I don’t know what it is about these past two losses bringing back bad memories of some infamous games from the 1990s.  Maybe it’s my subconscious commenting on the direction of the program. As Lattimore pushed Georgia around for Spurrier last week, I was reminded of Errict Rhett’s Jacksonville performance in 1993.

We’ll get to the offense in a minute.  But as we watched Arkansas complete crossing pattern after crossing pattern, I couldn’t help but think back to that 1999 game against Auburn. I don’t really mean the flow of the game; the Arkansas game was much closer.  But the way Arkansas attacked and exploited Georgia’s aggressive defense was a little too similar to what Ben Leard did that night eleven years ago.

I doubt (and hope not) that Todd Grantham is another Kevin Ramsey.  Ryan Mallett also deserves a little more credit than Leard. But in both games we saw the opponent handle Georgia’s pressure, attack the spots on the field where the pressure came from, and put Georgia’s linebackers in some very awkward pass coverage situations.  We’re reminded that even experienced defenders like Justin Houston are still learning new responsibilities, and they can be made to look very bad.

It’s not that Georgia didn’t bring pressure.  They tallied just one sack, but they also affected several other pass plays. Arkansas did a good job of picking up the pass rush, and Mallett is now a pro at feeling the pressure and getting rid of the ball.  The Razorbacks talked about extra offseason preparation for this game, and you could tell that they weren’t surprised by much that the new Bulldog defense threw at them.  Georgia was defeated with brawn at South Carolina; scheme did them in defensively against Arkansas.

There’s only so much you can put on the defense though.  It’s small consolation after the porous defense at the end of each half, but they did make the stops Georgia needed to come back and even be in a position to win the game.  Their stop after Murray’s second half interception was huge at the time. Tackling was better, and Arkansas got little in the running game.

But bringing up turnovers leads to one of the big disappointments of the season:  the lack of takeaways.  It was an area of emphasis in the offseason, and things looked good after one game.  In SEC play though the Dawgs have recorded only one takeaway – the fumble recovery at South Carolina.  The Razorbacks had turned the ball over three times in each of their games coming into Athens, and forcing a few on Saturday would have definitely helped to slow Mallett.  The Dawgs had their chances, but the several dropped interceptions led to Arkansas points and possibly cost Georgia a defensive score of their own.

Of course you can’t bring up disappointments without talking about the offense and the line in particular.  Murray scrambling was one of Georgia’s more effective plays, and he misfired on several throws while he was feeling the heat.  One of the nation’s most experienced lines gave up six sacks to a team that had a total of five in two games against lightweights.  It wasn’t just one side or player – tackles were beaten, and Ealey whiffed at least twice to lead to a couple of sacks.  There was perhaps no more crucial missed block than on the failed 3rd-and-4 play that stood between a fair scoring chance to win the game and the punt that started Arkansas on their brief game-winning drive.

The excuses are ready-made. Caleb King, perhaps a better blocker, was unavailable.  Georgia had to shuffle its line without Chris Davis in the game.  Sturdivant remains limited.  Even with all of that, Georgia didn’t vary much from its play-action, and the plays that took eons to develop were tailor-made disasters for a quarterback who himself had a role in the sacks. It was very nearly Murray’s first signature comeback win, but the shortcomings of the offense were too much to overcome with the game in the balance.

We’ll learn soon enough whether Georgia’s schedule was really front-loaded with two of the conference’s better teams.  Of course no conference game is a given win now – even Vandy seemed to find their legs a bit on Saturday.  If the Dawgs are going to start to turn the season around, they’ll have to do it on the road for the next couple of weeks.  Mississippi State presents their own unique challenges, and we saw how closely they played Auburn in Starkville.  This will be another game where – on paper – turnovers and mistakes have hurt the opponent.  Will Georgia be able to take advantage of those tendencies this time?

Georgia’s players are damned if they do and damned if they don’t when it comes to their reaction to a loss. If they turned confrontational and started on the whole “in the arena” business again, things would be ugly enough. But even when they fall on their own sword and own up to poor play, that too sometimes just doesn’t sit very well.

I do appreciate Rambo admitting to leaving a lot in the locker room and noting a need to step up his play. The Rambo vs. Evans question was at the heart of many fans’ dissatisfaction with the defense and the staff last year, but Rambo hasn’t exactly been dominant or sharp so far in his short time as the starter and leader of the safety position. It’s not exactly Tebow’s Promise, but at least he’s not pleased with his current level of play.

Darryl Gamble’s assessment might be more troubling.

“I’d say it was maybe a little effort and a little bit of guys being shell shocked out there in their first SEC game – a lot of guys weren’t ready for it.”

Not ready for their first SEC game? What? Pretty much all of the defenders who played Saturday, save Hamilton and a few others, have seen SEC action before. This wasn’t Georgia State going to Tuscaloosa. This was a noon start in Columbia for a ranked SEC contender against a team the Dawgs had lost to once in the past seven years. And they were the ones shell shocked? How in the world has this happened from a team ranked #1 just two years ago?

Not being prepared, focused, hungry, and unfazed in such an important game is a big deal. Again, it’s a program problem. Put alongside the sub-par play from the offensive line, and it wasn’t a team prepared to compete for important early-season position in the SEC East. It’s a laziness we put on a certain group of coaches last year, but the problem persists. It hasn’t been long enough to let a culture change kick in, but steps in that direction we thought we saw in Week One were erased the second that the next opponent started pushing back.

Talk about rededication and fiery Sunday film sessions now rings about as hollow as it should have back in 2008. Enough talk.

A day later and I’m still not sure what to make of the game.  Georgia never trailed by more than 11 points, and they spent much of the game within a single score.  Still, the challenge to come back seemed as steep at times as it ever did in the blowout losses of the past two years.  Credit to South Carolina for taking it right at Georgia, and credit especially to a freshman tailback that had one of the most impressive SEC debuts you’ll ever see. To have a chance Georgia needed a spark on offense, and it wasn’t going to come from the 2005 Georgia/Florida gameplan. 

Spurrier and Lattimore can cackle about the zone read as if it were some sort of brilliant strategy, but Georgia had the players in position time and again to challenge Lattimore, and that first contact often came at or behind the line of scrimmage.  Lattimore’s more important observation was one that’s sure to be repeated and stewed over by disgruntled Georgia fans:  "Our offensive line was in better shape than their defensive line." Georgia was pushed around on both sides of the ball, especially on the lines.

It wasn’t just the defensive line.  Georgia, from the line to the secondary, put on the worst display of tackling since the 2008 Georgia Tech game.  Even a safety who came to Georgia with the nickname "Hitman" was among the many leading with their shoulders and bouncing off a more physical freshman tailback.

The lack of physical play wasn’t limited to the defense.  Georgia had trouble running between the tackles for the second time in two games.  Again the line had much better success on outside running plays and in pass protection, but the push just wasn’t there – especially in the second quarter when the game began to get away.  It’s interesting that Richt singled out the guards on Sunday.  The guards of course are key to those interior running plays.  It’s hindsight now, but I wondered how much Cordy Glenn, a solid All-SEC lineman, was knocked down by a preseason bout with mono.  He’s recovered the weight, but it takes a lot out of you. Key I think to this problem is the return of Trinton Sturdivant.  If Sturdivant is able to contribute, Boling becomes another option at guard and can really beef up the rotation there.

Yet with all of the negative things that were going on, this was a one-possession game for much of the second half.  You’re not going to win many games scoring six points, but you stand a fair chance of winning many games giving up just 17.  We’ve spent the past two years tearing our hair out over defensive meltdowns that saw opponents put up 30 points in a single half.  We can debate whether it’s better to get lit up or suffer death by a thousand cuts, but the defense did at least keep things from getting out of hand waiting, waiting for the offense to finally get going.

More positives? I liked the pass coverage. Yes, there was a longer pass completed and a few others just missed.  Generally though Garcia was at his most uncomfortable in straight passing situations, and there were even a few coverage sacks.  The Dawgs didn’t give up the big play.  For all of Lattimore’s success, South Carolina only managed around 100 yards of second half offense, so there were some adjustments. Adjustments, fewer penalties, turnovers, all of the things we’ve asked for were there, but it wasn’t enough as the basics of tackling and any consistency on offense eluded the team.

Then there’s Murray.   

Without getting into the details of the game, Murray’s effort was good enough that coaches "think he’s prepared to just run the system as we have it." In other words, opening up the offense and putting more on Murray’s shoulders.  Now much of that depends on the supporting cast.  A team that can’t run the ball effectively is going to be inconsistent no matter who’s under center.

It’s good that the staff has come to that realization about Murray, and maybe it took two games of actual experience for them to see what he can do.  But if Richt and Bobo ever end up on any kind of hot seat, their hesitancy in situations like this will prove to be central.  A friend last week joked that Bobo should be told that A.J. Green was playing anyway, referencing the Israel Troupe play against Auburn last year.  South Carolina felt more than comfortable putting the game on a freshman tailback, and I doubt they cared very much how well he pass-blocked.  I’m glad to see Murray ready to take on more, but it’s not as if he showed up on campus this August.  He was an early enrollee in 2009 and has been through two spring practices and spent over a year and a half with the team. It took an unproductive loss at South Carolina to understand his capacity for running the system?

The comments about Murray and the interior line do make me wonder if this team will struggle with an identity crisis.  Bobo put it plainly: "we were gonna play to our strength: The play-action pass and the running game." It wasn’t just the fans who anticipated a good running game to develop behind a veteran offensive line.  I don’t expect the Dawgs to go 5-wide for the rest of the season, but the promise of a more involved Murray does make me question if we, the media, and even the coaches have the strengths right.

Two more Bulldog arrests over the weekend, barely a week after Damon Evans was toppled, has the message boards and media up in arms again over the state of discipline in the Georgia program. Short-timer David Hale still manages to capture the exasperation of the Bulldog Nation by asking “when’s the last time UGA had a worse offseason than this?“

Hale’s talking about more than just the arrests of course. We start with the coaching changes in the aftermath of the 2009 season. The coaching changes were definitely disruptive and will be a big part of the story in 2010, but you’ll have to dig deep to find many fans who see the changes as a negative. The drama surrounding the arrest and subsequent resignation of athletic director Damon Evans was certainly a huge story for the athletic department, but it has little impact on the short-term operation of the football program. That brings us to the arrests, and there are many.

• DE Montez Robinson: Robinson’s dismissal in April started the offseason problems. Robinson ran into trouble during the 2009 season and found more of the same this spring, derailing an attempt at a comeback.
• QB Zach Mettenberger: Mettenberger’s spring break arrest ultimately led to his dismissal from the program and made the QB depth chart a sudden concern. The future of would-be receiver Logan Gray and the readiness of true freshman Hutson Mason are now key questions.
• Walk-ons Trent Dittmer and Josh Parrish were arrested in April for alcohol-related incidents. Dittmer was kicked off the team, and Parrish was suspended indefinitely.
• BratGate: It ended up being a non-issue, but RB Dontavious Jackson found himself in potential trouble when some acquaintances of his harassed and attacked a couple in an Athens taxi. Jackson was vindicated as a “peacemaker” in the incident, but his name and the strange story behind the incident went nationwide for a few days until his role emerged.
• DB Jordan Love: It will go down as the most surreal incident of the summer, and we’re still waiting on charges to be dismissed. I’d be surprised if Love’s incident resulted in a suspension, but a judge’s unwillingness to end this madness last week kept the uncertainty alive.
• RB Dontavious Jackson: For the second time this year, Jackson’s name is in the news. This time it’s for DUI, and it’s earned him at least a six-game suspension. For someone already struggling to make an impact on the depth chart, this suspension could sink his chances of contributing on the field.
• WR Tavarres King: King was arrested along with Jackson, but King was 1) a first-time offender and 2) not facing nearly the list of charges Jackson is.

That’s an awful lot to happen in the past three or four months and has certainly created some headaches for Mark Richt, but fans have the luxury of skipping ahead to this question: how does it affect the team I’ll see on the field this season? I don’t mean to sound flippant about players getting arrested, especially when drunk driving is involved, but neither do I see the point of over-the-top hand-wringing from budding Lord High Executioners typified by this column in the Red and Black. “The University cannot continually endure summer after summer of this juvenile and immature behavior from its most high-profile athletes?” Really? It can’t? 225 years down the drain?

But how can you blame student writers for hyperbole when the pros demonstrate a similar lack of perspective? Take Ron Higgins of Memphis who plays an interesting game of connect-the-dots to call Mark Richt’s future into question. If you read Higgins’ piece, you’d get the impression that Damon Evans was the only administrator fighting for Richt against a university and its quick-on-the-trigger president that can’t wait to see Richt gone. Of course that’s fantasy, and it’s backed up with nothing at all but conjecture, but that’s easy summertime fodder for someone who intends on giving very little thought to what all of this actually means to Mark Richt and his job in 2010.

In terms of actual impact, you have this: a promising sophomore defensive end/outside linebacker expected to see playing time is gone. So is the presumptive #2 QB. A likely starting receiver is out for at least one game. A 4th string tailback is out for half the year. You can create plausible scenarios in which all but the Jackson suspension have a significant impact on the team’s 2010 fortunes, but unless King’s suspension is extended into the South Carolina game the team is still in fairly good shape. The loss of Robinson hurts at a thin position, and hopefully we won’t have to find out much about the second-string quarterback. No, that doesn’t make it all OK or excuse the behavior – it’s just an honest accounting of the situation on the football field.

Getting back to Hale’s question, I’ll suggest that the buildup to the 2003 season still stands out. The combination of injuries, suspensions, and the scandal of selling SEC Championship rings had the Bulldogs headed into a season-opening road trip to Clemson with significant holes on defense (not to mention an offensive line dominated by underclassmen). Eight players were suspended. The situation in the secondary was so dire that the Bulldogs turned to a freshman walk-on named Tra Battle to do what he could against a Clemson offense that was defined by its passing game. Here’s a summary of what Georgia was missing entering the 2003 season:

Injured
Will Thompson, DE, Dislocated Ankle, OUT for year
Cedric Haywood, SE, Knee-ACL, OUT for year
Marquis Elmore, DE, Ankle Sprain, OUT for Clemson game

Suspended
Tyson Browning-RB (3 games), Tim Jennings-DB (2 games), DeMario Minter-S (2 games), B.J. Fields-DB, Chris Hickman-FB, Jamario Smith-FB, Mario Raley-SE, Bryan McClendon-FLK (1 game)

Could Miss Opener
Gerald Anderson, NT, Neck Sprain
Greg Blue, ROV, Knee-PCL
Kentrell Curry, ROV, Stress Fracture in Leg
Michael Turner, C, Shoulder Sprain
Ken Veal, NT, Ankle Sprain

Yes, a lot of those absences were injuries, and we’re not even to the point yet in 2010 of dreading the daily Red Cross Reports from preseason camp. The suspensions were still significant, and RingGate brought on its own hand-wringing and existential crisis. (Has everyone recovered yet from that stain on their diplomas? Good.) There’s no great lesson here; we’re still talking about degrees of misery. The SEC East title (and one incredible defense) that followed eight suspensions in 2003 means as little for this team as the 8-5 finish that followed a relatively clean offseason in 2009.

Paul nails several key issues that the new athletic director will have to face over the next several years. I’m especially concerned about retaining Mark Fox. But as soon as he hits the ground – be it six months or a year from now, there are two things Evans’ replacement should see to. Yes, I’m not including anything about football here. Short of facilities needs, the football program just requires a laissez-faire approach. In addition to firming up the strengths of the athletic department, there is one sport that seems out of alignment with its recent history and potential. More on that in a second. The top priority is…

Continue to build on what Evans did well. Michael Adams said he was troubled most by the “loss of potential” upon Damon Evans’ arrest and resignation. It’s frustrating that a competent and respected administrator who had developed a good organization was done in by a personal flaw. Job #1 of Evans’ replacement will be to first do no harm in these areas which have become strengths of the Bulldog program:

• Sound financial management. Membership in the SEC puts you ahead of the game, but it’s easy to take that gravy train for granted and to forget the expense side. Georgia has maintained a healthy financial standing while continuing to invest in facilities improvements, and that shouldn’t change under new leadership.
• Academic emphasis. The Harrick scandal did a lot of damage to the academic reputation of Georgia student-athletes, and a lot has been done to repair that reputation. Georgia’s performance in the APR has been consistently near the top of the SEC. The Rankin Smith Center is an outstanding resource. Class attendance is enforced. None of that is unique to Georgia, but it’s still a culture that needs to be kept up and constantly resupported.
• NCAA compliance. As President Adams noted earlier, there wasn’t a hint of impropriety concerning compliance issues under Evans. Again, compliance is as much cultural as anything.
• Support for basketball. It might prove to be Damon Evans’ most positive legacy. The new practice facility, the ongoing Stegeman Coliseum renovation, and the hiring of Mark Fox have Georgia basketball fans daring to be optimistic about the future. Fox has already started to show results on the court and on the recruiting trail, and he won’t have his hands tied by longstanding concerns about facilities going forward. A new athletic director needs to continue to nurture this turnaround which is still at a very fragile state.

Repair the relationship with baseball. The future of David Perno is just one piece of the puzzle. If the relationship between the program and the athletic department hasn’t been adversarial, it’s still been troubling. The issue of the Nike bats imposed on the team was probably the most public example of the difficulties. Facilities also remain an issue: there are plans for a reconfiguration of Foley Field, now at 20+ years since its last renovation, and work is underway to replace bleachers with chairback seating. There is some sentiment that baseball now occupies the back seat once reserved for basketball. Whether progress requires a change in leadership of the program or just a better relationship between the program and the athletic department is up in the air. We’ve seen the potential of the program over the past decade, and work needs to be done to realize that potential on a much more consistent basis.

Maintaining the cash cow that is football revenue is important, but the program can also do more to grow its other revenue sources. That comes back to a stronger basketball program and investment in baseball. Georgia hoops brings in about $7.3 million and even turns a profit of nearly $1 million, but that revenue is towards the bottom of the pack in the SEC. Not surprising for a program that’s struggled to win, but the possibility for $2-3 million additional dollars is there if the turnaround continues. Baseball is also a potential source of additional revenue, but the capacity of Foley Field is a constraint. The current project to convert bleachers to chairbacks might even reduce capacity. There are no luxury boxes or sources of premium revenue. Can the demand be generated to merit significant investment in the baseball facility?

Haven’t had the chance to read much G-Day reaction, so I’ll get these few observations out before I catch up. I’m sure others have made many of the same points by now – we all watched the same game.

It was what I’ve come to expect from G-Day – more frustration than anything else. Another pretty bland, low-scoring game. With the intention of keeping the defense pretty much basic, the staff probably didn’t mind the lack of fireworks. Whether it was the effectiveness of the defense or a bad day by an offense that’s supposed to be pretty loaded, those you’d consider the sure starters on offense played a very minor role. Washaun Ealey had just 22 yards. AJ Green had a few catches but not much yardage. The biggest plays of the game were by reserve tailbacks and tight ends. If you tend to buy into G-Day as any sort of indicator for the season, the first-team offense has a ways to go.

Of course the biggest buzz after the game was about the quarterbacks. It was Zach Mettenberger’s day – it seemed as if he completed a lot more than six passes, but those six completions seemed to completely reverse the fans’ perception of the quartertback position. Many of the conversations I had after the game were half-hearted attempts to rationalize the outcome:

Mett was going up against the second-team defense all day. Yeah, but… Murray didn’t do much in the first quarter going up against the same defense.

Mett didn’t handle pressure well. Yeah, but… did anyone?

It was only G-Day – one game. Yeah, but… Mettenberger’s been strong in the other spring scrimmages as well. In the three scrimmages, Mettenberger was a combined 23-36 (64%) with 5 TD and 2 INT. G-Day was his *worst* scrimmage of the spring in terms of completions.

I think for most of us, the story of the day wasn’t that Mettenberger did relatively well. He had another good day, and we should be as thrilled to see that as we were to see Carlton Thomas and Dontavious Jackson showing off the depth at tailback. The story was that Murray, heralded as he was, looked decidedly average. His deep passes were often overthrown, and he missed touchdowns to both Green and Charles. His interception was a bad mistake – a common freshman mistake of getting careless while trying to create something after a play breaks down. Even his size came into question when a pass was batted down at the line. I think it said something that the final drive of the day still had Murray and the first team offense in there trying to make something happen in a 2-minute drive. That was unusual as far as most G-Days go, and I got the feeling that the staff was trying to give Murray (not to mention the first team offense) one last chance to end the day with something positive.

That’s not to ignore Logan Gray. A few months ago, many of us had assumed he’d be a receiver by now. He didn’t light it up with the starting offense, but he didn’t make many mistakes either. His touchdown pass was a perfectly-executed play fake and bootleg (wait – I thought the new defense meant the end of those!), and he ended up with a fair 10-of-17 performance.

I guess I’m just surprised that the quarterback play and offense overall was so lackluster. Mettenberger had the best day, but he still had just six completions. They were facing a base defense that’s still being installed by three new coaches. Pressure was limited, and the QBs weren’t allowed to be hit. They won’t face more accommodating circumstances. But any semblance of a vertical passing game was absent. The starting offensive line was hardly an advantage against an uncomplicated defense that showed a lot of nickle. With the quarterback the lone question mark on an offense otherwise stocked with proven players, was it that one position that kept the starting offense from doing more?

The staff will take their time coming up with a post-spring depth chart, but I think the way they lined up tells us how things were leaning. Gray got the start with the first team, Murray had opportunities all over the field with both units, and Mettenberger spent the day with the second team. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the depth chart reflect the fact that no quarterback seemed to have separated himself – will we see a co-#1 or co-#2? Look, whether it’s Gray, Mett, or Murray, I just hope settling on a starter is not dragged out until the Vandy game again.

I still maintain that the suspension of Mettenberger makes it virtually impossible that he will be the starter. It seems very unlikely that the staff would pass on the chance to give the starter experience in the season opener and then change the signal-caller within a week for a road game that’s also the SEC opener. So much of preseason camp is building routine and familiarity so that decisions come more by instinct than by thought during a game. I can’t see how it would be anything but disruptive if the starter were changed for any reason other than injury.

The progress of Mettenberger is very reassuring though. It shows a good deal of maturity for him to deal with his embarrassing arrest and still manage to have a strong spring when much might not have been expected of him. It’s also becoming a success story for the Georgia staff. Mettenberger’s size and arm can’t be coached, but he could best be described as raw and unaccomplished coming out of high school. He’s not nearly there yet, but the progress is unmistakable.

On to other observations…

One of the positions that had the most to do with our perception of quarterback play was tight end. It’s one of the team’s deepest positions, and they were central to some of the game’s biggest plays. The Black team’s tight ends came to play, and Lynch’s touchdown at the end of the first half showed that nice combination of hands and brawn you want from a prototypical tight end. On the other hand, if we hadn’t seen White or Charles before Saturday, many fans would have probably come away disappointed. White was relatively anonymous. Charles had a couple of drops and had a chance for a late touchdown on a pass that was arguably a touch too high. If depth at receiver turns out to be an issue, Georgia still has plenty of options to make a 2-TE set work.

I know Nick Williams got lit up by Coach Grantham for his role in some late-game shoving, but I liked the intensity from Williams. Williams’ 7 tackles included some of the nicer tackles in the game including a few where he slammed the ball carrier to the ground.

Several of the deep incompletions were overthrown, but the secondary also got to several others. The pass breakup in the endzone on a late Murray strike to Durham was especially good. Hamilton played well enough to all but disappear (about as big a compliment as you can pay a defensive back), and the only time I remember seeing a guy break open deep was Green.

It was really nice to see Kris Durham back out there. He had a couple of plays that reminded us how valuable his hands and long stride will be this year. Wooten looks poised for a larger role.

Justin Houston is going to handle the transition to OLB just fine. He was also effective on the edge as the defense went to more of a 4-2 look against spread formations.

I had to laugh when fans around me were grumbling about the shanked punts after the first few series. It’s not like Georgia has the Ray Guy Award winner returning or anything.

The crowd was great though. With the north stands closed, the rest of the lower bowl and club level was full. You couldn’t ask for a better day, and Bulldog fans took advantage of it.

If it’s Signing Day, it must be time for points and counterpoints about the value of recruiting services and rankings. I can understand the doubts (but, really, how many times do we have to hear Thomas Davis’s name in these discussions?), and I can understand why many journalists don’t care to touch the subject. Following recruiting can be borderline obsessive, harassing, and at times straight up creepy. It used to be the province of subscription newsletters and 900 numbers. Now it’s big business online and into the mainstream. Did you think ten years ago that the ESPN crawler would be flashing a commitment by some 3-star cornerback who picked SMU over Central Florida and Maryland? Me neither.

Doc Saturday does the work – with actual math – and finds out that top-rated prospects are much more likely (per capita) to become All-Americans. Not all of them do – not even half of them or even most of them. That’s the basis of much of the criticism of recruiting rankings, but, as Brian Cook reminds us, those critics often < ahref="http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/the_sporting_blog/entry/view/53433/when_evaluating_recruiting_services,_dont_forget_to_divide">forget to divide.

With 120 FBS schools signing 20 or more prospects each year, that’s at least 2,400 guys entering Division I. The Rivals 100 or whatever list of top prospects you use makes up less than 5% of the incoming class nationwide. It’s reasonable that you’re going to have several individual success stories from among that 95%. 50 of the 93 All-Americans Dr. Saturday examines – the majority – were rated 3 stars or lower. That’s impressive until you do the math and see that those three-star or lower prospects make up the long tail which contains over 85% of incoming players.

The recruiting rankings might not be able to identify which specific prospects will make it big, but if they could they’d be several steps ahead of even the best coaches.

By now this is pretty well-worn ground, but I’ll just add the points I try to keep in mind during recruiting season:

• Recruiting ratings aren’t perfect. Neither are the evaluations of coaches who are paid much more for their expertise.
• Ratings can’t take into account intangibles like academics, an enjoyment of firearms, or brooding over that girl back home.
• Since not every top prospect pans out, you’d rather have more than fewer and increase your odds.
• Ranking players gets sketchier the greater the geographic area covered. High school football is just too big to see everyone out there.
• Need matters as much as talent. You can fill your class with top-rated receivers, but not filling needs on the offensive line or in the secondary will lose you games.
• Highlight videos are just that. You notice how they never show anyone fumbling or missing a tackle?
• If you ever find yourself saying or agreeing with the statement “give me a bunch of 2-and-3 star guys who bleed [team colors] over some 5 star prima donnas,” don’t operate heavy machinery. Yes, of course we’d all like a fleet of 5-star guys who grew up reenacting in the backyard our team’s most famous highlight, but prospects choose schools for any number of reasons, and not all of them are warm and fuzzy. Give me the best talent every time.
• When in doubt, look at the offers. Again, the enormity of high school football makes it possible for many guys to fall through the Tim Jennings-sized cracks and become the exceptions to the rule. But on the whole you’d rather be competing against your peers for a prospect and not the teams you schedule for Homecoming. There might be a reason why your Top 10 program is going after a guy also considering Akron and UMass, but it should be a good one.

Congratulations to Mark Ingram. He’s as good a choice as anyone this year, and his reaction to winning the Heisman was a great and genuine moment.

Ingram is barely home from New York, and he already faces the question faced by any underclassman winner: can he do it again? It would be a tough order, and history won’t be on his side. The previous two Heisman winners won as underclassmen and neither was able to repeat. In the case of Bradford, injury cut short any repeat talk before it could get started. In the case of Tebow, the phenomenon of Tebow fatigue and declining stats since that 2007 season kept him from repeating. Tebow still managed to become a rare 3-time finalist, and Ingram can still match that feat.

I don’t expect there to be nearly as much “Ingram fatigue” as there was Tebow fatigue. As star football players go, Ingram’s still relatively anonymous. He’s not the outspoken leader that Tebow is/was. With such teammates as Cody, McLain, and Julio Jones, it’s possible that Ingram isn’t even the biggest name on his own team. That will change almost immediately. The Ingram media blitz is underway, and he’ll be the centerpiece of the championship game coverage as well as every preseason publication next year. I still think it won’t be as obnoxious or overbearing as what we saw out of Gainesville, but that was as much the media’s creation as anything, and Ingram will only have so much control over his own image going forward.

If someone other than Ingram is going to win the 2010 Heisman, he’s likely going to have to come from relative obscurity (much as Ingram did). 2009 was unusual with established stars like Tebow, McCoy, and Bradford all returning, but that won’t be the case next year. Of the top 10 from this year’s results, only three – Ingram, Boise’s Kellen Moore, and Houston’s Case Keenum – might be back next year. That number might dwindle further as Keenum explores his draft options.

You’re sure to hear some specific names come up next year. There are the stars from traditional powers: Pryor for sure will at least be in the preseason discussion and given every chance to win it. Even young players like Barkley and Forcier could come into play if their teams have strong seasons. Then there are exciting players from the next tier of programs: Dion Lewis at Pitt is bound to draw some attention. Kellen Moore could launch his candidacy with a BCS bowl win this year. Ryan Williams at Virginia Tech and LaMichael James at Oregon were phenomenal freshmen. The Pac-10 will have several high-profile quarterbacks (Luck, Masoli, Barkley, and even Locker). Finally there are the gaudy stat guys. Keenum would be the head of this class if he returns. Ryan Mathews at Fresno put up over 1,600 yards rushing despite missing a game. Ryan Mallett had a strong season for Arkansas and could put up big numbers in Petrino’s offense, but turnover on the staff and general questions about the quality of Arkansas could hurt his Heisman chances.

But, yeah. There don’t seem to be many sure-fire candidates – as it stands now – to challenge Ingram. That’s the story of Ingram’s improbable season though. If someone other than the Big 3 quarterbacks was going to win the Heisman this year, hardly anyone mentioned that it could be the sophomore tailback from Alabama. Coming into 2009 Reggie Bush was the only non-quarterback to win the award this decade. Ingram himself was barely on the Heisman radar at midseason. A lot of players had some very good seasons, but the lack of a real focal point (think Tebow in 2007 or Bush in 2005) opened up the race to a group of nontraditional candidates like Gerhart, Suh, and of course the first Heisman winner from Alabama. As stark as the Heisman landscape might look entering 2010, we know there will be several players who emerge.

Ingram’s biggest obstacle to repeating might be sharing a locker room with him. Even playing behind a Heisman winner true freshman Trent Richardson managed 642 yards and 5.1 YPC. I’m not suggesting that Richardson will beat out Ingram next year, but they will split time. It’s a fact of life as a tailback. Will Ingram get enough carries to put up Heisman-type numbers, and can he match his 6+ YPC number again? The presence of another capable back isn’t necessarily a death sentence for Heisman hopes though – Ingram won it this year despite Richardson’s impressive freshman season, and Reggie Bush managed just fine alongside another NFL-quality back.

What does Ingram have to do to repeat? At the bare minimum, he’ll need to:

• Stay healthy. Ingram played through some pain late in the season, but anything more serious could have cost him valuable exposure and stats in a tight race. It was only two years ago that Dennis Dixon had his legitimate Heisman chances stopped cold by injury.
• Put up far better numbers. Ingram’s 2009 stats were enough for him to win a close vote this year, but they were the fewest rushing yards by any Heisman-winning back since 1975. He can’t hope to repeat if his stats drop or even stay constant – the bar has been set. The challenge will be getting his numbers while playing alongside Richardson and a maturing passing game that features McElroy, Jones, and Maze.
• Feature on a winning team. Bama still figures to be strong, but just dropping a game or two along the way could derail a Heisman candidate. Alabama will play Penn State and Florida in addition to the usual SEC slate in 2010.

It’s official – the Dawgs are going to meet the 6-6 Texas A&M Aggies in the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl on Monday Dec. 28 at 5:00 ET.  The game will be televised on ESPN2.  Georgia is 1-3 all-time against the Aggies.  Georgia dropped the first three meetings – including a postseason loss in the 1950 Presidential Cup Bowl.  But the Dawgs took the most recent game – a 42-0 win in Athens in 1980.

If you wanted to find the least ideal opponent for a team that was short three defensive coaches, it would be a team that was near the top of a major conference and rated among the top 5 nationally in total offense.  That’s just what Georgia is getting in Texas A&M.  Through all games, the Aggies led the Big 12 in total offense and were third in scoring offense.  Isolating only conference games A&M was second in total offense and still third in scoring offense.  They got there primarily behind a rushing offense that was second-best in the league with 180 YPG, and they also averaged 245.4 YPG passing against Big 12 competition.

The Aggie running game is led by a duo of backs Christine Michael and Cyrus Gray.  The two have similar stats, but Michael leads the team in touchdowns and has been getting the bulk of the carries lately.  The running game is augmented by a mobile quarterback.  Jerrod Johnson is an efficient passer who torched Texas for 342 yards passing and 97 yards on the ground.  For the season Johnson has an impressive 455 net yards and 8 touchdowns rushing along with 28 TD through the air against just 6 INT. (By contrast, the Georgia record for passing touchdowns in a season is 25.) 

The Georgia defense and its hodgepodge of coaches will have a tough job first containing the triple running threat while paying attention to a diversified passing game that has seen nine Aggies (including both featured tailbacks) record at least 15 receptions during the season.  They convert third downs at nearly a 50% clip, thanks no doubt to Johnson’s ability to create.

There’s a silver lining of course and a reason why such a potent offense led to a 6-6 record.  The Aggies were the Big 12’s worst defense in terms of scoring defense and total defense.  They gave up over 460 YPG to conference opponents.  They were dead last in passing defense, and their rushing defense is also among the bottom quarter of the Big 12.  Against bowl-eligible Big 12 teams, the Aggies gave up an average of 42 PPG. 

As you might expect, that volatile combination of potent offense and toxic defense has led to A&M being on both sides of some lopsided scores.  They got blown out by Arkansas and Kansas State but rebounded to put up at least 35 points in wins over bowl-bound Texas Tech and Iowa State.  They followed those wins up by losing to a bad Colorado team and getting destroyed 65-10 by an Oklahoma squad that limped to a 7-5 record. 

Many saw A&M’s most recent outing – a 49-39 loss to Texas on Thanksgiving night.  The Aggies, led by Johnson’s incredible performance, kept pace with the #2 team in the nation but had their back broken by a 95-yard kickoff return.  The Aggies put up a prodigious 532 yards but allowed 597 (plus 186 return yards).

There are common opponents. Two weeks after losing to Georgia in Fayetteville, Arkansas put a 47-19 beating on Texas A&M at a neutral-site game in Dallas. Arkansas trailed after the first quarter but put up 23 points in the second quarter to break the game open.  The Hogs were able to move the ball on the ground as well as through the air, and their dominance of the game let Mallet have a relatively reserved 17-27-271 day with 4 TD passes.

The Aggies fared slightly better against Oklahoma State.  The Cowboys won by a close 36-31 margin in College Station. Georgia lost 24-10 in the season opener at Oklahoma State.

Georgia’s defense will have its work cut out, but the offense will be under pressure to put points on the board and keep the ball away from a potent Aggie attack.  The Dawgs led their conference in scoring (in conference games), but they’ve also done themselves in with turnovers. They’ll need the strong running game we saw at Georgia Tech to control the clock and keep the Aggie firepower on the bench.  There should also be opportunities in the passing game, and the return of A.J. Green could provide a big spark for Georgia.

As we wait for the BCS and bowl picture to shake out this afternoon…

• The final week of the regular season proved to be one of the most entertaining of the year.  From Fresno-Illinois to the big championship games, there was no shortage of drama, amazing individual performances, or great finishes.  It was also the week of the botched extra point.
• What has Texas done over the past two games to make their case as the presumptive opponent for Alabama?  Take another look at that non-conference schedule. Scheduling a championship season is something we talked about as soon as last season ended, and it looks as if the Longhorns are going to get there. 
• Most of the best individual efforts in yesterday’s game came from the losing side.  Suh, Spiller, Keenum, and Dion Lewis were all standouts in their games but were let down by those on the other side of the ball.
• Good news: Charlie Strong might be headed to Louisville.  Bad news:  Florida might join a crowded market for defensive coordinators.  Georgia’s under a lot of pressure already to make an impact hire, and, in the hyper-competitive SEC, you know that Georgia fans are going to measure their choice of coordinator against Florida’s.
• Speaking of which, I think we can safely remove Kevin Steele from Georgia’s list.  A lot of teams look bad against Tech’s offense, but that wasn’t the best audition last night. Given two shots against Tech this year Clemson’s defense actually looked worse last night than back in September.
• Will Tech be among those making defensive changes in the offseason?  Paul Johnson can’t like grinding out touchdown drives only to give up a quick score going the other way.  They’ve come out on the right side of most of their shootouts this year, but that’s mostly due to his offense’s ability to control the clock at the end of the game.
• I’m hoping for a Tech-Cincinnati matchup in the Orange Bowl.  We’d get to see whether that scoreboard has a third digit.
• Welcome Zander Ogletree to Georgia football.  UGASports.com broke the news ($) yesterday that the twin brother of safety Alec Ogletree would join the recruiting class of 2010. 
• Georgia’s defense is going to be short on coaches heading into the bowl game.  I can’t blame the departing coaches; their top priority now is finding their next gig.  Mark Richt and Rodney Garner will direct the defense with help from graduate assistants.  Hopefully the offensive scheme of the bowl opponent will be pretty straightforward – I wouldn’t be too excited about playing a team like Missouri.
• Congratulations to Alabama.  Incredible effort and plan on both sides of the ball.  Florida’s running game has been a storyline for several years now, and it was glaring yesterday. 

1. You have someone in mind who’s the obvious choice to head up Georgia’s defense.
2. There’s someone else who thinks that would be a worse hire than Mike Locksley at New Mexico.

I’m not even going to bother with a list because there’s a good chance few will be familiar with the coordinator (and definitely the assistants) Georgia ends up hiring. Mark Richt hasn’t had to make a lot of staff changes, but I don’t recall seeing names like VanGorder or Jancek or Searels before they were brought on. The world of college football is a much bigger one than the same three or four names you’re seeing everywhere.

So after yesterday’s fun it looks as if Shreveport and the Independence Bowl are the most likely postseason destination for Georgia. There’s enough griping about that, but it’s really not worth getting worked up over. I’ll still eat at Chick-fil-A (mmmmmmmm…Peppermint Chocolate Chip milkshake…..). Of course nothing’s official now until the conference allows bids to go out after the championship game, and it’s amusing to read all of the disclaimers and denials taking place since the announcements started breaking after Auburn and the Outback broke the logjam. “We haven’t extended an invitation to anyone yet. In fact, we’re still researching at this moment exactly which teams are in the SEC and ACC. Of course we’re still VERY interested in – what team are you calling about again?” said Chick-fil-A Bowl spokesman Gary Stokan.

So, at the risk of going against protocol, we’ll still assume it’s Shreveport for the Dawgs. And that’s life. As Texas Dawg noted in the comments yesterday, it could mean an interesting opponent from the Big 12. With teams like Oklahoma, Missouri, and Texas A&M in play a decent matchup does seem to be a possibility. I’m about over playing the Big 10 at this point. And at the very least, Georgia will be an answer to a trivia question as the bowl will sever its tie with the SEC after this season.

Still, Shreveport remains a bit of a punchline among SEC fans, and people seem in agreement on what this destination offers as a lesson for Georgia: take care of business next time against Kentucky. Actually, that’s not the lesson. Auburn lost 5 of its last six games against FBS competition including a home game with Kentucky but still finds itself headed for a New Year’s Day bowl. That’s the thing about a glut of 7-5 teams: we can beat ourselves up for losing to Kentucky, but any of our peers can be singled out for their blunders and missed opportunities too. The lesson is something Mark Richt has said many times in the past. When you don’t take care of the things you can control, you leave your fate to the whims of others. It’s not about what one team or another deserves or has earned. The same whims can set you up on New Year’s Day in Florida or banish you to Shreveport, and either fate can be justified.

There’s another lesson, though. Would Georgia, at 8-4, be a more attractive to a bowl than a herd of 7-5 teams? Well, yes, that’s the point of the “just beat Kentucky next time” lesson. But Georgia is also the only one of the SEC’s six 7-5 teams to face three BCS conference opponents in their nonconference schedule, two of which were ranked. Where did that get us?

Tennessee and Georgia both finished the season with identical overall and conference records (7-5 and 4-4). The other four SEC teams with 7-5 records all were 3-5 in the league and got to seven wins with perfect nonconference records. Of those teams, only South Carolina played more than one nonconference opponent from a BCS conference. Would Tennessee or Georgia be more attractive bowl teams had they swapped UCLA or Oklahoma State for a generic mid-major to get to 8-4? It didn’t hurt Ole Miss, did it?

There’s another way to look at it of course. These trips to Tempe, Boulder, and – I suppose – Stillwater can be their own bowl trips within a season. Anyone who made the trip to Tempe can tell you that the scene felt just like a bowl (and a major bowl at that). The upside in a situation like 2008 is that you get a nice midseason bowl-like trip and get the win that builds your resume for a better postseason bowl bid. We saw the downside this year when a nonconference road loss to a quality opponent probably contributed (along with the whole losing 4 conference games thing) to missing out on a more attractive bowl game.

Damon Evans’ consistent message in his approach to scheduling is to “build the brand”. That brand took enough damage this year thanks to the results on the field, but the aggressive scheduling won’t be doing the brand any favors this bowl season.

It’s been over a month since the last game at Sanford Stadium. We left Sanford on the afternoon of October 3rd deflated after a heartbreaking loss to #4 LSU. Though Georgia did plenty to lose that game – impotent first half offense, allowing two 4th quarter touchdowns, and shoddy kick coverage – the officials served as a convenient lightning rod to draw criticism and blame away from the team.

Saying that the month away from home has been disappointing is an understatement. Georgia has suffered two decisive losses to divisional foes, and a team that headed for Knoxville confident of its ability to play with top 10 teams is now resetting its goals and aiming for bowl eligibility. We’re long past blaming the refs or anything else extraneous; it’s to the point that we’re starting to go overboard in eating our own. Such is the climate to which the Bulldogs return from their month on the road.

It’s pretty easy to guess what kind of reception the Bulldogs will receive at Homecoming: indifference. Questions about empty seats came up at the weekly press conference. The unspoken answer is that there will be many. Those who don’t unload tickets on the babysitter and still decide to come will make up the typically bland Homecoming crowd. The team might or might not play their best game of the year or might turn it over 3 more times, but a 1:00 kickoff, a 1-AA opponent, and a Homecoming game on pay-per-view isn’t going to make much of an impression. Forgive me if I look past this game.

I’m starting to buy in to the idea that the Auburn game in a week is the biggest remaining game on the schedule. That’s not to concede or discount the Tech game (that’s always the game that I circle personally), but I’m thinking more about the need to hold it together in front of a home crowd whose opinions have shifted quite a bit in such a short time.

It was 10 years ago that Georgia suffered a home loss to Auburn that led to one of the ugliest scenes I can remember at Sanford Stadium. The damage done by that loss shook the faith of the fans in a coach who was less than two years removed from a top 10 finish and a win over Florida. That coach wouldn’t last but another season at Georgia. You might argue that Richt is on much stronger ground now than Donnan was at midseason in 1999, and you’d be right. But does that ground seem as firm as it did as recently as a month ago?

Georgia fans drew praise in 2008 for sticking by the team at halftime and beyond during the loss to Alabama. For those of us who remember the 1999 Auburn game it was a remarkable contrast. At the same time there was an implicit caution not to go to the well of good will too soon and too often. Blutarsky talks a bit about that this morning. Richt standing on his record is certainly valid, but doing so "indicates that he’s already spent some of that good will…banked…as a result of his track record." When it comes to the support of the home fans, much of that good will was spent against Alabama and Georgia Tech last season, and not much has been put back into the till since.

The optimist in me doesn’t want to consider the fallout from another blowout loss at home. It was, in hindsight, fortunate that the Tennessee game was on the road. I’m not anticipating a loss, blowout or otherwise, to Auburn, but we do have to concede concerns going up against an offense that has looked great at times this year against a defense that hasn’t. A loss to Auburn isn’t a pleasant thing to consider – not only would it be a loss to Auburn, but I really do worry about the reaction of the crowd on a national broadcast. Fans are coming into the game with arms crossed, eyebrows raised, and in a foul temperament. It won’t take much to set them off. I hope we never find out.

Beating Auburn won’t salvage the season or prevent the uncomfortable post-season evaluations that must occur. A win sets up the possibilities of a 5-1 home record, a good-but-not-great 5-3 SEC record, and a 3-game winning streak going into Atlanta. That might seem like small potatoes (especially with the big game left to finish the season), but it would be an indication of a team that hasn’t given up on the season and is determined to finish it out.

Any conversation I’ve had about the game took an average of 8 seconds to get to that disclaimer.  Look – no one’s claiming that the win healed all wounds and that the Dawgs have turned it around.  But Vanderbilt was the opponent, and – for a nice change – Georgia took care of business against a lesser opponent without much drama.  It was only Vandy two years ago when the Dawgs escaped by a field goal.  In 2006 the Dawgs followed up an ugly loss to Tennessee by imploding against Vanderbilt at home.  With so much negativity around the program this week Georgia responded by handing Vandy their biggest loss of the year and recording the biggest Georgia win in Nashville since 1993.

Even disclaiming the quality of competition, there was plenty to like:

• Georgia got out in front, held a lead, and put away Vanderbilt.  Sounds simple, but the Dawgs had found a way to make things interesting in each of their other three wins.
• Georgia gave Vanderbilt very few opportunities to get back in the game with field position, turnovers, or special teams mistakes.
• The Dawgs immediately answered both Vandy scores cutting off any chance the Commodores had of getting on a roll.
• Though the running game struggled for much of the game it showed up when it was time to put the game away.  Time-of-possession was in Vandy’s favor most of the game, but it ended up being nearly a five minute advantage for Georgia by the end of the game.  The nearly seven minute 4th quarter drive that ended with Munzenmaier’s touchdown was a thing of beauty.
• Georgia was an acceptable 7-for-15 on third downs while limiting Vandy to just 3-of-15.
• With the exception of the fake punt that proved harmless, Georgia’s special teams were strong in all areas. Even kick coverage was decent with no return longer than 20 yards, and the kick out of bounds at the end of the first half was good strategy if it was intentional and not a bad outcome if it was accidental.

It wasn’t a perfect result  – the running game still struggles, Vandy was more effective on offense than the score indicates, and even Cox and the receivers had a tough time getting on the same page at times – but the simple conclusion that Georgia did what you’re supposed to do against a weaker team is more than many of us expected heading into the game.

There’s a certain clarity that comes from games like Saturday’s loss. There’s no ridiculous penalty, no turnover, no play (unless you count 17 versions of the same bootleg play), and no specific coaching decision on which you can pin a loss like that. In earlier setbacks you could take some solace in the performance of the defense as the offense struggled, excuse points away to field position, or zero in on horrible calls against Rashad Jones or A.J. Green. You could look ahead to the next game thinking how things might finally click if we just stopped those pesky turnovers. That fog has lifted after a weekend that ended with Mark Richt admitting that “where we are right now is a culmination of everyone.”

HR Department

It’s not my place to be flippant with the careers and livelihoods of Georgia’s coaches. We’re customers and not shareholders or managers, and our choice is ultimately whether or not to buy the product (a fact which will be very evident come kickoff of the Tennessee Tech game). That doesn’t imply satisfaction or complacency. It’s Mark Richt’s job to manage his staff and team, not mine, and his program’s success will ride on those decisions. He’s certainly given us plenty of reason to trust his judgment when it comes to building a successful program, but the current competitive landscape and the state of the Georgia program are uncharted waters for this coach. At the very least he’s earned the opportunity to try to navigate these waters.

I will say one thing though to those who still maintain some sort of firewall between their feelings for certain assistants and their reverence for the head coach. If the start to this season has made any difference in the way fans view the program, it’s that their dissatisfaction can no longer be put on a specific area or assistant. There is a program problem now, and it’s Richt’s problem to address.

Calling for changes on defense is nothing new; some have been at it since the first half of the West Virginia game that concluded the 2005 season. Grumbling about special teams (and kickoffs in particular) is also a well-worn path. But aside from the occasional gripe with John Eason whenever a receiver dropped a pass or pointing out the offense’s role in some of the spectacular team meltdowns over the past couple of seasons, most of the vocal critics have been able to target the bulk of their criticism at one or maybe two assistants and reassure themselves that the one simple change is all that’s keeping Richt’s Georgia program from reaching its fullest potential.

Is that possible any longer? Is there an area of the program about which to feel confident apart from A.J. Green’s natural gifts or the legs of Butler and Walsh? I don’t mean that in an emotional fling-poo-blame-everyone sense. There just isn’t a part of the team performing at a high level right now. Even the offensive line – the supposed strength of the team – hasn’t been able to survive the loss of a single player. I’ve even seen calls for Richt to take playcalling duties back from Mike Bobo – a decision that was universally hailed as a success at the end of the 2006 season.

I don’t envy Richt’s position over the next couple of months. Fans would replace coaches weekly if they could with all the cold consideration of managing a fantasy football roster. Richt has to deal with some very difficult decisions regarding men he respects professionally and likes personally. Part of the current level of grumbling among the fans has to do with Richt’s unwillingness to make changes following last season in which some of the same issues manifested themselves. Instead an intact staff (except for voluntary turnover) plus an emphasis on the vague concept of “leadership”, a relatively healthy roster, and even a well-disciplined off-season haven’t added up to much. It could be argued that the program is currently living with the consequences of prior indecision.

You can see the weight of the situation pressing on Richt. It shows up in sharp postgame exchanges with reporters. It shows up in the bunker mentality that has Richt talking about the “honor in being in the arena.” It’s even more frustrating and concerning for the staff and players, but at the same time there are many fans and members of the media still willing to stay in Richt’s corner. Now’s not the time to push them away no matter how high the level of frustration.

This painful situation is of course the tradeoff of a program built on loyalty and family. That’s almost always a feature and not a bug. It’s proven to be a winning culture – a culture that was cited when sought-after assistants turned down opportunities elsewhere to continue on in this working environment. Is part of the appeal knowing that the pressure to produce is sometimes less in such a culture? That’s a question for Richt that will have to be considered even any staff changes that take place; any postseason assessment will have to look at the incentives and rewards within the program that guide and reinforce the culture, and it goes way beyond money. Those kinds of touchy-feely management issues can be some of the most difficult for technically proficient head coaches who excel at the principles of football.

What’s Next

Regardless of how you feel about the staff, we’re just not likely to see many changes before the end of the season. This is the team and staff that’s going to trot out there for the next six or seven games. We have the luxury of thinking about decisions that are months away, but the team still has at least six games left and can’t afford to become preoccupied over the last one.

Earlier in the season it was possible to talk about the team Georgia could be if they eliminated certain mistakes and played more efficient and smart football. Now halfway into the season we have to admit that those traits are more or less the identity of the team. Turnovers, questionable decision-making (fielding a punt on the 1? spiking the ball as the clock runs out?), and porous pass coverage remain and don’t seem to be going away.

It’s disappointing and frustrating for fans, and I know many people have already written off this season and will wait for significant changes before getting back on board. That’s understandable – it can be a big investment of time and money. For those willing to stick it out with this team and season, I hope you listen to Michael Moore. That seems much more honest – and also much more likely to be embraced by the fans – than the stone wall coming from the coaching staff. Following Saturday’s comments, Richt was much more open on Sunday about putting everyone on notice. “I’m pointing the finger at all of us as a whole. We must all improve, period,” he said.

Any time a program faces a crisis like this, you have to pay attention to recruiting. Georgia has the bulk of another impressive class already committed, but it’s reasonable to expect that even the most rock-solid commitment will be observing how Georgia finishes the season with special attention given to any changes on the staff. Lane Kiffin is going to wave this win in the face of as many recruits as he can find this week, and I don’t blame him; it’s the only thing on which he can hang his hat going into the bye week recruiting trips. The building frenzy of Georgia fans calling for a scorched-earth approach to the coaching staff won’t go unnoticed either.

2007?

We love our analogies. Towards the end of last week I began to hear a lot of Georgia-following-FSU comparisons to tie Richt’s problems to Bowden’s, and FSU’s shootout loss to Tech on Saturday certainly didn’t help things. Now we’ve started to see and hear a few people mentioning Georgia’s stunning turnaround in 2007 which followed a disappointing start and an ugly loss at Tennessee.

Is such a turnaround possible? Sure. Georgia stands a chance against all of its remaining components (and that includes Florida). The biggest difference between 2007 and 2009 is the lack of upward vectors on this Georgia team. In 2007, you had a sophomore Matthew Stafford coming into his own. Knowshon Moreno put up 157 yards at Vanderbilt in a game that transformed him from impressive newcomer to the supercharged star we all saw finish the season. Defensive end Marcus Howard also began to come on strong towards the middle and end of the season and gave Georgia the pass rush they needed to become a much more effective defensive team. There appear to be few players on those kinds of trajectories this year. Joe Cox hasn’t been a disaster at quarterback, but his floor and ceiling appear to be set. The tailback situation is as muddled as it was before the season. Justin Houston’s return did give the pass rush a nice shot in the arm, but the overall defense still struggles.

“Georgia is just as close to 1-5…”

One last thing: please – enough of this. It’s bad enough that Georgia is 3-3; let’s not start taking away wins or players. Yes, Georgia would be worse off without A.J. Green (duh). But he’s on the team. Georgia did come close to losing the South Carolina and Arizona State games, but playing the what-if game with those close outcomes does a disservice to the plays made by guys like Green and Rennie Curran to secure those victories. If this isn’t going to be a championship season, such standout plays might be the best things we’ll have to take from the season.