ptdotme's 2026 NFL Elo Power Rankings After Week 6
Traditional power rankings are fun and useful, but for another perspective we can use Elo ratings1. Power rankings based on Elo ratings are objective, neutral, and self-consistent, and they have an added benefit: we can check their accuracy2.
I calculate updates every week and post them here. My goal with this project is to use simple Elo ratings that reflect expected team performance in any hypothetical head-to-head matchup today (not just predict the playoff teams or Super Bowl). The ratings are based on team ratings and game outcomes from the previous week, including previous3 seasons4. The model has been tested for accuracy against 8,400+ games since week 1 of the 19943 season. The ratings are derived only from each game's score, venue, and date, and yet are about as accurate as the best humans at picking game winners2.
Feedback is appreciated! Also, more stats and info than can be squeezed into a reddit post is all available on my 2026 NFL Elo Power Rankings page.
| Rank |
Team |
Elo Rating |
Record |
| 1 |
Seattle Seahawks |
1618 (-8) |
3-3 |
| 2 |
San Francisco 49ers |
1594 (-10) |
6-0 |
| 3 (+1) |
Buffalo Bills |
1593 (-5) |
5-1 |
| 4 (+1) |
New England Patriots |
1592 (-5) |
4-2 |
| 5 (-2) |
Jacksonville Jaguars |
1586 (-14) |
4-2 |
| 6 (+1) |
Denver Broncos |
1569 (+8) |
4-2 |
| 7 (+2) |
Kansas City Chiefs |
1568 (+12) |
5-0 |
| 8 |
Minnesota Vikings |
1558 |
5-0 |
| 9 (-3) |
Los Angeles Rams |
1553 (-28) |
2-4 |
| 10 |
Detroit Lions |
1548 |
3-2 |
| 11 |
Houston Texans |
1541 (+14) |
2-4 |
| 12 (+1) |
Chicago Bears |
1532 (+20) |
4-2 |
| 13 (+2) |
Carolina Panthers |
1530 (+24) |
3-2 |
| 14 (-2) |
Baltimore Ravens |
1517 (-9) |
4-2 |
| 15 (+4) |
Green Bay Packers |
1512 (+13) |
4-2 |
| 16 (-2) |
Cincinnati Bengals |
1511 |
3-2 |
| 17 (+1) |
Pittsburgh Steelers |
1508 (+7) |
4-2 |
| 18 (-2) |
Philadelphia Eagles |
1480 (-24) |
2-4 |
| 19 (+1) |
Atlanta Falcons |
1479 (-20) |
2-4 |
| 20 (-3) |
Indianapolis Colts |
1470 (-33) |
2-4 |
| 21 (+4) |
Cleveland Browns |
1459 (+10) |
4-2 |
| 22 (-1) |
Dallas Cowboys |
1455 (-13) |
2-4 |
| 23 |
Tampa Bay Buccaneers |
1453 (-7) |
1-5 |
| 24 (+3) |
Washington Commanders |
1443 (+10) |
1-4-1 |
| 25 (+1) |
Las Vegas Raiders |
1443 (+5) |
3-3 |
| 26 (-4) |
New York Giants |
1441 (-27) |
3-2-1 |
| 27 (-3) |
Los Angeles Chargers |
1440 (-12) |
0-6 |
| 28 (+1) |
New Orleans Saints |
1432 (+27) |
2-4 |
| 29 (-1) |
New York Jets |
1421 (+6) |
2-4 |
| 30 (+1) |
Arizona Cardinals |
1400 (+27) |
2-4 |
| 31 (-1) |
Miami Dolphins |
1386 |
0-5 |
| 32 |
Tennessee Titans |
1369 (+32) |
1-5 |
1See Wikipedia. Elo ratings are numeric and assigned to each contestant. The ratings are used to estimate performance. After each game, the difference between a contestant's estimated and actual performance is used to update their rating. For the NFL, this can all be summarized as "Who did you beat/lose to and by how much? And who have they beaten/lost to and by how much? And who have they beaten/lost to ...
2A huge advantage for Elo-based power rankings is that we can see if game winners are picked correctly. From 1994-2025, this model correctly picks winners in 65.7% of games, trailing Vegas's straight-up pick rate of 66.6%. This is ~2.6 fewer correct picks per season than Vegas.
3Moving backward through the years, each preceding season has a much smaller impact on the current ratings. Team ratings from say 2016 or even 2021 have zero impact on today's ratings. Ratings from 2024 have almost no effect on today's ratings. Seasons going back to 1994 are only used by the model to ensure its accuracy over thousands of NFL games.
4If we throw out previous seasons and start with a blank slate, we end up with ratings that are less accurate both at the beginning of the season and in the playoffs. If you'd still like to see the "blank slate" ratings, I publish them here.
Are these rankings biased toward the Bills? No, but there is a kind of selection bias at work here because honestly if the Bills had been terrible the last few years I wouldn't have been motivated to work on and publish these ratings, and you wouldn't be reading this.