.9 | — | The Rams sit at 1.9 points better than average on a neutral field, but that's a steep fall from a prior-season rating of 11.2, and their -1.481 strength of schedule says the 3-4 record isn't a fluke of tough opponents. The offense has been functional at 27.0 points per game over the last five, yet a 25.2 points allowed and a thin 0.10 EPA differential per play explain why the market has them 3.42 points worse than the rating suggests, so I'm selling Los Angeles as a favorite and treating any spread short of a field goal as a fade. |
| 10 | Δ ▲1 | 5-2 | +1.4 | -1.0 | Denver grades out at +1.43 points over an average team on a neutral field, up 0.31 this week, but that's a sharp step down from a 3.04 prior-season rating and the profile is more solid than scary: 22.8 points scored against 19.4 allowed over the last five with a thin 0.051 EPA edge per play. The market is basically in agreement at -0.05 versus my number, so there's no edge here — this is a hold, not a buy, and the 1.0-point injury dock with Patrick Surtain questionable and Talanoa Hufanga out means I'd only lean Denver at a full field goal or more against average competition. |
| 11 | Δ ▼2 | 3-2-1 | +1.2 | -0.3 | Detroit's rating slipped 1.2 points this week to 1.236, and that soft -2.03 strength of schedule is doing a lot of the lifting for a 3-2 team whose last-five point differential is just 3.0 per game. The market is already ahead of the number at -1.65 versus my rating, so this is a sell-high spot, not a buy. Brian Branch being questionable is the one absence worth monitoring, and the 0.3-point dock already baked in keeps me from treating this rating as a bargain. |
| 12 | Δ ▲3 | 4-2-1 | +1.2 | -1.9 | Green Bay grades out at 1.184 points better than average on a neutral field, a rating that jumped 1.78 this week and sits well above last year's -0.821 prior, so this is a genuine buy rather than a market overreaction. The profile is winning ugly: just 20.4 points per game on offense over the last five, but 17.2 allowed and a +0.108 EPA differential per play, which supports a modest 0.39 edge versus the market. The 1.9-point injury dock already accounts for Zaire Franklin being out, so don't double-count his absence when you compare this rating to the spread. |
| 13 | Δ ▼6 | 6-1 | +1.0 | -4.7 | San Francisco sits at 13th with a 1.05 neutral-field rating, but that's down a massive 2.19 points from last week and the model has already docked 4.7 points for the absences of Mike Evans, Deebo Samuel, and Nicholas Bosa. At 6-1 with a +3.2 point differential over the last five and a soft schedule (-1.22), this is a clear sell-high candidate whose rating is now well below where the market has them at -1.98 versus the number. |
| 14 | Δ ▼10 | 5-1 | -0.3 | -2.2 | KC sits at 14th with a -0.314 neutral-field rating despite a 5-1 record, and that rating has cratered 3.87 points in a week — the market's -4.82 vs_market gap says this team is being priced well above what the numbers support, making them a clear sell. The missing Rashee Rice and Brashard Smith already cost them 2.2 injury points, and a -2.298 strength of schedule means that 5-1 mark is softer than it looks. |
| 15 | Δ ▲13 | 2-5 | -0.7 | -4.7 | Tampa Bay sits at 15th with a -0.659 neutral-field rating, but that's a massive 10.1-point jump from last week and 3.8 points better than the market, so the number-crunchers are clearly buying what the last five games showed: 23.2 points scored, 19.0 allowed, and a positive 0.106 EPA per play. The catch is a 4.7-point injury dock with Mayfield questionable and Egbuka and Winfield already out, which is why I'd treat this as a buy-low on the rating rather than a team to back at any price until the QB picture clears. |
| 16 | Δ ▲1 | 3-4 | -0.9 | -2.8 | Atlanta's rating jumped 1.0 point this week to -0.9, and the underlying form backs it up: 31.0 points per game and a +7.2 point differential over the last five against a schedule 1.37 points tougher than average. At 3-4 they're a clear buy, sitting 3.52 points better than the market's number, so the spread is lagging this team. The 2.8-point injury dock for Deablo and Robinson is real, but the offense's recent output says this rating is still too low, not too high. |
| 17 | Δ ▼3 | 2-5 | -1.6 | -2.9 | Houston's -1.573 neutral rating ranks 17th and has fallen 1.204 points in a week, with a 2-5 record and a 0.598 strength of schedule exposing that prior-season 6.427 rating as stale. The 2.9-point injury dock for David Montgomery, Reed Blankenship, and Jalen Pitre is material, and the -4.48 vs-market gap says the number has been shading Houston too high all year, so this is a sell until the rating stabilizes. |
| 18 | Δ – | 3-4 | -1.9 | -1.4 | Dallas sits at 18th with a -1.915 neutral-field rating, a big jump of 2.222 points from last week, but that number still trails the market by 4.13 points, meaning the public is pricing the Cowboys well above what the underlying metrics support. The last five games show a perfectly balanced 26.4 points scored and allowed with a slightly negative EPA differential of -0.0182, so this is a mediocre team with real absences in Dee Winters and KaVontae Turpin baked into the rating. That 4.13-point gap versus the market makes Dallas a clear sell — lay the points against them rather than backing the brand name. |
| 19 | Δ ▼13 | 3-3 | -2.6 | -0.3 | Carolina's -2.577 neutral-field rating puts them a hair below average, and that -5.816 weekly drop is the loudest signal in this file — the market still has them at -1.19 versus my number, so I'm selling the Panthers rather than buying the last-five scoring bump (24.4 ppg) that's propping up their price. The 0.635 strength of schedule says those points came cheap, and losing Jaelan Phillips and Thomas Incoom at linebacker only deepens the case to lay the points against them. |
| 20 | Δ ▲1 | 2-5 | -4.1 | -0.5 | New Orleans sits at -4.15 points versus an average team on a neutral field, a rating that's climbing (up 2.03 this week) but still well below last year's -3.15 baseline and backed by ugly recent form: 21.6 points scored against 29.2 allowed over the last five, with a -0.18 EPA per play and -7.6 point differential. The market is already giving them 1.77 points of respect relative to this rating, so I'm not chasing the Saints as a buy-low — this is a sell until the run game and defense stabilize, especially with Alvin Kamara limited in practice and Nathan Shepherd questionable. At rank 20 against a tough 0.565 schedule, they're a fade in spots where the line asks them to cover more than a field goal. |
| 21 | Δ ▲1 | 2-5 | -5.4 | -0.9 | The Jets sit at -5.4 rating points on a neutral field, a big jump from last year's -14.4 and up another 0.8 this week, so the underlying model likes them far more than their 2-5 record suggests. At 19.4 points scored against 24.0 allowed over the last five with a -0.036 EPA differential, they're losing small rather than getting blown out, and being 2.0 points better than the market makes them a quiet buy in the right matchup. The caveat is that -5.4 rating means they should be underdogs against a league-average opponent, so back them as a road dog catching points, not as a favorite, especially with Breece Hall questionable and Ossai and Mauigoa already out. |
| 22 | Δ ▲1 | 4-2-1 | -5.6 | -2.9 | The Giants grade out at -5.574 points on a neutral field, 22nd in the league, but that's a big jump from a -2.232 prior-season rating and up another 0.9 this week, with a +4.51 vs-market mark suggesting the market is still catching up to them. The last-five profile backs it: +3.2 point differential, 25.8 points per game, and a positive 0.082 EPA per play despite a -3.442 strength of schedule. But the rating already docks 2.9 points for missing Greg Newsome, Jevon Holland, and Fe'Zahn Edmunds, so treat this as a modest buy on the number rather than a bargain — the 4-2 record is real, but the secondary and linebacker absences cap the upside. |
| 23 | Δ ▼4 | 3-4 | -5.7 | -0.9 | Las Vegas grades out at -5.744 points versus an average team on a neutral field, 23rd in the league, and that rating is sliding fast — down 1.291 this week after a last-five stretch of 26.0 points scored against 34.0 allowed and a -0.1383 EPA differential per play. The offense is scoring enough to keep games interesting but the defense is bleeding points, and with Dont'e Thornton out and a 0.9-point injury dock already baked in, this is a sell — the market's 0.92 vs. spread means you're not even getting a discount on a team whose true number is closer to a touchdown underdog than a field-goal one. |
| 24 | Δ ▲7 | 1-4-1 | -6.2 | — | Washington sits at 24th with a -6.19 neutral-field rating, but the 7.08-point jump from last week is the real story, and that surge is happening even with a -0.12 EPA per play and a -7.6 point differential over the last five. At 1-4 they're still being priced 2.14 points better than the market, which says the number is lagging the improvement, so this is a buy-low on the rating rather than a team to back blindly at 29.6 points allowed per game. |
| 25 | Δ ▼5 | 2-5 | -6.6 | -3.2 | The Colts sit at -6.6 points vs. an average team on a neutral field, and that rating is falling fast (down 1.46 this week) with a 2-5 record and a -1.0 point differential over their last five. Losing Tyler Warren, Ahmad Gardner, and a limited DeForest Buckner is already baked into a 3.2-point injury dock, so this is a sell — the market still has them 3.2 points better than my number, which is real value fading them. |
| 26 | Δ ▼2 | 1-5 | -6.9 | -0.1 | Miami's -6.911 neutral-field rating ranks 26th and sits a massive 4.81 points better than the market, meaning the number is already pricing this team far worse than the underlying rating suggests. The last-five profile is ugly — 17.0 points scored against 26.0 allowed, -0.2154 EPA per play, and a -9.0 point differential — so the 0.7-point weekly bump is noise, not a turnaround signal. That gap versus the market makes Miami a live buy-low on the spread, especially against a schedule that's been 1.928 points harder than average, though Willie Gay's questionable tag is a minor ding. |
| 27 | Δ ▼2 | 5-2 | -7.4 | -4.9 | Cleveland sits at 27th with a -7.44 neutral-field rating, meaning they'd be roughly a touchdown dog to an average team, and the 4.9-point injury dock for Dillon Gabriel and Denzel Ward's questionable tag explains much of that drag. The 5-2 record is doing a lot of misleading work here: a +1.4 point differential and near-zero EPA per play over the last five say this is a below-average team winning close games, so sell high and fade them as favorites. |
| 28 | Δ ▲2 | 0-6 | -7.8 | — | The Chargers are 0-6 and rated 28th, a -7.8 neutral-field rating, yet that's actually a 3.1-point jump from last week, so the model sees real improvement even as the record stays ugly. The offense is scoring just 15.2 per game over the last five while the defense allows 25.0, a -9.8 point differential and -0.119 EPA per play that explain the losses. The market is still pricing them 4.3 points better than this rating, which makes them a sell until the scoring catches up to the underlying bump. |
| 29 | Δ ▼2 | 1-6 | -9.2 | -0.6 | Tennessee sits at 29th with a -9.18 neutral-field rating, and the underlying numbers back it up: -0.19 EPA per play and a -6.2 point differential over the last five while scoring just 15.6 per game. The one real betting signal is that they've outperformed the market by 3.06 points, so this is a team the public has priced worse than the numbers suggest — a mild buy on the number, not on the team. With Calvin Ridley questionable and the secondary banged up, though, I'm not rushing to back them until the injury report clears. |
| 30 | Δ ▲2 | 2-5 | -9.3 | -3.1 | Philadelphia is a legitimately bad team right now, ranked 30th with a -9.3 neutral-field rating and a -10.8 point differential over its last five, and the offense averaging just 15.8 points per game while allowing 26.6 is a recipe for blowouts. The market is still pricing the Eagles about 5.5 points better than this rating, which makes them a clear sell until the number catches up to how ugly the underlying EPA (-0.29 per play) and the absences of Dontayvion Wicks and a questionable Saquon Barkley actually are. The one caveat is that +4.7 rating jump from last week, so I'd fade them at the current inflated price rather than chase a bottom that may be forming. |
| 31 | Δ ▼5 | 4-3 | -9.3 | -7.8 | The Ravens grade out at -9.3 points versus an average team on a neutral field, 31st in the league, and that rating is sliding fast (-1.3 this week) after cratering from a 3.5 prior-season mark. A 7.8-point injury dock for Lamar Jackson being out explains most of the collapse, and with a -10.6 vs-market gap, the number is already baked into the price — this is a sell on any lingering reputation, not a buy-low. |
| 32 | Δ ▼3 | 2-5 | -12.1 | -3.7 | Arizona is the worst team in the league by a wide margin, and the numbers back it up: -12.1 rating points on a neutral field, -0.21 EPA per play, and a defense allowing 32.6 points per game over the last five, all against a schedule rated 1.115 (tougher than average). The 3.7 injury dock for Jeremiyah Love, Walter Nolen, and Andrew Wingard is already baked into that rating, so there's no hidden upside there. The market has been slow to catch up — they're 3.2 points better against the number than their rating implies — but at 2-5 with a rating that's dropped another 1.2 points this week, this is a sell, not a buy; lay the points against them rather than backing them as an underdog. |
Rating is in points on a neutral field: a team's rating minus its opponent's approximates the spread. Rec is the team's W-L-T through this week. Δ Wk is movement vs last week. Inj is the rating points docked for key players ruled out/doubtful/questionable this week. SOS is the average rating of opponents faced, in points vs league average (negative = easier schedule). vs Mkt is Earl's rating minus the market's (from closing lines), placed on Earl's points scale — positive means Earl is higher on the team than the market. How Earl rates teams →