Greetings from the cellar. A 6-4 record picking last week’s games straight-up is shameful, but that’s where I sit in the UGASports.com media pick ’em after expecting some road teams to do a little better than they did. I need to pick games next to Lou Holtz instead of these guys so I seem smarter.

First the ones I got wrong in descending order of error:

Ole Miss over Missouri: The Ole Miss offense proved to be not so nearly healthy and balanced as it looked against Memphis. They ran into a buzzsaw in the Missouri defense and emerging Mizzou QB Chase Daniel did the rest. Given the state of the Big 12 North this year, why not Mizzou?

Minnesota over Cal: I thought the Gophers had figured out some things in their opener. They had, but defense apparently wasn’t one of them. I wasn’t so much down on Cal, but I thought a decent Big 10 team could at least hang with Cal on the west coast. Wrong.

Texas over Ohio State: This was a close game most of the way, but Texas couldn’t figure out a way to convert yards into points. Ohio State has a good, solid team on both sides of the ball.

Clemson over BC: Leave it to a missed XP to ruin this pick. Clemson seemed like the better team, but they do miss their injured defenders, and they don’t yet have that swagger and killer instinct to win the games that would justify their ranking. Georgia fans can empathize with letting one get away to Boston College.

OK…with that cathartic penance out of the way, here are the correct picks that I managed to back into in descending order of "duh":

Kentucky over Texas State: The ESPN ticker said this game was delayed. Were they waiting on the ticketholder to show up?

LSU over Arizona: it was never going to be close.

Oregon over Fresno State: I’m not surprised that Fresno gave the Ducks a tough time, but Oregon is experienced enough now as a program to know how to win these games.

Colorado State over Colorado: The most interesting thing related to this 14-10 yawner wasn’t Colorado’s 0-2 start. It’s that 1-AA Montana State beat Colorado only to lose to Division II Chadron State. Transitivity is a bitch, Buffs.

Georgia over South Carolina: Georgia was clearly better, and the only question was whether South Carolina could make it the usual fourth quarter nailbiter. They nearly did, but the Georgia defense rose to the occasion to keep the Gamecocks off of the scoreboard and protect a lead that looked shaky for a while.

Notre Dame over Penn State: If I got one thing right last week, it was that Notre Dame would make Penn State’s 2005 season seem 20 years distant.

Hopefully better voices in the head and better results this week.

tOSU has it 2nd and 12. 12!!! You’re lucky we don’t cut away entirely!

During the 1990s, there weren’t many more marquee time slots for college football than the ESPN national 7:45 broadcast. Ron Franklin and Mark Gottfried were as good as it got in the booth. The late Adrian Karsten defined a new role for the sideline reporter. It was a great product.

How times have changed.

Mike Patrick is the face of the generic ESPN play-by-play guy. Women’s hoops, college football…send in Patrick. Todd Blackledge is spot-on as always with his sharp analysis, but it seems to have less impact alongside the bland Patrick than it did next to the lively Verne Lundquist.

But there’s another problem. Instead of holding on to its position as the place to see the best game of the week, ESPN’s Saturday night game has become second-fiddle to whatever ABC has on at 8:00, and it’s more than happy to bend over and advertise that fact.

Using such innovations as the “Primetime Pulse” and the “Red Zone Alert”, those of us who lack remote controls and/or motor skills to change the channel if we want to watch another game get forcefed the game that ABC/ESPN/Disney really wants us to watch. It was such a transparent plea to get ESPN viewers to change the channel that Patrick and Blackledge had to half-seriously remind people to check back in on the game they were actually broadcasting. ABC wasn’t so kind – I’m told there was no Primetime Pulse to give viewers a look at the interesting South Carolina – Georgia game. We shouldn’t be surprised. All of the ads on ESPN’s own Gameday show were for the ABC game and not for the game actually on ESPN later that night.

We know that ESPN and ABC serve the same corporate masters, so of course they want eyeballs where it serves them best. #1 vs. #2 is a huge game and brings in a lot of ad money. But isn’t it kind of sad that the game everyone used to tune in for now just serves to go through the motions and pimp something on another channel?

The north endzone at Williams-Brice Stadium doesn’t look particularly imposing. It is the only side of the stadium that isn’t enclosed by multiple seating decks. But in each of the last three Georgia-South Carolina games in Columbia, this innocent-looking endzone has been the site of the key Gamecock meltdown that shut the door on their hopes of winning.

It’s not that the south endzone hasn’t had its moments. That’s where Pollack worked his magic, and it’s where the Gamecocks clanked a field goal off the upright last night.

But that north endzone has a much more sinister history.

2002: Gamecock tailback Andrew Pinnock drops a pitch at the Georgia goal line. A touchdown gives the Gamecocks a win, but Thomas Davis recovered the fumble to secure the Bulldog victory. It happened on the doorstep of the north endzone.

2004: On fourth-and-one inside the Georgia ten yard line with less than five minutes remaining, the Bulldogs stuffed Gamecock quarterback Dondrial Pinkins and held on for a 20-16 win. South Carolina had just fumbled on its last possession inside the Georgia 20 on the same end of the field. Which end? The north end, of course.

2006: Georgia’s 15-0 lead looked less solid as South Carolina drove the field in the third quarter. They seemed likely to take a big chunk out of the lead when they faced third and goal from the Georgia one. On third down, the Bulldogs stuffed Cory Boyd at the one. A video replay overruled a call that said that Boyd had fumbled, leaving the Gamecocks with fourth-and-one. The Gamecocks attempted to send Mitchell over the top, and as he reached the ball forward over the pile, Jarvis Jackson knocked it loose. The ball rolled into the endzone, that mystical north endzone, where by rule it became Georgia’s ball at the spot of the fumble. South Carolina seemed poised to pin the Dawgs against that goal line, but a 23-yard quarterback draw by Stafford on third down kept a drive alive that would eventually lead to Georgia’s final score of the day.

The north endzone strikes again.

For the first time in nearly 20 years, a Steve Spurrier-coached college team was shut out. It doesn’t quite make up for the 51 points in 1995, but it is a nice twist of the knife to have the 18-0 shutout come at the hands of the Georgia Bulldogs.

The Dawgs grabbed control early and built a 15-0 halftime lead on a wild swing of events at the end of the first half. South Carolina missed a field goal that would have cut Georgia’s lead to 10-3. Georgia drove the field and appeared poised to extend their lead before a tipped pass was interecepted on the one yard line. South Carolina ran a slow-developing play out of the end zone which was abruptly ended by Charles Johnson for the safety. Georgia then drove quickly into field goal position and ended the first half by tacking another three points on to the lead.

The game was ugly and tough, but unlike 2002 and 2004 it wasn’t close. The Georgia defense played a magnificent game, stepping up several times at the goal line to deny South Carolina. The linebackers in particular had a wonderful game, and the defensive line was active all night – often applying sufficient pressure with just three or four men. Jarvis Jackson had another strong game in Columbia, and he was responsible for causing the game’s pivotal fumble in the third quarter as South Carolina quarterback Blake Mitchell tried to dive forward for a touchdown on 4th down at the Georgia one yard line.

The resourcefulness and the determination of the Georgia defense could be summed up in a play by Jeff Owens. Mitchell had eluded the Georgia rush and had scrambled forward into Bulldog territory for a first down and much more. Owens, a defensive tackle, tracked Mitchell down from behind and caused a fumble that was recovered by the Dawgs. Plays like that were made all night across the board.

The offensive line also played much better. Velasco, Jones, and Shackleford noteably had good performances. When Georgia was able to bust a nice play up the middle, Jones and Velasco were often out in front. South Carolina’s pass rush wasn’t overwhelming most of the time.

And the quarterback…Matt Stafford stepped in as a true freshman at one of the SEC’s most intimidating road venues and performed as you might expect a talented freshman: lots of glimpses of excellense but lots of shaky play as well. His overall line would get a veteran starter crucified by fans. But his especially strong second quarter was enough to get the job done. The pass he threw to Massaquoi late in the half to get the Bulldogs inside the Gamecock five was a thing of beauty.

He was much less effective in the second half – a nice pass to Ware was the exception. Timing was off on deeper passes, and you’d expect that when Stafford hasn’t worked much with the first team offense. The prognosis on Tereshinski’s ankle notwithstanding, Stafford should have three weeks or so to work on that timing and decision making with the first team before the SEC schedule resumes. He has plenty of work to do. I believe we saw last night why he wasn’t starting outright but also why he will start eventually.

Lots more to talk about later, but this is a great win for the program. The defense did what it should have done against a below-average offense, and the offense gritted out what it needed. With this win and the Spurrier drama behind them for another year, the season and its possibilities begins to open up for Georgia. How much can they improve before their next SEC game at Ole Miss?

Kelly was the only guy who kept me out of last place in last week’s UGASports.com media pick ’em. 7-3 straight-up isn’t terribly good, but at least I’m in good company with ESPN’s Mark Schlabach. Mark Weiszer of the ABH needs to hop a plane to Vegas. This week is the on-the-road edition where I pick six of ten road teams to win.

Georgia at South Carolina: Georgia’s the better team, but South Carolina has plenty of tactics it can use to make this game close.

Ole Miss at Missouri: I think the Rebels will continue to settle in behind the new quarterback, but one of the nice surprises last week was the play of tailback BenJarvus Green-Ellis. Ole Miss will need to play better defense, but they should have enough firepower to hold off a lukewarm Missouri team.

Colorado State at Colorado: Colorado will rally around this game as they try to forget the humiliating loss to Montana State. If they can’t win this rivalry game, stick a fork in their season. They’re still searching for answers on offense, and I think they won’t find them for a while.

Ohio State at Texas: Much is being made of Ohio State’s losses on defense, but I’m not entirely sold on their offense yet. Ginn and Smith are fine talents, but they will need the balance of a running game. My money is on Texas and Gene Chizik whose last loss as a defensive coordinator was in 2003 to Georgia.

Clemson at Boston College: This is the first test of Clemson’s lofty ranking. Lose on the road to BC and stay out of the Top 20 for the next year or two.

Texas State at Kentucky: Many states have "State Universities" with decent sports programs. N.C. State. Ohio State. Mississippi State. Louisiana State. Montana State. Texas is not one of those states.

Arizona at LSU: Arizona isn’t as bad as they used to be, but they’re not as good as LSU.

Minnesota at California: This is the one game where I really go against the grain this week. I believe that Minnesota has every bit the amount of scoring potential that Tennessee did. The real question is Cal’s offense. We know Lynch is legitimate, but can the quarterback duo settle into this new offense? It’s a lot asking the Gophers to go on the road and beat a mad and talented Cal team, but I’m saying they can do it.

Penn State at Notre Dame: Penn State begins to realizes that last season was like the movie Awakenings where catatonic patients left for dead wake up and experience a brief period of vitality before slowly slipping back into their vegetative states.

Oregon at Fresno State: The Ducks looked mighty impressive against Stanford. Fresno becomes an early scratch from the "BCS Buster" list.

This could be a close game if South Carolina has its way. Without a flurry of defensive or special teams scores, the Gamecocks shouldn’t put up more than 20 points. South Carolina’s strategy should follow much like this: keep the game close, keep the clock moving to shorten the game, hang on to the ball, and get to a point in the fourth quarter where it’s anyone’s game. It’s a familiar underdog strategy and one we’ve seen before. Remember last year’s South Carolina game?

We can look at all sorts of matchups and fret over Spurrier’s bag of tricks, but the more I think about it, the game comes down to something in Georgia’s control.

It’s all on Georgia’s passing game.

Since 2002, Georgia has scored at least 20 points against the Gamecocks twice (2003, 2004).

In the two games (2002, 2005) where the Dawgs didn’t score 20, they averaged 140.5 yards of passing. In the two higher-scoring games, the Dawgs had over 200 yards passing in each. Rushing totals had a lot less correlation with scoring.

Last year Georgia was a pitiful 8-17 through the air for 112 yards. With Shockley. Those are JT3 vs. Florida numbers. I know…Ko Simpson, good secondary, etc, etc. Georgia’s inability (unwillingness?) to move the ball through the air kept that game within South Carolina’s reach.

When the Dawgs routed the Gamecocks in 2003, they "only" threw for 213 yards, but it was a somewhat efficient 17-29 58.6%. The Bulldogs were also able to run a lot after Reggie Brown put on a show to build an early lead. In the other three games with SC since 2002, the Dawgs have done no better than completing 50% of their passes.

There is less and less doubt in my mind that Georgia’s passing game is why we’d be looking at a close game on Saturday that plays into South Carolina’s preferred strategy.

Now that we know what the key to Georgia’s success is, the question becomes "can they muster a passing game?" That implies a few other questions:

• Can a thinned-out offensive line without Daniel Inman hold back a South Carolina defense that showed a good ability to pressure the passer in their last game?
• How much of a dropoff is there in the South Carolina secondary without Ko Simpson and Johnathan Joseph? Mississippi State didn’t have the talent to test the Gamecock secondary; the few deep passes they threw were 1) dropped or 2) wounded ducks that were intercepted.
• Does Georgia have the personnel to execute this strategy? Shuffling the receiver depth chart and an uncertain quarterback rotation makes the issue questionable. We’ve yet to see a gameplan with Tereshinski where the strategy is to come out firing, and I believe we saw the upper limit on his range last weekend (around 30 yards). Is the answer more Stafford? That’s a lot to ask of a freshman in his first road game. Will the receivers even catch the ball?
• How will the Georgia run and pass feed off of each other? If the running game is constantly stuffed, long-yardage passing situations will be much easier for South Carolina to defend.
• Turnovers. South Carolina’s best offensive play in the past two games has been returning an interception for a touchdown. It’s a risk you take when you throw the ball, but it’s one that Georgia needs to take. Can the quarterback avoid making the disastrous mistake that Richt has talked about so much this preseason?

Much is being made of the decision to sit MoMass and Kenneth Harris in favor of starting Mario Raley and AJ Bryant at South Carolina. The reason given was drops, but there has to be more to it than that (Martrez Milner is still starting after all).

The more important point is Eason’s intent to send a message to Massaquoi. This wouldn’t be such a big deal if this were a one-game thing.

I didn’t make a big deal out of it at the time because it was just the spring game, but I only recall one catch from him at G-Day too. Oliver shut him down for much of the game.

He’s proven he has the hands, and that should make him our best receiver. A drop or two won’t change that; we’ve seen what he can do, especially against Auburn. Because of his hands he’s now drawing attention from defenses. If he can’t make an impact and get open against that kind of extra attention, he might as well be a third-down possession receiver.

The message is much more than a reaction to a drop or two against WKy. It’s more along the lines of "if you’re the #1 receiver, start making plays."

Playing time for and development of other receivers will only help Massaquoi in the long term. If someone – Durham, Raley, Bryant, Goodman, whoever – can turn into a dependable and consistent receiving option, teams won’t be able to focus on MoMass, and he’ll have more room and freedom to make those plays.

I have to give full credit to Paul over at Georgia Sports Blog for a brilliant brief documentary of the “family-friendly” tailgating areas. Watch the video and listen for the wind blowing across the deserted plains. Most of the time these blogs just talk about what other people have done or wrote, but kudos to GSB for creating some original journalism that cuts right to the point.

Tailgating in general was a bit down with the early start and poor opponent; I didn’t notice much traffic when I arrived around 8:30. We’ll see if these areas remain as desolate in coming weeks.

I know this is stale now, but there are a few leftover comments from the game I wanted to get down. I am one of those who thinks that you can tell a great deal even against poor 1-AA competition – tackles are tackles, catches are catches, and so on. Some things you can’t evaluate fully, but many things can be.

Defense. The starting defense was scary good. Even against a 1-AA team it’s easy to see how good this defense can be, especially along the line. The best part about the defense might have been the depth. Georgia started subbing reserves from the third series, and some like Dewberry made an immediate impact.
Did the defense have its questions? Sure, but they were few. Allen and Miller were thrown to the fire and looked lost at times in the secondary, but they’ll be fine. The defense was occasionally open to counter plays that ran the ball outside. The blown coverage that led to the touchdown has to be addressed. There were probably lots more little things that the coaches will tweak, but you’ve got to be pleased with the play of the defense.

Offense. I’m not concerned about the low yardage. When your defense and special teams sets you up at midfield for most of the game, you’re not going to put up gaudy yardage. I’m not sure whether or not it’s a good sign that the Dawgs were able to coast without much production from their offensive stars: Thomas Brown and Mohamed Massaquoi. MoMass only had one reception, and Brown looked pretty ordinary at tailback (again). At the very least, can we please stop the platitudes about Thomas Brown being the strongest or best this or that? Run for 100 yards a couple of weeks in a row, and we can talk.

Quarterbacks. I disagree with Ching when he says that "I don’t feel comfortable saying (Tereshinski) played well or poorly". While it might be premature to gush over Stafford, I think it’s perfectly valid to question Tereshinski’s performance, and I think we can. It’s pretty clear that Joe T. has made improvements from even last season, but I wonder if that improvement will be enough.

To my eyes, Tereshinski had four really nice passes: the TD pass to Raley (on which he made a nice audible), the in-stride crossing pattern to Goodman, 30-yard pass down the sideline to Harris, and a perfect throw to Milner that was dropped. Other passes, including the incompletions and drops, were either behind the receiver, underthrown, or late. The late passes were of special concern. They allowed defenders to read the pass and get a jump to make a play. Other than Milner’s drop of a sure touchdown, I think that coaches and observers are being generous with the "dropped pass" label. For the most part, they just weren’t good passes or were made more difficult by timing or requiring an adjustment from the receiver.

The most important thing to remember is that Richt isn’t an idiot and can see the same things we do. It’s been pretty funny how many fans have twisted and turned the comments and events to fit their own fantasies of how the quarterback position should and will shake out. Does anyone honestly think that Richt is playing JT3 simply out of some sense of obligation and loyalty? This "token pat-on-the-back start" theory is as messed up as it comes. Can we just be rational and see that Richt is sticking with "just good enough" while he brings a young talent along? The "throw them to the fire" approach might be fine for Arkansas where you have to pull out all of the stops to save your career, but Richt is grooming a starter for the next several seasons, and he’s not going to screw that up by putting an unprepared freshman out there for more than he can handle.

Nothing like it. All of the analysis, anticipation, anxiety….none of it matters much anymore because we live for this. We get precious few days with the Dawgs, only seven in Sanford Stadium, and each one is special and unique. Can’t wait to see what this year brings.

GO DAWGS!!!!!!!!!!

You can hear me on this week’s UGASportsLIVE broadcast (towards the end)…just talking football and going down memory lane.

I’m also a part of the UGASports.com media pick-em where a few of the folks covering the Dawgs put in our two cents about the games of interest each week. Should be interesting, and hopefully I can hold my own. I think in future weeks we’ll be commenting on the picks too.

Do yourself a favor and find a way to watch the recent roast of Larry Munson put on by Hondo Williamson and the folks at 750 WSB. It was on CSS last night; hopefully they will show it 25,000 more times as they have with the spring football games. It’s also on Comcast’s OnDemand service if you receive that. I’m really glad I caught it. It was an outstanding tribute to the Legend and pretty damn funny too.

Highlights of the event:

• Wes Durham doing a dead-on Loran Smith impression recalling the infamous occasion when Loran asked Charles Grant about boiled peanuts. For being the voice of the enemy, Wes Durham all but stole the show. Wes said during the roast that we won’t ever see anything like the generation of Munson and Woody Durham, but Wes is too modest – he’s well on his way to becoming a fixture in the style of those old-school broadcasters.
• Munson himself. He was at his best – dry and witty.
• Jim Donnan. Donnan continues to amaze and impress me with his graciousness and humility since his departure from Georgia. He handles the awkwardness of the "fired coach" well, and he has nothing but good words for Dooley, Richt, and the Dawgs.

Game week.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

The buildup is much less than for last year’s nationally-scrutinized opener, but that’s fine. This is a different team with different needs for its opener.

What do we know about Western Kentucky? Very little. They’re 1-AA, they sent us Dennis Felton, and their mascot had one of the funniest segments of the 2004 Capital One Mascot Challenge. They’ve played two “major” Division 1 teams early in the season in the past few years. In 2004, they put a nice scare into Kansas State in the season opener. Despite a large gap in yardage, they were within seven points of Kansas State in the fourth quarter. Last year, they lost 37-14 at Auburn in late September. Auburn had shaken off the loss to Georgia Tech and had begun to get its act together by this point, and they led 30-0 after three quarters. Georgia should win this game easily, but I’d be very surprised if the Dawgs are able to score 40+. If they do, it’s likely to involve some turnovers or special teams scores – and we’d welcome those with open arms too.

What am I looking for from the Western Kentucky game? We’ll start with the questions that have formed over preseason camp:

• No injuries. Of course you never want injuries in any game, but these little cupcake games always seem to be the source of the worst injuries. We all remember Boss Bailey going down against Georgia Southern in 2000, and the season went south from there. Let’s bring an intact team at least as far as our SEC opener.
• How do we come out? “Finish harder” is the theme for the season, but “start sooner” was more appropriate at times last year. How will Georgia set the tone for the game and the season?
• QB play. This is the obvious area where most people will be focusing. Tons of questions. Can Tereshinski lead the team and make the offense look smooth against even 1-AA competition? Will Cox impress coming off the bench? Who will be the third QB in the game if there is an opportunity to clear the bench? What will be the differences in their performance in games vs. what we’ve seen in practice?
• Will Paul Oliver intercept a pass? It’s not a Georgia practice lately if Paul Oliver doesn’t record an interception. Is that because he’s jumping the familiar plays from the Georgia offense? Or is he really ready to take the next step as Georgia’s next great cover corner? There’s a ton of young talent ready to step into significant playing time in the secondary. Is it ready and able?
• Is Thomas Brown really that much better this year? Let’s see it out of the gate. The Georgia running game is supposed to carry the load this year – is it up to the job?
• We’ve heard many promising things about the receivers this fall. I’m very interested in seeing their progress. Whose light has really switched on?
• How will the new offensive line hold up esepcially with Inman’s suspension?
• Moses and Johnson have been well-advertised all summer. What kind of impact will they have?
• Ching has been hinting not to expect much from Gant this weekend. How will the center of the defensive line perform with Owens and Dixson? Is Weston going to make a difference?
• The linebackers are still licking their wounds from some sloppy play in 2005. Are they back? Will the long-awaited debut of Dewberry be something to remember?

Now we won’t get all of these answers on Saturday. I’m not expecting to see much that’s too revealing. We’ve been at these games where things get frustrating and boring as we send a third-string offense out there to run the ball in the fourth quarter. “WHAT?!?!? Why are we having this walk-on run the ball instead of seeing Stafford throw???” The “keeping things vanilla” line is too often used as an excuse for poor play, but there shouldn’t be a need to get too fancy in this game. With that said, cleanly executing the plays we do run is still important. Runs are still runs. Passing efficiency needs to be high. Tackles need to be clean and finished. All of these things need to be there whether the gameplan is dead basic or overly complex.

We don’t know the extent to which the game will be an extended audition for the quarterback job. Will Tereshinki be the only one getting meaningful experience with the first team? If three quarterbacks play, will the third do much of anything besides hand off? Will Cox show he can perform in a game? Will he have enough of an opportunity to make a change to the depth chart?

I think what most of us want to see from the opener boils down to this: can we be confident in the team we will take to Columbia?

Georgia fans have a wary eye on gameday changes planned for campus this football season, but it might be a year or two before those changes butt heads with the big game Georgia tailgating scene. For which games on this year’s schedule would you really want to show up before 7 a.m.?

Think about the typical football season. Remember Tennessee in 1998 or LSU in 2004? Even Auburn last year? We’re all familiar with those "arrive on Thursday" games where you can sense the electricity on campus at mid-week. The game might be a night kickoff, or it might just be significant enough to start the tailgate well in advance no matter what time the game kicks off (LSU 2004 was one of those).

Now look at this year’s home schedule:

• Western Kentucky: 12:30 kickoff. 1-AA. See you at 10 a.m. Students, see you at 3 p.m.
• UAB: another late-arriving crowd.
• Colorado: interesting.
• Tennessee: we’ll come back to this one.
• Vandy: Homecoming, which means no later than a 1:00 start.
• Miss. St.: can’t see much build-up for this one.
• Tech: it’s cold. Though the Tech game always brings out a good tailgate, the weather will mean it starts on Saturday and no sooner.

There are two games to talk about. First is Colorado. This won’t create the stir of someone like Oklahoma coming to town, but it is still an interesting matchup of BCS conference teams. Colorado doesn’t have an especially large and rabid fan base that will invade Athens on Wednesday, so this tailgate is pretty much up to us. It could take on some importance if the Buffalos have an impressive start to the season, but I don’t see this one getting to the level of most big SEC games.

That brings us to Tennessee. In previous years, the Tennessee game would produce some huge tailgates. 1998 brought Gameday to Athens. Unreal scene. 2000 saw a night game and a chance to end the streak. It was wild, and the celebration continued well into the morning hours. In 2002, we were flying high and ready to claim the SEC after proving we were "man enough" at Bama. But starting in 2004, the post-LSU hangover made the Tennessee game less of an event. The Vols’ performance in 2005 took even more wind out of the sails. I’m afraid that if the Vols don’t come into this game at 4-1 or better, we’ll lose our only shot all year for a really good tailgating scene. Add in rumors that the game might be picked up by CBS at noon, and things deteriorate rapidly.

Now before we get all conspiratorial and say this is President Adams’ grand plan, several things could happen to make things more interesting. Television might make some games start later, and some game might end up taking on more importance than it seems to now. And there will always be bigger games down the road where Athens is the place to be. Just not this year. When Adams or whoever claims victory for the changes put into place this year, just put a copy of the schedule in front of them and ask, "what exactly did you expect?"

Remember a few weeks ago when a writer out of Jacksonville called college football an "inferior product" to the NFL? Ivan Maisel over at ESPN.com had a great piece recently that pretty much puts that silly notion to bed. Inferior, indeed.

But there’s one thing in Maisel’s column to which I can’t help but respond, and of course it has to do with #4 – the postseason and the lack of a playoff.

Maisel focuses his point on "those ugly December (NFL) games when Peyton Manning plays one series and sits out, as if it were August." Pro teams already assured of their playoff spot and homefield advantage rest their starters. OK, fine. We see it in several pro sports; several baseball teams will soon clinch and start resting people. His implied point is that college teams would do the same, and there would be less emphasis on later regular season games as teams solidify their place in the postseason.

The first problem with that line of thinking is that any proposed college playoff involves a much smaller percentage of teams. You still have to be among the elite or at least win your conference in even eight-team playoff scenarios, and that means winning games right up until the end of the season. While a single loss wouldn’t necessarily remove you from the national title picture anymore, it could severely impact seeding and make a much tougher road through the bracket. Who would sit players and risk a possible #1 or #2 seed?

For a bigger and more basic flaw in the NFL analogy, you can go right to his points #1 and #3. You’re telling me that Alabama would sit its starters and shrug its shoulders over the Iron Bowl? Texas would roll over against the Aggies for a chance to rest the tailback? Please. The coach wouldn’t make it out of the parking lot alive. Even in college hoops where teams know they have a spot in the Big Dance, JJ Redick doesn’t skip the UNC game.

In fact, passion and rivalries drive the entire season. If "every game is a playoff" (an idea I find to be a bit of fiction to begin with), why doesn’t the inverse of Maisel’s Peyton Manning scenario apply? Why don’t teams pack it in once they’ve lost a few times and been all but eliminated from the national title picture? Passion and rivalries won’t allow it. Even in a 4-7 season with no hope of a bowl, your rivalry games matter. The Georgia Tech game will always mean something to Georgia fans whether it’s 1993 and both teams are sore from losing seasons or 2005 where both teams are bowl-bound. The Dawgs were only 5-6 in 1996, but the comeback to beat Auburn clearly mattered to Georgia fans.

With teams “eliminated” weekly from the national title scene, we still end up with an incredible college football regular season. You’re telling me that would somehow be diminished by giving more teams something else to play for over the course of the season?