Phil Steele: UCLA No. 21

by Menelaus on Jul 17, 2007 6:30 PM PDT Comment 20 comments

I know I'm not the first to mention Phil Steele. But I just got my grubby little hands on his Pac 10 Football 2007 Preview. I also just listened to a rather awesome interview he just gave on EDSBS Live to the guys over at Burnt Orange Nation and EDSBS. So, I thought I'd mention him again now.

If you're not familar with Steele, the guy puts together -- by far -- the most comprehensive pre-season college football preview on the market. And, having now heard him speak, I can say that he has a truly encyclopedic knowledge of the sport to match his magazine. Dude is incredible. A machine.

Anyway, enough fawning over Steele. What did he have to say about UCLA? From Steele's 2007 Pac 10 Forecast:

2. [in the Pac 10] UCLA- the Bruins have a Pac 10 high 20 returning starters, and a conference low 12 letterman lost. After years where they have had either an outstanding offense or defense but were weak on the opposite side of the ball, the Burins are stong on both this year. They also have a schedule that could very well have them 11-0 when the travel to USC in the season finale, making the Bruins one of this year's surprise teams.

Steele also ranks the Bruins No. 21 overall. I won't say more -- you should buy a copy and read it for youself.

But, this just goes to show you that some of the best minds in college football are telling you the same things you are reading here on BN. The Bruins have the potential to have a special year. And no matter how many VHT's Southern Cal might have, UCLA has a solid shot at a Pac-10 championship this year.

People are rightly excited about the Bruins this year. I am too. Let's hope Dorrell can prove me wrong, and get it done this year.

GO BRUINS.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Listened to the interview myself

Usually listen to the EDSBS Live podcast, but went real-time tonight, though I had to miss what seemed to be the Pac-10 portion of the talk. Sounded like DD was around as well.

First saw Steele's UCLA forecast in the overall CFB preview guide a few weeks ago; certainly sounds logical, though I would like to think a few spots better than #21 overall. Additionally, in the full guide, Steele listed UCLA as the most experienced team (2-deep) of the BCS-conference teams, and tied for #2 in D-1 (#1 and #2-b are both service academies, for whatever its worth).

by bruinhoo on Jul 17, 2007 7:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I was there but had to leave

it was a shame because I couldnt stick around for the Steele interview. I will listen to the podcast. I stumbled upon th EDSBS live show right before it went on, its very cool. They had a live call-in and they called me to go on right before Steele but it was too late, I was in the car and just couldnt do it. Im going to tune in when I can. Cool show.

by DumpDorrell on Jul 17, 2007 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would be interested to know

where he placed us the last couple of years. (I assume McCloskey can find that little tidbit in three seconds flat.)

by Fox 71 on Jul 17, 2007 7:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

2006

He predicted we'd be 7th in the Pac-10. I don't have an earlier version.

by Menelaus on Jul 17, 2007 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

do you remember what record

he predicted us having?

by DumpDorrell on Jul 18, 2007 6:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

W/L record

I couldn't quickly find an exact prediction, but he said we'd "at least double last year's [2005's] loss total [of 2]." He got that right.

by Menelaus on Jul 18, 2007 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So where does this leave us with this

prognosticator? Is he so accurate that we have to take him seriously, or is he just picking numbers of wins and losses at random?

by Fox 71 on Jul 18, 2007 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dunno

I think you have to take all national commentators with a grain of salt. And while I have an enormous amount of respect for Steele, the guy still has to keep track of 119 teams -- and even for a machine -- something's got to give.

In this case, I take a lot of what he says seriously. If BN is for reality-based Bruins, then Steele's magazine is for statistics-based college football fans. The data and analysis he provides is unmatched. So, to answer your question, what he does appears to be far from random.

Of course, that doesn't mean I don't disagree with the guy. For example, he ranks UCLA as having the 5th toughest schedule in the nation -- based in no small part because of the Pac-10's overall strength and round-robin format. I disagree.

At the end of the day, the most striking thing about all the prognosticators is, as I believe DD and others have noted at length, how far over the map they all are. Some have us ranked highly nationally; others have us in the lower half of the Pac-10. In my opinion, this is a clear manifestation of the Dorrell Factor.

by Menelaus on Jul 18, 2007 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

My wife got the Steele mag...

... from a friend, and I definitely like the stats included.

That whole thing I've been espousing re: our guys only having two road games with teams that ahd winning record last year? Steele's mag amde that easy to back up.

In each school's pages, it also includes good tables breaking down a coach's overall record (i.e. on road, vs. winning teams, vs. Top-25 teams, etc.), so it's nice to have handy.

Make sure you ahve reading glasses or a magnifier next to it, though -- they cram a boatload on each page, and it's not exactly USA Today in terms of clarity of format.

MIM

WHY NOT US? WHY NOT NOW?

by Meriones on Jul 18, 2007 8:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Phil's writing

It certainly takes some getting used to. It's usually a cliche when someone says that a magazine is "jam packed with information", but in Steele's case, it's perfectly accurate. I remember last year it taking me half a day just to learn all the acronyms.

As an aside, during his interview yesterday, Steele said that he dictates everything. That blew me away. I do a fair amount of dictating in my law gig, but it's hard to imagine how the guy dictates all those stats. That is, at least I couldn't imagine it before I heard the guy talk; then at least I sorta got it. Again, dude is a machine.

by Menelaus on Jul 18, 2007 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Meriones wife

I want to meet a wife that is deep enough into her husband's "passions" to bring home appropriate reading material!!!!

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Jul 18, 2007 9:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Those are far and few

but good luck anyway.

by bluegold on Jul 18, 2007 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm with Bill

About half way through almost anything having to do with sports, I can see rigor mortis setting in on Mrs. Fox 71. Meriones, you're a lucky guy.

by Fox 71 on Jul 18, 2007 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In fairness to the missus...

(1) Ms. M got the Steele mag as part of a birhday present from her brother-in-law, an A&M grad;

(2) Ms. M wasn't pleased when I got to the mag first;

(3) Before we met, I BARELY watched NCAA football;

(4) Ms. M watched college football ever since her pops took her to campus as a kid; AND

(5) I learned the nuances of watching college football from HER.

Yep, I know I am blessed.

WHY NOT US? WHY NOT NOW?

by Meriones on Jul 18, 2007 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where can I pick one of these bad boys up?

Where do you pick up Steele's magazine? I've been looking around passively and so far I haven't seen one. Do they sell them at the local walmart or will I have to go to the news stand on Kinross to pick one up?

Victory or until next year!

by ncrpz2 on Jul 18, 2007 10:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Try a news stand

I got mine at a Barnes and Noble (in the Valley). If I were you, I'd try a newstand or a bookstore that has a good selection. You probably won't have any luck at the supermarket, etc.

Also, I went to the Kinross newstand a few days ago, and they didn't have the national preview mag. The guy said he didn't expect more for 3 weeks. They might have the regional Pac-10 mag, though.

by Menelaus on Jul 18, 2007 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Try Borders

Found the mag when it came out at a Borders in the bay area; Borders on Westwood Blvd. (or elsewhere) may have some in stock.

by bruinhoo on Jul 18, 2007 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm confused a bit

He picks us to be #2 in the Pac-10, but that only translates to #21 in the nation? He must have a low opinion of the Pac-10 I guess, or he expects us to lose many non-conference games...

by tasser10 on Jul 18, 2007 4:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Technically

He has us tied for 2nd in the Pac-10 with Oregon. Probably should have mentioned that.

by Menelaus on Jul 18, 2007 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

right

I recall (I think) that Oregon was placed ahead of UCLA by Steele (Oregon = Holiday Bowl/UCLA = Sun Bowl). He did also state that the Bruins may be favored in all but the SC game (= could end up 11-1), which in all likelihood would result in a uncontested 2nd place (and Holiday or Rose Bowl bid).

by bruinhoo on Jul 18, 2007 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs