06-13-2019, 11:31 AM
1 Utah
2 Miami
3 TCU
4 Iowa State
5 Oregon
6 Nebraska
7 Missouri
8 Washington
9 VT
10 Stanford
2 Miami
3 TCU
4 Iowa State
5 Oregon
6 Nebraska
7 Missouri
8 Washington
9 VT
10 Stanford
Phil Steele’s Surprise Teams for 2019
06-13-2019, 11:56 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-13-2019, 11:57 AM by OutsiderFan.)
Utah is assumed to be the Pac-12 pre-season favorite so it's hard to see them as a surprise (unless to the negative), especially considering they were in the conference championship game in 2018. The #1 surprise team is usually not a negative prediction.
By the same token, how can Washington, also in the conference title game last year, be considered a surprise?
Missouri is the only team on that list that I could conceivably consider a surprise, given what they have accomplished over the last few years and what they have going for them. Even Nebraska, with Scott Frost in year 2, how could they sneak up on anyone?
As for Stanford, who expects any surprises against the toughest schedule in the country? To me the only surprise would be anything over an 8-4 record or under 6-6.
By the same token, how can Washington, also in the conference title game last year, be considered a surprise?
Missouri is the only team on that list that I could conceivably consider a surprise, given what they have accomplished over the last few years and what they have going for them. Even Nebraska, with Scott Frost in year 2, how could they sneak up on anyone?
As for Stanford, who expects any surprises against the toughest schedule in the country? To me the only surprise would be anything over an 8-4 record or under 6-6.
(This post was last modified: 06-13-2019, 11:57 AM by OutsiderFan.)
Utah is assumed to be the Pac-12 pre-season favorite so it's hard to see them as a surprise (unless to the negative), especially considering they were in the conference championship game in 2018. The #1 surprise team is usually not a negative prediction.
By the same token, how can Washington, also in the conference title game last year, be considered a surprise?
Missouri is the only team on that list that I could conceivably consider a surprise, given what they have accomplished over the last few years and what they have going for them. Even Nebraska, with Scott Frost in year 2, how could they sneak up on anyone?
As for Stanford, who expects any surprises against the toughest schedule in the country? To me the only surprise would be anything over an 8-4 record or under 6-6.
By the same token, how can Washington, also in the conference title game last year, be considered a surprise?
Missouri is the only team on that list that I could conceivably consider a surprise, given what they have accomplished over the last few years and what they have going for them. Even Nebraska, with Scott Frost in year 2, how could they sneak up on anyone?
As for Stanford, who expects any surprises against the toughest schedule in the country? To me the only surprise would be anything over an 8-4 record or under 6-6.
06-13-2019, 12:47 PM
A two game spread is your margin for non-surprise? You, my friend, need to get out more.
I mean, a result of 4-8 would be disappointing, but not unforeseeable. AS you point out, it is a tough schedule, there is a lot of uncertainty for this team, and fluke things happen. I could easily see us lose all three of our non-conference games, plus losses to UW, WSU, Oregon, UCLA, and USC. Hell, Cal might be better than expected and we could go 3-9.
On the flip side, another 10-win season seems a bit of a longshot, but isn't that crazy. We will be very strong on D-line and cornerback, which are the ingredients for a lock-down defense. Although the schedule as a whole is challenging, we do have a favorable home/away break.
I think this might be a high variance team with a lot of question marks but a lot of potential studies, so we shouldn't get stuck on 6-8 wins.
BC
I mean, a result of 4-8 would be disappointing, but not unforeseeable. AS you point out, it is a tough schedule, there is a lot of uncertainty for this team, and fluke things happen. I could easily see us lose all three of our non-conference games, plus losses to UW, WSU, Oregon, UCLA, and USC. Hell, Cal might be better than expected and we could go 3-9.
On the flip side, another 10-win season seems a bit of a longshot, but isn't that crazy. We will be very strong on D-line and cornerback, which are the ingredients for a lock-down defense. Although the schedule as a whole is challenging, we do have a favorable home/away break.
I think this might be a high variance team with a lot of question marks but a lot of potential studies, so we shouldn't get stuck on 6-8 wins.
BC
A two game spread is your margin for non-surprise? You, my friend, need to get out more.
I mean, a result of 4-8 would be disappointing, but not unforeseeable. AS you point out, it is a tough schedule, there is a lot of uncertainty for this team, and fluke things happen. I could easily see us lose all three of our non-conference games, plus losses to UW, WSU, Oregon, UCLA, and USC. Hell, Cal might be better than expected and we could go 3-9.
On the flip side, another 10-win season seems a bit of a longshot, but isn't that crazy. We will be very strong on D-line and cornerback, which are the ingredients for a lock-down defense. Although the schedule as a whole is challenging, we do have a favorable home/away break.
I think this might be a high variance team with a lot of question marks but a lot of potential studies, so we shouldn't get stuck on 6-8 wins.
BC
I mean, a result of 4-8 would be disappointing, but not unforeseeable. AS you point out, it is a tough schedule, there is a lot of uncertainty for this team, and fluke things happen. I could easily see us lose all three of our non-conference games, plus losses to UW, WSU, Oregon, UCLA, and USC. Hell, Cal might be better than expected and we could go 3-9.
On the flip side, another 10-win season seems a bit of a longshot, but isn't that crazy. We will be very strong on D-line and cornerback, which are the ingredients for a lock-down defense. Although the schedule as a whole is challenging, we do have a favorable home/away break.
I think this might be a high variance team with a lot of question marks but a lot of potential studies, so we shouldn't get stuck on 6-8 wins.
BC
06-14-2019, 04:17 AM
I said I would be surprised with 9-3 or better or 5-7 or worse. That means 8-4, 7-5, or 6-6 are my expected range of performance, so it’s actually 3 possible outcomes that wouldn’t surprise me.
I don’t see how 9-3 or better or 5-7 or worse can’t qualify as surprising. It seems nuts to me that the top-rated returning QB and Senior starter would be on a team that isn’t in the upper half of the PAC-12. I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
I don’t see how 9-3 or better or 5-7 or worse can’t qualify as surprising. It seems nuts to me that the top-rated returning QB and Senior starter would be on a team that isn’t in the upper half of the PAC-12. I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
I said I would be surprised with 9-3 or better or 5-7 or worse. That means 8-4, 7-5, or 6-6 are my expected range of performance, so it’s actually 3 possible outcomes that wouldn’t surprise me.
I don’t see how 9-3 or better or 5-7 or worse can’t qualify as surprising. It seems nuts to me that the top-rated returning QB and Senior starter would be on a team that isn’t in the upper half of the PAC-12. I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
I don’t see how 9-3 or better or 5-7 or worse can’t qualify as surprising. It seems nuts to me that the top-rated returning QB and Senior starter would be on a team that isn’t in the upper half of the PAC-12. I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
06-14-2019, 08:21 AM
(06-14-2019, 04:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
Trent Edwards was an accomplished senior QB who would later be drafted in the third round; he was winless in 7 games until he got injured and Stanford went 1-11.
BC
(06-14-2019, 04:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
Trent Edwards was an accomplished senior QB who would later be drafted in the third round; he was winless in 7 games until he got injured and Stanford went 1-11.
BC
06-14-2019, 10:17 AM
(06-14-2019, 08:21 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(06-14-2019, 04:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
Trent Edwards was an accomplished senior QB who would later be drafted in the third round; he was winless in 7 games until he got injured and Stanford went 1-11.
BC
I don't consider Edwards to have been that accomplished before his Senior season. My greater point is the Top 4 QBs in the Pac-12 this year are all projected to be Seniors - Oregon (Hebert), Stanford (Costello), Utah (Huntley), Arizona (Tate) - and such teams perform well in the Pac-10/12 historically.
That's why I would be quite surprised to see Stanford finish 5-7 or worse.
(06-14-2019, 08:21 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(06-14-2019, 04:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
Trent Edwards was an accomplished senior QB who would later be drafted in the third round; he was winless in 7 games until he got injured and Stanford went 1-11.
BC
I don't consider Edwards to have been that accomplished before his Senior season. My greater point is the Top 4 QBs in the Pac-12 this year are all projected to be Seniors - Oregon (Hebert), Stanford (Costello), Utah (Huntley), Arizona (Tate) - and such teams perform well in the Pac-10/12 historically.
That's why I would be quite surprised to see Stanford finish 5-7 or worse.
06-14-2019, 10:23 AM
(06-14-2019, 08:21 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(06-14-2019, 04:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
Trent Edwards was an accomplished senior QB who would later be drafted in the third round; he was winless in 7 games until he got injured and Stanford went 1-11.
BC
2017 didn't get off to a great start under SR Keller Chryst either before being replaced.
(06-14-2019, 08:21 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(06-14-2019, 04:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I can’t in my lifetime remember a team led by an accomplished Senior QB doing poorly in the PAC-12.
Trent Edwards was an accomplished senior QB who would later be drafted in the third round; he was winless in 7 games until he got injured and Stanford went 1-11.
BC
2017 didn't get off to a great start under SR Keller Chryst either before being replaced.
06-14-2019, 10:59 AM
(06-14-2019, 10:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I don't consider Edwards to have been that accomplished before his Senior season.
This strikes me as a "no true Scotsman" argument.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRG9Gq-xtr8
Edwards had been a three-year starter by 2006 and going into the season was:
On the 2006 Davey O'Brien Watch List
Pre-season all-American honorable mention (Street & Smith's)
Pre-season first team all-Pac-10 (The Sporting News)
Pre-seasons second team all-Pac-10 (Athlon, Steele's)
He had been the MVP of the 2005 team, and ranked 28th in the country in pass efficiency rating.
And he did all of this while playing for teams that won a combined 13 games if my math is right while he was there. Which is my point; a great quarterback on a dreadful team with no offensive line and no running game to speak of won't by himself be able to generate much offense. Put Costello, or hell, even Luck, on that 2006 team, and you really think the team is going to win 6 games? Conversely, give Edwards the keys to the 2012 team, and we are a decent bet to make it to the BCS championship (we lost two games that year, by 4 points at Washington , and in overtime at Notre Dame; both games we failed to score an offensive touchdown).
BC
(06-14-2019, 10:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I don't consider Edwards to have been that accomplished before his Senior season.
This strikes me as a "no true Scotsman" argument.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRG9Gq-xtr8
Edwards had been a three-year starter by 2006 and going into the season was:
On the 2006 Davey O'Brien Watch List
Pre-season all-American honorable mention (Street & Smith's)
Pre-season first team all-Pac-10 (The Sporting News)
Pre-seasons second team all-Pac-10 (Athlon, Steele's)
He had been the MVP of the 2005 team, and ranked 28th in the country in pass efficiency rating.
And he did all of this while playing for teams that won a combined 13 games if my math is right while he was there. Which is my point; a great quarterback on a dreadful team with no offensive line and no running game to speak of won't by himself be able to generate much offense. Put Costello, or hell, even Luck, on that 2006 team, and you really think the team is going to win 6 games? Conversely, give Edwards the keys to the 2012 team, and we are a decent bet to make it to the BCS championship (we lost two games that year, by 4 points at Washington , and in overtime at Notre Dame; both games we failed to score an offensive touchdown).
BC
06-14-2019, 11:12 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-14-2019, 11:13 AM by OutsiderFan.)
(06-14-2019, 10:59 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(06-14-2019, 10:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I don't consider Edwards to have been that accomplished before his Senior season.
This strikes me as a "no true Scotsman" argument.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRG9Gq-xtr8
Edwards had been a three-year starter by 2006 and going into the season was:
On the 2006 Davey O'Brien Watch List
Pre-season all-American honorable mention (Street & Smith's)
Pre-season first team all-Pac-10 (The Sporting News)
Pre-seasons second team all-Pac-10 (Athlon, Steele's)
He had been the MVP of the 2005 team, and ranked 28th in the country in pass efficiency rating.
And he did all of this while playing for teams that won a combined 13 games if my math is right while he was there. Which is my point; a great quarterback on a dreadful team with no offensive line and no running game to speak of won't by himself be able to generate much offense. Put Costello, or hell, even Luck, on that 2006 team, and you really think the team is going to win 6 games? Conversely, give Edwards the keys to the 2012 team, and we are a decent bet to make it to the BCS championship (we lost two games that year, by 4 points at Washington , and in overtime at Notre Dame; both games we failed to score an offensive touchdown).
BC
I'm not really interested in dissecting a one statement molehill into a greater argument mountain. I gave my reasons for why I find it difficult to believe Stanford can be a surprise team. Nothing is ever absolute, we all have opinions, and I'm not doing hours of research to defend my statements that are meant for casual message board dialogue.
How about just stating what you think and why, about the original post in the thread?
(This post was last modified: 06-14-2019, 11:13 AM by OutsiderFan.)
(06-14-2019, 10:59 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(06-14-2019, 10:17 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I don't consider Edwards to have been that accomplished before his Senior season.
This strikes me as a "no true Scotsman" argument.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRG9Gq-xtr8
Edwards had been a three-year starter by 2006 and going into the season was:
On the 2006 Davey O'Brien Watch List
Pre-season all-American honorable mention (Street & Smith's)
Pre-season first team all-Pac-10 (The Sporting News)
Pre-seasons second team all-Pac-10 (Athlon, Steele's)
He had been the MVP of the 2005 team, and ranked 28th in the country in pass efficiency rating.
And he did all of this while playing for teams that won a combined 13 games if my math is right while he was there. Which is my point; a great quarterback on a dreadful team with no offensive line and no running game to speak of won't by himself be able to generate much offense. Put Costello, or hell, even Luck, on that 2006 team, and you really think the team is going to win 6 games? Conversely, give Edwards the keys to the 2012 team, and we are a decent bet to make it to the BCS championship (we lost two games that year, by 4 points at Washington , and in overtime at Notre Dame; both games we failed to score an offensive touchdown).
BC
I'm not really interested in dissecting a one statement molehill into a greater argument mountain. I gave my reasons for why I find it difficult to believe Stanford can be a surprise team. Nothing is ever absolute, we all have opinions, and I'm not doing hours of research to defend my statements that are meant for casual message board dialogue.
How about just stating what you think and why, about the original post in the thread?
06-14-2019, 12:41 PM
I agree with Outsider that parts of this thread are senseless but I really enjoyed that No True Scotsman video!
Cheers,
Pete F.
Cheers,
Pete F.
I agree with Outsider that parts of this thread are senseless but I really enjoyed that No True Scotsman video!
Cheers,
Pete F.
Cheers,
Pete F.
06-14-2019, 08:18 PM
I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
06-14-2019, 10:04 PM
(06-14-2019, 08:18 PM)Mick Wrote: I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Accuracy was his strong suit. I don't think even Andrew was as precise. What happened to Trent at Stanford was a damned shame ( I'm looking at you, Robin Mamlet and Ted Leland).
(06-14-2019, 08:18 PM)Mick Wrote: I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Accuracy was his strong suit. I don't think even Andrew was as precise. What happened to Trent at Stanford was a damned shame ( I'm looking at you, Robin Mamlet and Ted Leland).
06-15-2019, 08:24 AM
(06-14-2019, 10:04 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(06-14-2019, 08:18 PM)Mick Wrote: I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Accuracy was his strong suit. I don't think even Andrew was as precise. What happened to Trent at Stanford was a damned shame ( I'm looking at you, Robin Mamlet and Ted Leland).
I wonder how he would have done with a Bill Walsh-type coach...or even a Kyle Shanahan.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(06-14-2019, 10:04 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(06-14-2019, 08:18 PM)Mick Wrote: I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Accuracy was his strong suit. I don't think even Andrew was as precise. What happened to Trent at Stanford was a damned shame ( I'm looking at you, Robin Mamlet and Ted Leland).
I wonder how he would have done with a Bill Walsh-type coach...or even a Kyle Shanahan.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
06-15-2019, 12:09 PM
(06-14-2019, 08:18 PM)Mick Wrote: I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Roger Theder had a QB training service that my son attended along with Trent. I think Trent was a 9th or 10th grader then. Roger Theder told me about Trent "He's going to be a good one." Pretty accurate prediction.
(06-14-2019, 08:18 PM)Mick Wrote: I thought Trent Edwards was one of the best high school QBs I'd ever seen. I watched Los Gatos play Paly in a playoff game. In the first half, Trent was six for ten. Three of his missed passes hit his receivers in the numbers. The fourth was about sixty yards in the air and overthrew his receiver by two feet. Amazing QB.
Roger Theder had a QB training service that my son attended along with Trent. I think Trent was a 9th or 10th grader then. Roger Theder told me about Trent "He's going to be a good one." Pretty accurate prediction.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »