Hypocrisy is not an option here.

I must admit, the Georgia partisan in me is completely aghast at the prospect circulating the ESPN's of the world right now. A non-conference champion from the Big 12 South is being discussed as a viable option in the national title run right now. Seriously? I mean, what makes a 1 loss Texas or Oklahoma team that doesn't win it's division a more acceptable National Title game participant this season than Georgia was last year? It was blasphemy last season to suggest that 10-2 Georgia was just as good, if not better than 10-2 LSU was at the end of the season, and now we're at the point where it's completely acceptable to put forth Texas or Oklahoma as national title participants even though we're all aware they very likely will not win their own division?

Look, I get it. It's ok, really. I mean, the Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma situation is a tough one for pollsters. 3 teams potentially sitting at 11-1 at seasons end is a hard question to answer, especially all in the same division. However, the rule is still the rule. If you stood up and lobbied hard for Georgia being unworthy of last year's national title game (I'm looking at you ESPN), then you cannot in good concionce ask me to swallow a complete change of pace this year. I, just like all the other Georgia homers pointed out that it seemed fine for Nebraska and Oklahoma to play for national titles without winning their respective conferences, but for Georgia it was a big no-no. Well, you made a compelling arguement that voters have learned from that mistake (see both teams loosing). To now completely go back on that and have no problem just accepting that one of the Big 12 South teams, even if they aren't a conference champion, should be in the game? Well, that just stings. Tell me the truth. After watching LSU play Tennessee in last year's SEC title game, can you really imagine Georgia and LSU not being a better game? After watching Georgia literally throttle Hawai'i in the Sugar Bowl, are you going to tell me that we didn't deserve that option?

If so, fine, but stand by your points. Don't cave now and place a non-division winner into the national title game. You say you're not biased. Fine, I'll believe you. Apply the rule to everyone for a change. I sound like the whiny Georgia fan who's burned his team isn't doing so well. You're right, I am. But, I'm a whiny Georgia fan with a memory. One that remembers a year ago watching Pittsburgh beat West Virigina and Oklahoma fall to Texas Tech. I remember Georgia being in prime position to be in that last game, and LSU jumping us (10-2 LSU jumping 10-2 Georgia, mind you) on the strength of the argument that LSU was the conference champion. If Georgia doesn't get the breaks, then nobody else should either. Hypocrisy is not an option here.

Desert Leap (150yards for Moreno)

Just a quickie post, but I'm wondering. Who thinks we move up for impressively beating a 10 game winner from last season (assuming that argument was used similarly for USCw earlier to pass us)? Oklahoma and USCw didn't play this weekend, so what grounds are there for keeping us behind at least Oklahoma?

27-10 over Arizona St. doesn't seem like a game people can just brush off like our game versus South Carolina. We looked positively dominate during the 2nd quarter.

Jackets in Danger?

A reporter then asked if Richt would ever run up the score by keeping his first-teamers on the field late in a game he already had wrapped up just to impress the voters.
"I don't think so," Richt said. "If it's the 12th game of the year, maybe. But not before then."

That doesn't bode well for our friends on the flats. As we all know, they're always game 12. I like your style, Mark Richt...I like it alot.

Thanks for watching, AP voters.

Ok, so this is some bullshit. Win, get to 3-0 and 1-0 in the SEC, and move down another spot. Unbelievable.

Lower your poll position to raise your profile

In general, this year so far has provided little to talk about. UCLA beating Tennessee was interesting, but really wasn't great aside from the fact that it was one of the better (i.e., close) games of opening weekend. ECU's victories over Virginia Tech and West Virginia have both been interesting, but over all they weren't totally stunning, as both Tech and WVU were expected to have less than stellar years (general lack of experience on Va. Tech, and coaching change for WVU).

So, what have we learned so far then? I think that, on the whole, this season will prove to have less "crazy" overall than last, for sure. No Pitt over WVU's, no Oklahoma losing at season's end to a mediocre TTU. I just sense a sort of entrenched nature to the top of the polls this year. The good teams are actually all good, and just like most years, we'll get some losses (someone will lose between USC and tOSU, UF & UGA & Auburn/Bama), but on the whole the top 10 will stay reasonably consistent this year.

I'm also unconcerned with UGA's drop to #2. I think, while it seems unfair that we won and dropped, I can understand the reasoning. Overall, we were barely the #1 pick, and they did play a BCS level team and beat them week 1. However, I doubt the "fluid" nature of the polls that many voters referenced when they explained moving USC up will help UGA at any point. If it did, you would have to imagine that UGA would move back up above USC this week (which, it turns out, did not happen) since they did not play, and Georgia thumped MAC champions CMU. Shouldn't 2-0 beat 1-0? However, whatever. I'm not going to get worked up. If UGA manages to get to the Bama game undefeated, then that will be a nationally televised night game. The next week, UGA/Tenneessee is a 3:30 CBS game that will also be pretty widely seen. Next week's UGA/USCe game will be widely seen, and I'm pretty positive that the LSU game will be a night game. Florida/UGA will be a 3:30 CBS game like it always is. Auburn/GA will be on TV as long as we both hold up till that point. What does that say to the voters? UGA will be on national television 6 times if all those games play out well for us. Go 5-1 (with the loss not at UF), and Georgia will be plenty fine. Think about sitting at 8-1 with that schedule. Unbelievable talent would be required to run that gauntlet, and the voters would be well aware. At that point, whether we're #1 or #2 will be unimportant. What will be important is that voters will be seeing a team for the ages, and they'll damn well know it. Knowshon, Caleb King and Richard Samuel will have to have been amazing, Stafford (and probably Cox at one point or another) will have been efficiant, and the WR's will have turned what many viewed as a liability for us into a strong point. Our defense will have gone from a "no name" group to some of the bigger stars in college football. Shuting down LSU, Auburn and UF will garner Asher Allen and Ellerbe some serious attention, and Rennie Curran will be in the running for some awards.

Tell me that doesn't make you feel better about being number 2? It does for me.

Dramatic Gopher doesn't have shit on this guy

"Clawson, who was head coach at Richmond for four years before joining the Vols staff, said he coached on many teams that have suffered losses similar to the one at UCLA but has found that the successful teams find ways to bounce back." [Emphasis mine] - link

Dave Clawson, master of the obvious.

Dawgs Start #1

I've been gone for awhile now, and I just figured I'd let people know I'm still alive. This summer has held some interesting challenges for me, personally, and I'm only now starting to emerge from them with any real time to look and pay much attention to football again. It's been a long, hot summer.

I'm ready for football, are you?

Personally, all the talk about the AP/Coaches Poll #1 Georgia Bulldogs is pretty scary. I won't be like some and wish we started lower, but I will express a fear I have about our ability to be psych'd out by this. Every year I was in school that we started ranked relatively high (top 10), we usually lost a game we shouldn't have, with no bigger or better instance than my sophomore year when we lost to UT with a Freshman Erik Ainge as QB, and we had a Senior David Greene and David Pollack, coming off a crushing victory over the defending national champs, LSU. I have never been more stunned at a game (save the feeling, 2 years later, after loosing to Vandy on homecoming). I cannot imagine the crushing feeling that having something similar happen this year would bring. Especially considering the general feeling amongst most Dawg fans I know of this being the most talented team, top to bottom, that we've fielded since we've been following Georgia football.

With a team this talented, we shouldn't have to fear the almost inevitable falloff that seems to haunt us. Joe Cox is a talented backup who never lost a game in high school, more than capable of navigating us through games if something happens to Stafford. Similarly, I feel like many of the backup running backs, namely Caleb King and Richard Samuel, could at a minimum carry the weight for a couple games if an injury sidelined Knowshon Moreno. These aren't very happy topics, I'm aware, but they are realisitically a reason to be happy. Teams rarely (aside from 2000 champions Oklahoma) make it through a season without any major injuries. Just as importantly, I think, our defense has a 2 deep I'm not scared of seeing anyone subsitute from. Therefore, I should think, rationally, we have no reason to fear aside from our personal knowledge that Mark Richt coached teams tend to underachieve when they're favored. Again, however, after last year's amazing growth which we all witnessed by the coach, this is something I can only imagine is easier to deal with than at other times historically.

Where will I get my Southern Mississippi coverage?

Good Lord, we're losing SMQ! I don't know what I'll do without his constant invaluable insight during the season. I'm stunned and saddened, although it's awesome he turned this blogging into a full-time gig. If anyone will make a great "real" sportswriter, it's SMQ (or maybe Orson at EDSBS or the Mayor at the GSB).