Back in May, I took a look at the post-spring depth chart according to class. It was obvious even then that the 2007 Georgia team would rely on a lot of young players. The caveat back then was that the depth chart could and would change before the season, and it has. We’ve also added in the true freshmen and will count on some of them. Based on the most recent changes, here is a revised look at the depth chart according to class. The youth movement underway is even more apparent now. Over a third of the two-deep are newcomers (freshmen / redshirt freshmen / JUCO and prep transfers), and over half are underclassmen.

1st-teamers are in solid red, 2nd-teamers are highlighted in back, other scholarship players are in gray, and walk-ons are unshaded. We allow for 24 players on each unit (11 offense, 11 defense, a punter, and a placekicker) with these exceptions on the offensive line: Justin Anderson is currently listed as the backup at both guard positions, and Chris Davis is the backup center. The freshmen shaded in green are expected to redshirt (not greenshirt). I have removed Oliver, Coates, and Ian Smith.

As usual, corrections are expected, welcome, and will be made as soon as possible.

There’s a lot of hand-wringing today over the reports from last night’s scrimmage. Though the Dawgs easily beat the scout team, many are focusing on Matthew Stafford’s impatience with the energy level.

"The thing that was missing was energy, man," Stafford said. "Maybe 92,000 sitting in the seats will spark a fire under some of these guys. People are going to find out quick, young guys what it takes to play in this league. I just hope they realize it before they go out there and play."

As others have observed, he’s really taking control of this team. Whether or not the young guys, especially the offensive line, respond in time. There is a window of opportunity with a quarterback like Stafford on campus, and the Dawgs need to make the most of it.

Another bit of news from last night is Thomas Brown emerging as the starting tailback. One one hand, it’s amazing that a guy less than a year removed from a major knee injury has risen back to the top. On the other hand, you’re not surprised by anything from Brown. I admit that I expected Lumpkin to at least start the season as the starter. We’ll see both Brown and Lumpkin as well as Knowshon Moreno rotate in. Given Brown’s reputation as a blocker, one wonders if the staff is making their decision with an eye on an inexperienced offensive line. It has to be disappointing for a guy like Lumpkin who was the starter for the second half of 2006 and into the spring, but he’ll have every opportunity during his time on the field this season to make his case.

There are certainly bigger questions on the team than the three-deep tailback position, but does that mean more of the same from the tailback position this year? With the addition of Moreno, fans were expecting a step forward.

The Offense Strikes Back

The weekend started with a bang. After the defense looked strong in the first scrimmage of the preseason, the offense showed up in Friday night’s scrimmage. Quarterbacks combined for six touchdown passes, and three of the passes went for over 30 yards. Excuse my optimism over hitting the deep pass. "You know we had a lot more success offensively today than the other day," remarked Coach Richt. He credited the improvement in part to a better effort from the offensive line. "The number one unit blocked really well," he said.

Other than a few individual plays (like Geno Atkins’ 40-yard fumble return), the big news from the scrimmage is that 1) there were no serious injuries and 2) the coaches haven’t had much time to go over and make changes to the depth chart based on the scrimmage. Any changes might come early this week, though several positions are still very much up in the air.

One-headed Monster?

I can’t be the only one who’s noticed that, despite fewer carries, Knowshon Moreno has led both scrimmages in rushing yardage and YPC. Scrimmage stats might be as relevant as G-Day stats, but no one would be dismissing these stats if it were Brown or Lumpkin putting them up. The running backs only got carries in the first half of Friday’s scrimmage.

Richt made it clear though that the tailback rotation would continue. "Whether people like it or not, they’re all very talented and they all are ready to play and they’re gonna play." Meanwhile, Caleb King’s nagging hamstring injury makes his chances of redshirting greater and greater with each practice missed.

Fine Line Between Dedication and Insanity

I consider myself a pretty big fan – I think that’s obvious, right? I’ll concede there are more devoted fans. I’ll also concede that having children can and does change your priorities. But none of that should involve camping out overnight for a chance at a picture with Uga and/or Mark Richt. Ching writes,

I always enjoy the details on picture day of who showed up first for the guaranteed tickets for photos with Uga VI and Mark Richt and WHEN. This year’s Uga winner was Athens’ Joe D’Angelo, who got in line for the first of 120 guaranteed tickets at 8 p.m. Friday night (the dog’s time at the stadium was between 1 and 3 p.m. today). Jackson’s Wayne Parker started the Richt line at 4:30 this morning. He got the first of 250 Richt tickets. Demand again was pretty high. A little more than seven minutes after UGA staff began distributing the tickets at 9 a.m., they were all gone.

There are lots of reasons to attend Picture Day even on an extremely hot day like Saturday. Kids seem to love it, and the players enjoy the interaction. But there are literally dozens of better opportunities for getting a snapshot with Richt or Uga. I hope it was worth it for those gentlemen.

Man Down

Our best wishes to D.J. Shockley for a quick recovery after sustaining a knee injury on Friday night that will keep him out for the 2007 NFL season. Shockley tore his ACL and injured his MCL against Buffalo.

Spotlight on the Receivers

Everyone in the world seems to be sensitive to (or at least aware of) the issue of dropped passes. Whether you believe it’s a question of talent, coaching, scheme, or some combination of them, it’s the 800-lb. gorrila in the room when the subject of receivers comes up.

You even have other players sticking up for the receivers. Thomas Brown said,

The receivers were making plays. They’ve received a lot of criticism in last season and in the spring about not being able to catch the ball. But they’ve made a lot of great steps. They’ve been doing it all camp long in practice, making diving catches and things like that, so they’re gonna be fine.

Matthew Stafford added,

Their effort is up. Their confidence is up. That’s what you want from any position.

We’ve seen several articles now with this slant. "Massaquoi forgets the past." "Georgia receivers have something to prove." "UGA wide receivers are sticking together."

There are two ways that this kind of spotlight can affect the situation. Right now, everyone’s happy. Us vs. the world. "We’re all in it together, no matter who is catching the ball, no matter who it is thrown to, no matter who has the touchdowns," said Mikey Henderson. That’s a great attitude, and fellow senior A.J. Bryant has echoed it. If that kind of prove-everyone-wrong approach is what it takes for the receivers to step forward this year, great.

But as Mark Richt likes to say, you never really know how good a team is until it is tested by adversity. The receivers seem focused and a close-knit group now, and I hope they can keep that attitude after the first inevitable drop and the simultaneous groan of 92,000 fans. There has been a lot of self-doubt and a lack of confidence in the passing game (and, to be fair, the receivers are far from the only group affected by drops). With an emerging star in Matthew Stafford, the receivers should have the talent, experience, and the quality passes they need to have the kind of year they are talking about. All they need now is for that attitude to show up on the field.

It turns out that Kiante Tripp’s move to the offensive line isn’t the only positional shuffling going on. Ching has the details and a transcript of Richt’s press conference.

Tripp Update

I asked last night whether the move would be temporary in response to the injuries on the line, and it looks as if Tripp’s position change is more or less a permanent thing. That makes sense when you go back to the recruiting process. Tripp, as I mentioned yesterday, was rated the 9th-best offensive tackle in America in 2006 by Rivals.com. He was (is) an athletic and smart guy and also a basketball standout. The agility and leaping skills of a basketball player also made Tripp an attractive prospect at defensive end where he might be able to do some damage against less-agile offensive linemen.

As a result, he was recruited both as an offensive tackle and defensive end. Though rated higher as an offensive tackle, Tripp preferred defensive end, and Georgia promised him a chance at that position. True to their word, Tripp was a defensive end during his freshman season. An injured knee made redshirting a certainty, and he joined the competition at the defensive end this season as a redshirt freshman.

But, as Coach Richt said, Tripp "sees the opportunity" at offensive tackle and seems to have embraced it. "He was ready to move." Richt was upbeat. "It’s like getting a commitment from a top two or three tackle in the United States, so that’s pretty exciting for us." It was illustrative for Richt to contrast the position move with the case of Dale Dixson. You might have a grand plan where a player might fit in, but you can’t force a guy into a position that he just doesn’t want to play. Fortunately, Tripp was more receptive.

Richt made another, more subtle, comment about recruiting later. "I don’t know if I can talk too much about a recruiting class — I guess I could, I’m not mentioning names — but like I said, it’s like getting a signee at tackle right there." Is that a veiled comment about A.J. Harmon’s commitment to Clemson or Tyler Love’s commitment to Alabama? Georgia was in on both of those line prospects (and possibly is still recruiting Harmon as a defensive tackle).

Brandon Miller, Brandon Miller, Brandon Miller.

After a trumpeted move to middle linebacker, it seems as if Miller is back outside. Coach Richt praised Miller’s play at strongside (SAM) linebacker, but I have to be skeptical. Why? Miller was the starting SAM linebacker last season too. He lost the job midseason to Danny Verdun-Wheeler. That’s no knock on Verdun-Wheeler, but it does help to paint the picture of Miller’s prospects as an outside linebacker. Then you consider that Miller has spent the spring and summer to this point working in the middle (at a position where Coach Richt called him "the key to the defense"), and you have to wonder where the improvement has come from to make the SAM linebacker outlook that much better. Richt stated that Miller is "just comfortable there (at SAM)," but that doesn’t necessarily mean that he’ll be productive.

Jarius Wynn

Wynn, according to Rodney Garner, was "probably the most highly recruited" of Georgia’s three signees from Georgia Military. He was considered a possible impact player at a questionable defensive end position. There was a question about Wynn possibly moving inside to defensive tackle. Garner used the Phrase of the Week, "cross-training", to explain that Wynn was indeed working some inside, but he gave no indication that it was a permanent move. Garner went on to explain the similarities between the end and tackle (5 and 3) positions where Wynn was cross-training.

The 2007 Bulldogs have a lot of questions to answer, but the offensive line and linebacker positions have been at the top of the list from the beginning. On the offensive line, the issues are experience and depth. At linebacker, the Dawgs are replacing all three starters and a ball-hawking playmaker in Tony Taylor. It’s not a surprise that those two positions highlight the reports from Saturday’s first scrimmage. Reading into a scrimmage this early is about as useful as paying attention to the scores of preseason NFL games. We dwell on the areas that get attention in the recaps and questions, but they don’t always capture everything that went on in the scrimmage. So we’ll avoid getting too picky at this stage and look at these two general areas of concern.

Offensive Line

Injured linemen Haverkamp and Adams take in Monday morning’s practice Photo: UGASports.com

Injuries were the story along the offensive line. Though no injuries seem to be long-term, they still come at a time when the unit is trying to build cohesiveness and familiarity. The lost practice time from even minor injuries can be frustrating. "There won’t be any group of five working together this week, not all week, maybe as early as Wednesday, I don’t know. I can’t even predict," explained Coach Richt after the scrimmage. With all of that uncertainty up front, it’s hard to expect the offense as a whole to run smoothly.

Starters Chester Adams and Scott Haverkamp are both sidelined with ankle injuries, and reserve Tanner Strickland joined them on the injury list. Chris Little has a hurt wrist, but he’s out of shape and unlikely to play this year anyway. The result was a bit of chaos along the line. Freshman Clint Boling was forced to play with the first team at tackle. Coach Bobo’s comment that "(Boling)’s all we’ve got" is hardly an endorsement of the true freshman, but but it’s to Boling’s credit that he has done well enough in such a short time to impress the coaches to move up to the first team as Adams recovers.

It was kind of under the radar that despite the OL woes Stafford was able to complete over 60% of his passes, Moreno was able to rush for 7+ YPC, and the offense was able to have some success in goal line situations. We focus on the critical and even tend to be alarmist about the line, but there were some good things happening.

Linebacker

Things are a bit different at linebacker. Injuries aren’t the concern here. Personnel and positions are. The phrase of the weekend was "cross-training." It’s a useful concept where players at similar positions (such as linebacker) swap positions to improve depth and versatility across the unit. Danny Verdun-Wheeler was a master of this training and was at one point considered the top backup for all three linebacker positions before he moved into a starting role during the 2006 season.

That’s fine, but here’s the thing: Brandon Miller already has experience not just practicing but starting at outside linebacker. Based on Miller’s move to the interior this year, Coach Richt has said, "he’s the key to our whole defense." With all that at stake, wouldn’t the first objective be to get Miller as much work as possible at his new position? About a week ago, Richt called Miller "the key to our whole defense." Now we don’t even know how the linebackers will line up. "By the time the second, third scrimmage rolls around, we’ll know how to line them up," Richt said following Saturday’s scrimmage. "I would say it’s not etched in stone right now how we’ll line up at linebacker."

That’s not cross-training. That’s still an audition. Cross-training is a luxury you have only after the starters are certain and competent in their primary roles. If we don’t know how the linebackers will line up yet in the first place, worrying about cross-training at this point is very much cart-before-the-horse stuff.

Miscellaneous

• With the departure of Paul Oliver, who made his NFL debut last night, the cornerback battle is an area of interest. Prince Miller is getting first-team work as Bryan Evans nurses a hamstring injury, and Thomas Flowers is giving Asher Allen all he wants at the other position. These are all talented guys, and the competition is very healthy.
• The numbers don’t quite add up. In the limited stats released from the scrimmage, the quarterbacks were credited with a combined 22 completions. Yet only 13 receptions were recorded. Henderson and Massaquoi didn’t land a reception between them?

Once again we look at some of the more popular search keywords people are using to get here:

• "shaun chapas": Chapas is a redshirt freshman fullback from Jacksonville. He and Fred Munzenmaier are in the mix behind established starter Brannan Southerland. You never know how much time a reserve fullback will see, but I imagine that we’ll see Chapas and/or Munzenmaier on the field this year, especially in jumbo or "wham" situations.
• "georgia football suspensions": I had a recent summary of the off-season suspensions, but we’ve since added two more to the list. Tripp Chandler and Blake Barnes each received one-game suspensions. With the offseason departures of Akeem Hebron, Ian Smith, and Seth Watts, Chandler and Barnes are the only active players who will miss the first game.
• "ian smith uga football": We learned before practice began last weekend that Smith had decided to leave the Georgia football program for "medical reasons". We don’t know if those medical reasons are related to Smith’s two alcohol-related arrests, but we hope that Smith got or is getting whatever help he needs.
• "uga spying va tech": This was a nice distraction from the first weekend of practice. Frank Beamer never came right out and claimed that Georgia cheated, but his message was clear enough. Coach Richt of course denied any spying and even offered some empathy for coaches who are concerned with leaks from practices. I thought about this issue when photos and descriptions of formations from Arkansas practices hit the Web earlier this week. At what point does fan interest (and fan ego) become a disadvantage to our teams?
• "vance cuff": The saga of Vance Cuff ended last week when the NCAA granted Cuff a waiver, essentially overruling an NCAA Clearinghouse decision concerning one of Cuff’s core high school classes. With the waiver, he is eligible by NCAA standards and has enrolled at Georgia. The freshman cornerback is now practicing with the team (and will likely redshirt).

The last meta-topic we’ll touch on before this season starts is the ultra-subjective group of "elite" or "national power" teams. Stewart Mandel waded into this territory last week and fumbled around, and he really whiffed with his "what does someone in Montana think?" attempt this week.

Many getting involved in this discussion are dwelling, like Mandel, on the related but different question of being nationally recognized. Yes, everyone knows Herschel Walker. Uga is an icon. "Between the Hedges" means something to most knowledgeable football fans. The "G" is sharp and distinctive. None of that makes Georgia a national power on the football field. A powerful brand? Sure..probably even in Montana.

The question of actual power has to be fluid and kept in the current context because it wanes and waxes. History is full of teams and individuals that were once powerful and relevant but aren’t any longer. How a team has done since 1976 doesn’t really have any relevance to me. Power, though not a one-season thing, is still pretty short-term. Personally, I think we use the "elite" label a little too loosely in an everybody-gets-a-trophy kind of way. There are only a handful of programs each season who belong in the national title picture, and it doesn’t make sense to continually be on the outside of that picture and still be considered a national power.

Some will use historical criteria. Others prefer averaging wins over a reasonable period. Championships matter more to some. A coast-to-coast schedule impresses others. I think it’s much simpler and can be boiled down to three guidelines:

• You must show some level of consistency. FSU set the bar in the 1990s. One phenomenal season doesn’t make you a power.
• You should be considered at least peripherally in some recent national title discussions. Winning it really helps.
• You cannot consider yourself a "power", especially in the national sense, when you’re under someone’s thumb.

Georgia fans will recognize right away that I played the Florida card. It’s plain silly to talk about national power status when you’re on the wrong side of such a one-sided series. That means you too, Alabama. It also held a team like Texas up before Vince Young came along. It held Ohio State up under John Cooper. This point alone settles Georgia’s "national power" question for me, but we’ll look at the other guidelines anyway.

Has Georgia’s success been consistent? Last season was the first year since 2001 in which the Dawgs didn’t win at least 10 games. Not bad. But that ten win threshold, particularly in the 12-game era, still means at least two losses per season. They’ve won three divisional and two major conference titles over the same span and haven’t gone more than a single season without a trip to the conference championship game. That’s outstanding in a conference like the SEC. By itself, Georgia’s consistency seems enough to merit national power recognition.

Georgia hasn’t been a part of the national title discussion since 2002. Yes, they started 2004 ranked #3. That faded after a scare at South Carolina and a loss to Tennessee. It was nearly impossible to get above the noise of Southern Cal and Texas in 2005, and Georgia’s chances ended when D.J. Shockley crumpled to the turf against Arkansas. Georgia has certainly been relevant over that time and probably competitive with any team, but it’s hard to make the case that they belonged among the teams mentioned as title contenders.

The Bulldogs aren’t far from national power status. 2007 is very important in terms of consistency- they cannot slide lower than the 9-win total of last season. The national title discussion is already crystallizing around a handful of teams – LSU, Southern Cal, and Michigan with teams like Texas, Florida, and your choice of Big East teams on the periphery. Most importantly, the Dawgs must find a way soon to turn the Florida series. I don’t mean that Georgia must begin dominating the series. Just get it competitive again.

If you forced me to stick to these criteria to say who the elite teams are in college football, here we go: Southern Cal. LSU. Texas. Ohio State. Florida depends upon the consistency they show this year. Maybe Oklahoma (waning?). That’s it. No Notre Dame. No Tennessee. No Georgia. No Cal. Michigan? You’re close, but work on the consistency thing and on beating Ohio State.

There’s no shame to be where Georgia is right now. Most programs would kill for it. Let’s just not call it what it isn’t. Deep down, we know that there is a next step that Georgia has yet to take.

Every season brings its share of new faces, but for some reason this year’s Georgia team seems to have more than usual. With so much of the two-deep sophomores or younger, it’s likely that there are several 2007 contributors we haven’t seen much of – if at all.

It’s a good time to become familiar with some of the names we’ll be hearing about in the next couple of weeks. This is by no means an exhaustive breakdown of the entire team, but these are several guys who could be thrust from obscurity into key roles this season.

Offense

• Tailback Knowshon Moreno (RFr.): If there’s a newcomer who needs no introduction, it’s Moreno. The New Jersey native had a strong year of practice and turned heads at G-Day. Though the running back depth chart seems solid with Lumpkin and Brown returning, Moreno will push for carries.
• Offensive tackle Trinton Sturdivant (Fr.): Some are calling him one of the keys to the season, and that’s an awful lot to put on a true freshman’s broad shoulders. But the job of protecting Matthew Stafford from the important left tackle position will likely fall to Sturdivant.
• Offensive guard Scott Haverkamp (Jr.): Haverkamp is another newcomer to the program (via JUCO) who might find himself in a starting role. He chose Georgia over Arizona State, Illinois, and also had interest from FSU.
• Offensive guard Chris Davis (RFr.): Davis will be new on the field, but he at least has a year in the program. That experience gives him the edge over several of the other young linemen.
• Tight end Tripp Chandler (Jr.): Chandler takes over the legacy of Georgia tight ends from Martrez Milner. Chandler had 2 receptions for 37 yards and a touchdown last season. His first career catch was memorable: he caught a 21-yard touchdown pass in traffic on a 4th-and-1 play against Mississippi State. Chandler will be suspended for the first game of the season, so Coleman Watson and NaDerris Ward will get an opportunity.

Defense

• Defensive end Marcus Howard (Sr.): Howard is hardly a newcomer, but it couldn’t be easy to make a splash alongside former defensive ends Moses and Johnson. Howard began his career at linebacker but has since made the move to the line. He might still be considered undersized at 235 lbs., but he has speed and strength to compensate. It’s true that Howard might be used situationally, but that will depend on the progress of the younger ends.
• Defensive end Roderick Battle (So.): Battle is the other likely starter at defensive end. He, too, is a little undersized for the typical SEC defensive end. JUCO transfer Jarius Wynn could push Battle before long.
• Defensive tackle Geno Atkins (So.): Atkins saw limited time as a true freshman last season, but he’ll be placed in a much larger role this year as a possible starter on the defensive front. Sophomore Kade Weston and JUCO transfer Corey Irvin will compete here.
• Linebacker Akeem Dent (RFr.): Though Dewberry, Miller, and Ellerbe seem established as the starting linebackers, Dent might be the reserve most ready to step in if necessary. I see him in a "Danny Verdun-Wheeler" role where he might be the first off the bench at any linebacker position.
• Safety C.J. Byrd (Jr.): Byrd is a known name to more serious observers of the team. He has contributed for several seasons on special teams and saw more time at safety last season. He’ll step in as a starter this year replacing Tra Battle.
• Safety Reshad Jones (RFr.): Everyone saw Jones at G-Day, so he’s hardly a secret anymore. The only question will be finding a spot and playing time for this playmaker.

Which other new faces will you be watching during the preseason?

The Senator has some thoughtful posts up in the past couple of days about preseason polls and their effect on the postseason.

I looked at the story of Auburn 2004 myself last month (more from a scheduling perspective) and came to a similar conclusion but with one key difference: Auburn’s problems started long before the preseason polls. I believe that the mess left after the 2003 BCS established default 2004 contenders from the second that the final whistle blew. The 2004 preseason polls were just the culmination of the controversy and eight months of debate.

We see a similar thing already happening this season. Even before any official preseason polls have been released, those who help to guide the discussion are already setting the table for a Southern Cal – LSU national title game. It’s theirs to lose.

I don’t disagree with the merit and logic of delaying official polls. It’s clear that "name" programs get the benefit of the doubt. I do think though that delaying polls runs contrary to the nature of a football fan. We are constantly measuring ourselves against our rivals and opponents in everything from recruiting to scheduling. Many of the preseason polls included in Stassen’s analysis do nothing but drive magazine sales. If an Auburn fan can hold something over the head of an Alabama fan, it doesn’t matter how premature, inaccurate, or trivial the poll is. Mascots? Been there. Stadiums? Done that. Coaches? Finebaum stirs that pot every summer.

Will that change if official polls are delayed? I don’t think so. Fans will still support the preseason magazine industry, and the rankings are the core of that business. I even suspect that the official polls themselves wouldn’t change much. Why? Because, as the Senator reminds us, people who vote in polls are lazy. How true that is. What that means in terms of releasing polls later in the season is that the pollsters will "cheat". The groupthink would be established over the summer by the pundits and the magazines, and no observer of the game can remain untainted. Why take the time to pour over a month of football when Phil Steele has done all of the work for you? Take the preseason consensus, adjust for the losses over the first month of the season, and you’re done. For that reason, I don’t expect that any poll released for the first time in October would be much different than the polls we already see in the fifth and sixth week of the season.

While the flaw the Senator points out is very real, I’m not so sure that delaying polls would provide any real changes.

The Georgia-Florida game as-is still has at least three years left. All it took was a mention from Coach Richt to get opinions flying again on the subject. Nearly every Georgia fan has a pretty strong opinion on the issue, and variations on alternatives are about as numerous as playoff proposals. As we get closer to the decision, just think how much more heated this discussion will become.

I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that any change to the Georgia-Florida game, especially if initiated by the Georgia side, will have as divisive an effect as the Dooley-Adams flap of 2003.

Last night’s Atlanta Bulldog Club meeting was the typical preseason pep rally, but the nagging topic of Florida naturally came up.

Coach Richt didn’t back down to the challenge and matter-of-factly stated that the Gators stood in the way of Georgia’s goals. "If we are going to win an SEC East title, and that is our plan – to win it, we are going to have to beat them," he explained. "If they are in the way, then so be it." That sounded great until the topic of the venue came up.

"Do I truly think it is a neutral site?" Richt said. "No, I don’t. That doesn’t feel very neutral to me. If you want to have a neutral game, let’s have a neutral game in Atlanta. I would not be against rotating the thing around."

Forget about defending the tradition of the Cocktail Party for a second. We’ve got a bigger problem.

Florida is a tough enough opponent without things like the location becoming a mental block for the head coach. In a game of this magnitude with not only a rivalry but often an SEC East title on the line, that’s not good news. When the Top Dawg gets off the plane thinking, "neutral my left toe," you’re at a disadvantage before the game is ever played. The game has been decided by a touchdown or less in the past five meetings, so you can appreciate the significance of the mental advantage when two pretty evenly-matched quality teams play.

I don’t think it’s a reach to suggest that this mental block has manifested itself in Georgia’s offensive performances in Jacksonville. For all of the attention paid to Spurrier and Meyer and their offenses, Georgia’s biggest impediment in Jacksonville has more often than not been on the other side of the ball. In Richt’s six games against Florida, the Dawgs have scored 10, 13, 13, 31, 10, and 14 points against the Gators. It hasn’t exactly taken Norm Chow on the other sideline to beat those meager point totals, and it’s not an accident that Georgia won in the only year in which they broke 20 points. Mike Bobo was under center for a big loss and a big win in Jacksonville, and we’ll see if his promotion to coordinator can do anything to snap Georgia out of this funk on offense.

Maybe I’m wrong for dwelling on this point on a night where Richt confidently praised his quarterback and said "I don’t think we are too far away" from bringing a national title to Athens. It’s just that any national title run in the near future is going to go through Jacksonville. The Dawgs need a dose of that same mental toughness that they bring to Columbia, Knoxville, and Auburn, and dwelling on the neutrality of the site isn’t a positive first step towards building that attitude.

Richt is resigned to play the game in Jacksonville for the time being, "Whatever Damon says goes. The bottom line is we have got to win the game." That conclusion, while true, doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence when we’re reluctant to be there in the first place.

One of the themes coming out of the Georgia camp from SEC Media Days was the relative absence of Bulldogs in preseason media honors. As Ching wrote,

The Bulldogs were shut out of the first-team balloting for the first time since the Media Days event started in 1992. Only two Georgia players – place-kicker Brandon Coutu and linebacker Brandon Miller – earned second-team honors, tying Georgia with Mississippi State and Ole Miss for the fewest all-conference players in the league.

Georgia was the only SEC team without a first-team player. Sounds pretty ominous, right? Yet the same media also picked the Dawgs to finish third in the tough SEC East, and they were a lot closer in the voting to second place Tennessee than they were to fourth place South Carolina. That apparent incongruity could mean any or all of these:

• The press is going out on a limb that a proven coach like Mark Richt will put a good team together despite the lack of stars.
• The press believes that the Dawgs have a lot of above-average-but-not-quite-great players.
• The press acknowledges that Georgia doesn’t have many all-SEC players based on previous production, but they expect a few to emerge this year.
• Georgia will be hurt by their lack of star power, but the press isn’t ready yet to move teams like South Carolina or Kentucky into the top half of the division.

Take your pick – you could make a case for any of them. If you ask Coach Richt, the answer might be the third option. "Whether we rise or not is the big question,” he admitted at Media Days. “But I believe in this team. I think we’ve got a chance to do as well as any team that we’ve had since we’ve been here.”

The Dawgs are facing a double-whammy: not many teams have fewer returning starters, and those returning starters are either young or have had average production to this point. Florida, on the other hand, has only eight returning starters, but six of their key contributors are on the preseason all-SEC team. To illustrate the point, think back to 2003. Georgia’s offensive line was decimated after 2002 and gave up over 40 sacks in 2003. At least the Dawgs had a stout defense with proven playmakers on which to lean. In 2007, Georgia has no such glaring strength to carry the team. Instead of Pollack, Davis, Thurman, and Jones, the 2007 Dawgs will lean on guys like Stafford, Massaquoi, Lumpkin, Sturdivant, Owens, Miller, and Johnson.

Those guys are hardly stiffs, but almost all have inexperience to overcome or have spent careers out of the spotlight to this point. Richt’s "whether we rise" question hits the story of the 2007 season dead on. Some talented guys will be thrust into key roles by necessity, and Georgia’s fortunes will turn on their ability to turn preseason anonymity into postseason glory.

It’s not necessarily a good feeling to look at the Georgia wide receiver depth chart and alternate between "he’s a senior now?" and "he’s still on the team?"

When we last left the receivers: It wasn’t exactly a banner year for Georgia wide receivers. Blame whatever you like – coaching, talent, new quarterbacks, or the granite bulldog – Georgia receivers had a grand total of four touchdowns last year. Four. Mohamed Massaquoi and Mario Raley had two apiece, and no other Georgia receiver found the end zone. You can point to a diverse offense that spread the scoring to tight ends and even fullbacks, but only Ole Miss and Mississippi State had fewer receiving touchdowns last year. The stigma of drops and a lack of big plays continued to haunt the position.

What’s happened since: The biggest news at the receiver position is the return of two upperclassmen from injury. Sean Bailey tore his knee after a two touchdown performance in the 2005 SEC Championship game and missed the entire 2006 season. Demiko Goodman was finally starting to turn it on late last year before suffering a season-ending knee injury at Kentucky. Senior T.J. Gartrell is also back after missing 2006 with a torn patella tendon. Gartrell has yet to find his place, but as a senior he could have a limited but productive role similar to Raley last year. Mikey Henderson stood out in spring – enough to rocket past most others on the depth chart and challenge for a starting spot.

What to look for in preseason practice: The Dawgs have a lot of upperclassmen receivers, and at times you want to make all of them and none of them a starter. The depth chart and rotation is very much up for grabs. Massaquoi is the most likely starter, but anything could happen after that. Will Bailey step back into a prominent role? Goodman was pushing the starters before his injury last season; will he pick back up at that level?

You also have the question of some veterans who are hanging around, occasionally making plays but never quite breaking through. We’ve touched on Gartrell. A.J. Bryant came into the program as the #1-rated "athlete" in the nation, but his success at receiver has been spotty and slowed by injuries. Kenneth Harris likewise has had his moments but has not been a consistent standout. You’d like for one of these upperclassmen, especially Bryant, to make a move forward before their eligibility runs out.

There are also a group of younger guys looking for playing time. Kris Durham made a name for himself with several clutch catches as a true freshman. Michael Moore also looked decent in his first season. Tony Wilson looks to join the fray this year after being named Most Improved Receiver in spring practice.

While the receiver class of 2008 is already building hype, we forget that Georgia signed two good receivers last February. Israel Troupe was probably the best receiver in the state and will play for Georgia despite being selected in the 2007 Major League Baseball draft. Walter Hill is a football/basketball star recruited for both sports. At 6’4", he’ll be a tall talent with great leaping ability. Last year Durham made an impact as a true freshman. Unless there is improvement from the upperclassmen, Troupe and/or Hill could likewise see time in 2007.

Concerns? Optimism? Challenges? With so many names listed above, you’d think that Georgia has more than enough depth to field a decent or even above-average receiving corps. So far, the production hasn’t matched the recruiting hype. Massaquoi began to shake off his sophomore slump in the Tech game, and that must continue. The opportunity is there for any receiver ready to step out of the shadows. The good news is that Georgia’s receivers have one of the best passers in the league under center. The stability at the quarterback position should help a great deal.

Since the departure of Gibson and Brown in 2004, the Georgia receiver position has been largely anonymous. Massaquoi emerged quickly as a fan favorite, but the praise hasn’t resonated far beyond Athens. With the window of opportunity in the Matthew Stafford era entering its prime, the receivers must step up to keep up.

There’s an interesting discussion going on about the influence of ESPN in the college football world. We’ll pick it up with Kyle’s post here and then see responses here and here. Interesting stuff, mostly.

I have to admit that it’s good sport to watch the nascent sports blogosphere interact with the sports media. I can understand how the blogs which really began to hit their stride two years ago think that this is new ground, but it’s not. The first generation of online writers in the mid-1990s also butted heads with more traditional media, and we saw much of the same friction. If there’s a difference it’s in the competitive marketplace. Print journalism was (and still is) competing directly with a lot of these online sites. Innovations we take for granted on modern newspaper Web sites such as multiple daily updates, deeper online photo galleries, and even comments and discussion spaces were pioneered first online and adopted by print media in the fight for eyeballs. Inch-deep coverage wasn’t going to cut it as the predecessors of Rivals.com and Scout.com changed the marketplace.

Blogs have taken the interaction to a more granular individual level. Smarter journalists are jumping in with both feet and have built their own personal brands. Newspapers like the AJC have beat blogs with more frequent, brief, and informal updates from their journalists on the news beats. Several professional pundits have embraced the interaction and earned places as authorities and discussion leaders. The competition here has to do with insight, interesting ideas, and access. Unless Ivan Maisel offers compelling content, why read him instead of an interesting blog? We’re all just writers hoping that someone will find our content worth reading. Some do it better than others, and some stake their livelihoods on it.

With ESPN television, it’s a bit of a different story. There simply isn’t the competitive pressure. We have to differentiate between the ESPN punditry and the network itself. The pundits, from Simmons to Schlabach and on down, face the same competition in the marketplace of ideas as any other "print" journalist. But in terms of SportsCenter or Gameday or live coverage of games themselves, the competition (if any) comes from CBS, FOX, and other networks, not from Deadspin or DawgsOnline. ESPN Gameday might be cheesy, overdo the Virginia Tech story, or go to the wrong game. Who cares? We’ll watch anyway. Eyeballs and ratings – not well-crafted blog missives – are what drives ESPN. When someone carries more games or provides a better alternative to Gameday, the competition will tell the tale.

We complain about the influence of ESPN in college football, but what we might have seen is the Law of Unintended Consequences at work after 20 years.

Prior to 1984, the NCAA had strict control over which schools appeared on television:

Under the old NCAA plan, which had been in effect since 1952, teams were limited to six appearances during two seasons.

Schools which attempted to organize their own deals were threatened with banishment from the organization, and it wasn’t until Georgia and Oklahoma successfully sued the NCAA in that landmark 1984 case that things began to change. The CFA replaced the NCAA as the distributor of television coverage, but even that proved too restrictive for the membership. The moves by Notre Dame (NBC) and the SEC (CBS) in the early 1990s brought control of television deals down to the conference and even the individual team level.

But while NBC and CBS settled on those valuable broadcast rights, ESPN attacked with breadth. So CBS has the best SEC game of the week; ESPN will take the second-best…and the fourth-best. It’ll also add another game on ESPN2. They might even convince a couple of SEC teams to play on Thursday night. Combine that with the national and regional reach of ABC, and you have quite a network. NBC will have their Notre Dame game, CBS will have one or two games, but there’s a lot of action left over and a lot of demand for college football. Spread it beyond Saturdays, and there are even more opportunities to broadcast games with programs willing to sacrifice the tradition of Saturday afternoon for national exposure.

Think about what some of this additional coverage has meant to the game. Back in the days of few networks and NCAA limits on television appearances, would stories like Boise State or Rutgers ever catch on? Would anyone have seen all but a glimpse or two of the West Virginia backfield? It’s likely that a displaced fan in Oregon can somehow catch the UConn-Pittsburgh game. Through broadcast networks and pay-per-view, almost every Georgia game is available on television. Were such things even imaginable 25 years ago?

Increased coverage has done its part to make things more democratic. With more and more games showing up on television, there are fewer and fewer excuses for pollsters and the punditry to be provincial. Even more, it’s easier and easier for the college football fan to catch the BS and have their own informed opinions about the national landscape.

This widespread availability of games has come with a cost, and obviously networks are not bringing us more games out of altruism. Without the oversight and restraint of the NCAA or even the CFA, television networks can dangle some pretty juicy plums in front of conferences. Teams, particularly those mid-level programs who will do anything for a little more exposure, have begun playing on all days of the week. It’s hard for me as a fan of a program with plenty of exposure and cash to criticize this development, but I wouldn’t like my team taking a spot in one of those games.

There is a concern that ESPN is crossing lines in brokering out of conference games. Arranging games is nothing new. It’s how college football’s most cherished tradition and most valuable brand came to be. The Senator is nervous (with good reason) that the media conglomerate might take a greater role in the evolution of the college football postseason, yet we hold on to a postseason where matchups are already brokered well in advance by conferences and local chambers of commerce.

College football has brought a lot of the current state of affairs on itself. The 1984 decision gave greater negotiating power to teams and conferences, but it also transfered power from the NCAA to the networks. Some suggest that we’d have the same breadth of televised games regardless due to the growth of cable and satellite television, but I have to think that at some point the NCAA would have put a stop to things like Friday night college football. It could be argued that such limits would be to the detriment of smaller programs, but that’s a moot point; the CFA ship has sailed a long time ago.

We also fret over ESPN crossing over the news/entertainment line, but that’s not as big of an issue with me. I rarely rely on ESPN as a news organization. I never watch EOE productions. I watch sports. If ESPN has too much influence, it’s the tradeoff we make by giving media opinion such a prominent role in college football’s ultimate prizes. Again, media influence is hardly a new development. In recognition of that long-standing fact, ESPN and the AP withdrew from their participation in the BCS.

So what are we left with? A self-promoting media organization that brings us dozens of good college football games. Of course they have some awful commentators and analysts; that’s kind of unavoidable anywhere these days. I’ve had my criticisms of the coverage before, but it’s because I want a better product to watch and not because ESPN/ABC is leading us all down the path to prepackaged hell. I will close with this: with the NCAA more or less hands-off when it comes to the college football postseason, someone else will guide the process. The networks and their sponsors already have a large role in the BCS, and it shouldn’t surprise anyone to see them at the forefront of future changes.

Will Lumpkin answer the call? Photo: UGASports.com

With just a couple of weeks before the start of preseason practice, it’s time to leave the offseason blog parlor games for a moment and focus back on the sport itself. We’ll go position-by-position through the Georgia team, recap the current status of things, and then look ahead to some questions that need answers before the season begins. We’ll start with the running backs.

When we last left the running backs: The "three-headed monster" took its lumps and was down a few heads by March. Danny Ware decided to try his luck in the NFL. Thomas Brown’s 2006 season ended abruptly with a knee injury against Vanderbilt. Kregg Lumpkin went into spring as the only returning tailback with significant game experience. At fullback, there was no doubt about Brannan Southerland’s firm grasp on the position.

What’s happened since: Lumpkin held on to the starting role during spring, but one story from spring practice was the emergence of redshirt freshman Knowshon Moreno. Moreno poured kerosene on the fire at the G-Day game with some impressive runs. Though many expected (or hoped) that Thomas Brown would use a redshirt season to completely recover from his knee injury, Brown has been cleared and will try to play in 2007. As he works his way back into the mix, Brown will have to compete with Lumpkin as well as some younger talent for carries. Redshirt freshmen fullbacks Shaun Chapas and Fred Munzenmaier had good springs, but neither established himself as a clear backup to Southerland. Last year’s utility fullback, Tripp Taylor, moved to the defensive line.

Moreno sure looks ready. Photo: UGASports.com

What to look for in preseason practice: The Dawgs have another potential logjam at tailback. Lumpkin is the incumbent starter, but he’ll be pushed by the return of Brown and two newcomers. Moreno will also earn carries. The wildcard will be the arrival of true freshman phenom Caleb King. King doesn’t intend to redshirt, but few freshman really do until reality sets in sometime in August. But King has been mentioned as a possible first-year contributor throughout the recruiting process, and he’ll join the team completely recovered from a leg injury that ended his high school career last fall. Even if King doesn’t rocket to the top of the tailback depth chart right away, he might be versatile enough to see time as a receiver out of the backfield (think Tyson Browning – only better and with hopefully more plays than just the screen pass).

In a much less-hyped area, will Chapas or Munzenmaier make a move toward the backup fullback position? The days of capable but walk-on fullbacks like Wall and Thomas are gone. Georgia has not one, not two, but three scholarship fullbacks. Will the position take a slightly higher profile? There are already the inevitable but premature calls to move one of the freshmen to linebacker.

Concerns? Optimism? Challenges? I’ve said before that the appearance of a glut of tailbacks isn’t typically a good thing. You want a standout, and Georgia still doesn’t have one. You’ve heard this every summer since 2003, but this year’s crop of tailbacks seems even more talented than the last, so will a clear starter emerge?

Few running games can excel without quality blocking, and Georgia’s new offensive line coach and inexperienced line will have a big say in the production from the Georgia running game. With a depth chart to sort out and some creative blocking challenges, how will the running game be used in offensive coordinator Mike Bobo’s 2007 offense?