I have to agree with Kottke that YouTube sucks for sports highlights. Don’t get me wrong; I’m grateful for what’s out there and have spent hours looking at clips. It just seems like we’re where we were during the mid-1990s with internet audio. We were just so overjoyed to get something over our speakers that it didn’t matter if it sounded tinny, distorted, and dropped off every few minutes. YouTube is good enough to get the point across and show the red blob scoring against the orange-ish blob.

It’s especially bad with prospect videos, since so much of them are low-quality to begin with before you compress the hell out of them for YouTube. I was looking at the A.J. Green video that pwd had the other day and could barely follow the plays. And I have better than 20-20 vision.

So what’s next? The success of YouTube is obviously not due to the quality of the videos. It’s the simplicity of viewing, sharing, and embedding videos. That makes for an instantly viral site that has built up a good enough community around its brand to fend off knock-offs. The acquisition by Google doesn’t hurt either. Ideally, we’d want the ease of watching and sharing a YouTube video with HD quality which loads and streams nearly seamlessly. And a pony.

We’re still far away from that day both in terms of Internet bandwidth and client processing power – cable companies have enough issues just delivering their TV signals. There are services coming like Joost which are streaming video at higher qualities, but people can’t upload to them. Then there are the issues of ownership. Broadcasters might not care if some ultra-low quality clip of a game shows up on YouTube. But a service that offers HD-quality highlights and game clips might run into the "express written consent" folks.

On the eve of Andy Landers entering the women’s basketball Hall of Fame later this month, his staff is facing some serious turnover. Assistant Brenda Hill resigned to take a local high school job which would keep her off the recruiting trail and at home with her daughters. Now we learn of another departure.

The ABH today confirms a rumor that I had heard about assistant coach Katie Gilbert not returning next season. The report claims that her contract was not renewed, and we all know what that means.

Though I don’t claim to have any day-to-day insights on the program, this move really stinks on the surface. It’s one thing for a coach to move on as Hill did, but it’s another for one to be let go. Gilbert had two primary responsibilities: scouting/preparation and guard play. From what I had seen in pregame scouting reports and shootarounds, she was more than competent at scouting and preparing the team for each opponent. Guard play has carried the team for the past several years; this most recent backcourt produced a WNBA draft pick and the SEC Freshman of the Year. Not bad.

Again, there might have been something behind the scenes that led the athletic department not to renew her contract, but from the stands it didn’t seem to be performance-related. Was the change “suggested” to Landers by Carla Green Williams or Damon Evans? It’s true that the program has stagnated recently and slipped to “only” a Sweet 16 program. It’s now been eight seasons since the last Final Four appearance. Recruiting was also getting scrutiny. In such situations, assistants are often leaned on and asked to do more. Gilbert might have had other priorities and resisted additional responsibilities or demands on her time. That’s her right, but it can also create an incompatibility with the objectives of the program. Perhaps such a drastic shakeup of the staff was necessary to give the program the kick it needs.

The reaction from the boosters will be interesting. They are the fans closest to the program and provide its strongest support both financially and in the stands. Through her pregame chalk talks, Katie was the staff to many of the boosters. She’ll be missed. As a devoted mother married to a local dairy farmer, she’s not the traditional job-hopping assistant. I believe she’s exploring other options in the Athens area.

With the Hall of Fame induction coming up, it should be a relatively light and celebratory time not only for Landers but for Georgia women’s basketball. This news casts a bit of a shadow on things for me. Let’s face it – the recent track record on the bench hasn’t been great. Gilbert was in my eyes the strongest assistant. Brenda Hill wasn’t a standout. The loss of Michael Shafer was inevitable, but his replacement didn’t last the summer. Now only the relatively inexperienced La’Keisha Frett remains, and even she might have her eyes set on the next rung of the coaching ladder. Heading into his first season as a “Hall of Fame coach”, Landers will have a short time to synthesize a new staff that must come together quickly as the window of opportunity in the Tasha Humphrey era gets smaller and smaller.

The whole “will Caleb King redshirt” question reminded me of this proposal I read recently at CFR.

Players are currently given five years in which to play four. With ever-shrinking scholarship numbers in football as well as the temptation to turn pro after three years, it makes sense to allow the player to participate in all five years of his eligibility. Simplify.

The current rule creates a complex but silly decision for coaches each fall as they must weigh the value of playing a true freshman versus the cost of burning that year of eligibility. Eliminate that decision and let the player contribute during the entire course of his eligibility. For those who would redshirt for traditional reasons (either to get a good start on academics or develop physically), the coach still has the option to play them sparingly or not at all. I like this proposal too.

True stars will leave after three years, but you’ll have received a full three years from them (instead of potentially wasting one year on the bench). Others will have a decision to make after their fourth season. They might be ready to go pro at that point, or they might be ready to graduate and move on. Still others will create a new class of player – the true 5th year seniors who will become the elder statesmen of the college game.

One of the pitfalls of beginning the college football recruiting season earlier and earlier is that some of your early commitments will take the 9-12 months until Signing Day to reflect on their decisions, and some might end up changing their minds. The process doesn’t stop, and the competition won’t stop trying to sway a commitment until the Letter of Intent is signed.

There are those who will use that fact to point out how badly we need an early signing period in football. As the good Senator points out, that’s almost entirely in the school’s interest and not the prospect’s. Get him signed before he changes his mind or sees how our next season goes.

College recruiting has provided us with plenty of head-scratching terms over the years including the oxymoronic "silent verbal" or the favorite "soft verbal" which has done as much as celebrity marriage to set the bar for "commitment" as low as possible.

Recent events have inspired a new term. Call it the soft decommitment. A prospect goes so far as to back out of a verbal commitment to look at other schools but also hasn’t eliminated that original school. Georgia has had two such "soft decommitments" in recent weeks: offensive lineman B.J. Brand and running back Martin Ward. Both committed to the Dawgs earlier in the process, but as Brand put it, "I made a real quick decision and I like Georgia a lot, but I just want to make sure of things. I still like Georgia a lot and they are still up there on my list, but I am going to look around a little bit before making my final decision." OK…I can buy that. At least they were honest about it.

On a commitment scale of 1-to-10 where 1 is "John Capel undecided" and 10 is "came out of the womb wearing his future school’s colors", this new area is somewhere around a 5. It’s different from a soft verbal commitment since Mr. Soft Verbal doesn’t want to go so far as to decommit and risk losing his offer. Just for fun, here’s the rest of the scale.

Football Recruiting Scale o’ Commitment:

10: Odd birthmark in the shape of his school’s logo. Coincidence?

9: Becomes a recruiting intern and starts calling other prospects

8: Solid commitment. Makes his decision and isn’t heard from until he signs at 8:30 on Signing Day and shows up on time in August.

7: Committed, but hasn’t cleaned out his cell phone’s contact list just yet.

6: The soft verbal: claims he is still committed but has other visits lined up "just to be sure of my decision."

5: The soft decommitment: officially backs out of a hasty early commitment but keeps his original school at or near the top of his list.

4: Genuinely undecided but doing his homework

3: Major life decision is heavily influenced by paddleboats.

2: Anyone have a coin?

1: "I committed to Ole Miss because I really felt at home there. Just as I did at LSU the week before, Arkansas the week before that, and Tennessee last month. Where am I visiting this weekend?"

It’s a paradox of college football that because so much emphasis is placed on the regular season we end up with a regular season that doesn’t reach its full potential. It’s not a big revelation that most schools approach their scheduling asking "how much can we get away with?" The first priority is wins, and strength of schedule is a secondary priority for most teams in major conferences. No one likes the games against cupcakes, but the all-or-nothing nature of the regular season rewards those wins provided they are balanced against a sufficiently strong conference schedule. Even where national titles aren’t at stake, an impressive win total still plays into bowl bids and their valuable paydays.

It’s to the point now that Big 10 coaches are willing to acknowledge (HT: Get the Picture) that playing an additional conference game is not in their best interests. The sure win over a cupcake is worth more to teams because it’s a guaranteed notch in the win column, and that means more bowl bids (and money) for the conference. Though the really compelling out-of-conference game isn’t rare, it is still the exception and noteworthy enough to be the subject of press releases.

I don’t blame them in the least. It’s rational behavior considering the incentives. The consequences of a single loss often far outweigh any benefit of playing a tougher-than-necessary opponent. Why play nine conference games when eight will do and get you to the Rose Bowl? You might get the luck of the draw and not have to face Ohio State or Wisconsin along the way – all the better. I’d love to see more conference games – I find it ridiculous and contrary to the point of a conference as anything other than a revenue-sharing entity that teams in these super-conferences don’t play more often. But as the sport’s popularity soars and fans continue to fill the stands, what is the incentive to make things more difficult?

What I don’t get is those who bemoan these weak schedules and not ask "why?" Why are teams not doing more with this 12th game? Why are fans glad to see an additional home game if it means a glorified scrimmage? Why don’t people take a closer look at the incentives driving this scheduling?

The chatter among the Dawgnation this morning is about the Banner-Herald’s publication of athletic association salaries, including administrators, head coaches, and assistant coaches. Go ahead and peek. It should go without saying that the list doesn’t represent the total compensation for many people on it.

I understand and appreciate the need for transparency in public matters, but there’s still something gauche about reporting it. Though many salaries in the public sector are stratified and paid according to job grade, there’s still a natural tendency to compare when it’s out in the open. Greed, jealousy, and vanity aren’t far behind if one isn’t careful.

I won’t get much into the report, but there is one thing that Sen. Blutarsky points out that will probably have a ripple effect: brand new offensive line coach Stacy Searles – a position coach and not coordinator – is the third-highest-paid coach of any kind at Georgia. Only Mark Richt and Andy Landers earn more (in terms of base salary of course). No other football assistant, including coordinators Bobo and Martinez, currently earn as much.

What does that mean? It could be that Searles is instantly the best assistant on the staff and is paid accordingly. More likely is that his hiring was one of Georgia’s first experiences with the increasingly expensive market for football assistant coaches. As head coaching salaries soar, assistants are beginning to see measurable increases themselves. Georgia had to compete with the likes of Alabama for Searles, and you have to think about the kind of money they offered him if they threw $32 million at Saban.

As a result, the other assistants will likely be the beneficiaries as their salaries are adjusted accordingly. Has Georgia gotten away with “underpaying” football assistants? Possibly. There has been no mass exodus, so something is keeping them here. But if Searles’ hiring is an indication of the market rates for a good position coach, Georgia will eventually have to react in order to retain the quality assistants already in place.

Worst choice of a name for a mini-feature on UGA athletics?

Congratulations, AJC, on the new "UGA FOOTBALL BUZZ". Was the "UGA FOOTBALL GATOR CHOMP" considered? The "WAR EAGLE UGA FOOTBALL REPORT" would have been a better choice.

One of my favorite features over at the Grapevine recruiting site was the "Recruiter’s Roster". It showed at a glance how the team broke down by class so that needs and depth issues would show up right away. I’m doing a little variation on that here by taking the post-spring depth chart and exploding it by class. 1st-teamers are in solid red, 2nd-teamers are in the lighter red, other scholarship players are in gray, and walkons are unshaded. I’m going by the information from that depth chart as the positions are now. The chart doesn’t tell the whole story (Haverkamp is a junior but is still a rookie for example), but I think it’s close enough.

As you’d expect and hope, many of the starters are juniors and seniors. Still, it stands out how many potential contributors are sophomores or younger particularly on the lines. That shouldn’t surprise any of us, but it was strange to see Howard and Velasco as the only senior linemen on either side of the ball. The junior class isn’t much deeper until you add in the JUCO transfers. You can also get a sense for the infusion of young defensive speed on the team. Linebackers like Dent and Gamble as well as a slew of defensive backs will be counted upon heavily this season.

Anyway, even if it just looks like a giant pixelated game of Tetris, enjoy.

Want to see a bunch of tough-talking advocates of personal responsibility turn into the biggest bleeding-heart mass of equivocating relativist excuse-makers? Watch a typical football fan learn that one of his team’s players can’t get out of a punishment.

In the past day, the suspension of Akeem Hebron for the fall semester has blown up on the message boards. I’m having trouble understanding why people are surprised by the news. We knew as soon as the second arrest came that he would be facing this suspension. I guess much of the shock comes from the news that a football player couldn’t somehow get around the University policy.

Most are focusing on the harshness of the punishment. Does it fit the crime, etc.

That’s completely irrelevant. Whether the policy is too strong or is fitting (I think it’s a bit reactionary myself), it’s spelled out right up front (HT: Ching) and applies to every UGA student. Not many made a noise about this policy until it took down a football player. If the policy sucks, work to change it, but you have to live by it in the meantime.

We learn today that Hebron will take the path I mentioned yesterday and enroll at Georgia Military College for the fall semester. He’ll be eligible to return for the spring semester, and the AJC reports that "Hebron said Georgia coach Mark Richt would welcome him back in January 2008 if he followed the necessary steps."

Oh, the drama I’ve read in the past day. The excuses and enabling would make an addict proud. "He’s being crucified for such a small mistake." "He just was unlucky and got caught doing what we all did in college." "His career is ruined because of a knee-jerk zero-tolerance policy." "The police are out to get football players." Some, apparently unable in their hysteria to comprehend that getting arrested often presents certain other problems, have even asked why Stafford doesn’t face the same kind of suspension. Won’t someone think of the children?!?!

Of course none of that exaggeration is true. While most are no stranger to underage drinking, few use the bad judgment to become belligerent with a downtown bouncer months after a MIP citation. Even fewer would be likely to do it once Richt lays down the law after the first offense. You can be certain that Hebron knew what was at stake if he were arrested again. His career is far from over or ruined. The escape route to GMC is the best possible outcome in this situation. If (if, if, if) things go well at GMC, he will pick back up at UGA for the spring 2008 semester, get back on track in terms of academic progress, and lose only his freshman season. It could have been a lot worse.

I don’t want to sound overly hard on the guy. It’s a tough situation, and the start of his football career has been delayed, but it’s the result of his decisions. He knows that. "I’m disappointed in myself. The whole thing has been difficult, " he told the AJC. He’s getting what so many don’t: a legitimate third chance. The support structure at Georgia to help him will be there. I can’t imagine a better guide in that spot than Richt and Van Halenger. It’s also a positive sign of commitment by Hebron to take this route. He’s not playing D-1 ball next year regardless, so he could have used the year to transfer and get a clean start somewhere else. He’s chosen to accept the fact that he’ll have to face the probation and academic pressure when he gets back to Athens as well as face the work he’ll have to do to get back in the good graces of the football program.

Ching follows up on his depth chart post by asking what Georgia needs "most of all" this year. I agree with his conclusion, though a dominant defensive lineman isn’t far behind. After seeing guys like Reggie Bush, Darren McFadden, and even Percy Harvin – players who bend and redefine traditional positional roles – everyone wants one of those. Call him the playmaker. Georgia just hasn’t had many. The best receivers recently have been third-round picks at best, and the tailbacks since Robert Edwards (well, Garrison Hearst really) have been only steady or had brief moments of brilliance. They’re not awful or even average; they’ve often been really good but just not at that next level.

Ching starts his list with Henderson and Bailey. Anyone who saw a punt return last year realizes Henderson’s explosive potential. Yet he had just seven receptions and a carry last year on offense. Has he improved that much to get 5-10 touches within the offense per game? Sean Bailey’s another guy with a great pedigree and a few highlight plays in his past. But in his last complete season, he went from the second game until the SEC Championship game without a touchdown reception. That’s not a trait of a game-changing playmaker. You can go down the list of receivers from Bryant to Goodman and the response is the same…"yeah, he could be a playmaker, but…." It’s tough for a receiver. Even the best won’t get many touches during a game, but the best can consistently turn those few touches into significant plays. Having a guy like Stafford distributing the ball won’t hurt.

Does a tailback have a better chance? People have a false perception that Richt won’t let a tailback have that opportunity. Once Verron Haynes proved himself, he got the ball exclusively. Richt had no problem featuring Musa Smith. So I don’t buy that it’s an offensive philosophy keeping the tailbacks down. Will Lumpkin or Brown become that guy in their senior seasons? We know that both are capable of being quality backs. The inexperience of the line has me concerned that a back can be a consistent weapon this year. Is Moreno the answer? Yes, I watched the same G-Day you did. Let’s see it in the fall. Caleb King drew comparisons to Reggie Bush, so who knows…he might be the answer eventually.

There’s another component to this question, and it’s coaching. The staff has to be creative and innovative enough to make the most of such a playmaker when he shows up. No one would confuse Tyson Browning with Ronnie Brown, but was a screen pass the only way to get the ball to Browning? If Henderson is the real deal, how will they use him? AJ Bryant would like to listen in on that conversation too. If Moreno or Lumpkin or Brown is capable of a special season, can we identify that before November? Does such a drought of impact skill players at Georgia indicate a problem on the sideline or in the playbook? Will things change much with Bobo? It’s not as if Georgia has been completely talentless on offense.

So I agree with Ching when he identifies the playmaker as a need for this team, but I’m not as optimistic as he is that the answer lies among the upperclassmen he names. I say that because the kind of player he’s talking about often makes himself obvious early on. I’m not without hope that someone like Bailey or Lumpkin can have a great season as an impact player. I do have my eye to the future when looking for a really special playmaker whether it’s Moreno, King, or a receiver down the road like A.J. Green.

David Ching along with several others report today about the latest preseason depth chart changes. Of course a depth chart at this stage always needs these three disclaimers:

1. True freshmen aren’t on the chart. It’s likely that a few will work their way into the lineup by September. Players "coming off injuries" are listed separately from their positions.
2. Depth charts will change before the season. We’ve seen the chart used as motivation before, and there are positions like the Battle/Dobbs/Tripp "tie" that have to be sorted out. "It’s certainly how we feel at the moment, but there’s an awful lot that can change, as we all know," explained Coach Richt.
3. Someone has to start, but several positions frequently rotate players. Players far down the receiver and defensive line charts will see plenty of time.

With that out of the way, let’s overanalyze a few places that stand out:

• Is it me, or does the WR depth chart look a little unbalanced? I realize that the flanker and split end positions are not identical and interchangable. I also grant that we’ll be using multiple receiver sets and rotate guys in and out all of the time. Still, at one position you have the veterans Bailey and Massaquoi and then the sure-handed Durham. Massaquoi is the leading returning receiver and won’t be starting. Then we move over to flanker and see Henderson starting at 5’10", 150 lb. with Bryant backing him up.
• Not much has changed on the offensive line. Only one of the top four on the key left side (protecting Stafford’s back) has been at Georgia longer than a spring practice. It’s going to be dicey.
• As I mentioned above, there are three guys tied for one of the starting DE jobs. Touted JUCO transfer Jarius Wynn is not among them. A tie for a starting position is not a positive thing for me. No one was neck-and-neck with David Pollack.
• The defensive tackles are also a jumble. Tripp Taylor, a converted walkon fullback, is listed on the second team. No offense to the guy who did a fine job last year as the wham fullback, but Corvey Irvin was recruited from junior college to be that depth. This will be a position to watch in August.
• If there’s a chance for a newcomer to make an impact, it seems to be linebacker. Akeem Hebron is the most recent bit of attrition there. Brandon Miller is still a question mark in the middle, and Marcus Washington is more or less the second-string MLB by default. The loss of Hebron for the year puts a lot of pressure on Gamble and Dent to be ready to play. Ellerbe has reclaimed the starting WLB spot, and I bet he holds on to it this time.
• The secondary is looking really solid. When you have a former starter like Ramarcus Brown fighting for a second-string position at corner and prototypes like Reshad Jones and Antavious Coates as your depth at safety, you should be in fine shape. Having Asher Allen, Prince Miller, and Brown behind the starting corners makes me sleep well at night.
• Brian Mimbs, he of the spectacular onside kick in the Chick-fil-A Bowl, is the punter, but we expect Drew Butler to get a look in August.
• I wonder if there will be competition for the punt return job. Henderson seems like the obvious choice, but it’s a lot closer than we think. Mikey got nearly half his punt return yardage last year on three returns, two against Western Kentucky and one against Tennessee. After the Tennessee game, Henderson didn’t have a return over 20 yards. Thomas Flowers isn’t to be ignored in this conversation, but the Dawgs do have two good proven options at this key special teams position.

Wyatt gets it done in the 2004 Super Regional Photo: AP

With two losses to #1 Vandy last weekend and series left against postseason-bound Mississippi State and South Carolina, Georgia’s hopes for a late-season surge into the SEC Tournament are about shot. They are assured of a sub-.500 conference record.

So for me, the season comes down to tomorrow night’s game in Athens against Tech. The two teams have split the season series so far. If the Dawgs aren’t heading for the postseason, let’s salvage what we can and claim another season series from the enemy.

I mean it…treat the game like a super-regional. Throw Dodson and/or Moreau and whatever it takes to win the game. If that means weakening the team for the Mississippi State series, so be it. Would I trade a slim chance at an early exit in Hoover for the season series with Tech? Damn right.

If you could script it, famous Tech-slayer Jonathan Wyatt will make a big play in this game.

Then again, all this is predicated on Tech actually making the trip this time.

Chip Towers had some nice off-season red meat a few days ago. Several of the players ran for some NFL scouts recently, and Coach Van Halanger shared some of the impressive results.

I should add that neither Towers nor Coach Van made any claims or predictions based on these speed trials. Still, it’s easy to get excited about guys running sub-4.4s. Can’t coach speed, right? Accuracy of the times aside though, that speed still has to translate somehow into results on the football field. Speed is only one attribute of a good football player. The most successful players usually aren’t the fastest. The pure speed track-star types often don’t do well. But speed is a good place to start.

Let me pick on two guys from Towers’ report, Mikey Henderson and A.J. Bryant. Bryant arrived several years ago rated #1 in the nation at the "athlete" position by Rivals.com. Henderson, a converted defensive back, finally got a chance to make an impact last year returning punts when Thomas Flowers was lost for the season. He came through with 367 punt return yards on 25 returns (219 of those yards coming on three returns). Bryant and Henderson were juniors in 2006, so they’ve paid their dues. Yet as receivers they had just 21 receptions between them in 2006. But they’re "athletes", so maybe we got them involved in the offense in other ways. Nope. Two carries total for a net of one yard.

Richt continues to talk up Henderson in particular this spring, and Mikey won "best all-around offensive player" honors for spring. Bryant himself isn’t a slouch. Still, I can’t help but be skeptical about their senior seasons. Will they be used more? Used differently? Are there deficiencies in their skills that keep them from more productivity? Is there a creativity problem in the playbook? Injuries have been a factor, but they haven’t been long-term obstacles. Will they as seniors get more than a reception each per game and the very rare carry?

Just a second, you say. We have other, more productive, receivers and a fleet – a many-headed monster, even – of tailbacks. We can’t get all of these guys 50 receptions and 1,000 yards a season. That’s true, but no one is getting 50 receptions a year lately or coming anywhere close to 1,000 yards. Having so many supposedly talented skill players jumbled up doesn’t mean that you’re blessed with an abundance of options. It more likely means that few have done much to separate themselves. A tight end has led Georgia in receiving yardage and receptions for two seasons now. Forgive me if I question how much we’re getting out of this speed.

On the other side of the ball, Towers said that cornerbacks Ramarcus Brown and Bryan Evans were neck-and-neck as the fastest guys in the time trials. Yet as last year went on, Evans won that other cornerback spot from Brown and looked to claim it as his own in the bowl game. That’s a player doing something positive to sort out a close positional battle. I doubt that Ramarcus will give up, and we’ll see him fighting to get on the field. I wonder if we’ll see more of that with Moreno at tailback this year (here I go buying into hype). Great players stand out even from other talented guys. Felix Jones is a tremendous tailback, but McFadden still shines through for Arkansas. Richt had no problem handing the ball to Musa Smith to the tune of 1,300+ yards.

Rashad Jones and Brandon Wood were two others that Chip mentioned. These two young guys have speed to burn. Jones showed his abilities at G-Day, and Coach Van raved over Wood’s combination of speed and strength. Does that automatically make them destined for success? Of course not. As freshmen, there’s still a lot to learn and work on fundamentally. They’ll be two to watch over the next couple of seasons to see how much the defense can get from them. It’s possible in 2008 to have Brown, Evans, and Jones as part of one fast-as-hell defensive backfield.

First, congratulations to the drafted Dawgs and those signing free agent deals. Their work and dedication to this point has paid off with a great opportunity. This is just the beginning, though. Making the most of this chance, earning their way on to a roster, and starting a successful pro career is the next step.

With four players drafted, it’s hard to say that this was a sub-par draft class from Georgia. But relative to the competition, it was. It’s actually the second straight so-so group. For the first time since 1997, Georgia will go at least two seasons without a first-round pick. In fact, Tim Jennings was the only Bulldog taken in the first or second rounds in the past two years. The 2006 draft marked the first time since the 2000 draft that no Bulldog was taken in the first round.

Will Georgia return to the first round next year? It’s possible but not a certainty. Paul Oliver jumps out as the star, and we certainly hope he has a first-round kind of senior season. Kicker Brandon Coutu might get some interest, but kickers are almost never taken early. Kregg Lumpkin and Thomas Brown are pro-quality talents but don’t yet have the numbers to justify a first or second round selection. At this point, I don’t even see someone who I would consider to be a serious threat to enter the draft as a junior next year. Massaquoi? Southerland? Maybe. They’d have to have a pretty tremendous 2007.

In retrospect, it’s pretty incredible that Georgia won the SEC in 2005 without much first or second round talent on that team. Of course that doesn’t mean that Georgia had or has lousy players. We’re talking about guys like Pope, Jean-Gilles, Shockley, Taylor, Moses, Johnson, Golston, and so on. They were very quality college players – just not the prototypes that stand out to pro teams. Having tons of players drafted high doesn’t necessarily mean that you had a good team (right, Miami?), but as with highly-rated recruits you’d rather take your chances having more of them than fewer.

Coaches like Willie Martinez have taken some lumps in the past couple of years because of letdowns that didn’t happen as frequently earlier in the decade. Georgia’s cupboard might not be empty, but the draft could be telling us that it wasn’t as full as it once was. The SEC title in 2005 and the strong finish last year might suggest that there’s some pretty good coaching going on with the talent that is there.

The coaches don’t get a pass though – talent and recruiting is also their department, and there are signs that deficiencies are being addressed. If you hope to have a strong team and don’t see many players projected as high draft picks, you’d better have some young talent, and Georgia does. Stafford is the obvious. A slew of young players at linebacker and defensive back are coming into their own. Georgia had one of their best offensive line hauls this year. Tailbacks like Moreno and King have promising futures. Now even receiver recruiting is taking a step up with AJ Green and hopefully a few others.

With Florida back in form, Tennessee and Auburn holding on, a stronger Alabama on the horizon, and a wild card over in South Carolina, Georgia has no choice but to increase its talent level. A return to producing top draft picks won’t necessarily mean that the Dawgs will dominate the SEC, it will just mean that Georgia will have the players it needs to compete and hold ground in this conference.

Sportsline’s Gary Parrish points out today that recent changes among the SEC’s men’s basketball coaches have left the league with only one minority coach, Georgia’s Dennis Felton.

I won’t even address his suspect stretch to link another bizarre Arkansas personnel decision with a conference-wide backlash against minority coaches.

But I will ask this question: does such hysteria when a minority coach is fired make programs more or less likely to take a chance on a minority coach in the future?

(Don’t tell Parrish, but it’s even worse than it appears. Three of the four vacant SEC women’s basketball coaching positions this spring – all formerly held by women – went to men.)