- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Phillip Steele (sp?) interview on Finebaum
Posted on 7/7/09 at 9:45 pm
Posted on 7/7/09 at 9:45 pm
Picked OM 6, Bama 8, LSU 17, but said its because of OM easier schedule and LSU's difficult east schedule and road schedule.
His power ratings had LSU in the top 10, but schedule brought them down.
Unfortunately made too much sense.
Anyone see his publication? LINK
His power ratings had LSU in the top 10, but schedule brought them down.
Unfortunately made too much sense.
Anyone see his publication? LINK
This post was edited on 7/7/09 at 9:47 pm
5
Posted on 7/7/09 at 9:49 pm to kjacksonp
i am gonna just go out with the ranter response and say that ole miss will go back to being ole piss and we will win the national championship
i do believe ole miss will have alot more trouble this year than last, but i dont necessarily believe we will win a NC... its possible though
i do believe ole miss will have alot more trouble this year than last, but i dont necessarily believe we will win a NC... its possible though
Posted on 7/7/09 at 9:51 pm to kjacksonp
Yes, BUT he picks teams the way he thinks they will finish
NOT how good they are. Which sucks because it shouldn't be that way at the beginning of the season. It is a great magazine for someone looking to see how well teams will do, but it shouldn't be how teams are ranked at the beginning of the year.
But, overall a great magazine.
NOT how good they are. Which sucks because it shouldn't be that way at the beginning of the season. It is a great magazine for someone looking to see how well teams will do, but it shouldn't be how teams are ranked at the beginning of the year.
But, overall a great magazine.
This post was edited on 7/7/09 at 9:52 pm
Posted on 7/7/09 at 9:56 pm to jbirds1
quote:
Yes, BUT he picks teams the way he thinks they will finish
NOT how good they are.
How else would you want him to pick? I thought that was the purpose of any prediction on any level of any sport... to predict what you think the outcome will be.....i.e. how teams will finish
Posted on 7/7/09 at 9:57 pm to kjacksonp
quote:
Unfortunately made too much sense.
who has represented the West in the SECCG in every odd numbered year this decade?
Posted on 7/7/09 at 9:58 pm to loUiSiAnatiger
Well, it screws up the beginning of the season rankings. I like the way Steele does it. But, when you have the ability to influence voters on top ten teams and you adjust for strength of schedule, it's not right.
Posted on 7/7/09 at 10:10 pm to jbirds1
Bama at 8 with a new QB, not going to happen.
Posted on 7/7/09 at 10:34 pm to LSUSUPERSTAR
I just dont see Bama at 8, that doesnt make any sense to me at all.
They have a new qb, new o-line, they lost their best rb, they lost some good tight ends, and they lost a good safety. They will still have a good d but their offense wont be nearly as efficient or effective.
As for LSU, we are better than 17. Im not going to complain b/c we have a lot to prove but I am confident that we will be a much better team than we were last year.
They have a new qb, new o-line, they lost their best rb, they lost some good tight ends, and they lost a good safety. They will still have a good d but their offense wont be nearly as efficient or effective.
As for LSU, we are better than 17. Im not going to complain b/c we have a lot to prove but I am confident that we will be a much better team than we were last year.
Posted on 7/7/09 at 11:04 pm to jrowla2
Bama and Ole Miss have been overrated imo in every poll. I don't believe they will be as consistent as UF or LSU
Posted on 7/8/09 at 12:56 am to jbirds1
quote:
Yes, BUT he picks teams the way he thinks they will finish
NOT how good they are
he does both
Posted on 7/8/09 at 7:13 am to aibo synthetic
Bama's d will be awesome. offense will be equally as bad. bet the under for the first few weeks.
ole piss is being highly regarded because of snead, who is the real deal. however, you don't loose multiple early round picks on both lines, and jump up in the polls. overrated.
ole piss is being highly regarded because of snead, who is the real deal. however, you don't loose multiple early round picks on both lines, and jump up in the polls. overrated.
Posted on 7/8/09 at 7:20 am to EasyE
Three things:
1. Rashard Johnson
2. Antione Caldwell
3. Andre Smith
Big losses. I'mnot worried abut the QB because first he is more talented than JPW, 2nd we just ask him to hand off. LSU runs the spread. Lots of reads, needs to be athletic, quick passes after faking that takes time away from looking downfield. Apples to oranges as far as whats expected from the QB. If we fill those 3 spots, we wont lose. Not even to UF this time because Saban is still ticked and that 4th qtr wont happen again. As far as our schedule, We should be favored in every game. Its tough in the SEC but right now the feeling is our toughest game will be the first one. Then the trip to Oxford and Auburn of course will be keyed up.
1. Rashard Johnson
2. Antione Caldwell
3. Andre Smith
Big losses. I'mnot worried abut the QB because first he is more talented than JPW, 2nd we just ask him to hand off. LSU runs the spread. Lots of reads, needs to be athletic, quick passes after faking that takes time away from looking downfield. Apples to oranges as far as whats expected from the QB. If we fill those 3 spots, we wont lose. Not even to UF this time because Saban is still ticked and that 4th qtr wont happen again. As far as our schedule, We should be favored in every game. Its tough in the SEC but right now the feeling is our toughest game will be the first one. Then the trip to Oxford and Auburn of course will be keyed up.
This post was edited on 7/8/09 at 7:22 am
Posted on 7/8/09 at 7:30 am to BaysideBama
quote:He should probably install a conditioning program designed to build his team's physical endurance and mental toughness during the fourth quarter. That would probably help.
Not even to UF this time because Saban is still ticked and that 4th qtr wont happen again.
Posted on 7/8/09 at 7:50 am to BaysideBama
Bama should be as advertised, because their D will be one of the best in the country, and their O will play to run the ball and drain the clock.
OM is a wild card. I think they are getting way too much credit for beating us and beating TTech. And yes they beat FL, but the rest of their wins were very close against very average teams.
Steele's magazine is an interesting read, but every issue it seems that he brags more and more about how right he was 3-4 years ago. I dont want to read that crap.
OM is a wild card. I think they are getting way too much credit for beating us and beating TTech. And yes they beat FL, but the rest of their wins were very close against very average teams.
Steele's magazine is an interesting read, but every issue it seems that he brags more and more about how right he was 3-4 years ago. I dont want to read that crap.
Posted on 7/8/09 at 8:03 am to kjacksonp
Phil Steele usually does a very good job. I think he had us ranked around #12-15 last year and he was closer than most.
I hope he is wrong this year...
I hope he is wrong this year...
Posted on 7/8/09 at 8:35 am to kjacksonp
this is Phil Steele's top 25 last year:
1. Florida
2. Ohio St
3. Oklahoma
4. USC
5. Clemson
6. WV
7. Missouri
8. USF
9. Georgia
10. Penn St
11. Texas Tech
12. Auburn
13. LSU
14. Utah
15. Texas
16. Va Tech
17. BYU
18. SC
19. ND
20 Cal
21. Wisconsin
22. Oregon
23. Tennessee
24. Florida St.
25. Pitt
How they actually finished:
1. Florida (60) 13-1 1,524
2. USC 12-1 1,393
3. Texas 12-1 1,389
4. Utah (1) 13-0 1,375
5. Oklahoma 12-2 1,333
6. Alabama 12-2 1,157
7. TCU 11-2 1,114
8. Penn State 11-2 1,091
9. Oregon 10-3 1,011
10. Georgia 10-3 904
11. Ohio State 10-3 874
12. Texas Tech 11-2 867
13. Boise State 12-1 809
14. Virginia Tech 10-4 740
15. Mississippi 9-4 620
16. Missouri 10-4 549
17. Cincinnati 11-3 493
18. Oklahoma State 9-4 480
19. Oregon State 9-4 407
20. Iowa 9-4 250
21. Brigham Young 10-3 248
22. Georgia Tech 9-4 219
23. Florida State 9-4 217
24. Michigan State 9-4 179
25. California 9-4 116
1. Florida
2. Ohio St
3. Oklahoma
4. USC
5. Clemson
6. WV
7. Missouri
8. USF
9. Georgia
10. Penn St
11. Texas Tech
12. Auburn
13. LSU
14. Utah
15. Texas
16. Va Tech
17. BYU
18. SC
19. ND
20 Cal
21. Wisconsin
22. Oregon
23. Tennessee
24. Florida St.
25. Pitt
How they actually finished:
1. Florida (60) 13-1 1,524
2. USC 12-1 1,393
3. Texas 12-1 1,389
4. Utah (1) 13-0 1,375
5. Oklahoma 12-2 1,333
6. Alabama 12-2 1,157
7. TCU 11-2 1,114
8. Penn State 11-2 1,091
9. Oregon 10-3 1,011
10. Georgia 10-3 904
11. Ohio State 10-3 874
12. Texas Tech 11-2 867
13. Boise State 12-1 809
14. Virginia Tech 10-4 740
15. Mississippi 9-4 620
16. Missouri 10-4 549
17. Cincinnati 11-3 493
18. Oklahoma State 9-4 480
19. Oregon State 9-4 407
20. Iowa 9-4 250
21. Brigham Young 10-3 248
22. Georgia Tech 9-4 219
23. Florida State 9-4 217
24. Michigan State 9-4 179
25. California 9-4 116
This post was edited on 7/8/09 at 8:37 am
Posted on 7/8/09 at 8:51 am to jbirds1
quote:
Well, it screws up the beginning of the season rankings. I like the way Steele does it. But, when you have the ability to influence voters on top ten teams and you adjust for strength of schedule, it's not right.
I believe focusing on the end result is the best approach and you believe focusing on the best team is better. As the season progressed I would adjust my rankings for what actually happened and presumedly so would you. In a perfect world we would reach the same conclusion at the end, but the world is not perfect. We may end up with differenct results, but I don't know how you would know that is due to method or an honest difference in opinion.
Regardless, the question is which approach is better. The honest answer is no one knows, and in such a case, the best approach is to take a variety of perspectives. Even though I have a different preference, I have no problem with your approach. I only have a problem with trying to get everyone to do the same thing.
Posted on 7/8/09 at 9:24 am to Indiana Tiger
quote:disagree b/c voters don't adjust their rankings, and instead a team that is voted low to start the season b/c of a tough schedule gets punished even if they do win out, while teams picked ahead of them b/c of an easier schedule get rewarded. If voters actually adjusted as the season went along, that'd be one thing, but most have a hard time having one school jump another w/o a loss.
I believe focusing on the end result is the best approach .
quote:the best approach would be to do away w/ pre-season polls until the 4th or 5th week of the season.
the best approach is to take a variety of perspectives.
This post was edited on 7/8/09 at 9:27 am
Posted on 7/8/09 at 9:49 am to Books
quote:
disagree b/c voters don't adjust their rankings, and instead a team that is voted low to start the season b/c of a tough schedule gets punished even if they do win out, while teams picked ahead of them b/c of an easier schedule get rewarded. If voters actually adjusted as the season went along, that'd be one thing, but most have a hard time having one school jump another w/o a loss.
quote:
the best approach would be to do away w/ pre-season polls until the 4th or 5th week of the season.
All this is just a bunch of assertions unsupported by facts. Voters adjust their rankings all the time, particularly early in the year. They might not adjust as fast or as often as you want, but they do.
Generally, the only poll that matters is the one after the conference championship games, and even in that one there are only a few consequential decisions that have to be made: e.g. who will be #2 in the BCS and possibly who may get an at-large bid. All the rest is just bullshite fodder. IMO voters take these decisions seriously and preseaon polls have nothing to do with it.
But I have an open mind. You should be able to provide me with many examples where it's clear that the only reason for a team's ranking position is due to it's prior rankings, preseason or otherwise.
Posted on 7/8/09 at 9:52 am to BaysideBama
quote:
Not even to UF this time because Saban is still ticked and that 4th qtr wont happen again.
When do you play FL? What is he so ticked about?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News