Minnesota remains first in my NFL power ratings after Week 8 despite its first loss. The Vikings are 6–1, with San Francisco second and Buffalo moving from sixth to third. Chicago and Jacksonville complete the top five.
Power Ratings
Minnesota leads at 105.537, followed by San Francisco at 104.619. The gap is now 0.918, compared with 3.025 in last week’s snapshot. Buffalo climbs three places to third at 104.304, while Chicago is fourth at 104.004 and Jacksonville fifth at 103.730.
| Rank | Team | Won | Lost | Tied | PF | PA | Rating | SOS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  MINNESOTA |
6 | 1 | 0 | 140 | 93 | 105.537 | 100.324 |
| 2 |  SAN FRANCISCO |
6 | 1 | 0 | 197 | 139 | 104.619 | 99.465 |
| 3 |  BUFFALO |
6 | 1 | 0 | 233 | 181 | 104.304 | 99.280 |
| 4 |  CHICAGO |
6 | 2 | 0 | 214 | 160 | 104.004 | 100.632 |
| 5 |  JACKSONVILLE |
5 | 2 | 0 | 196 | 111 | 103.730 | 99.605 |
| 6 |  DENVER |
6 | 2 | 0 | 172 | 165 | 103.718 | 100.797 |
| 7 |  DETROIT |
5 | 2 | 0 | 203 | 180 | 103.655 | 100.986 |
| 8 |  PITTSBURGH |
6 | 2 | 0 | 180 | 144 | 103.353 | 100.227 |
| 9 |  NEW ENGLAND |
5 | 3 | 0 | 184 | 162 | 103.007 | 101.363 |
| 10 |  GREEN BAY |
5 | 3 | 0 | 171 | 164 | 102.634 | 101.063 |
| 11 |  KANSAS CITY |
5 | 2 | 0 | 167 | 131 | 102.409 | 99.234 |
| 12 |  CINCINNATI |
5 | 2 | 0 | 206 | 158 | 102.294 | 98.952 |
| 13 |  SEATTLE |
4 | 4 | 0 | 185 | 159 | 101.599 | 100.656 |
| 14 |  CLEVELAND |
5 | 3 | 0 | 139 | 173 | 100.759 | 100.044 |
| 15 |  TAMPA BAY |
3 | 5 | 0 | 178 | 151 | 100.746 | 101.442 |
| 16 |  CAROLINA |
3 | 4 | 0 | 178 | 193 | 100.259 | 100.888 |
| 17 |  LA RAMS |
4 | 4 | 0 | 194 | 168 | 100.247 | 99.607 |
| 18 |  ATLANTA |
3 | 5 | 0 | 171 | 189 | 99.756 | 101.562 |
| 19 |  LAS VEGAS |
4 | 4 | 0 | 221 | 230 | 99.583 | 99.510 |
| 20 |  NY GIANTS |
4 | 2 | 1 | 163 | 161 | 98.609 | 97.087 |
| 21 |  NEW ORLEANS |
2 | 5 | 0 | 162 | 194 | 98.496 | 101.268 |
| 22 |  BALTIMORE |
4 | 4 | 0 | 179 | 203 | 98.386 | 98.935 |
| 23 |  ARIZONA |
3 | 5 | 0 | 175 | 238 | 98.071 | 100.336 |
| 24 |  NY JETS |
2 | 6 | 0 | 170 | 188 | 97.599 | 100.412 |
| 25 |  DALLAS |
3 | 5 | 0 | 219 | 213 | 96.948 | 98.254 |
| 26 |  HOUSTON |
2 | 5 | 0 | 165 | 170 | 96.794 | 99.259 |
| 27 |  MIAMI |
1 | 6 | 0 | 117 | 181 | 96.731 | 102.150 |
| 28 |  WASHINGTON |
2 | 4 | 1 | 159 | 182 | 96.132 | 98.158 |
| 29 |  INDIANAPOLIS |
2 | 6 | 0 | 161 | 222 | 96.001 | 99.908 |
| 30 |  PHILADELPHIA |
2 | 6 | 0 | 137 | 202 | 94.663 | 98.797 |
| 31 |  LA CHARGERS |
0 | 7 | 0 | 99 | 175 | 93.288 | 101.419 |
| 32 |  TENNESSEE |
1 | 7 | 0 | 144 | 199 | 92.924 | 98.138 |
The largest rises this week are Detroit (13 to 7), Buffalo (6 to 3), Tampa Bay (17 to 15). The largest falls are Kansas City (5 to 11), Baltimore (19 to 22), Cincinnati (10 to 12).
Elo Ratings Top 10
Chicago leads the updated Elo ratings at 1547.829, followed by Jacksonville at 1545.870 and Minnesota at 1543.486. Buffalo and San Francisco complete the top five. Only 1.959 points separates Chicago from Jacksonville.
Why the Elo Ratings Changed
I updated how last season’s results feed into NFL Elo. Previously, the model carried the prior season’s ratings into the current season and updated them with each game. That starting advantage or disadvantage could continue to influence the rankings well into the season.
The revised method builds two separate ratings: a fixed preseason rating based on last season, pulled 28% toward the league-average baseline of 1500, and a current-season Elo rating that starts every team at 1500. The published rating blends the two, with the preseason share shrinking each league week.
After Week 1, the blend is 87.5% preseason and 12.5% current season. After Week 4, it is 50–50. After Week 8, the preseason share reaches zero, so the ratings shown here reflect only this season’s games. The fade follows league weeks, including a team’s bye week.
That change explains the reshuffling from the earlier version of this post. Seattle moves from first at 1599.038 to 14th at 1512.743, while Chicago moves from eighth to first and Minnesota from ninth to third. These are comparisons between the old and revised calculations for the same Week 8 results, rather than changes caused by another game.
Elo still updates game by game based on results relative to expectations, with home-field advantage and a dampened margin-of-victory adjustment. The new approach gives last season a defined role early on, then lets the current season fully determine the ratings by Week 8. The power ratings above use a separate method and are unchanged by this Elo update.
| Rank | Team | Record | Elo |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CHICAGO |
6–2 | 1547.829 |
| 2 | JACKSONVILLE |
5–2 | 1545.870 |
| 3 | MINNESOTA |
6–1 | 1543.486 |
| 4 | BUFFALO |
6–1 | 1542.504 |
| 5 | SAN FRANCISCO |
6–1 | 1542.291 |
| 6 | CINCINNATI |
5–2 | 1542.027 |
| 7 | PITTSBURGH |
6–2 | 1533.453 |
| 8 | DETROIT |
5–2 | 1526.831 |
| 9 | KANSAS CITY |
5–2 | 1526.708 |
| 10 | DENVER |
6–2 | 1523.899 |
Wins Above Average Top 5
Wins above average compares actual wins with the wins a league-average team would be expected to earn against the same opponents. Ties count as half a win. These rankings use the version with home-field advantage included.
Minnesota remains first at +2.638, with Denver second at +2.350 and Chicago third at +2.276. San Francisco and Buffalo complete the top five.
| Rank | Team | Wins | Expected Wins (HFA) | WAA (HFA) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MINNESOTA |
6.0 | 3.362 | +2.638 |
| 2 | DENVER |
6.0 | 3.650 | +2.350 |
| 3 | CHICAGO |
6.0 | 3.724 | +2.276 |
| 4 | SAN FRANCISCO |
6.0 | 3.753 | +2.247 |
| 5 | BUFFALO |
6.0 | 3.762 | +2.238 |
Full wins above average rankings
Team Offense Top 5
Scoring Average
Buf leads this group at 33.29 points scored per game, followed by Cin, Det, Sf, Jax. This is the raw scoring average, without an opponent adjustment. Higher averages are better.
| Rank | Team | Points Per Game |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | BUF |
33.29 |
| 2 | CIN |
29.43 |
| 3 | DET |
29.00 |
| 4 | SF |
28.14 |
| 5 | JAX |
28.00 |
Adjusted Scoring
Buf ranks first at +10.31, followed by Cin, Chi, Det, Jax. Higher values are better: positive adjusted scoring means scoring above the opposing defenses’ usual allowance.
| Rank | Team | Points Per Game | Adjusted Scoring |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BUF |
33.29 | +10.31 |
| 2 | CIN |
29.43 | +8.64 |
| 3 | CHI |
26.75 | +5.80 |
| 4 | DET |
29.00 | +5.73 |
| 5 | JAX |
28.00 | +5.51 |
Team Defense Top 5
Scoring Average Allowed
Min leads this group at 13.29 points allowed per game, followed by Jax, Pit, Kc, Tb. This is the raw scoring average, without an opponent adjustment. Lower averages are better.
| Rank | Team | Points Allowed Per Game |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | MIN |
13.29 |
| 2 | JAX |
15.86 |
| 3 | PIT |
18.00 |
| 4 | KC |
18.71 |
| 5 | TB |
18.88 |
Adjusted Scoring
Min ranks first at +10.93, followed by Jax, Ne, Tb, Pit. Higher values are better: positive adjusted scoring means holding opponents below their usual scoring output.
| Rank | Team | Points Allowed Per Game | Adjusted Scoring |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MIN |
13.29 | +10.93 |
| 2 | JAX |
15.86 | +6.72 |
| 3 | NE |
20.25 | +5.32 |
| 4 | TB |
18.88 | +4.85 |
| 5 | PIT |
18.00 | +4.34 |
Quarterback Ratings Top 5
Brock Purdy remains first in my Quarterback Efficiency Ratings (QER) at 89.8, followed by Jared Goff at 86.1 and Joe Burrow at 83.6. Josh Allen is fourth, and Kirk Cousins enters the top five. Burrow has 2,115 passing yards and 20 touchdown passes in the current snapshot.
QER combines passing efficiency and production with a bonus for qualifying rushing performance. The current minimum is 112 pass attempts. Ratings are relative to qualified quarterbacks, so a player’s rating can change even without an additional game.
| Rank | Quarterback | Team | QER | Pass Yards | Pass TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brock Purdy | |
89.8 | 1748 | 15 | 4 |
| 2 | Jared Goff | |
86.1 | 1964 | 15 | 1 |
| 3 | Joe Burrow | |
83.6 | 2115 | 20 | 6 |
| 4 | Josh Allen | |
79.2 | 1793 | 11 | 5 |
| 5 | Kirk Cousins | |
78.3 | 2124 | 19 | 5 |
Full quarterback ratings and methodology
Skill Player Ratings Top 5
My Scrimmage Performance Ratings (SPR) compare players within their positions using production, per-game output, efficiency and ball security. Each position gets its own top five.
Running Backs
Jahmyr Gibbs leads at 96.2, with 1058 scrimmage yards and 10 touchdowns. Kenneth Walker III ranks second at 82.2, followed by Bijan Robinson at 74.6.
| Rank | Player | Team | Scrimmage Yards | TD | SPR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jahmyr Gibbs | |
1058 | 10 | 96.2 |
| 2 | Kenneth Walker III | |
901 | 8 | 82.2 |
| 3 | Bijan Robinson | |
983 | 5 | 74.6 |
| 4 | Jaylen Warren | |
998 | 3 | 73.5 |
| 5 | James Cook | |
817 | 7 | 72.5 |
Wide Receivers
Jaxon Smith-Njigba leads at 96.3, with 1014 scrimmage yards and 9 touchdowns. Tee Higgins ranks second at 70.9, followed by CeeDee Lamb at 67.5.
| Rank | Player | Team | Scrimmage Yards | TD | SPR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jaxon Smith-Njigba | |
1014 | 9 | 96.3 |
| 2 | Tee Higgins | |
726 | 4 | 70.9 |
| 3 | CeeDee Lamb | |
703 | 6 | 67.5 |
| 4 | Christian Watson | |
708 | 6 | 67.2 |
| 5 | Zay Flowers | |
642 | 3 | 58.9 |
Tight Ends
Brock Bowers leads at 93.0, with 547 scrimmage yards and 5 touchdowns. Trey McBride ranks second at 80.6, followed by George Kittle at 73.0.
| Rank | Player | Team | Scrimmage Yards | TD | SPR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brock Bowers | |
547 | 5 | 93.0 |
| 2 | Trey McBride | |
544 | 5 | 80.6 |
| 3 | George Kittle | |
425 | 5 | 73.0 |
| 4 | Isaiah Likely | |
395 | 5 | 70.2 |
| 5 | Travis Kelce | |
410 | 2 | 65.8 |
Full skill player ratings and methodology
Strength of Schedule
Miami has played the toughest schedule in my power ratings at 102.150, followed by Atlanta at 101.562. Tampa Bay, Los Angeles Chargers, New England complete the top five.
The Giants have played the easiest schedule so far, followed by Tennessee, Washington, Dallas, Philadelphia. These ratings describe games already played, not the remaining schedule. Opponent ratings can change as more games are added, shifting a team’s rating even when its own record stays the same.
All of the team and player rankings are available on the 2026 NFL rankings page.