A Response From Sports Illustrated On Big 12 Football Selections

by ccmachine on Aug 17, 2009 11:30 AM CDT in Football

As posted last week, I had sent an email to Sports Illustrated about their college football preview issue in which Oklahoma State made the cover and Texas is picked ahead of OU in the Big 12 South. In response to that I received an offer to put my email in a Q&A format and send it to one of the writers. Senior writer and Big 12 correspondent Phil Taylor is the person it landed with and he was gracious enough to take the time to shed a little insight on the Big 12 selections for us.

CC Machine: I’m curious to know the logic behind picking Texas ahead of OU. Is it an X’s & O’s decision or was it based on sympathy from the Horns not making the Big 12 Championship game last year? If you wouldn’t mind, I’d like to ask you a few questions on the issue.

Phil Taylor: It's hard to give you a precise reason for ranking Texas ahead of Oklahoma, or for a one-spot difference between any two teams, because our rankings are based on the opinions of several writers and editors who are involved in our college football coverage. It's not a formal process in which we tabulate votes, it's an informal one in which we take everyone's opinions and arrive at a general consensus. With Texas #2 and Oklahoma #3, we obviously consider them to be very, very close on paper. If we had decided to flip the two teams, I doubt that anyone on our panel would have objected strongly. That's how close they appear, as evidenced by the fact that if you look at other preseason magazines, you'll see that some of them went Oklahoma/Texas and some went Texas/Oklahoma. It's almost a coin flip. One thing I can tell you is that our decision wasn't based on sympathy for Texas over last season. We stay away from that kind of bias.

CC Machine: While the Sooners are replacing four offensive linemen the Longhorns are replacing three defensive linemen. Games are won and lost in the trenches but this looks a bit like a wash to me. What are the criteria for giving an advantage one way or the other up front?

Phil Taylor: We considered Texas a little bit better equipped to withstand their heavy losses on the DL largely because of the presence of Sergio Kindle, who was a stud last year and seems ready to be a stud again this year. He would seem to be a real anchor for that unit. Oklahoma seems a little more unsettled, with their only returning OL starter switching positions. I'd also say that Coach Stoops' comments about his OL concerns had some influence here. Some of that may have been a motivational ploy, but it would be hard for us to conclude that the Sooners are fine on the offensive line when Stoops hasn't exactly raved about the unit.

CC Machine: Both schools have great quarterbacks but OU also has the best tight end in the nation and the last I checked Texas doesn’t have a tight end to speak of. OU is returning two 1,000 yard rushers at running back and Texas is very much unproven at running back. Even with a new offensive line OU has returning starters at every skill position who are homerun threats - Ryan Broyles (WR), DeMarco Murray (RB), Jermaine Gresham (TE). Texas can’t boast that but does four out of five returning linemen make up for it?

Phil Taylor: Here's how I'd summarize the situation: Two outstanding quarterbacks, with McCoy, at least at this point, able to expect better protection than Bradford because of the Longhorns' experienced offensive line. Bradford has more quality backs and receivers to work with, and you're right, Gresham is terrific, but the cupboard isn't exactly empty for the Longhorns, with a solid go-to guy like Jordan Shipley. Overall, you could definitely make the argument that the Sooners have a slight edge, but again, it's a close call. Would a QB rather have top-notch backs and receivers and an inexperienced offensive line? Or a solid line and inexperienced backs and receivers? I'd rather have the line, but others may disagree.

CC Machine: In addition to the three new defensive linemen Texas is also replacing two linebackers and one of their starting corners. Are they being deemed a championship caliber defense based on the reputation of defensive coordinator Will Muschamp or have they earned it on their own merit?

Phil Taylor: Muschamp's reputation has little to do with it. Our assessments are based on what we've seen returning players do on the field, and what we think we can expect of newcomers, which are of course educated guesses based on our own observations and the information we've gotten about players from various sources -- including coaches and local media members who are around the teams on a regular basis.

CC Machine: I realize that mostly I see the Big 12 World through crimson and cream glasses which sometimes taints my judgment but other than a non-conference schedule that would make Bill Snyder chuckle, I don’t think Texas has much else in their favor as far as a national championship run goes. This is even proven by SI’s All-American Team in which only one Longhorn is mentioned and he’s in the wrong position. Sergio Kindle is a defensive end now but SI has him as an All-American linebacker. How does that happen?

Phil Taylor: As far as Kindle goes, the indications we have are that he'll be moved around some. He may play primarily defensive end but it won't be unusual to see him with outside linebacker responsibilities at times. In order to fit what we felt were the most deserving players on the All-America team, we put Kindle at OLB. We don't think that's inaccurate.

CC Machine: To be honest, both Oklahoma and Texas have a lot to prove before anyone can pencil them in to the BCS Championship game but I would like to know, for the record, the logic behind picking Texas.

Phil Taylor: Again, the bottom line is that the two teams both have lots of strengths and a few question marks. We simply gave Texas the advantage by a hair, for the reasons I mentioned above, but I wouldn't argue with anyone who gave the edge to the Sooners. If we had ranked Oklahoma ahead of Texas, I'm sure we'd be getting similar questions from Longhorn supporters. I think an unbiased observer would say Oklahoma and Texas should both be in the national championship picture this season, and a strong case can be made for either one.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Taking off those glasses...

Since we’re all homers in one way or another and will never be able to get away from that, let’s try asking the question differently:

Last year, 45-35. Argumentation about MLB injuries and personal fouls aside, what do you think has changed about OU and UT in terms of personnel, skill sets, and coaching that has changed? And does the sum total of those changes equal OU +10.5?

I’ve already done my orange-colored math, and I don’t think so. I’m sure that you are bone-tired of hearing it, but I think that the new O-line is going to doom you to a differential worse than ten points. If you can present such an argument (or a challenge to my assumptions), I would be happy to read it, trying as hard as possible to be objective.

by Tackchevy on Aug 17, 2009 12:53 PM CDT reply actions

Who cares?

For crying out loud it is a pre-season ranking by a magazine, not the polls. Get a life.

by Pantheon on Aug 17, 2009 1:31 PM CDT reply actions

My thoughts...

exactly

by ern on Aug 17, 2009 6:06 PM CDT up reply actions

OU vs. TX

Tackchevy—I guess that’s why they play the games and the polls/rankings change constantly throughout the season.

This is all from the Oklahoma side and you can throw back numbers, if you’d like. But I’m stating a case that we can cover that 10.5 point differential.

In the ’05 season, Oklahoma was 8-4, lost to Texas 45-12, and had 4 seniors on the line (Joseph, Chaisson, Bush, and Chester – 38 starts that season [max of 48 which equals 80%]). Remember, ’05 is when Vince Young won the Heisman.

Here’s the Games Start/Games Played for the ’05 season for the eventual starters of the ’06 season (Messner – 8/12, Robinson – 0/9, Cooper – 1/7, Simmons – 0/0, and Braxton – 4/10). As you can see, very little experience.

In the ‘06 season, wasn’t McCoy a stud Freshmen? His QB rating in the ’06 season was 161.8 and his QB rating in the ’08 season was 173.8—not much of a difference.

In the ’06 season, Texas still beat Oklahoma, but this time it was 28-10, 15 points better than the previous year.

With the inexperienced O-Line coming in to the ’09 season and seeing how the past has played out, I feel that we can change that and cover the 10+ point differential from last year.

I know we could throw out stats all day to make them say what we want to—but this is what I found…

by soxboys21 on Aug 17, 2009 2:03 PM CDT reply actions

VY never won the Heisman.

Unless you mean should’ve won b/c Reggie Bush got financially compensated, you’re wrong. I think VY should have won, but he didn’t.

I don’t understand your argument. I’m not trying to be a jerk. I just really don’t understand. Are you saying OU will make up the difference b/c the O-line is less experienced?

by ajax77777 on Aug 17, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't get your point

You say that since the ’05 line did not have any experience they got blown out and closed the gap a year later and then won the game the following season. So basically you are saying they got better with experience.

Then you say that we will cover the 10 point differential from last year, but provide no reason as to why. You are trying to sound smart, but in essence end up looking really stupid. You are basically since A > B and B > C that A > C. Why would we cover the 10 point differential with an obviously worse o-line. I’m not saying we will lose, but by your argument we will.

There was a firefight!!!!

by ThePhenomenon on Aug 17, 2009 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions

Were you replying to me?

I’m guessing you meant to reply to soxboys21.

by ajax77777 on Aug 18, 2009 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions

Correction

I meant to say, was 2nd place in the Heisman…

by soxboys21 on Aug 17, 2009 5:31 PM CDT reply actions

Rebuttal

I’m saying that Oklahoma has a chance, eventhough their O-Line is inexperienced.

I used past data to show what Oklahoma did against Texas with an experienced and an unexperienced line.

by soxboys21 on Aug 17, 2009 5:32 PM CDT reply actions

Texas losses on Defense

Some of these defensive “starters” lost will be addition by subraction.

DL Aaron Lewis: solid but not someone to cry over when they leave
LB Rashad Bobino: I think I speak for all Texas fans when I say I’m happy the third of the triumvirate of failure (Bobino, Killebrew, Derry) is finally gone.
CB Ryan Palmer: The guy was 5’9" in cleats. Had a decent senior year but the guy replacing him Chykie Brown is an upgrade in every way

As for offense none of the players are “inexperienced”:

McGee, Whittaker, Johnson all have at least one season of meaningful playing time. Now as far as production Brown&Murray definitely outclass them, no argument there.

TE is a black hole for us at this point.

WR corps is going to be elite. Phil Taylor mentions the WR as Shipley and a bunch of guys. Collins, Kirkendoll, Williams are all proven playmakers, no Texas fan is worried about the WR corps…at all.

by owenh on Aug 18, 2009 11:16 AM CDT reply actions

regardless

The game has been neck and neck the last 3 years and thats what a rivalry like ours deserves.

OU will be a NC contender…and so will Texas. Thats how it’s supposed to be.

by owenh on Aug 18, 2009 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions

It seems like you’re underestimating a lot of Texas units. We lost Bobino at linebacker, he was our worst starter last year. We’re replacing him with highly talented guys like Keenan Robinson and Emmanuel Acho. Our secondary is very talented and going to take a huge step forward considering we started two freshman last year. This year we have talent, depth, and experience. Clearly losing Miller and Orakpo makes our line worse. However, there is talent there, especially at DE, and we only lack depth at tackle (if Houston goes down we’re in trouble). Our defense has far fewer questions then last year and I expect this unit to take a step forward from last year when it was the best in the BIg 12.

As far as our offense goes… what’s different from last year when we were very, very good? We lost Cosby but replace him with multiple, talented receivers. We return Colt and Shipley and almost our whole OL. We return all our RBs. We still have the same issues, no TE, no proven run game, but we worked around it last year and we have even more tools this year. At least this year we’re aware of the issues in the offseason and can let the brilliant Greg Davis scheme around it.

You sound incredulous that someone would pick Texas over OU (most have). I have no problem with someone thinking one team is better than the other, but thinking OU is the clear cut favorite? That’s ridiculous. Replacing the OL is one of the hardest things to do. My personal opinion is that OU won’t be any better than last year (which of course is still good enough to be one of the top teams in the nation and in the National Championship picture) and Texas will be better than last year. Seeing as how Texas was very good last year and beat OU, that makes me think that Texas will be the better team. If you disagree, that’s fine, at least this is one question that will be settled on the field … for a few weeks.

by bduran on Aug 18, 2009 9:14 PM CDT reply actions

Not sure which is more pathetic...

…That you’re crying over being picked 2nd by a preseason magazine poll,
…or that you think Texas is so horribly bad that it is unconscionable for anyone to put them ahead of the sooners. You’re acting like SI picked Baylor over you. Jeezus Christ, you even wrote a strongly worded letter to the editor.

One can only imagine your reaction if OU beat Texas by 10 this year AND THEN had to watch national media pick the ’Horns first and Sooners 2nd. Your head would detonate.

by DogTown on Aug 19, 2009 12:02 AM CDT reply actions