[armyoflovers]

Each year i buy his CFB publication and it serves as my bible, giving me all the golden nuggets i need to prosper during the CFB season. Anyone elses buy this kick-ass mag?

[bigboydan]

I can't say I do Armyoflovers.

[gridironguy]

Religiously for at least 12 yrs now

[raiders72002]

Religiously for at least 12 yrs now

same here

Blue Ribbon is the Bible of college sports.

[gridironguy]

I have used every CFB guide out there -- nothing, not even Blue Ribbon, can touch Steele

Blue Ribbon is full of paragraphs but not enough about the individual players

[ritehook]

Steele's mag is good, perhaps essential. But it could be a lot better. It's too damn wordy - who really cares, betting-wise, what a team did in 2000-04? He writes it, largely, for the pure fan, not the bettor (even tho, of course, his big bucks come from touting.)

I also question his methodogy re "improving" vs "regressing" teams. One of his criteria is close wins/losses the prior year.

In my view, good teams wins close games - it's not a knock agaisnt them. Bad teams lose close games.

Ditto for penalties and turnovers - because a team had a lot of both the prior year doesn't mean they will have a lot fewer this year, and thus will improve.

That said, I do buy the mag. But as noted it could be a lot better. Steele, being mainly a tout, just can't quite get over shouting about himself,and that distorts a lot of info.

[pokernut9999]

I bought it for the first time last week. Won +13 units 1st week. Had a lot of good info.

[ritehook]

One of the "improving" teams Steele pinpointed this year was Stanford, because they qualified on several of his "improving"/"declining" models.

He picked them in his first regular season newsletter. (If you send in for his free NFL mag you get a week or so of his newsletter as well)

And you know what happened last week when UCLA played Stanford . . .

[gridironguy]

Originally Posted by ritehook

Steele's mag is good, perhaps essential. But it could be a lot better. It's too damn wordy - who really cares, betting-wise, what a team did in 2000-04? He writes it, largely, for the pure fan, not the bettor (even tho, of course, his big bucks come from touting.)

I also question his methodogy re "improving" vs "regressing" teams. One of his criteria is close wins/losses the prior year.

In my view, good teams wins close games - it's not a knock agaisnt them. Bad teams lose close games.

Ditto for penalties and turnovers - because a team had a lot of both the prior year doesn't mean they will have a lot fewer this year, and thus will improve.

That said, I do buy the mag. But as noted it could be a lot better. Steele, being mainly a tout, just can't quite get over shouting about himself,and that distorts a lot of info.

Very nice assessment there.

He also has a habit of getting projected starters wrong. He likes to put his own VHT guys who he rated out of HS. Often times, when I turn on my TV and watch the teams play, it's a different QB, RB, or whatever, and there was no injury. It's just that Steele likes to put his guys in there as starters.

Still, he's about as good as it gets for preseason annuals. The very best thing is to watch the teams and assess them for yourself

[gridironguy]

Originally Posted by ritehook

One of the "improving" teams Steele pinpointed this year was Stanford, because they qualified on several of his "improving"/"declining" models.

He picked them in his first regular season newsletter. (If you send in for his free NFL mag you get a week or so of his newsletter as well)

And you know what happened last week when UCLA played Stanford . . .

This is just one example. If a guy predicts 10 teams will improve, and 6 of them do, that is pretty damn good

[pokernut9999]

I think previous years info is valuable. I believe in trends.

LSU 6 str avg 27 point margin and 11 of 12 vs Miss St. 45-0
Texas Tech 6 str avg 27 point margin vs SMU 49-9

Some dont buy into these things but I do till they stop.

Ala 19 str and 33 of 34 vs Vandy -3 this week I will lay the 3

[Dark Horse]

Steele's college preview is top of the line. Each year I'm amazed it has so much info for under 10 bucks. If I'd have to price it I'd put a 25 to 30 dollar sticker on it. What a steal.

[raiders72002]

Steele has to much fluff. You get more info online.

[jjgold]

newsletter ok for info, I guess just a gambling tool.

[ritehook]

Originally Posted by gridironguy

Very nice assessment there.

He also has a habit of getting projected starters wrong. He likes to put his own VHT guys who he rated out of HS. Often times, when I turn on my TV and watch the teams play, it's a different QB, RB, or whatever, and there was no injury. It's just that Steele likes to put his guys in there as starters.

Still, he's about as good as it gets for preseason annuals. The very best thing is to watch the teams and assess them for yourself

This is exactly another big prob with Steele. If you actually watch, or better, listen on a hometown radio station, you'll see that the actual starters in the opening game are often quite a bit different than the ones Phil projects in his preseason magazine. It's not due to injury, it is, as gridirionguy states, Phil wanting his VHTs to start.

You really have to do your own research. Tho I do enjoy the magazine, it fills dead time during the summer. I did like the preseason Gold Sheet during the 90s, when they came out with it AFTER the summer camp - their projected starters, being right on top of the season, were much more accurate. TGS is now a spring deal, available in July - and since they no longer have a print edition, I'm guessing they're ready to bow out of the preseason mag biz

[BuddyBear]

I like his magazine a lot. The only criticism I have is his endless discussion of positions players from 4-5 years ago. I'd say place more emphasis on the current players.

But bottom line, Phil Steele is legit and is as credible as you can be in such a slimy industry.

[PatrickSports]

I have in the past...he's murdered me. One year in the bowls, I think 99 (?) he went 4-21. Last year he hit a solid 47% in football.

He's a textbook Simple Simon, ie, "last year they had 3 returning starters and this year they have 4 so they will definitely be stronger." He analyzes EVERYTHING like that, adds them up, then chooses his side.

He also puts way too much stock in who out first downed and out gained the opponent, and if his selection lost 48-17 he'll claim he had the right side because they had more first downs. (like in the 4th quarter while the team up 42 was letting them dink and dunk, while subsequently killing the clock on themselves). His analytical abilities lack insight and make simple assumptions that will always have him equal to a coin flip.

He is very likable, and obviously works hard to accumulate alot of mostly useless knowledge and bombards you with it to claim credibility, but after following him and reading him for years it is clear he is one of those guys that just doesn't "get it." If he gambled for a living he'd be back to selling insurance (Ive heard he was an Allstate agent...no idea if thats true). Also I've heard his last name isn't Steele (thats my pornstar name, first name Rod). I've heard its Charles (by a pissed client heavy hitter that tracked him down) so that tells you something.

[onetobet]

He went 0-2 last night With the over 53- Saints/Colts And over 44 Oregon St/Cincy.

[PatrickSports]

Anyone get this during 2001 when 9/11 changed the schedule at the last minute. His newsletter didnt acknowledge any of the changes, leading to the conclusion that it is pre-written over the summer.

It must be for you to receive it on Tuesday of the week, it'd be impossible to analyze every Sat and Sun game, write the thing, print and mail to everyone in one or two days. So I think the entire thing is written over the summer and mailed out Thurs or Fri the week before...BEFORE the outcomes of the previous weeks games are even known! Yikes.

[ritehook]

I tend to agree with Patrick Sports re Phil. (Tho I still buy his annual)

It's correct that Phil never bets. A few years back he admitted the same on the old Stardust football contest radio show (where he was also quickly eliminated. On that same show Wayne Root also admitted he never bet - but of course Root is an old-fashioned, 100 % American con-man).

In 1999 or 2000 I checked Steele's W/L record at the end of that season, with Sports Monitor of Vegas (of the the two with a rep for honesty.) Phil that seasaon went 39% on his Best Bets.

His mag is good (compared to many others) but stiill much too much verbal diarrhea, too much "isn't Phil Steele great," and too many claims and rhetorical legerdemain without straight facts to back it up.

[ritehook]

During that same season Steele hit a sad 39% on Best Bets, the guy who specializes in trends and quick systems hit a whopping 29% of his Best Bets.

Who was it? From same area (Ohio) as where Steele livees

Oh, yeah, Now I remember. Marc Lawrence

[jjgold]

They are all losers and scam artists

Steele gives 2 sides to games, I got it on tape

[ritehook]

Originally Posted by jjgold

They are all losers and scam artists

Steele gives 2 sides to games, I got it on tape

Wouldn't surprise me. Bob Dunbar (a one-time competitor of Steele's, and himself a super conman tout - tho very literate) used to refer to Steele as "Opposite Sides" Steele.

[spliff]

Great buy for under $10, but I agree with many on here about the ex-player info, diarrhea, and "yay me!" statements.