Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

I picked up Phil Steele's 2006 college football preview magazine over the weekend. Again, this magazine has more information than any person could ever want in a preview magazine. Of note related to BG:

Kory Lichtensteiger - #21 guard (9th among juniors)
Derrick Markray - #47 guard
Devon Parks - #59 defensive end

In his "Power Poll" near the end of the magazine, he has BG ranked #110. He has BG's schedule ranked as the 13th easiest. He also has us listed as the 2nd most inexperienced team in the nation.

I believe there was another thread that listed the All-MAC guys - Kory (1st), Derrick, Devon, and A. Smith (2nd), several more on third team (including Corey Partridge). He seems pretty high on AT, but has him behind Getsy, Horvath, and Cubit.

Unit rankings of note: RB (11th), OL (4th), DL (8th), ST (12th). I think our backs (especially Dan Macon) will surprise some people this year.

Obviously not much fun to read predictions about BG being down a little, but overall the magazine is awesome.

BGGrad01 wrote:I picked up Phil Steele's 2006 college football preview magazine over the weekend. Again, this magazine has more information than any person could ever want in a preview magazine. Of note related to BG:

Kory Lichtensteiger - #21 guard (9th among juniors)
Derrick Markray - #47 guard
Devon Parks - #59 defensive end

In his "Power Poll" near the end of the magazine, he has BG ranked #110. He has BG's schedule ranked as the 13th easiest. He also has us listed as the 2nd most inexperienced team in the nation.

I believe there was another thread that listed the All-MAC guys - Kory (1st), Derrick, Devon, and A. Smith (2nd), several more on third team (including Corey Partridge). He seems pretty high on AT, but has him behind Getsy, Horvath, and Cubit.

Unit rankings of note: RB (11th), OL (4th), DL (8th), ST (12th). I think our backs (especially Dan Macon) will surprise some people this year.

Obviously not much fun to read predictions about BG being down a little, but overall the magazine is awesome.

I really don't know what to say about this. I'll buy the guy's mag because it is so full of info it will make your head spin. But there is NO WAY this program is 110 outta 119....NO WAY. I think we should be in the 70-85 range to start the year. Now I'm really getting pissed and psyched for the season.

Oh well, easy thing to do is prove them all wrong and go out and kick ass.

GO FALCONS!! 80+ days to go.

Think of it this way, last year, when everyone else was picking us in the 20-30 range, Phil Steele picked us somewhere in the 60's. Sadly, he turned out to be closer to right than anyone else...

Still, I think PS is just like any other hack college football analyst. Outside of the BCS, not much else exists for him. Sure he puts a LOT of stats and info into his magazine, but give any idiot enough time and a staff big enough, and all of a sudden his magazine isn't that special.

As any professor/teacher would tell you, volume does NOT necessarily equate with quality...

To add a bit on the Phil Steele rankings, he listed good ol BGSU as the top recruiting class in the MAC and #75 nationally. Jackson, Brighton, Ellis and Rojas are all listed in the top 100 at their postions. We have several kids listed in the 100-250 range (remember, a lineman or LB rated in the 100's or 200's even is a good player because there are so many of them signed each year)

Flipper wrote:To add a bit on the Phil Steele rankings, he listed good ol BGSU as the top recruiting class in the MAC and #75 nationally. Jackson, Brighton, Ellis and Rojas are all listed in the top 100 at their postions. We have several kids listed in the 100-250 range (remember, a lineman or LB rated in the 100's or 200's even is a good player because there are so many of them signed each year)

Really? Haven't been able to pick it up yet. I stand by our recruiting the last few years. This 2006 team WILL contend for the East and MAC title. It may be a slow start but we'll be gellin'...

GO FALCONS!! < than 80....

If you consider these rankings [RB (11th), OL (4th), DL (8th), ST (12th)] in conjunction with the 13th easiest schedule in the country, it means you should be able to run the ball, stop the run, and win the special teams battle in most of your games. That usually translates into a very successful team. We'll see.

San Diego Falcon wrote:If you consider these rankings [RB (11th), OL (4th), DL (8th), ST (12th)] in conjunction with the 13th easiest schedule in the country, it means you should be able to run the ball, stop the run, and win the special teams battle in most of your games. That usually translates into a very successful team. We'll see.

I assume those rankings are for MAC teams. So he thinks we've got the worst STs in the MAC and one of the worst RB corps in the MAC. Our DL is middle of the pack, and our OL is above average.

If those rankings are accurate I'd say you've got the makings of a pretty horrible team. Luckily the worst of those two rankings are nearly impossible to rank. Our STs will be hinging on two FR kickers which scares the hell out of me, but they cannot be worse than what we had last year. Our RBs are also hinging on guys that nobody has really seen play, but they have shown flashes in practices/spring games, so hopefully they'll break out.

As for the STs, I'm not nearly as concerned about the kickers as I am the rest of the units. Since coach Brandon got here we have continually been abysmal at covering kicks & blocking kicks. We have also been mediocre in the return game. Stellar STs play (outside of just the kickers) are staples of any well coached team. It's time we start paying attention to that unit as much as the offense.

hammb wrote:Since coach Brandon got here we have continually been abysmal at covering kicks & blocking kicks. We have also been mediocre in the return game.

Good points. Two examples of covering kicks from last year jump out at me. We jumped up 20-7 on Wisconsin and looked unstoppable offensively. Terrible kick coverage leads to an 85 yard kickoff return to set up a TD. If we get a stop and score again, the outcome of that game may have been different. Same thing against Boise. We finally got an offensive TD to tie it up early in the 2nd quarter and they return the kickoff for a TD. I'm not saying we would have won that game, but we had momentum in that game for about 15 seconds before that kickoff return. It is going to be critical to avoid those types of lapses this year. I don't think we have the type of offense that can overcome those mistakes.

BTW, those unit rankings were in the MAC. LB's and DB's were each 9th also.

Get a kicker who can kick the damn ball to the side he's supposed to and the coverage will improve dramatically.

Well.... 12 days till the Bird lands in BG.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by San Diego Falcon:
If you consider these rankings [RB (11th), OL (4th), DL (8th), ST (12th)] in conjunction with the 13th easiest schedule in the country, it means you should be able to run the ball, stop the run, and win the special teams battle in most of your games. That usually translates into a very successful team. We'll see.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I assume those rankings are for MAC teams. So he thinks we've got the worst STs in the MAC and one of the worst RB corps in the MAC. Our DL is middle of the pack, and our OL is above average.

Oops, I thought those were his national rankings - never mind....

MIBGSUFan wrote:Well.... 12 days till the Bird lands in BG.

Count me among those who can't wait!

I'm actually half tempted to drive down to BG to watch a practice once everyone arives. Hmmm...tailgaiting anyone?

We are horrid at covering kicks, but I wouldnt call our return game mediocre. Especially not our PR game. Everytime last year Chuck or CP was back there I felt like we had a chance to take it all the way for a TD. Not many teams give me that feeling, especially not Purdue, Boise St, and other teams that I frequently watch!

I believe you're right -- our punt return unit was the only bright spot from last years ST units. I believe they led the MAC in punt return average. Some of that big yardage was run up in blowouts but still, we led the MAC.

We were 10th in kick return average. I attribute a lot of that to the absence of P.J. In any event, our return game has been much more watchable than our coverage game the last few years. Actually, Gigli has been a lot more watchable than our coverage game the last few years.

BGGrad01 wrote:I picked up Phil Steele's 2006 college football preview magazine over the weekend. Again, this magazine has more information than any person could ever want in a preview magazine. Of note related to BG:

Kory Lichtensteiger - #21 guard (9th among juniors)
Derrick Markray - #47 guard
Devon Parks - #59 defensive end

In his "Power Poll" near the end of the magazine, he has BG ranked #110. He has BG's schedule ranked as the 13th easiest. He also has us listed as the 2nd most inexperienced team in the nation.

I believe there was another thread that listed the All-MAC guys - Kory (1st), Derrick, Devon, and A. Smith (2nd), several more on third team (including Corey Partridge). He seems pretty high on AT, but has him behind Getsy, Horvath, and Cubit.

Unit rankings of note: RB (11th), OL (4th), DL (8th), ST (12th). I think our backs (especially Dan Macon) will surprise some people this year.

Obviously not much fun to read predictions about BG being down a little, but overall the magazine is awesome.

Can't say that I totally disagree with the inexperienced evaluation...but it seems hard to believe that a schedule that includes OSU and Wisconsin is the 14th WEAKEST in the country...perhaps it says more about the East Div. of the MAC....where are Kent,Buffalo etc. ranked in terms of THEIR schedules? Oh right, they have to play BG, Akron and Miami.