'Contenders' are not a Top 16; allow me to explain

	Chris Leak and the Gators could finish in the Top 10, but a brutal schedule may take them out of the national-championship picture. Bill Frakes/SI
	MAILBAG Submit a question or an opinion to Stewart. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

When you come up with a list of 16 national-title "contenders" that includes South Carolina but not Texas, you figure you're going to get your share of confused and angry e-mails.

Despite making every effort in Tuesday's package to explain the "Great Wide Open" concept -- devoting a page of analysis to each included team and a separate story detailing the reasons why the Longhorns and others were left off -- I knew going in that some people wouldn't bother to read beyond the headlines, and that others would read every word but still be ticked off. And that's OK. Because now I can use this week's Mailbag to clarify any confusion.

Where is Florida in this top 16? They have a better chance than half the teams on the list.
-- Sean Lyon, Ithaca, N.Y.

Ah, but it's not a "top 16," Sean. We didn't set out to regurgitate the preseason coaches' poll. Anybody could do that. The point of the "Great Wide Open" feature was to take a different look. With so much uncertainty this season among every major contender -- the preseason No. 1 team, Ohio State, has nine new starters on defense, for crying out loud -- this year's national champion could emerge from nearly anywhere. What we did was identify 16 teams that, if certain things were to fall into place, could theoretically be that team, knowing full well that some of them could just as easily go in the other direction and wind up 7-6. As befits the theme, we wanted to include a mix of both obvious and under-the-radar candidates.

Do I think Florida is one of the top 16 teams in the country? Of course I do. Probably Top 10. But as you know, you can finish in the Top 10 and still not contend for a national title. In the Gators' case, we felt that even if they successfully resolve their biggest questions (the offensive line, running game, cornerbacks, etc.), they still won't be able to survive such a brutal schedule with their national championship hopes in tact.

You don't think it's a bit of a stretch to include the likes of Clemson, Georgia Tech, Nebraska, South Carolina and Utah on the so-called "contenders" list? How in your right mind can you place those second-tier programs above the defending national champions?
-- Jeff, Conroe, Texas

Of course it's a stretch -- but no more so than if, say, we had compiled a list like this prior to the 2000 season and included then-unheralded Oklahoma. Or if we'd put LSU, coming off an 8-5 season and a Cotton Bowl trashing by Texas, on the 2003 preseason list. The point is to expand your horizons beyond the traditional Top 10, because it's entirely possible that this year's national champion is currently buried closer to 20th.

As for Texas, I think we're all in agreement that the Longhorns are still one of the best teams in the country. But to repeat as national champions, they'd have to buck all conventional logic (and several decades of history) and do so while starting a freshman quarterback. All the teams on this list have question marks, but in most cases they're things -- a questionable secondary, a mediocre running game -- that can be improved from one season to the next. A freshman quarterback, on the other hand, can't get a year older. As we've seen, freshman QBs are usually inconsistent and mistake-prone, and that's not in the recipe for a national title. That doesn't mean the 'Horns won't finish higher than many of the teams on this list -- they just won't finish No. 1.