More Fun With Numbers: All the Right Moves

OK, I promise we'll be done with recruiting stuff after this. Well, probably.

Anyway, earlier today I talked about the relative value of a 5-star player over a 3-star player, long term. But those are pretty general evaluations, and obviously you can't get a 5-star guy at each position every year. So while the premise remains worthy (Georgia needs to go after the top athletes and be successful at landing a few of them each year), reality dictates that they also need to get the most out of the rest of the crop of players they land.

So, who's doing a good job with that? Let's go position by position.

Again, these are numbers for Georgia's recruits from 2004-2008, so really, this probably says more about UGA than it necessarily does about things on a macro level, although you could probably make a fair argument that players at a position like O line can be more easily turned from 3-star recruit into 5-star talent because less pure, measurable athleticism is needed than for, say, a cornerback to make that same leap. In any case, here's how UGA's players have developed...

Position	Recruiting Stars	Production Stars	Difference
DE	3.75	2.41	1.34
WR	3.82	2.55	1.27
OL	3.3	2.05	1.25
QB	4.0	2.75	1.25
LB	3.77	2.54	1.23
TE	3.2	2.0	1.2
DB	3.47	2.59	0.88
DT	3.86	3.14	0.72
FB/RB	3.7	3.0	0.7

Obviously there are a ton of different factors that go into determining whether a player develops as he is expected to -- injuries, effort, intelligence, luck and coaching come to mind as the primary ones.

Of course, if you look at those factors, the first four seem to me to be variables shared at each position. A linebacker is just as likely to get hurt as a wide receiver, for the most part.

What changes from one position group to the next is the coaching.

So while we can't rule out those other factors as potential reasons why an individual player fails, for the purposes of comparison, they should mostly cancel each other out when we're talking about a larger group.

If that's the case, then the chart above, which measures the difference between expectations of players and production -- or "failure rate," if you will, seems to me to be as good an indication of the relative ability of position coaches as anything, and what those numbers tell me is that things are pointed in a good direction at Georgia right now.

Hear me out...

If we look again at those position groups, there are a couple of external factors that should be considered:

-- The O line "failure rate" is higher -- and certainly higher than fans would like -- but that number is probably skewed due to a high level of attrition at the position in the year immediately following Stacy Searels' arrival.

-- The "failure rate" at QB is a bit on the high side, too, but that is due in part to the low number of QBs recruited. If one fails, it has a far more dramatic effect on the total than one failure in the linebacker group, for example. Same is true for tight ends. (Plus, in just a 5-year time span, it's hard for more than two QBs to be deemed a success, since only one can play at a time.)

So, keeping that in mind, we have six groups that we can compare fairly easily: DBs, DEs, DTs, LBs, WRs and RBs.

Look at those results: Three of those groups are doing a pretty lousy job, statistically speaking, at turning potential into production. Three have done a pretty solid job.

For all the talk of Jon Fabris' talent with defensive ends (his silver lining after destroying special teams), the numbers say that he's gotten less out of the talent at that position than any other coach on the staff. Of the 12 DEs signed between '04 and '08, only three -- Justin Houston, Demarcus Dobbs and Charles Johnson -- had production that matched their recruiting grade. (None dramatically exceeded their grades, although Houston certainly could still make that leap.)

Of course, Fabris is gone now.

Georgia has managed to produce a couple of very, very good wide receivers during this time period. In fact, two of the 5-star production guys were wide receivers -- Mo Massaquoi and AJ Green. And yet, there's a big group of WR recruits who have failed to live up to their promise, too. Sure, Israel Troupe could still blossom, but the track record of guys like Demiko Goodman and Tony Wilson and Walter Hill is hard to ignore.

Of course, Tony Ball would be the guy in charge of turning around Troupe's career. It was John Eason who presided over those past "failures."

When it comes to linebackers, it's hard to ignore the fact that Georgia has a former player who started on an NFL playoff team (Dannell Ellerbe) and another likely to get drafted before round 4 this year (Rennie Curran). But on the whole, this is an underperforming group, too. I like the futures for Marcus Dowtin and Christian Robinson... but what about Charles White, Darius Dewberry, Akeem Hebron and Marcus Washington? Heck, Darryl Gamble and Akeem Dent could have huge senior seasons, but so far, they've been more talent than performance.

Of course, that was John Jancek's department. And he's gone now, too.

So the position coaches who appear to have had the least success at turning promise into performance are all gone now, replaced during the past two offseasons.

I somehow doubt these are the numbers that Mark Richt was crunching when he made the decisions to let those guys go (or in Eason's case, move him upstairs), but that doesn't mean he didn't come to the right conclusion anyway.

It's still far too early to tell what type of impact Georgia's new coaches will have, but it's nevertheless encouraging to know that the problems were identified. Because if Tony Ball and Todd Grantham and Warren Belin can each take one guy per season who might have been a "failure" under the old regime and turn him into a success, that'll mean 12 more productive players four years from now. And that's a significant difference.

ADDENDUM: Rex Robinson brings up the interesting case of Tony Ball in a recent post on his blog, noting that Ball's resume could have been another factor in the loss of Da'Rick Rogers.

I lumped Ball in with the "successful" assistants in this analysis because the overall grade for running backs was solid during his tenure, but it's probably a bit more accurate to say that the jury is still out.

Ball developed two very good fullbacks in Brannan Southerland and Shaun Chapas, but Southerland was already a starter when Ball arrived.

Ball also presided over one of Georgia's biggest success stories in Knowshon Moreno. Of course, Ball was also the position coach who thought Knowshon needed a year to redshirt in 2006.

And then we have Caleb King's stunted growth during his first two years in Athens before blossoming under Bryan McClendon and we have Marlon Brown's lost 2009 season. Ball was in charge in both cases.

So... does Rex have a point about Tony Ball?

I think we'll have a much better idea of that after this season, when it will be incumbent upon Ball to make sure that Israel Troupe, Marlon Brown, Tavarres King and Rantavious Wooten -- each of whom has a high upside -- begin to reach their potential.

Practice Notes: All Is Calm on Recruiting Trail

With shakeups on the coaching staff and rumors about possible replacements cropping up at a frenzied pace, it might be understandable if Mark Richt was spending a lot of time putting out fires with recruits the past few weeks. As it turns out, however, he said things have been pretty calm on that front.

“Initially that was the majority of the conversation, but now we’re just continuing that relationship of them just being excited about being at Georgia and talking about the end of their seasons and school and finals and the holidays,” Richt said.

The most recent contact period with players ended last weekend, but Richt and his staff spent the previous few weeks getting in touch with their current commitments and letting them know as many details as possible on the changes to the defensive staff and the timetable for finding replacements. Once those initial conversations occurred, it has pretty much been smooth sailing, Richt said.

At last weekend’s end-of-season gala, Georgia hosted many of its top recruits and commitments, and for those on the defensive side of the ball, Richt spent some extra time with them talking about the future, but he said there has been virtually no concern on the players’ parts about what’s in store.

Coaches get another opportunity to contact recruits again in January, and Richt said he plans on making a round of home visits then – ideally with the new defensive coaches in tow.

“I’ve strategically tried to save most of my home contacts until after the bowl season,” Richt said. “And hopefully we’re going to get a chance to get out with our new coaches after that point.”

BANKS QUESTIONABLE FOR BOWL

Reserve safety Quintin Banks suffered a neck sprain during Sunday’s practice that could cost him a chance to play in the Independence Bowl next week.

Banks, who has battled myriad injuries in his career, had seen increased playing time down the stretch with freshman Bacarri Rambo out, but he suffered a sprained neck while making a hit during Sunday’s practice. He was taken to the hospital for observation, but Richt said the results were all positive.

“All his extremities are moving just fine,” Richt said. “He got discharged from the hospital last night. They evaluated him but everything looks real positive.”

Banks was also scheduled to start on several special teams units, and Richt said that could still happen if things improve throughout this week.

“I wouldn’t count him out right now,” Richt said. “We’ll just have to wait and see.”

SPECIAL TEAMS STAY THE SAME

Georgia will have plenty of new input on specials teams in its bowl game, with two graduate assistants handling kickoffs and tight ends coach John Lilly taking over punt returns, but Richt said there won’t be any drastic changes on either unit in terms of philosophy.

“It’s kind of like defense,” Richt said. “You don’t want to re-invent everything. It’s hard to do in such a short amount of time. There’s not a big difference.”

KEEP IN TOUCH

Former defensive coordinator Willie Martinez may be gone, but he’s hardly forgotten.
Several of Georgia’s players said they have spoken with Martinez since he and two other assistants were dismissed earlier this month, and cornerback Brandon Boykin said Martinez had a specific message for him.

“He told me he’ll call me if I’m doing bad on the field and critique me,” Boykin said. “We’ll continue to talk.”

Several players, including Boykin and linebacker Rennie Curran, said it was difficult to talk to their former coach after the changes occurred, but all said they hoped to stay in touch in the future. Boykin said he even planned to see Martinez in person.

“I’m not sure what he’s going to do, but I’ll probably go by his house and just see him,” Boykin said. “We have a good relationship and I want that to continue.”

EARLY ARRIVALS

Rodney Garner confirmed that two of Georgia's incoming commitments would enroll early in January. He said official paperwork has yet to be filed but he did not expect any complications.

One of the two early enrollees will be junior-college transfer Jakar Hamilton, a safety from Georgia Military College, according to his head coach Burt Williams. The other, according to Scout.com, will be Buford offensive lineman Kolton Houston.

UPDATED: Three Coaches Out

Per UGA release...

Contracts of three Georgia assistant football coaches will not be renewed following the 2009 season according to an announcement Wednesday by UGA head football coach Mark Richt.

Defensive coordinator and secondary coach Willie Martinez, defensive co-coordinator and linebacker coach John Jancek, and defensive ends coach Jon Fabris will not return in 2010 according to Richt; however, he indicated that all three have been asked to coach through the bowl game.

“I cannot express enough my thanks to all three for their contributions to our program,” said Richt. “However, in the final analysis I’m charged with providing the leadership and direction for the Georgia program and sometimes that means making difficult decisions. This was one of them.”

Martinez and Fabris are members of Richt’s original staff that came in 2001. Jancek joined the Georgia staff in 2005.

***Richt will be holding a teleconference this afternoon at 5. I'll keep you posted.

----

Fun afternoon, eh?

Some quick updates...

-- Yes, I have seen Joe Schad's tweet about Willie Martinez getting the axe.

-- No, I cannot confirm it at this point (2:30 p.m.).

Here's what I can tell you...

As of about 2 p.m., Georgia's players had not been told anything about changes to the staff.

There is expected to be a players meeting later today, but this would not be entirely uncommon regardless of the coaching situation.

Willie was out on the recruiting trail as recently as this morning.

I haven't been able to speak with Willie directly, so no confirmation or comments from him.

I'm obviously staying on top of this, and for the latest updates I get, follow me on Twitter.

I'll post updates on the blog when I have something concrete, but I'm not going to post any speculation here.

Also, I apologize for not returning emails or responding to comments on the blog. My email account is completely screwed up at the moment (hey, makes reporting so much easier!) and I'm working on getting that fixed, too.

As for the initial reports, I think the AJC's Jeff Schultz does a nice job of summing them up (with an excellent use of quotation marks to indicate sarcasm). Remember folks, "unconfirmed reports" and "I'm hearing" are far from facts, so treat them accordingly.

The Latest on the Coaching Rumors

Today, we come to the end of the regular season. Tomorrow, we're likely to start a whole new whirlwind of activity.

The rumor mill on the fate of Georgia's assistant coaches has been swirling for two full years now, and it's about to reach a fever pitch. It's hard to say what will happen, when it will happen or how dramatic the effects will be. But I can tell you two things for certain:

First, there will be changes. That doesn't necessarily mean that coaches will be gone, but while fans have taken much of Mark Richt's unflinching approach to this year's problems as a tacit endorsement of the status quo, I'm told that what has gone on behind closed doors is not so calm, cool and collected. Again, I have not been told that any changes are definitively in the works, but those fans who think Richt will not take a hard look at his program are underestimating him.

Second, a new set of assistants will not be an instant fix. A cursory look at the history of programs that have had massive coaching overhauls on one side of the ball or the other reveals as many instances where the head coach has been gone within a year or two as it reveals situations in which the problems were solved. Most fans look at coaching changes as a necessity, but there are drawbacks in terms of recruits being lost, the time it takes for players to adjust to a new system and the time it takes for the new coaches to adjust to their surroundings. In many cases, it's a situation of being careful what you wish for.

Beyond that, there isn't much that's set in stone for next week. If changes are going to be made, they could come quickly to avoid a lot of negative recruiting during the all-important contact period next week. Or coaches could stick around for the bowl game. Or changes could me made, then more happen among the assistants after a new coordinator is brought in. Or nothing will happen at all.

But while we're waiting to find out, here are a few issues I've come across in recent days...

What will happen with Rodney Garner?

In the discussions about Willie Martinez's future, Garner's name invariably comes up. The assumption is that if Garner isn't going to be offered a coordinator job, he might choose to leave rather than settle for being passed over for a promotion. This is worrisome for fans who have seen Garner turn Georgia's recruiting into a juggernaut during his tenure.

Garner was a hot commodity last season, interviewing for Auburn's head coaching job and being offered spots on the staff of both Lane Kiffin at Tennessee and Gene Chizik, after he was eventually brought in as the head coach at Auburn.

Even beyond recruiting, Garner's potential departure could cause other problems. Much was made a few weeks ago about Montez Robinson's potential transfer, and that issue would no doubt rise again if Garner left. The two are extremely close, and Robinson told me that had Garner left last season, he would have followed. Robinson is hardly the only Georgia player with close ties to Garner, so it could certainly shake things up if he leaves.

But there's more on Garner…

I spoke with Garner earlier this week about his interest in potential head coaching vacancies throughout the country, of which there will be more than a few at both the FBS and FCS levels. He was a bit reserved in his comments for obvious reasons, but he said he would not rule out pursuing another head coaching job regardless of any changes at Georgia. Beyond that, however, he was keeping quiet.

"My whole focus is Georgia Tech," he said. "Let’s get this behind us and we’ll deal with whatever comes.”

But there's even more on Garner...

Dean Legge at Dawg Post ($$$) submitted a Freedom of Information request for all the assistant coaches' contracts last week. UGA reported back that Garner, in fact, didn't have a contract.

This seemed odd, so I asked Garner about it. His response was short and sweet:

“Ask Mr. Evans."

I then asked if that meant that it was not Garner's decision not to sign a contract.

"Someone else would be in a better position to explain it,” he said.

Well, I took Garner's advice and talked to Damon Evans about it. Here's how that conversation went:

Me: Why is it that Coach Garner doesn't have a contract?
Damon: "He just hasn't signed one."
Me: So did he have a problem with the contract that was offered?
Damon: "No, he just hasn't signed his contract."
Me: So is that something you would have liked to have seen happen?
Damon: "I'll just leave it like this: He hasn't signed a contract."

Sounds like a great relationship, eh?

Of course, that leads us into our next big issue regarding potential coaching changes...

Will Damon Evans open up his wallet to bring in a top guy if a job opens up?

While most fans seem to be upset with Richt for his lack of interest in making changes, it might be fair to wonder what kind of resources Richt would have to work with should changes be required. I have had a couple of sources tell me they aren't sure how much money Georgia would be willing to spend to lure away a top defensive coordinator, let alone buying out a contract that might add to the overall price tag.

(NOTE: According to USA Today's recent analysis of coaching salaries, Georgia currently spends $2,029,816 on its assistant coaches, which ranks sixth among the 11 public institutions in the SEC. Florida ranks seventh, $65,000 behind Georgia, and Kentucky ranks eighth, $80,000 behind the Dawgs.)

Hearing this struck a chord with me. I had actually talked to Evans in the spring about this very subject. After Lane Kiffin broke the bank to bring in a staff of heavy hitters at Tennessee, I asked Evans if he thought that might change the landscape of what assistants at Georgia make. Here's what he said at the time:

"My philosophy is this: We want to keep up with the marketplace. Three institutions don't set the marketplace from my standpoint. They have to do what they feel is appropriate for them, but what I like to do is look at the big picture and see where everyone is big picture and ask, where is Georgia in that marketplace: Lower, middle or upper? Wherever we are, do we feel comfortable with where we are? That's the question I have to answer every day. I tend to believe that we have kept our coaches in a good position in the marketplace.

"Do I think that marketplace is going to change? Yes, I think it's going to change. Will we at Georgia do what's appropriate for the University of Georgia with regard to that marketplace? Yes, at the right time, but I'm not going to overreact to what a handful of schools have done."

Of course, that's what Evans had to say this spring, long before Georgia was a 6-5 team and surrounded by coaching rumors. So, to be fair, I asked him again this week if he had changed his philosophy at all, and I didn't exactly get the response I was expecting.

"First of all, I never gave a philosophy with regard to that, and I don't know if right now is the appropriate time to be talking about that," Evans said. "We've got coaches that are under contract and are paid what they're paid. When you say 'philosophy,' I'm kind of lost when you say 'philosophy.'"

I then proceeded to explain exactly what I meant by "philosophy" and here's what Evans said:

"Let me say this: I never gave you a philosophy with regard to what we would do salary-wise," he said. "I said that I'm not going to overreact to what one or two institutions do. So I always say, what we'll do at Georgia is what we believe is appropriate for that particular coach and for that particular time."

Now, maybe I'm way off base here, but it seems to me when your comments begin with "My philosophy is this" and you go on to explain a philosophy, I don't see what's particularly confusing about me referring to that as a philosophy.

And just to be clear, I had emailed Evans the full quote for him to read, but he said he did not receive the email. Regardless, it seemed silly to argue over semantics.

Still, I think we can parse what he did say a bit:

-- "I'm not going to overreact to what one or two institutions do."

What this tells me is that anybody who thinks money won't be an object is not going to be pleased.

-- "We'll do at Georgia is what we believe is appropriate for that particular coach and for that particular time."

What this tells me is that a bump in the overall salary structure won't necessarily be ruled out for the right guy.

As to which of those two statements takes precedent, should a vacancy arise, will likely be the biggest factor in who Georgia would bring in to fill out the staff.

Will Mark Richt even make a change?

A year ago, Richt was definitive in saying that he would not be making any changes to his staff. This year, he has largely avoided the topic, save a few minor examples. When asked this week about how he would handle things, he said he wouldn't be letting public sentiment dictate his evaluation process.

“You can’t let public opinion run your program is probably the best way to say it,” Richt said.

That didn't exactly engender a ton of excitement in fans hopeful for changes, but Richt also alluded to possible moves earlier this year in what was perhaps his most damning statement about the staff, way back in mid-October.

"I think a lot of people expect blood," Richt said after a loss to Tennessee. "They want somebody to be let go or fired or that kind of thing, and maybe that's what needs to be done, but at this point right now, we're going to do what we know is the best thing to do and that's to focus on this game this week."

Well, in the two losses since then -- both of which involved Georgia allowing more than 30 points -- the blood lust from fans has hardly dissipated. And regardless of how much Richt has avoided the topic in favor of a bunker mentality the past few weeks, he must be aware of the public opinion.

As for how likely changes might be, Dean Legge notes that at least one change ($$$) has come on Richt's staff in all but one season since he's been in Athens.

2001: Entirely new staff save Rodney Garner
2002: Tony Pierce dismissed
2003: Ken Rucker
2004: None
2005: John Jancek, Kirby Smart
2006: Tony Ball
2007: Stacy Searels
2008: John Lilly
2009: Bryan McClendon

Of course, it should also be noted that, of all those changes, Pierce's dismissal was the only one that wasn't voluntary.

What role will Damon Evans have in deciding what changes will be made?

I posed this question to Evans this week, too, and while he offered more support for Richt, he stopped short of saying that he wouldn't be involved in making those decisions.

"Like with everything, all programs are evaluated at the end of the year," Evans said. "As I've stated before, I have confidence that Mark will evaluate his program and do what he feels is appropriate, just like he does every single year. Right now I think our focus should be on the Georgia Tech game, and whatever we deem or Coach Richt deems appropriate, we'll handle at that time."

That's what we'll all be waiting for, no doubt. It should be an interesting week, regardless of what happens tonight.

And while you're waiting, here are a few more tidbits on the coaches that might interest you…

Per the USA Today report, here are the contract terms for each of Georgia's assistants:

Coach	Salary	Max Bonus	Nat'l Rank*
Willie Martinez	$325,815	$92,150	34
Mike Bobo	$325,000	$92,150	35
Stacy Searels	$290,000	$92,150	68
Rodney Garner	$290,000	$92,150	70
Jon Fabris	$202,041	$76,852	196
John Lilly	$165,480	$62,882	312
Tony Ball	$165,480	$62,882	312
John Jancek	$163,000	$57,650	332
Bryan McClendon	$90,000	$34,200	657

*National rank also includes other income from things like shoe and/or apparel contracts, TV and radio appearances, speeches and public appearances or camps. For UGA's staff, that amounts to $1,600 per coach, with the exception of Garner who is not eligible due to his lack of a current contract.

** All coaches are on one-year contracts, except Garner.

And finally, here's an email from John B. that I figured I'd pass along...

David,

I was searching the internet tonight for any info on the rumor that Willie has turned in his resignation effective after the Tech game....

I found this site for a petition to fire Willie.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/3/fire-willie-martinez

Its been signed 517 times. The last one coming on Feb 19th. I couldn't help but reading some of these comments. It seems like they were ripped from this years head line. I particularly like #453. It seems like it is pointing to this year's defense.

# 453:
2:09 pm PST, Dec 5, John McCarthy, Georgia
For UGA fto ever challange for a National Title they must do the following: On offense, quit being nice to your opponents...GO FOR THE JUGULAR AND PILE UP THE POINTS! Otherwise the BCS will keep saying Georgia Who?. On defense, pull out some old film and learn how to play REAL defense without mistakes. Last but not least, Defense wins champoinships and has forever. Put your coach on notice...win here or go lose somewhere else. Earn your salary for a change! Coach the players to stop making key dumb mistakes. Quit giving the momentum back to the opponent. The upperclasmen make to many freshman mistakes.

As a side note I wonder if that is "Big John" McCarthy from UFC fame making comments on the dawgs.

Notes: Uga VII Dies Suddenly

After less than two seasons as Georgia’s mascot, Uga VII died of heart-related causes Thursday.

The English bulldog took the reins as one of the nation’s most well known mascots just last year. The death came as a surprise to Uga VII’s owner, Frank W. “Sonny” Seiler.

“We are all in a state of shock,” Seiler said in a statement released by the university. “We had no warning whatsoever.”

There will be no mascot present on the sidelines at Saturday’s final regular-season home game for Georgia, a rarity since the first Uga was officially introduced in 1956.

Georgia head coach Mark Richt was informed of the news Thursday afternoon and spoke with Seiler soon after.

“I was sad to hear about Uga VII,” Richt said. “You never think something like that can happen that quickly, and I’m sad we won’t have him on the sideline anymore.”

Uga VII presided over 23 games, with Georgia posting a record of 16-7 during that span – the fourth best winning percentage the Bulldogs have had with any of the Uga mascots.

The dog was a popular figure among Georgia fans following his introduction in August of 2008 prior to the Bulldogs’ home opener against Georgia Southern. Richt said the line of fans waiting for their photos with the dog dwarfed the amount hoping for a snapshot with the Georgia coaches or players.

Uga VII was known for his more laid-back personality, rarely showing as much playfulness as his father, who gained a reputation for a mischievous personality.

Seiler said there are several options for Uga VIII, but noted that no replacement would be made official until next year.

Georgia’s players were not made available for comment Thursday, but after news of Uga VII’s death, several players including Jeff Owens and Michael Moore expressed sadness and sympathy and posted photos of their time with the dog on their Facebook and Twitter pages.

“This is a very sad day for the Seiler family, but also for all Georgia people,” athletics director Damon Evans said. “Just as his ancestors, (Uga VII) had captured the hearts of college football fans everywhere as the country’s No. 1 mascot. He had been truly embraced by all those who follow the Georgia Bulldogs across the country.”

ON THE MOVE?

There will be five senior defensive tackles who take the field before Georgia’s final game of the season Saturday to be honored as part of the team’s senior day festivities, which means there will be a serious blow to the Bulldogs’ depth at that position next season.

Meanwhile, Georgia figures to return all five starters on its offensive line, which makes for a crowded depth chart ahead of A.J. Harmon, the burly redshirt freshman who switched from the defensive to offensive line prior to the season.

But while a switch back might make perfect sense for Harmon and the Bulldogs in terms of numbers, head coach Mark Richt said it isn’t likely to happen.

“I have talked to him about that throughout the year, and you never say never, only because you never know what kind of injuries may hit your team,” Richt said. “But right now, we have no thoughts at all about moving him. We feel like he’s making good progress.”

Georgia will return just four scholarship defensive tackles next year, including three true freshmen -- Derrick Lott, Kwame Geathers and Abry Jones. Deangelo Tyson and Jones are the only two to receive playing time this season.

Harmon has seen minimal playing time this season, but he has shown significant progress in shedding weight and getting into better shape after entering school at nearly 330 pounds.

“A.J.’s come a long way at O line,” Richt said. “He’s reshaped his body. He needs more strength, but we like how he’s been progressing so we think we’ll keep him there.”

While Harmon appears unlikely to swap positions, the door is still open for tailback Richard Samuel to make the move to linebacker, but Richt said no official decisions on that will be made until after the season, when coaches can do a thorough review of the scenario.

“I don’t want to get into that because I don’t want to disrupt his life right now, but we’re going to look at everything in totality once this season’s over,” Richt said. “We’ll look at some things when there’s a little breathing room and some time to think about it.”

RECRUITING HYPE HEATS UP

What looked like an already crowded signing class for next season could get bigger for two reasons.

First, Georgia may have more scholarships to offer than previously assumed. With Tony Wilson, Bryce Ros and Neland Ball all earning medical disqualifications in the past seven months, a few more scholarships have opened up. Add to that the departure of juniors Kevin Perez and Ricardo Crawford, who both will graduate and leave the program despite having an additional season of eligibility remaining, and the Bulldogs have a bit more room to maneuver.

Still, Richt said the increased scholarships available won’t change the approach he has taken toward recruiting this season.

“I wouldn’t say that, oh now we can go get two more,” Richt said. “We’re recruiting the same guys we’ve been recruiting all along, so that hasn’t changed.”

While the extra scholarships may help boost Georgia’s signing class, which already has 18 commitments according to Rivals.com, it was the atmosphere from last week’s game against Auburn that may have an even bigger impact.

Georgia hosted one of its biggest crowds of recruits at the game, and Richt said the emotion of the win and the enthusiasm of the crowd, including an emotional moment when they chanted the name of injured safety Bacarri Rambo, did plenty to wow the potential future Bulldogs.

“It was fantastic … just how the crowd reacted to our team, to the Dawg Walk, to the play of our team and of course how they chanted Rambo’s name and just how loud they got at the end,” Richt said. “And for the official visits, they were in the locker room after the game and got to see how we celebrate in there. It was just a perfect night for football, and we played well against a very good team. It was a great representation of what Georgia football is about, so I couldn’t have asked for more on that one.”

DAWGS WON'T GO GREEN

It won’t be the first time this season that Georgia has gone to battle without A.J. Green, and the Bulldogs managed to post 31 points a week ago without their star receiver. Still, offensive coordinator Mike Bobo said there’s no replacing a player of Green’s caliber without changing the battle plan.

“It was good to see and get those guys in there to have opportunities, and they made plays,” Bobo said. “It’s a little bit difficult in the sense that you have a guy that was pretty dependable when the ball came his way in his ability to make plays and cause defenses to account for him.”

Bobo said he still was unsure who would get the start opposite Tavarres King this week, with Michael Moore, Rantavious Wooten and Israel Troupe all in the mix.

Regardless of who plays in Green’s place, Bobo said the key will be for Georgia to continue running the ball effectively, even with Kentucky’s defense likely to put extra defenders in the box to stop the run.

“We’ll still probably get a little bit more one-on-one that we did when he was out there, but we’re still going to have to be able to run the ball efficiently,” Bobo said.

MIXED BAG FOR COX

Bobo has made no secret that he believes Joe Cox is Georgia’s best quarterback, but he’s not going so far as to call Cox’s senior season a complete success.

Through 10 games, Cox has completed 58 percent of his passes, throwing 18 touchdowns and 12 interceptions. Cox’s season has been marked by inconsistency, from his five-touchdown performance against Arkansas to his dismal three-interception game in a loss to Florida.

“He’s been up and down,” Bobo said. “There’s been flashes of playing very well and leading this football team, but there’s been some inconsistency in throwing the ball accurately.”

Bobo said the lack of accuracy has been a surprise, given Cox’s history throughout his first four seasons in the program, but said the problems have usually been a result of hesitancy rather than judgment.

“Going into this season, he was a very accurate passer, knows his progressions,” Bobo said. “But a lot has to do with not trusting it, worrying about making the mistake, and then we’re making mistakes. You’ve got to play ball. If it’s not there, you’ve got to protect it, and there’s a fine line there. There’s going to be tight windows … and you’ve got to be willing to throw the ball in tight spaces, and then there’s going to be times when you’ve got to take a sack.”

FUTURE UNCLEAR FOR PUGH

Before the season began, redshirt freshman Makiri Pugh hoped he might be in line for significant playing time at both safety and nickel corner, but 10 games into the season, those opportunities have not developed.

Pugh has seen limited action on special teams but has made only the rare appearance on defense this season, and the lack of playing time has been frustrating.

“It’s been kind of rough really,” Pugh said. “I’ve only seen time on punt return and block, so I’ve just been trying to keep a positive attitude. I have guys ahead of me, so I’ve just got to keep on working. I’m just focused on getting better at the things I’m weak at to get that opportunity. Obviously the season is winding down, but you never know what can happen, so I’ve just got to stay prepared.”

With freshman Bacarri Rambo set to miss this week’s game, Pugh is hopeful he could see action as a potential replacement, but after a season of waiting, he has learned not to predict playing time.

“We’ll see how it goes,” he said. “I’ve been second team at safety and nickel the entire season, so I’m just going to prepare like I usually do, know the game plan and be ready. Playing is more of a reality. If one guy or two guys get nicked up, and I’m in there.”

With Georgia struggling to a 6-4 record, Pugh said it has been difficult to remain on the sideline, despite the losses. Richt has said he plans to continue playing starters for the remainder of the season rather than giving playing time to younger players in order to prepare them for the future – a plan Pugh at least tentatively endorses.

“We want to win, that’s the bottom line,” Pugh said. “But I think being on the bench on an undefeated team is a little different than being on the bench on a team that’s 6-4. But we care about winning and if they feel they have the guys out there that are giving us the best chance to win, then you have to go along with it. You’ve just got to work.”

What that means for Pugh’s future is still to be determined. The safety said he has not given serious consideration to a transfer, but will evaluate his situation once the season is over.

“I’m trying not to look ahead,” Pugh said. “We know we’re going to lose some seniors this year, but we don’t really know exactly how it’s going to work out. I haven’t really looked ahead too much because we’re in the middle of the season and I still have responsibilities this season.”

CLEARING UP THE CONTROVERSY

I had a couple people inquire about a moment on the sideline during Georgia's win over Auburn last week when defensive coordinator Willie Martinez was discussing a play with safety Reshad Jones and linebacker Rennie Curran appeared to shove Martinez away from Jones.

Some folks thought it was a sign of issues brewing between Georgia's defensive coordinator and its top defensive player, but Curran said it was nothing more than playful roughhousing that occurs all the time.

“I always try to get Coach Martinez pumped up, so I’ll come up and chest bump him sometimes," Curran said. "Before the game, we’ll be jumping up and getting rowdy and I’ll come up and push Coach Martinez just to get fired up. It’s perception, man. You see one thing and think another and take it out of proportion.”

(One other note... My latest Twitter updates are available along the right hand side of this page. For breaking info such as Uga's death, I may not have time immediately to post a story, but I'll typically post updates via Twitter that you can access.)

Those Who Don't Study History...

I have a story in today's Telegraph on the importance of the linebackers for Georgia this week.

In doing the reporting for the story, I didn't exactly get the warm fuzzies from the Bulldogs' comments about stopping the Gators. The keys to the game, they say, are many of the same things that they have struggled with the most this year -- stopping play-action, gap discipline, tackling.

And here's reason No. 1 for concern, and try not to throw up in your mouth after reading it:

Looking at Florida's offense -- a strong run game and a short passing attack that focuses on its tight end -- and wondered if the Gators might not end up looking a lot like South Carolina did earlier this season. As it turned out, Darryl Gamble had another analogy, and it's not one that offers tons of encouragement.

“Florida, they’ll try to give you a lot of misdirectional stuff," he said. "It’s more of playing like a Georgia Tech team. You’ve got to play your thing, what you’ve got to do. If you’ve got to stay in this gap, stay in this gap. It’s just more misdirectional stuff, so if your eyes are good, you should be good.”

Yikes. Um, that Georgia Tech game last year didn't go so well. And playing with your eyes? I felt like I had heard that before, so I went back to some comments made by Rennie Curran a few weeks ago and found what I was looking for.

“That’s another thing that comes from watching film. It’s eye progression and being disciplined. There are certain keys that give away that play-action, and those keys, you only know them if you study film, watch tendencies and know down and distance. Play-action is all about discipline in where your eyes go and knowing what you’re seeing.”

That's what Curran said after the Tennessee game when he complained that perhaps his teammates weren't spending enough time in the film room. Using their eyes has hardly been a strength this year.

The good news is, they've had an extra week to get in the film room for this game, so perhaps it will be a better overall effort that Georgia has seen previously. But Curran isn't arguing with Gamble's analysis. Regardless of Florida's struggles, this is a tough team to play -- not just physically, but mentally.

“They’re going to try to beat you deep, do different things to get you out of position, especially with having Tebow," Curran said. "They’re going to go to that spread and then Tebow’s going to try to run it. It just puts you on your heels a little bit more as far as not making mistakes and executing, making plays.”

Having said that, the road to success might not be as arduous as it used to be against Florida, and the key to stopping the Gators' offense, Curran said, isn't what most commentators will tell you. The key for Georgia's D? Make Tebow beat you.

“You want to put pressure on the quarterback to where he feels like he needs to make that extra play, make those extra yards," Curran said. "That’s pretty much what I’ve seen teams that have gotten Tebow to do – when he feels like he has to put the team on his back, he’s more prone to make a mistake.”

That's what Curran has learned from the past few weeks of watching the Gators. But how about defensive coordinator Willie Martinez? Here's a bit of what he had to say about this week's matchup…

On whether there is anything he can take, scheme-wise, from the success that Arkansas and Mississippi State had against Florida...

“Not really. They just played really well, really hard – the same things you say each and every week. The thing those guys did was they executed really well, they played really hard, they had those turnovers. Any time you’re turning the ball over, your opponent is going to have a good chance of winning. Arkansas played really hard, really well. Their defensive line played really well in the game. That’s what I saw. So you’re going into the ballgame, it’s the same thing. You want to try to control the line of scrimmage because that’s where it starts. They run the football. They set up the play-action pass really well. They have tremendous speed. They have great talent on the offensive side of the ball. You’ve just got to be patient and force them to execute and force them into third down-and-long situations, then once you get them into third down, you need to be successful.”

On working more this week to try to stop the play-action after struggling so badly against it in weeks past…

“We do that every week and it didn’t just start this week. You work on the things that hurt you in the previous game or throughout the season, and obviously build on the things you do really well. That’s no different. Prior to the Tennessee game, we did that. So we just have to play solid defense from the standpoint of lining up, fitting up right, making plays, forcing them into long yardage, and that means you have to do a really good job on first and second down and play-action. That’s always been part of their offense and why they’re so effective.”

On stopping Tim Tebow in the red zone this year after allowing him to rush for five touchdowns in the past two seasons…

“We’ve got to tackle better. We know he’s going to get the ball at those times, and you just have to make plays. He’s a very good player. If he wasn’t, we wouldn’t be talking about him every week. So you have to give him credit – he’s very talented and very tough. Our guys are looking forward to playing him, and you’ve just got to execute, play with an edge and play with a physicality that you need, especially in a game like this.”

On whether Florida's struggles in the vertical game mean he might challenge the Gators more, similar to what Mississippi State did by running a cover-zero last week…

“I don’t want to speak schematically, but the people that have had success and even our success when we beat them in ’07, it’s really the style that you play, the mentality you play with, the attitude you bring on every play. You’ve got to play physical. They’re a very talented football team, but we try not to make it about them. It’s really more about us and what we can do to help our team win. We know they’re tremendously talented on offense, but Mississippi State and Arkansas, they’re just playing hard, playing fast, making plays, forcing the quarterback to make poor decisions, whether it’s a breakdown in protection or just playing harder and faster. They just played really hard and really fast. That’s the key for us is to play that style, play that fast, play that hard and force the offense to get negative plays or keep them in long yardage.”

It Can't All Be Bryan Evans' Fault

Some trends are easy to spot. Some fly below the radar. This one, for me, was something I had noticed, but hadn't fully grasped until I actually sat down and looked at the numbers.

Here's a look at the stats from all seven tight ends Georgia has faced so far this season:

Player	vs. UGA	Season	Avg/Game	Best Non-UGA
W. Youman (OSU)	2-25-0	7-82-1	1-12	2-23-1 (Baylor)
W. Saunders (SC)	8-96-0	17-194-0	2.5-28	4-50-0 (NC St)
DJ Williams (Ark)	4-58-1	14-161-2	2-23	6-57-1 (Auburn)
D. Knapp (ASU)	0-0-0	1-2-0	N/A	1-2-0 (Stanford)
R. Dickson (LSU)	3-31-0	12-103-0	1.7-15	3-27-0 (La-Laf)
L. Stocker (Tenn)	4-68-0	13-180-0	2-26	2-46-0 (Auburn)
A. Monahan (Van)	1-11-0	10-92-0	1.4-13	3-31-0 (W Car)

Looking at these numbers, what can we say about how Georgia defends tight ends this season?

Well, for one, of the seven tight ends Georgia has faced, four of them have had their best game of the season against the Dawgs. Of those other three:

-- D.J. Williams didn't miss his season high by much against Georgia, and he sat out nearly the entire first half due to an injury.

-- Arizona State essentially doesn't use its tight end. Dan Knapp has just one catch all season.

-- Austin Monahan was below his season averages against Georgia, but most of that was collected against non-conference foes early. In his past five games, including vs. Georgia, Monahan has just two catches for 16 yards, 11 of which came against the Dawgs.

Actually, here's perhaps a slightly better representation of what we've seen:

In all games not against Georgia, these seven TEs are averaging 1.2 catches for 12.5 yards per game.

Against Georgia, they're averaging 3.14 catches for 41.3 yards per game.

In other words, Georgia is allowing more than triple the average production from tight ends that those same players are accumulating against other teams this season.

Of course, you might say, hey, even at that, it's just a difference of 29 yards per game. That doesn't really have a significant effect on the outcome, right?

Well, it is tantamount to three first downs over the course of a game, so it's probably nothing to sneeze at. But the bigger issue is this: Why would opposing play callers go to their tight ends -- players who appear to rarely be key aspects of the offense -- at triple the rate against Georgia they would against someone else? Obviously they see something on the film that makes them believe Georgia is vulnerable to the tight end, right?

But again, it's just 29 yards per game, so why is it really important?

Because of this:

Player	Rec.	Yards
A. Hernandez	33	392
R. Cooper	27	396
D. Nelson	8	79
O. Hines	7	98
B. James	7	93
D. Thompson	6	146

Those are Florida's receiving leaders this season. The name at the top of that list is tight end Aaron Hernandez. The Gators essentially have two real receiving threats, Riley Cooper and their tight end.

In fact, Hernandez's season averages are 5 catches and 56 yards per game. If Georgia allows, on average, three times the production to tight ends that they normally accumulate, Hernandez would be looking at a line of 15 catches for 168 yards on Saturday.

And that's a difference of more than just three first down.

Anyway, here's what Willie Martinez had to say about Mr. Hernandez:

"I don't know if you can slow him down. You just make yourself aware of where he lines up because he is a go-to guy. Hernandez has been a tremendous player for them and has made play after play in every big game they've had. Just knowing where he's at -- they have so many weapons -- and obviously in the passing game we know he's a big target, along with Riley Cooper."

Well, I guess knowing that he's good is a start. But that part about not knowing if he can be slowed down... that's less encouraging.

Of course, there is some good news. Georgia gets linebackers Akeem Dent and Marcus Dowtin back this week. Dent still isn't 100 percent, but he's an experienced strongside linebacker. Dowtin's return also allows Darryl Gamble to slide over and play more Sam this week. And Georgia's worst outing against a tight end was vs. South Carolina, a week when Darius Dewberry missed the game with an injury.

So while the Bulldogs have clearly struggled at stopping tight ends this season, they may be in a better position to alter that history this week than they have been at any other point.

And if Georgia can keep Hernandez at bay, Florida's offense looks a lot more manageable.

Third-and-Long: More Fun With Numbers

Mark Richt was asked for a simplistic answer to a complex question earlier this week, so perhaps it's not fair to really analyze his answer. But hey, what else do we have to do?

The question was this: What do you need to do to turn around the defense?

Here's what Richt's answer was:

“I think when we get people in the third-and-long situations, the possession down, we need to nail it more often. We need to get off the field when we get them there. ... We’ve gotten ourselves in that position on enough occasions where if we could just finish it I think the outcome of a couple of our games would have been different, too.”

Those pesky third downs. Richt talks about them often, and Willie Martinez essentially echoed his comments later in the week.

The lack of success on third-and-longs is demonstrated by the lack of sacks and turnovers, he said. It's been, as Richt said, the defining difference between wins and losses in some of Georgia's games.

But has it really?

Let's take a look at the real numbers. (Percent = conversion percentage.)

Opp.	Third Down	Percent	3&Short	Percent	3rd&Long	Percent
OSU	6-15	40%	5-6	83%	1-9	11%
SC	6-17	35%	4-8	50%	2-9	22%
Ark	3-14	21%	3-4	75%	0-10	0%
Ariz St	4-13	31%	1-2	50%	3-11	27%
LSU	5-14	36%	2-5	40%	3-9	33%
Tenn	5-11	45%	2-3	67%	3-8	38%

The number of third downs forced is a good indication of overall defensive success. If the opponent is facing a lot of third downs, Georgia has probably done well on first and second down.

So what do we find? Well, aside from last week's blowout loss, the overall number of third downs forced has remained essentially the same.

Georgia has played, to be general in our assessment, three good defensive games (OSU, ASU and LSU) and three bad ones (SC, Ark. and Tenn.). But there's essentially no correlation between Georgia's success on third down in the good games with the bad games.

But all third downs aren't created equal. It's those third-and-longs Richt is looking for -- those are the ones where Georgia's defenders can pin their ears back and make the big play. So we might assume in the good defensive games, there were a lot more third-and-longs, right?

Nope.

Opp	Total	3&Long	Percent
OSU	15	9	60%
SC	17	9	53%
Ark	14	10	71%
Ariz St	13	11	85%
LSU	14	9	64%
Tenn	11	8	73%

In Georgia's three best defensive games, 69 percent of all third downs forced were third-and-longs (i.e. third-and-5 or longer). In the bad defensive games? That number is 64 percent -- down a bit, but nothing substantial.

In fact, Georgia's only game with any measurable increase in sacks -- LSU -- didn't approach the success Georgia enjoyed in creating third-and-longs in games against Arkansas and Tennessee, the two worst performances by the defense.

And while Richt and Martinez seem to indicate that Georgia is having more trouble creating third-and-longs recently, the truth is that their two worst games at doing that were their first two. The game in which they created the second-most third-and-longs, meanwhile, was probably the worst defensive effort.

So maybe third downs don't really have much to do with how successful the defense really is, despite what Richt and Martinez have said.

What seems to be more important is how successful the Bulldogs have been on first and second down.

First off, let's look at the number of first downs that the opposition has picked up on a third-down play.

Opp	Total 1Downs	1D on 3rd	Percent
OSU	17	6	35%
SC	26	6	23%
Ark	17	3	18%
Ariz St	14	4	29%
LSU	19	5	26%
Tenn	24	5	21%

In Georgia's three strong defensive performances, 70 percent of all opposing first downs came on first or second down. In the three bad performances, that number jumps up to 80 percent.

Compare that to the SEC's top defense at Florida. For the season, 30 percent of the first downs the Gators have allowed came on third down. That's about the number Georgia is at in their "good" defensive performances. In essence, it's a sign of how successful the team has been at creating third downs or, more to the point, how unsuccessful they have been at holding teams on first and second down.

Of course, a better measure of that would be the number of third-downs created compared to the number of overall first downs -- i.e., how many sets of downs resulted in a third down. Here's Georgia's stats on that. (*Note, first downs include those that began a drive.)

Opp	First Downs	Third Downs	Percent
OSU	29	17	59
SC	38	17	45
Ark	33	14	42
Ariz St	26	13	50
LSU	31	14	45
Tenn	38	11	29

In both of Georgia's best defensive performances, it turned at least 50 percent of first downs into third downs two plays later. Its worst defensive performances were also the two games in which the opposition needed to get to third down the least.

Then let's look at how many big plays come on third down.

Opp.	Big Plays	On 1st	On 2nd	On 3rd
OSU	2	0	2	0
SC	2	1	0	1
Ark	9	7	1	1
Ariz St	3	1	1	1
LSU	4	0	4	0
Tenn	6	4	0	2

Georgia has allowed a total of 26 plays of 20 yards or more this season. Twenty-one of them have come on first or second down (81 percent).

So what does that mean?

It means Georgia's real problems aren't on third down. Martinez said the team's goal is a 67 percent success rate on third down. As it stands, they're successful 65.5 percent of the time -- not quite his goal, but not too far off. In fact, Georgia ranks 35th nationally in stops on third down -- not great, but not awful.

What we can say is that Georgia is simply not very good on first and second down. A lot of this starts with the same problems we witnessed against Tennessee. When teams have a chance to keep their game plan open -- running play action, for example -- Georgia's defense is lost. On third downs, when teams are more restricted in what they can do, Georgia is just as successful as we might expect. In fact, when the Bulldogs do get teams into third-and-long, they make the stop nearly 80 percent of the time.

Georgia doesn't have a problem getting off the field when they get third-and-long. The problem is that the Bulldogs aren't getting to third down enough, and that's less about execution than it is about recognition. When the Bulldogs know what to expect on D, they're good. When they don't, the recognition and adjustments simply aren't happening.

Read Richt's quote again: “I think when we get people in the third-and-long situations, the possession down, we need to nail it more often. We need to get off the field when we get them there. ... We’ve gotten ourselves in that position on enough occasions where if we could just finish it I think the outcome of a couple of our games would have been different, too.”

The numbers just don't support it. Georgia is doing just fine -- not great, but acceptable -- when they get to third down. Richt needs his defense to do better the rest of the time.

History Repeats Itself

There's no one on the Georgia roster you can count on for an honest assessment of the team better than Rennie Curran. He never calls out individual players -- unless he's calling out himself -- but he's always willing to say what he thinks is holding his unit back.

So when we were talking Tuesday, I put the basic question to him. What's keeping this defense from being successful?

His answer sounded familiar, and after spending about three minutes combing through some quotes from last season, it's clear why.

Rennie Curran following the loss to Florida last year:

"It’s preparation because the better prepared you are, the less likely you are to have things like that happen, miscommunications or not being in the right place at the right time, not being aligned and ready when the ball is snapped, and those are the things that we just have to work on in practice and be more efficient at. Everybody has to be on the same page, and when you’ve got nine guys all doing it, and two guys not doing it the right way, that will mess up your whole entire defense.”

Rennie Curran during the offseason:

“You just have to be persistent and hope everybody can get on the same page, but I have no worries about that this year. I feel like we’ve got a great group of guys that want to do things right and want to buy into the program, and that’s going to translate into good things.”
Rennie Curran following the loss to Tennessee last week:

"This season has been a huge emotional rollercoaster, having good week, bad week, guys not playing on the same page. But we’ve got to go into this week using those bad experiences to turn it into something positive for this team that can get us back on track and build some momentum for the rest of the season.”

Nearly a year apart, the song remains essentially the same, and the bottom line is that phrase: "Not Playing on the Same Page."

But why?

I thought about doing a detailed bit of writing about this, but after posing the question to a number of Georgia's key defensive players and coaches, I think they do a much better job of telling the story.

Despite what we heard during the offseason of all the effort and focus, some of that seems to have waned since this season began. Curran wants to remind people.

“We’ve got a lot going on as college students, but at the same time, we worked so hard during the offseason and we can’t just let that go for nothing," he said. "We’ve got to see some results. We’ve got to continue to fight hard."

So what will that take?

According to defensive coordinator Willie Martinez, it's a matter of persistence.

"It's a work in progress," Martinez said. "You keep talking about those things and being disciplined. You have some guys that have some inexperience and that's going to happen. You just have to work through it, continue to practice it and stress it to where you can be more consistent."

According to safety Bryan Evans, it's a matter of maturity.

“We’ve been trying to do that all season, but times like this, you can only get better by looking at film more," Evans said. "We try to get the younger players to watch film with us more, but a player is only going to do as much as they can do with the class schedule and stuff like that. But that comes with maturity. If you’re mature, you’re going to go in and watch film. If you’re not mature, you’re just going to do what you have to do and be done with it.”

According to defensive tackle Jeff Owens, it's a matter of emotion.

"You've got to give it your all," Owens said. "We know it's a grind. We know it's tough. If it wasn't tough, everybody in the world would be doing it. But you have to go out and give it your all, and you've got to have fun. That's what we have to get back is guys having fun, making plays and being excited."

According to cornerback Brandon Boykin, it's a matter of experience.

"Young people are going to make mistakes," Boykin said. "But I feel like that's where the film study comes in, like Rennie was saying. When you're inexperienced, you've got to get in there because you don't have a lot of reps under your belt. You've got to watch more film to know what to look for and be prepared for, and that in itself will lead to a lot more consistency."

So what's the bottom line?

From fans, the answer for the past few weeks -- heck, the past few years -- has been coaching. But Curran doesn't buy that. The NCAA restricts what coaches can force a player to do or how long they can make a player work. Curran doesn't think the motivation has lacked. It's the determination -- not on the field, but off it.

“We all want to win, we’re all fighting hard, we’re all fighting our hearts out every single game, but at the same time, we also need to focus on playing smarter," Curran said. "That starts with preparation. Coach Martinez can coach his heart out, but it’s up to us to stay in that film room for an extra 30 minutes or whatever it’s going to take to learn those formations, those tendencies that will help us on the field when he’s not there coaching us up.

"That’s when your film preparation comes in. When the offense comes out and does something different that you haven’t seen before, you’re already prepared, you have your rules down that you always stick to. But that’s only going to come with the time you put into it as a player, being a student of the game, and knowing the ins and outs. It’s not always about just the coaching. It’s a lot of times about the player and how bad he wants it and how much he studies himself. That’s something we have to improve on.”

To quote "Office Space," what do you think of a person who does the bare minimum?

"Well, I thought I remembered you saying that you wanted to express yourself."

Of late, going beyond seems to be something that hasn't been as high a priority as some of Georgia's defenders think it needs to be.

“I feel like everybody individually has to look themselves in the mirror and see how they can get better, see what’s gone wrong," Curran said. "If that means sitting in the film room and watching and critiquing yourself, that’s something you need to do. You have to do those things to get better and learn from your mistakes. We’ve got so many other things going on with school, with our families, but at the same time, that’s what we came to this school for was to be great football players and to get a degree and make a great living for ourselves.”

Curran isn't getting any argument on that point from Boykin, who said there's likely a direct correlation between the amount of time spent watching film and the results on the field lately.

"Film study helps, and that might be the deciding factor in a lot of our games," Boykin said. "But I also feel like it's man on man, who's the best a lot of times, and it comes down to us not making the play. But film study would definitely help us as a group if everybody got in there and did what they're supposed to do."

And it will only become a bigger and bigger issue. Teams have beaten Georgia's defense routinely using play-action and misdirection. Boykin and Curran agree that the more Georgia struggles in specific areas, the more the opposition will continue to employ those techniques.

"We know that other teams are going to copycat each other and see what hurt us defensively," Boykin said. "We're going to work on it, and Coach Martinez, I'm sure he's going to do what he's supposed to do. We've got to search within ourselves now and really find out what we want to do with our season, because it's not going to get any easier."

“That’s another thing that comes from watching film," Curran said specifically of defending the play-action. "It’s eye progression and being disciplined. There are certain keys that give away that play-action, and those keys, you only know them if you study film, watch tendencies and know down and distance. Play-action is all about discipline in where your eyes go and knowing what you’re seeing.”

So what's the final solution? How do the Bulldogs improve a problem that has been plaguing the defense for at least a year?

That should be a simple sell, Curran said, although he admits some frustration that it hasn't been as easy as it should be.

But here's the bottom line, he said. Players are at Georgia for a reason, and if they want to be great, they need to remember what that reason was.

“At times like these you have to remind the guys of why we came here," he said. "It’s the same thing as last year. We’ve got so many things as college athletes and students going on in our lives, but we have to realize that the work that we put in during the offseason and how much work has gone into this whole entire season and just what we represent in the tradition and the guys who have done it before us – all those things come into play.

"It’s where we want to go. I’m sure if I ask all my teammates if they want to play in (the NFL), I’m sure they’re all going to say yes. But at the same time, you have to do what it takes. You have to sacrifice. You have to study. You have to have those late nights. You have to put in that extra time. Those are the things you try to drive home to your teammates that it’s not just going to come overnight. Success isn’t going to come just because you want it to or just because you work hard. You’ve got to work smart. You’ve got to do all those necessary things it takes to be a successful player. Just as if you wanted to get that degree or be a successful student, you’ve got to sacrifice. That’s the main thing.”

The More Things Change...

Here are three quotes I got from three different sources following the loss to Tennessee.

First, from Joe Cox, who I asked about criticism aimed at assistant coaches. Here's what he said regarding Willie Martinez...

"In 2007, everybody was worried that Coach Martinez was going to get a head-coaching job somewhere, and he was going to be gone. Our defense had a great year, and then it's like when things start going bad, he's still running the exact same thing. He still coaches the same way. We're just not carrying it out like those teams have in the past."

Next, from Mark Richt, who addressed Georgia's lack of pressure on Johnathan Crompton...

“Most of the time when they were throwing the ball, where they had the most success was on the run downs. A great majority of their success came off the boot action… It was mostly hard running-game fakes. … It’s more difficult to get a great pass rush on a guy when you’re dealing with those kinds of things. Most sacks happen on third down, and we just didn’t get them in many of those. And they did a nice job of blocking.”

And finally, from Martinez, who addressed why Tennessee was so successful...

“I just think they executed really well and we didn’t. They did a nice job of mixing it up early on. We had opportunities to make plays and we didn’t. We got outcoached, outplayed, and they played really well and Tennessee deserves a lot of credit. … It kept us off balance. We were trying to bring pressure at times, but it seems like they were doing a great job of mixing it up. We weren’t able to get off the field and make plays. They out-executed us, out-coached us and out-played us, bottom line.”

Now, I'm guessing most of you already see the relationship between those three quotes, but let's point it out anyway.

Quote 1 boils down to: Martinez does the same things he's always done.

Quote 2 boils down to: Tennessee did some things that aren't "the norm" and that made it hard to get pressure.

Quote 3 boils down to: Georgia couldn't get pressure and so Tennessee was successful.

Now, I'm not exactly putting a ton of stock in Cox's analysis of Georgia's offense. Martinez is not Cox's coach, after all. But I've heard essentially the exact same quote from at least a half-dozen players or coaches in the past two years, so I'm inclined to believe it's valid.

And here's the problem: Martinez is doing the same things he's always done, but the rest of the SEC is not. Tennessee didn't. Georgia Tech hasn't. Kentucky didn't. Florida sure as heck isn't.

How many programs were running the spread in 2005, when Martinez took over the defense? How much has Georgia Tech's offense changed since then? How many QBs stand back in the pocket these days? Heck, how many even start out under center?

Georgia has been burned repeatedly by mobile QBs, by play-action, by diverse offenses. But the problem is, those things aren't the exception anymore. They're almost the rule.

The coaching in the SEC has changed. The offenses in the SEC have changed. The talent level in the SEC has changed.

I know Cox was trying to defend Martinez in his quote, but it comes out sounding more like an indictment.

Football is like any other business. In fact, take it from a guy who works in a dying industry -- if you're staying the same, you're falling behind.

Bobo & Willie: More Fun With Numbers

Yesterday I posted some interesting statistical work done by reader Jim F. regarding Willie Martinez's ability to make in-game adjustments. The reaction from readers was mixed, which is about what I expected. First, as I readily admitted in the post, stats don't prove everything, they simply provide context. If that context is being provided to an already fully-formed opinion, well, it's not very useful. For everyone else, my hope was that it might shed more light on the questions of why Martinez's defenses were struggling. In either case, it was not meant to say that Willie wasn't struggling.

But, the real beauty of yesterday's post wasn't the grand illumination of Georgia's defensive misfortunes. It was that it ignited a bit of creative and mathematical ingenuity on the parts of some other readers. So, let's take a look at what they found...

First, from David E., who wasn't sold on the numbers that supported Willie's ability to adjust in game. One of the common criticisms of the analysis was that teams are often less aggressive in the fourth quarter when they have a lead, so numbers across the board would be down.

There's some merit to that, I'd imagine, but that hasn't really been the case for Georgia's opponents this season. Either way, numbers only make sense in context, and David wanted to see how the Bulldogs' competition fared from quarter to quarter, too. Here are the results:

Looking at yards allowed by Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida and Vandy this year....

Time	UGA	Ga Tech	Florida	Vandy
All	972	861	480	425
1st half	554	378	269	264
2nd half	418	483	211	161
1st qtr	305	137	74	74
2nd qtr	249	241	195	190
3rd qtr	302	281	87	63
4th qtr	116	202	124	98

Now by QB rating...

Time	UGA	Ga Tech	Florida	Vandy
All	125.79	133.09	75.29	80.19
1st half	136.57	112.62	88.55	85.54
2nd half	115.29	155.3	61.85	72.94
1st qtr	165.19	96.02	67.46	67.46
2nd qtr	106.33	127.72	104.8	99.88
3rd qtr	147	215.22	61.54	66.48
4th qtr	75.89	115.92	61.98	79.7

And lastly, by first downs...

Time	UGA	Ga Tech	Florida	Vandy
All	41	34	24	18
1st half	23	16	14	13
2nd half	18	18	10	5
1st qtr	13	5	5	3
2nd qtr	10	11	9	10
3rd qtr	13	10	3	2
4th qtr	5	8	7	3

So, what does this tell us? I'll let David give his thoughts:

"As you can see, we are not that great at "making adjustments." Between the first and second half, only tech did not improve in their defense. Also, while it seems that our fourth quarter numbers are low relative to our first quarter numbers, this isn't unique to us, and, I think most disturbingly, speaks more to how terrible our first quarter numbers are. This little exercise has not helped my confidence. Cripes!!"

Two points I'll agree with David on: First, "Cripes" is a great thing to yell in situations like this. Second, Georgia's first quarter numbers (and really, the numbers overall) are pretty bad. Again, there have been no cupcakes on the Bulldogs' schedule like Tech, Florida and Vandy have enjoyed, but Georgia's numbers across the board are almost double what Florida and Vandy are allowing.

On the other side of the coin, I will offer this: In virtually every category for all three teams David studied, the numbers went up in the second and fourth quarters from where they were in the first and third quarters. For Georgia, however, it's just the opposite.

I'm not sure what that means, but here's one thought: Football is a game of adjustments. You come in with a game plan, and one team's is better than the others. Then coaches adjust, and you might expect a swing. Then coaches adjust again, and you might expect a swing back. Then again, and so on. These numbers tell me that for teams like Tech, Florida and Vandy, they've come into the game with a good plan, then adjusted at the half to the adjustments made by the opposition for the second and fourth quarters.

Georgia, on the other hand, has come in with a game plan that hasn't quite worked, been forced to adjust midway through each half.

Obviously that is far from fact, but it's one way of looking at the numbers, and it's a different opinion than I think most fans have of Willie.

But let's get back to the originator of this little exercise, our fine reader Jim F.

Rather than hide behind his first bit of analysis, Jim went back to find some context. To be fair, he included some delightful graphs of these numbers that I am simply not smart enough to get to format properly in this blog post. If any of you would really like to see the full standings, email me and I'll be happy to forward along the file in Excel format.

Anyway, here's Jim's explanations of his work...

What I got: The Overall QB Rating, 1st Half QB Rating, 2nd Half QB Rating and 4th Qtr QB Rating for all SEC teams. I want to get a SEC Rank of where UGA pass D adjustments stood.



Theory: Regardless of opponent, a "good DC" will make adjustments at the Half to nullify what the opponent is doing in its game plan, and within the game or late-game performance (either 'going for the throat', a trade mark of a "good defense" or coming up big in pressure situations)



Limitations: QB Rating itself -not the prefect stat, as stated the other day. If you asked, I doubt seriously not even 90% of even hard core fans, without Google, could accurately tell you what the formula is. I believe it is: ((QB age/2) + sq root of QB IQ) + (on a 10 point scale the Avg. score of cheerleader rooting him on) + TD)) - minus interceptions. :>). Suffice it to say the lower the "better" a Defense is playing.

(*Say that might be worth another prize pack: What is the formula?*)



I used variance as the indicator, again attempting to limit the argument - weak opponent vs. stronger opponent. What happened during the course of the game was what I was trying to get to. Variance is the change that happened, supposedly credited to decisions made during the game on the sidelines - adjustments. You could have used raw numbers, but I didn't go that route for reasons stated.



By using variance, it does legitimately leave some room for criticism. That is it is really measuring "Most Improved D/C during the game Award". I am taking two snapshots: One at the half and one at the end - giving out two pieces of hardware. For the halftime, I used the drop, hopefully, seen during the second half as compared to the first half. For the late-game performance, I used the variance between fourth quarter and overall.

But the truth is again that it is like "test score improvement". Well a 25 to 50 is a 100 percent improvement, but that potential "misleading" possibility is still out there. Being totally fair though three wins out of 4 is not a total failure.



Also the other potential 'misleading' variable is a) the number of games played and b) the number of BCS opponents that they played. Can other teams D stats be misleading because they played FLA Atlantic instead of a Big 12 team? After I got the QB Ratings to help minimizes that distortion or "noise" I went back and added the number of BCS opponents each team has faced on top of the graphs (on right hand side axis), and will let you decide if a team's D stat is puffed up by cupcakes or legit. But I didn't add in total games to graph, too confusing. But getting rest and playing with rested legs after 2-a-days is an important factor.



Results: UGA D Ranked fourth in halftime adjustments in making QB Rating drop, and first (best!) with fourth quarter adjustments. Auburn actually ranked No. 1 in halftime adjustments. With all the attention on the other side, I guess Chizik is taking on his D/C, umm HC, responsibilities.

OK, so Jim's additional research doesn't really vary greatly from David's, despite studying some different teams. So I think it's fair to say that, comparatively, Georgia -- i.e. Willie -- is doing a good job in the second and fourth quarters of games. But again, what does that mean?

That's the part that's open for debate, and I would guess that your explanation will likely be defined by how you view Willie as a coach to begin with. Indeed, the numbers are only a part of the story. You have to make the ending up for yourself.

Of course, we've spent all this time talking about the defense, and that's hardly fair to Mike Bobo, Georgia's offensive coordinator who has earned a share of criticism himself.

I wrote in my practice notes yesterday how Georgia was hoping to jump start its running game. Well, reader John B. decided to do some homework on the issue and thinks the problems may not be with Richard Samuel or Caleb King, but rather with Mike Bobo.

I'll let John explain his premise:

"I wanted to see how UGA's play selection and success/failure compared to other top teams on first down. My criteria was the team must be top rated and can't have more than one loss. Plus, I took the games that those teams played against their best competition. This was done because UGA has played no cupcakes yet.

"Games Selected: Bama vs VT, Boise vs Oregon, Miami vs GT, LSU vs Washington, USC vs OSU, Jean Shorts vs Coonskin Caps, TCU vs Clemson, South Carolina vs Ole Miss.

"The summary of the above winning team's first down play calling was charted to compare to UGA, then averaged to see how UGA's average over four games compared to these top programs' eight games."

Interesting premise, so let's see the results...

Category	UGA	Others
1st down passes	47	69
Completions	28	41
Incompletions	19	28
Comp %	59.57	59.42
Pass Yards	512	522
Avg Yd/attempt	10.89	7.57
Rushes	57	160
Rush yards	287	836
Rush yds/attempt	5.04	5.23
Pass to Run Ratio	45%/55%	30%/70%

(*Remember, this is play calling on FIRST DOWN only, not overall. So while Bobo appears "balanced" you have to factor in that first is traditionally more of a running down, while third down, for example, tends to skew in the other direction.)

This is pretty fascinating, but let me allow John his thoughts first...

* UGA is passing on first down 15 percent more than other top programs
* UGA's avg yards per pass attempt is significantly higher than other top programs. More than 3 yards per attempt. Thanks AJ and Orson!
* UGA has 10 fewer yards passing on first down than the 8 top teams selected combined
* Joe Cox's completion % on first down is nearly identical to the other 8 top teams
* UGA's avg yards per rush is on par with other top teams. Only lagging by less than .25 yards per attempt

John's conclusions:

"I believe UGA's struggles with the running game is a direct result to the lack of commitment to running the ball on 1st down. If Mike Bobo doesn't make a concerned effort to establish the run from the very beginning, how can you expect to be able to run it in crucial game winning or clock eating drives? I believe if this trend continues it will be tough to compete in the SEC East.

"Success in the running game comes from a team mind-set and commitment to be a physical team. You have to practice it in order to create the mind-set and team attitude that "no one is going to stop us." If we need two yards, we WILL get 3.

"I understand you have to get the ball to AJ. He's the best player on the field (PERIOD). BUT look at the Arkansas game. UGA ran the ball on every first-down play in the first 5 drives of the game. This opened up first down passing plays later in the game of 25, 20, 50, 18, 44 and 23 yards. Cox was 6 for 8 for 180 yards after we commited the first five drives to establishing the run.

"YOU RUN TO PASS NOT PASS TO RUN!"

OK, back to my thoughts...

First, you have to wonder about the simple paradox of cause and effect here. Is Georgia's running game struggling because they aren't running enough on first down or are they not running enough on first down because the running game is struggling?

I think the answer to that has to be the former, because as John points out, Georgia's success on the ground on first down is virtually identical to the success achieved by the victorious team in those other eight games.

Still, I'm not entirely sure I agree with John's conclusion that by not running on first down, Georgia is failing to set up the proper mind-set for success. There may be some truth to that, but I think the bigger issue is a matter of situational dynamics.

I spoke with Mike Bobo yesterday about the running game's problems, and he said he thought a good bit of that had to do with turnovers and penalties. It makes some sense.

Georgia ranks 115th nationally in penalty yards (314), with a majority of those coming on offense. That means Georgia is facing more first-and-15s or second- and third-and-longs as a result. Those aren't running situations, obviously.

Also look at the Bulldogs' turnovers. They have 12 already this year. Two occured on special teams, which cost the team a drive. Add in the fake punt by South Carolina, and that's another drive that Georgia lost. Then look at when the other 10 turnovers occurred:

Against Oklahoma State, Georgia had three turnovers -- one on the second play of a drive, one on the third and one on the fifth. That last one occurred on Georgia's last drive of the game when the Bulldogs were in pass-only mode as they tried desperately to play catch-up.

Against South Carolina, Georgia had two more offensive turnovers -- one on the second play of a drive, one on the first.

Against Arkansas, Georgia also had two offensive turnovers -- one the first play of a drive, one on the third.

And last week against Arizona State, Georgia had three offensive turnovers -- two on the third play of a drive, one on the first.

So that's essentially nine more drives that last three plays or fewer before ending with a turnover.

Then go back to John's numbers again. Georgia is throwing on first down 45 percent of the time. Those throws fall incomplete 40 percent of the time. That means that 18 percent of the time, Georgia is facing a second-and-10, which again is hardly an optimal running situation.

The bottom line is that Georgia's running game hasn't been given a chance to succceed yet. If 18 percent of its drives result in a second-and-long, 12 drives have been cut short by turnovers in three plays or less, and the team ranks among the worst in the country in penalties, there is simply no way for the running backs to get in a groove because the situations rarely dictate that being a possibility. Georgia has run the ball as much as they have because Bobo is insisting on it, not because the game has allowed it.

So while I think John has some serious merit in his analysis, I also think that if the Bulldogs can hold on to the ball and cut down on the flags, there's a good chance we'll see some improvement in the running game without any other factors being considered. Add to that improved play by Samuel and King, some more efficient play calls by Bobo and better blocking by the disappointing offensive line, and Georgia may really have a nice ground game going by the end of the season.

ADDENDUM: There's really nothing like tying two unrelated thoughts together, right? And while the analysis of Willie and the analysis of Bobo may not seem related that closely, here's some food for thought:

Georgia has 53 offensive drives so far this season (*not including drives to run out the clock before the half or to end the game).

A poor running game or poor play calling can result in short drives and lots of three-and-outs.

Twelve of Georgia's drives have ended in turnovers in 5 plays or fewer.

Eight have been scoring drives that lasted 5 plays or fewer.

Nine have been three-and-outs.

Seven more have been four or five plays before Georgia was forced to punt.

So far this season, Georgia has had possession of the football for a total of 113 minutes, 45 seconds out of a possible 240 minutes (i.e. 47 percent of the time).

But, add in South Carolina's fake punt, and on 37 of 54 possible possessions (69 percent) Georgia has run five plays or fewer before either scoring or giving the ball back to the opposition.

Since the defense cannot give up any yardage when the offense is on the field, and since the offense has not been on the field nearly as much as it could have been, it's fair to say that there's been a bit of an extra burden put on the D this season.

If Georgia was even moderately more successful in avoiding penalties and short drives, that time of possession number could swing wildly in the other direction, which by definition, would reduce some of the ugly numbers going against the D right now.