Phil Steele has OU #1

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Oklahoma went from a 7-5 team to a national championship team a few years back...sure it can happen

[Salt City Sooner]

Helu is a quality RB..I don't believe at all in the QB..the WR group is ok...
He's got a hawwwt sister. That's as good a starting point as any. :D

[NatureBoy]

You're delicate. Is that better?

Regardless, you act as if you were deeply wounded by STEP's comments. What he said was dead-on, and not that offensive. You're definitely the sensitive one.

If I had put a smiley face, would that have made you less concerned?

Message boards are for fun. I'm having fun. I'm sorry if that's too much for you to handle.

And so you don't get concerned: :) :P :cool: ;) :D

[NatureBoy]

He's got a hawwwt sister. That's as good a starting point as any. :D

I give your post 2 thumbs up. So does she.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3199/3077514617_234f7cbb2e_o.jpg

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Who said head-to-head is "the rule" on who is the better team?

nevermind

To summarize

I saw its a big stretch to have either team as high as they are

Nature Boy says its a bigger stretch to have OU #1, I disagree

I say 3 or 4 south teams will be better than the north champs, NB disagrees and wants me to put money on it too which I decline

Everybody gets involved in a little smack talk

I go make a sammich and think about making sure the boat and jet skis are ready for me to blow up this weekend

blah blah blah blah blah blah

it seems so long ago that I was defending nebraska in this thread

[JohnnyMack]

I just saw this thread. The only thing dumber than STEP is Phil Steele. #1 is a joke.

[Collier11]

Nebraska has 3 tough road games, @wash, @kstate, @A&M
2 home games that are tough, tex and mizzou

If Nebraska doesnt drop off a game like ISU again this year I figure that they will lose 3 games in the regular season.

[NatureBoy]

I say 3 or 4 south teams will be better than the north champs, NB disagrees and wants me to put money on it too which I decline


4 south teams??? :eek:

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I just saw this thread. The only thing dumber than STEP is Phil Steele. #1 is a joke.

you wasnt saying that last night..of course in the position you was in, it was difficult to speak

[Collier11]

I just saw this thread. The only thing dumber than STEP is Phil Steele. #1 is a joke.

Translation= JM has a boner for STEP

[stoops the eternal pimp]

4 south teams??? :eek:

maybe 3...I forgot that was so long ago...this ham sammich is so good

[delhalew]

You are wrong. I did not say that OU can't be dominant.

Good lord you're dense. Dominant would mean winning the big twelve if not number eight. That would entail finishing above texas and nebraska. Which is precisely what you are arguing.

[Eielson]

So what did we learn today? STEP's a jerk, I'm sensitive, us Okies are too stupid to "get the points" that this intellectually superior Nebraska boy is trying to make, injuries don't affect a game, real men put their money where their mouth is, history can't repeat itself, and Nebraska is returning 10 out of 11 starters on their awful offense from last year...so naturally, despite the loss of Suh, they're loaded.

[JohnnyMack]

And if we're 100% healthy last year we treat Nebraska like it was Jodie Foster on a pinball machine in The Accused.

[JohnnyMack]

Translation= JM has a boner in STEP's no no hole.

Fixed

[stoops the eternal pimp]

reason number 19,759 why I love you

[Collier11]

Who, me or JM...it better be me

[NormanPride]

Yeah, I bet Baylor takes it to you guys with Robot Griffin the Third. :D

Honestly, I think the Nebraska D takes a step back and the O gets a bit better. But who can tell the difference between the 108th best offense and the 79th best offense? Overall the same results, IMO. Unless some young kids replace starters on O.

As for OU, I think our D takes a step back, but the O jumps forward quite a bit. Improved run game, and a QB who doesn't crap himself on the road. Overall, not as dominant a D, but good enough to keep the O in any game.

Both end up in the 7-13 range.






Texas ends up 4-8 and cries after losing to Rice. :texan:

[NormanPride]

And now the gay lovefest scares off the nubs. :D

[Collier11]

like the cornholers are afraid of gay love

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Who, me or JM...it better be me

if you would slow down...you

[stoops the eternal pimp]

And now the gay lovefest scares off the nubs. :D

you really have a good feel for this board dont ya?:D

[Collier11]

if you would slow down...you

Its the hillbilly teeth that you wear

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Its the hillbilly teeth that you wear

those are real just like my breasts

[Collier11]

ah, your breasts, so supple for a man

[stoops the eternal pimp]

yup, I think we officially killed it

[NormanPride]

Everyone's too busy watching to interrupt. Go on.

[NatureBoy]

Good lord you're dense. Dominant would mean winning the big twelve if not number eight. That would entail finishing above texas and nebraska. Which is precisely what you are arguing.

Again, you're wrong. I have not said OU cannot win the conference. Do not confuse an argument about OU's preseason ranking as being equivalent to saying a team cannot accomplish something.

I don't think OU will win any titles is not the same as saying OU cannot. They certainly can.
Settle down.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Everyone's too busy watching to interrupt. Go on.

I knew you liked it....whore

[stoops the eternal pimp]

i swear to goodness this is the best ham sammich ever

[NatureBoy]

i swear to goodness this is the best ham sammich ever

And the biggest, apparently...

[stoops the eternal pimp]

actually my 2nd..you dont get this big by eating 1

[Eielson]

Again, you're wrong. I have not said OU cannot win the conference. Do not confuse an argument about OU's preseason ranking as being equivalent to saying a team cannot accomplish something.

I don't think OU will win any titles is not the same as saying OU cannot. They certainly can.
Settle down.

Quit interrupting the gay lovefest.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

collier is the gay one

[stoops the eternal pimp]

bazinga

[BoulderSooner79]

"Ham - the other pink meat"

[stoops the eternal pimp]

so anyway back to what we were talking about....

what was it?

[SoonerAtKU]

So the bigger question is whether this is supposed to predict where the teams will end up at the end of next year, or to rank them based on potential and the position each team is in to succeed or fail.

If we say what is the potential of each team, I'd definitely say OU has higher potential than Nebraska. The ceiling for OU next year is the national championship. I just can't imagine Nebraska being in the mix for a national championship next year without significant changes on offense. Maybe I'll be proven wrong, but it seems like that's the place these rankings are coming from.

[NormanPride]

jlew getting busy with rosie in the closet?

[Collier11]

i swear to goodness this is the best ham sammich ever

tube steak, not ham

[gaylordfan1]

Now I'm eating a ham sandwich..... what the hell just happened?

[gaylordfan1]

Damn, my post followed the wrong post. Doesn't look good on my part.

[Collier11]

Now I'm eating a ham sandwich..... what the hell just happened?

you know what happened

[gaylordfan1]

:eek:

[gaylordfan1]

Is this bad?

[Collier11]

you walked right into it, er...backed into it

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Just take deep breathes..

[CatfishSooner]

I think OU is a legit # 1...

[JLEW1818]

sausage fest

[sendbaht]

Go Phil.............I kind of like to start out around 7 or 8th and move up, this does look nice!

[AzianSooner]

I think OU is a legit # 1...

You shoud not think. You Know OU#1.


But, to others everything must be proven on the final score.

[pilobolus]

You seem a little too interested in the answer to this question. Can we see about getting a restraining order on Herr?

That's been needed for the last ten years or so.

[goingoneight]

While we're playing the game of "I want to see it first..."
I want to see Alabama replace three All-Americans and 9 starters on defense.

[gaylordfan1]

They lost 9 on defense?

[JLEW1818]

have you seen the Defensive classes Bama has brought in the last couple years?

[goingoneight]

Ummm... recruiting is the key to success, but not "replace 9 out of 11 starters"-success.

See: OU Offense 2008 vs 2009.

[goingoneight]

They lost 9 on defense?

I honestly don't know. I've heard "lost 9 out of 11 starters on defense" twice on ESPN and on the Sports Animal. I know they lost McLain, All-America All-Purpose Player Javier Arenas, Mt. Cody and a guy who's been a steady kicker for them.

I like Bama, really do. All I'm saying is they're not on some mountain where they're unbeatable. Before you know it, they'll be the next "greatest team ever" with all the hype they're getting. Congratulations on the MNC, but the show goes on. Nobody has won back-to-back since Nebraska in the mid-90s. And no... USC 2003 doesn't count. If undefeated Auburn can't claim a share of the MNC in 2004 because "they never played for the championship," neither can the SUC in my book.

[Collier11]

They lost atleast 7 if you go by their wikipedia page

Brandon Deaderick- Senior Defensive End
Terrence Cody- Senior Nose Tackle
Cory Reamer- Senior Linebacker
Rolando McClain - Junior Linebacker
Javier Arenas- Senior Cornerback
Kareem Jackson- Junior Cornerback
Justin Woodall- Senior Safety

Plus their good STs guys

# P.J. Fitzgerald- (Senior Punter)
# Leigh Tiffin- (Senior Kicker)

[mightysooner]

Interesting. I'd like to hear how he justifies that ranking of us. No way in hell I'd have us above Ohio State OR Bama. I have us about #15 or so.

[mightysooner]

They lost 9 on defense?

Yes. That Bama defense was senior laden. No way Bama repeats.

[JLEW1818]

I'll take an SEC team to win it vs the field. they have won the last 4.

[ndpruitt03]

Which means the odds are against them. The SEC is going to be a little down. Bama loses their D, and their offense isn't good enough to overcome that. They have Ingram who is really good and Jones. Good enough to win 9 or 10 games. Not sure about anymore than that. Florida loses Tebow and some key defensive players. Georgia should be pretty good, LSU should be good. But I don't think there's any NC team in the SEC this year.

[oudavid1]

When did this board become about Nebraska.......ah who cares.

[JLEW1818]

Which means the odds are against them. The SEC is going to be a little down. Bama loses their D, and their offense isn't good enough to overcome that. They have Ingram who is really good and Jones. Good enough to win 9 or 10 games. Not sure about anymore than that. Florida loses Tebow and some key defensive players. Georgia should be pretty good, LSU should be good. But I don't think there's any NC team in the SEC this year.

Well I don't think there is any NC team in the big 12.

If you base on what it returns.

[IronHorseSooner]

Again, Phil Steele bases his predictions on where he thinks teams will finish. A lot of prognosticators base their rankings on where they think they will start. Like it or not, OUr schedule is what is called in the business at "National Title Schedule." That is one that has:

1) A number of good, name teams, but the games are generally at home (FSU, USAFA, Tech).
2) The road games are somewhat challenging, but are definitely winnable (Cincy, *, Mizzou, A&M, OSU).
3) Contains a number of either bowl teams from last year, or teams that should go to bowls this year (FSU, USAFA, Cincy, *, ISU, Mizzou, A&M, Tech, OSU, and the winner from the North). That would be 10 of the 13 games, and Baylor might be better with their QB back.

If we win out, or are in a pile up with a bunch of 1-loss teams, that schedule should put us over the top. It would probably put us in over an undefeated BSU team.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Yeah, but what does Andre Ware have to say? lol

[delhalew]

Again, Phil Steele bases his predictions on where he thinks teams will finish. A lot of prognosticators base their rankings on where they think they will start. Like it or not, OUr schedule is what is called in the business at "National Title Schedule." That is one that has:

1) A number of good, name teams, but the games are generally at home (FSU, USAFA, Tech).
2) The road games are somewhat challenging, but are definitely winnable (Cincy, *, Mizzou, A&M, OSU).
3) Contains a number of either bowl teams from last year, or teams that should go to bowls this year (FSU, USAFA, Cincy, *, ISU, Mizzou, A&M, Tech, OSU, and the winner from the North). That would be 10 of the 13 games, and Baylor might be better with their QB back.

If we win out, or are in a pile up with a bunch of 1-loss teams, that schedule should put us over the top. It would probably put us in over an undefeated BSU team.

This is what I have been meaning to say.

[stoopified]

Yeah, but what does Andre Ware have to say? lolAfter all the man DID predict we would lose Bradford,Gresham,and OUr entire o-line to injury..... :)

[JLEW1818]

now keep in mind. 2007 LSU, 2008 Florida. they each had like 3-4 losses the year before i think. couple other teams to win the title under the BCS had like 4 or 5 losses the season before.

[Salt City Sooner]

'02 tOSU is another.

[IronHorseSooner]

In all of those situations, there were serious turnovers of personnel. Also, remember that 'Bama was one quarter from going 7-6 in 2007 to playing us in the Title Game in 2008. With the elite teams ('Bama, SUC, *, tOSU, FLA, LSU, and us), turn arounds are more possible than with other programs due to talent level and quality coaching. That statement shouldn't be earth-shattering, but with there are some programs that about 8-10 years ago were superpowers (TENN, FSU, Miami, NU) that really tried to significantly change what they were doing, and they are all trying to regain what they had. With the current powers, even with bumps in the road, they haven't changed their recipe for success, nor their coaches, despite what their fans think.

[starclassic tama]

i think this might actually be a year that a pac 10, big 10, or acc school wins one for a change... maybe virginia tech finally gets it done?

[IronHorseSooner]

i think this might actually be a year that a pac 10, big 10, or acc school wins one for a change... maybe virginia tech finally gets it done?

I was thinking about that last night, but I still believe that it would be hard for one of them to vault over us, 'Bama, or FLA, all things being equal. The SEC champ, until proven otherwise, will always get the benefit of the doubt. OUr schedule would put us in over a champ from the Big 10/11, ACC, or PAC-10. The most likely team in that scenario would be either tOSU or VA Tech.

tOSU would need to beat the likes of Miami, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Penn State to get there. That would equal OUr games against FSU, *, Neb (CCG), and Mizzou. We still have other games that would trump their rest of their schedule.

VA Tech would be more likely, as you said. They would need to beat BSU, FSU (CCG), BC, East Carolina, Central Michigan, Wake, GA Tech, and Miami. That's still only 8 bowl teams, compared to OUr 10. BSU would be their crown-jewel win, but we would have * and NU.

[Collier11]

Phil Steele owns a ut fan in a chat and gives us OU fans even more reason to be excited?


"Mike You say I do a lousy job picking the Big 12 South. Lets see who I picked and who played in the Big 12 Title Game

2009 My pick Texas, B12 Title game Texas
2008 my pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2007 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2006 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2005 My pick Texas B12 title game Texas
2004 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2003 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma

You say I do a poor job in the Big 12 South and yet I have picked the B12 South champ SEVEN straight years. What am I missing here?

Also you ridicule me for my pick of Oklahoma at #5 last year but of the 16 magazines/internet sites in '09 my #5 was the LOWEST pick of any so I was the most accurate on OU as most had #2 or #3.

Phil"

[Crucifax Autumn]

LMAO...That's great!

[swardboy]

Classic.

[delhalew]

This is why Steele's mags and power rankings are the best. Instead of talking out his ***. He makes sure he knows his stuff.

[badger]

If it hasn't been mentioned already, didn't Playboy pick us as #1 last year? :D

[IronHorseSooner]

Phil is one of, if not THE, most respected analyst in the field. Again, he's not the only one to put us this high. The best of the motley crew on ESPN, Herbie, has also picked us high, #3 to be exact, right after the BCS Title Game.

Different experts use different criteria for their pre-season picks. Some use number of returning starters. Others put the returning champ there, unless there has been a massive turnover of players and coaches. Craig James uses one that goes conference-by-conference picking the best team, and then ranking them. What makes Phil's unique, and effective, is that his analyzes schedule, players, coaching, and builds week-to-week. Yes, he makes some assumptions (like OUr OL), but other rankings make far more reaching conclusions. We have a nice balance of experience, young talent, good coaching, and schedule strength.

Some of the reaches are:

1) 'Bama: As much as others like them, and as great of a coach that Saban is, replacing nine starters on defense in the SEC is no small feat, no matter other factors.
2) BSU: It's all about schedule. By the end of the season, OUr win over FSU will be better than theirs over VA Tech. However, that's it for them; whereas, we have *, Cincy, A&M, etc.
3) tOSU: They are the second-best pick in this scenario. The Big 10/11 will be better this year, and they play a good ACC team like we do (Miami), two highly-ranked conference foes (us -* and possible NU, them- Iowa, Wisky), and a few other good teams. The difference comes to schedule. They play Iowa in Iowa City.
4) SUC: Too many distractions. I will leave it at that.
5) *: Too many replacements, too weak of a schedule.
6) NU: They have some other real playmakers on D, but replacing Suh is like replacing about five guys on defense. Also, where is the offense? Helu is a good back, but can Lee get it done.
7) FLA: Good YOUNG (notice the emphasis there) players. As much as we and others give him a hard time, Teebus was their heart-and-soul, and won't be easliy replaced, no matter how good Brantley may end up being.

Those are just some. Again, we have questions, but even to the most die-hard analyst, by mid-season, those will be answered.

[Collier11]

Its all on the O-line, if they are good we will be good, if they are avg or bad, we will be avg or bad

[JLEW1818]

Phil Steele owns a ut fan in a chat and gives us OU fans even more reason to be excited?


"Mike You say I do a lousy job picking the Big 12 South. Lets see who I picked and who played in the Big 12 Title Game

2009 My pick Texas, B12 Title game Texas
2008 my pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2007 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2006 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2005 My pick Texas B12 title game Texas
2004 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma
2003 My pick Oklahoma B12 title game Oklahoma

You say I do a poor job in the Big 12 South and yet I have picked the B12 South champ SEVEN straight years. What am I missing here?

Also you ridicule me for my pick of Oklahoma at #5 last year but of the 16 magazines/internet sites in '09 my #5 was the LOWEST pick of any so I was the most accurate on OU as most had #2 or #3.

Phil"


wow. that is great.

[mhackl]

I never like being preseason #1 on anyones list

[Jacie]

I never like being preseason #1 on anyones list

Then you should become an aggie . . .

[oudavid1]

Then you should become an aggie . . .

They usually never ranked. Texas Sucks!

[JLEW1818]

lol

[NormanPride]

I think both the Big 12 and SEC have the best teams, but none of them will make the title game.

Nightmare scenario: Boise St. Vs. Ohio St.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Ohio State has a darn easy road this year...biggest non conference game is home against miami.. and then the toughest conference game, penn state, is at home and rival michigan who sucks will be at home

[Salt City Sooner]

Ohio State has a darn easy road this year...biggest non conference game is home against miami.. and then the toughest conference game, penn state, is at home and rival michigan who sucks will be at home
They've got roadies at both Wisconsin (who I do feel is over-rated, but still, it's not an easy place to play) & Iowa, both of whom I've consistently seen in the top 10-15-ish of most pre-season polls.

[NormanPride]

Iowa had their good year last year. Now they will suck for the next five. Look for Meatchicken to do better than expected this year as the players get used to the system. Penn State lost their QB, right? And they're just mediocre anyway...

BSU has a **** easy schedule as well, so they could make it. Then you'd get two crappy teams in the title game who haven't played anybody worth a crap, and the best teams sitting with one loss going to BCS games.

[Collier11]

Stewart Mandel of SI.com answers this question in his most recent mailbag


Phil Steele has rated Oklahoma as his preseason No. 1 team ... huh? How would you rate his ranking on a scale of 1-10, with "1" being spot-on and "10" being way past ludicrous?
-- Jason, Ankeny, Iowa

I'd put it a lot closer to 1 than 10, seeing as there are easily 100 teams out there that would be more unlikely picks. While certainly surprising, I hardly find it ludicrous to pick a team that's played for the national championship four team times in the past decade (including as recently as two years ago) to return to that level. If we're assigning a 1 to Alabama (though the more accurate term would be "safe bet," not "spot-on"), then I'd rate Steele's pick a 3.

While Steele, like all of us, has had some notable busts over the years, in general, his are the most accurate predictions of any notable publication (as he's not shy to point out). The reasons are twofold. For one, he clearly puts more time and detail into this endeavor than any reasonably sane person (I believe they had to create a new font size to accommodate all the info he crams onto a single page). But more importantly, Steele, more so than most prognosticators, puts as much emphasis on trying to project forward as backward, on guessing how a team will mature and how it will fare against its given schedule rather than defaulting to how it did the year before.

A classic example came in 2008. I was still an AP voter at the time and clung firmly to my belief that a preseason poll should be treated solely as a "starting point." If a team finished the previous year No. 2 and returned 17 starters, it deserved to start the next season just as high. Hence, most other voters and I had Georgia (which fit that exact description) No. 1. Steele, on the other hand, went with Florida, a team that lost four games the previous year -- including a blowout to Georgia -- but had both potential and a more favorable schedule. Guess who was right?

Now that I'm free of voting responsibilities, I, too, can take more chances when it comes to preseason predictions, and the fact is every one of this year's token contenders has serious questions. Therefore, I have no problem with someone taking a stab on a sleeper team, and the Sooners -- coming off a deceiving five-loss season (three came by a field goal or less) in which they seemed to gel at the end (crushing Oklahoma State 27-0 and putting up 477 yards on Stanford in the Sun Bowl) -- could theoretically fit that bill. Bob Stoops has a history of producing prolific quarterbacks and Landry Jones began fitting that mold last year once he had time to acclimate.

But here's what I don't get about Steele's pick. I don't see anything particularly advantageous about Oklahoma's schedule. The Sooners do miss Big 12 North favorite Nebraska, but they face Cincinnati, Florida State and Air Force out of conference and play in arguably the nation's toughest division. Furthermore, the single most important area I look at in the preseason is a team's offensive line. Oklahoma's was terrible last year and its most accomplished performer (Trent Williams) is gone.

This hardly seems the stuff of a No. 1 team, but again, I'd hardly call it ludicrous. In fact, 10 years ago this fall, Stoops won his lone national championship in Norman -- coming off a five-loss season.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/06/02/preseason-polls/index.html?eref=twitter_feed#ixzz0pinIoC3V
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

[stoops the eternal pimp]

They've got roadies at both Wisconsin (who I do feel is over-rated, but still, it's not an easy place to play) & Iowa, both of whom I've consistently seen in the top 10-15-ish of most pre-season polls.

thats the equivolent of going to kansas or kansas state...possible that they could make it a game, but not likely to win...

[badger]

No offense to fellow Sooners or the rest of the Big 12, but the conference has been incredibly easy to pick this decade.

You could pick OU to win the Big 12 South every year (like most people here would, lol) and be right every year except 2001 (stupid pokes), 2005 (stupid whorns) and 2009 (stupid injuries).

So, for 00, 02, 03, 04, 06, 07 and 08, we'd be right. And let's face it, none of us were expecting anything out of 05, so we'd probably pick whorn to finally revenge the last five years. So, we'd be right 8 times, not 7.

We pwn Phil :D

[Salt City Sooner]

thats the equivolent of going to kansas or kansas state...possible that they could make it a game, but not likely to win...
Neither KU or KSU (who BTW, I think is a little bit under-rated by most I've seen to this point) are bringing back 17 starters from a 10-3 team (Wisconsin) or 15 starters back from a 11-2 team (Iowa), both of which totals include returning starting QB's. If Iowa can get their OL ironed out (definitely no gimme as we've seen first hand), I think they're a threat to run it out because their D should be rock solid. They've got a week 3 roadie at Arizona that'll be a good test, but if they get by that one, they get PSU, Wisky, & tSOU all in Kinnick.

Agree to disagree, have a good one.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I put them both in the same category with michigan state...they are all capable of putting together a good football game but that same iowa team that only lost 2 could lose 4 or 5 with the same bunch...but thats big 10 football... when it takes blocking back-to-back fg's to beat Northern Iowa at home, its not the earmark of a great football team..of course iowa will win a few games by a small margin one season, and lose a few games by a small margin the next..who knows which iowa team is gonna show up to a game...

After watching both those teams struggle with some pretty mediocre opponents last year and then measuring how strong the big 10 is, either team could win it or put together a crap season

[Salt City Sooner]

Stewart Mandel gives his take on the Steele pick:


Phil Steele has rated Oklahoma as his preseason No. 1 team ... huh? How would you rate his ranking on a scale of 1-10, with "1" being spot-on and "10" being way past ludicrous?
-- Jason, Ankeny, Iowa

I'd put it a lot closer to 1 than 10, seeing as there are easily 100 teams out there that would be more unlikely picks. While certainly surprising, I hardly find it ludicrous to pick a team that's played for the national championship four team times in the past decade (including as recently as two years ago) to return to that level. If we're assigning a 1 to Alabama (though the more accurate term would be "safe bet," not "spot-on"), then I'd rate Steele's pick a 3.

While Steele, like all of us, has had some notable busts over the years, in general, his are the most accurate predictions of any notable publication (as he's not shy to point out). The reasons are twofold. For one, he clearly puts more time and detail into this endeavor than any reasonably sane person (I believe they had to create a new font size to accommodate all the info he crams onto a single page). But more importantly, Steele, more so than most prognosticators, puts as much emphasis on trying to project forward as backward, on guessing how a team will mature and how it will fare against its given schedule rather than defaulting to how it did the year before.

A classic example came in 2008. I was still an AP voter at the time and clung firmly to my belief that a preseason poll should be treated solely as a "starting point." If a team finished the previous year No. 2 and returned 17 starters, it deserved to start the next season just as high. Hence, most other voters and I had Georgia (which fit that exact description) No. 1. Steele, on the other hand, went with Florida, a team that lost four games the previous year -- including a blowout to Georgia -- but had both potential and a more favorable schedule. Guess who was right?

Now that I'm free of voting responsibilities, I, too, can take more chances when it comes to preseason predictions, and the fact is every one of this year's token contenders has serious questions. Therefore, I have no problem with someone taking a stab on a sleeper team, and the Sooners -- coming off a deceiving five-loss season (three came by a field goal or less) in which they seemed to gel at the end (crushing Oklahoma State 27-0 and putting up 477 yards on Stanford in the Sun Bowl) -- could theoretically fit that bill. Bob Stoops has a history of producing prolific quarterbacks and Landry Jones began fitting that mold last year once he had time to acclimate.

But here's what I don't get about Steele's pick. I don't see anything particularly advantageous about Oklahoma's schedule. The Sooners do miss Big 12 North favorite Nebraska, but they face Cincinnati, Florida State and Air Force out of conference and play in arguably the nation's toughest division. Furthermore, the single most important area I look at in the preseason is a team's offensive line. Oklahoma's was terrible last year and its most accomplished performer (Trent Williams) is gone.

This hardly seems the stuff of a No. 1 team, but again, I'd hardly call it ludicrous. In fact, 10 years ago this fall, Stoops won his lone national championship in Norman -- coming off a five-loss season.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/06/02/preseason-polls/index.html?eref=sihp

[Collier11]

Stewart Mandel of SI.com answers this question in his most recent mailbag


Phil Steele has rated Oklahoma as his preseason No. 1 team ... huh? How would you rate his ranking on a scale of 1-10, with "1" being spot-on and "10" being way past ludicrous?
-- Jason, Ankeny, Iowa

I'd put it a lot closer to 1 than 10, seeing as there are easily 100 teams out there that would be more unlikely picks. While certainly surprising, I hardly find it ludicrous to pick a team that's played for the national championship four team times in the past decade (including as recently as two years ago) to return to that level. If we're assigning a 1 to Alabama (though the more accurate term would be "safe bet," not "spot-on"), then I'd rate Steele's pick a 3.

While Steele, like all of us, has had some notable busts over the years, in general, his are the most accurate predictions of any notable publication (as he's not shy to point out). The reasons are twofold. For one, he clearly puts more time and detail into this endeavor than any reasonably sane person (I believe they had to create a new font size to accommodate all the info he crams onto a single page). But more importantly, Steele, more so than most prognosticators, puts as much emphasis on trying to project forward as backward, on guessing how a team will mature and how it will fare against its given schedule rather than defaulting to how it did the year before.

A classic example came in 2008. I was still an AP voter at the time and clung firmly to my belief that a preseason poll should be treated solely as a "starting point." If a team finished the previous year No. 2 and returned 17 starters, it deserved to start the next season just as high. Hence, most other voters and I had Georgia (which fit that exact description) No. 1. Steele, on the other hand, went with Florida, a team that lost four games the previous year -- including a blowout to Georgia -- but had both potential and a more favorable schedule. Guess who was right?

Now that I'm free of voting responsibilities, I, too, can take more chances when it comes to preseason predictions, and the fact is every one of this year's token contenders has serious questions. Therefore, I have no problem with someone taking a stab on a sleeper team, and the Sooners -- coming off a deceiving five-loss season (three came by a field goal or less) in which they seemed to gel at the end (crushing Oklahoma State 27-0 and putting up 477 yards on Stanford in the Sun Bowl) -- could theoretically fit that bill. Bob Stoops has a history of producing prolific quarterbacks and Landry Jones began fitting that mold last year once he had time to acclimate.

But here's what I don't get about Steele's pick. I don't see anything particularly advantageous about Oklahoma's schedule. The Sooners do miss Big 12 North favorite Nebraska, but they face Cincinnati, Florida State and Air Force out of conference and play in arguably the nation's toughest division. Furthermore, the single most important area I look at in the preseason is a team's offensive line. Oklahoma's was terrible last year and its most accomplished performer (Trent Williams) is gone.

This hardly seems the stuff of a No. 1 team, but again, I'd hardly call it ludicrous. In fact, 10 years ago this fall, Stoops won his lone national championship in Norman -- coming off a five-loss season.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/06/02/preseason-polls/index.html?eref=twitter_feed#ixzz0pinIoC3V
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

Guess you missed this? :D

[IronHorseSooner]

But here's what I don't get about Steele's pick. I don't see anything particularly advantageous about Oklahoma's schedule. The Sooners do miss Big 12 North favorite Nebraska, but they face Cincinnati, Florida State and Air Force out of conference and play in arguably the nation's toughest division.

Hey, Stewie, aka Howie's untalented cousin, it is advantageous because it is difficult enough to get you into a BCS game, but manageable enough to run the table. I'm not saying they will, but I guarantee that it's more advantageous than a BSU. I can point to 2003, 2004, and 2008 to examples where this type of schedule was advantageous.

Also, how is a team that is generally in between 8-12 nationally considered a dark horse? Didn't 'Bama start way back when they nearly got there in 2008?

Maybe this is why he doesn't vote anymore. Mandel is one of my least favorite columnists, and is why I go to cnnsi.com last in my rotation of sports sites. This isn't as much as being against OUr Sooners, he just doesn't have a clue and contradicts himself.

[Collier11]

I think he does a good job, I like reading him

[Peach Fuzz]

Sorry but I still think Iowa is a pretender of a team... If you guys watched them last year you might agree they squeaked by 5 games 2 of which were given to them by our friends the refs...

[badger]

So... um... did Phil Steele say this about Poke State?

They have just 58% lettermen ret (24 lost) and will play in the brutal B12 South. I will actually call for their 1st losing season since 2005.

If that actually happened, the OP.com meltdown... epic. They could no longer say that they were a 'team on th rise' if they were a team on the free fall :D

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Nah, they would just say they are a basketball school and football is stoopid because it only crowns a "mythical" national champion.

[NormanPride]

I remember one year they had to fall back on wrestling because both BB and football sucked for them.

[BoulderSooner79]

I think Mandel's comments are extremely rational. The O-line is the biggest question mark, but not the only one. And a tough OOC schedule is a double edged sword. So I think picking OU to finish on top is certainly a reach, but not ludicrous given the talent pool. I look forward to an interesting year because all the recently elite teams seem to have more issues than usual.

[Salt City Sooner]

Interview w/ Steele (lasts about a half hour) :

http://www.blatanthomerism.com/2010-articles/june/podcast-phil-steele-explains-why-oklahoma-sooners-are-no-1.html