Why the Georgia Bulldogs Will Win the 2008 National Championship
I'm supposed to be covering a baseball game tonight, but, dadgum it, Georgia lost to Winthrop, so I'll face the Diamond Dogs' Tuesday evening setback at a later date. In the meantime, in case you didn't see the announcement (O.K., the announcements), I was on EDSBS Live tonight to discuss Georgia's national title prospects.
I am grateful to Orson and Peter for the opportunity to talk about the 'Dawgs and, if you didn't get the chance to hear it live, please follow the link and listen to me being grilled. Despite the fact that I was given ample rope with which to hang myself, I had extensive notes upon the subject and I did not get to all of them---hey, I am college football's most verbose blogger---so I'd like to share a few observations to explain . . . why I think Georgia will win the national title.
There are, of course, the obvious reasons: the Red and Black have 15 starters back from a team that finished the year ranked No. 2 in the nation, they have gone 14-2 in their last 16 games, and they are led by Matthew Stafford and Knowshon Moreno, who are backed up by Logan Gray and Caleb King.
Moreover, Mark Richt clearly has grown into the job. He is a better coach now than he was in his first five or six years and he was the most successful coach in Georgia history in those first few years.
Yeah, we call him Coach Mark Richt.
Yes, the 'Dawgs face a difficult schedule, but they get one significant break: as Paul Westerdawg pointed out, none of the teams on Georgia's schedule have an open date the week before facing the Bulldogs. Beyond that, the difficult schedule is a plus for several reasons:
1. It promotes offseason focus. Under Coach Richt, Georgia has always performed better in the years in which the Bulldogs have a legitimate early-season out-of-conference game, because it forces the team to prepare more in spring and fall practice. In 2001, 2004, and 2006, the Classic City Canines faced no serious non-conference opponents in August or September. Those years produced no conference championships, no division titles, and no bowls better than the Outback, and the 'Dawgs finished those seasons ranked outside the top 20 twice.
In 2002, 2003, 2005, and 2007, however, Georgia had early-season tests against Clemson (twice), Boise State, and an Oklahoma State squad some Orson Swindles I could name picked to win the Big 12. These opponents caused the team to be focused and those seasons produced two S.E.C. titles, three S.E.C. championship game appearances, four first-place finishes in the division, three Sugar Bowl appearances, two Sugar Bowl victories, and four top 10 finishes, including a No. 3 finish and a No. 2 finish. The presence of Arizona State on the slate will make the team concentrate.
2. The schedule will earn the 'Dawgs favorable attention. Maybe they should or shouldn't matter, but matter the computers and the poll voters do. The computer rankings will like Georgia's strength of schedule and, by traveling outside the South for first time in more than 40 years, Georgia will get national media attention and have the opportunity to impress the poll voters, especially guys who don't think of Georgia as a national power.
Southern California played Auburn in 2003 . . . and won the national title. Southern California played Virginia Tech in 2004 . . . and won the national title. Texas played Ohio State in 2005 . . . and won the national title. Louisiana State played Virginia Tech in 2007 . . . and won the national title. That kind of game is what springboards a national title run; playing nothing but patsies on your non-conference slate is what gets you Auburned.
3. The tough slate gives Georgia a margin for error. We saw this with L.S.U. last year, when the rough road the Bayou Bengals had to travel, both in and out of conference, allowed the Fighting Tigers to overcome the sting of two losses. While I don't believe a two-loss team will make into this year's national championship game, the Red and Black will face a schedule that includes defending Pac-10 co-champion Arizona State on the road, defending national champion L.S.U. on the road, Auburn on the road, Florida at Jacksonville, and a home slate featuring Tennessee, Alabama, defending M.A.C. champion Central Michigan, and Georgia Tech. If Georgia gets through that schedule with a 12-1 record and one of the twelve wins is in the S.E.C. championship game, I think Georgia gets into the title tilt ahead of any other one-loss conference champion except U.S.C. and even gets in ahead of an unbeaten Big East champion. Fair or unfair, that's the way I think it will work.
Yes, the Bulldogs have to travel to Baton Rouge, the only S.E.C. venue in which Mark Richt has coached but never won. I give all the credit in the world to the Bayou Bengal program and the team's fans, but I believe the 2003 S.E.C. championship game is for Mark Richt what the 1966 Georgia-Florida game was for Steve Spurrier. Since that contest---the only true beatdown a Mark Richt-coached team has ever endured except last year's Tennessee game---Georgia has taken on L.S.U. twice in what were supposed to be competitive match-ups.
Both games were beatdowns. Georgia beat Louisiana State 45-16 in 2004 and 34-14 in 2005. While I don't expect such a lopsided contest this time, the Fighting Tigers will have Coach Richt's undivided attention. In addition, there is the fact that Georgia is 6-1 versus defending national champions since 1965.
Oh, all right, I'll admit it: Pat Hodgson's knees were down.
I quoted that stat in January 2007 and spent the next ten months telling anyone who would listen that Georgia would beat defending national champion Florida the following fall . . . and I was right.
Ultimately, if he keeps after it, a quality head coach who produces consistent victories will get that one special player who fits his system perfectly or performs at a different level, and that's what makes a team a national champion. Consider:
Bobby Bowden won ten or eleven games a year for six straight years, then he got Charlie Ward, went 12-1, and won a national title. Tom Osborne consistently won nine, ten, or eleven games a year until he got Lawrence Phillips, went 13-0, and won a national title.
Steve Spurrier likewise consistently won nine, ten, or eleven games a year until he got Danny Wuerffel (who was perfect for his offense), went 12-1, and won a national title. Mack Brown won ten or eleven games every year for four straight years, then he got Vince Young, went 13-0, and won a national title.
You have to give the devil his due . . . literally.
To some extent, the same thing even applies to Vince Dooley. Aside from one bad year in 1977, Georgia's conference records from 1975 to 1979 were 5-1, 5-1, 5-0-1, and 5-1, then the Bulldogs got Herschel Walker, went 6-0, 6-0, and 6-0 in the league from 1980 to 1982, and won three S.E.C. championships and one national title.
Mark Richt is at that level. In the last six seasons, his Bulldog teams have gone 13-1, 11-3, 10-2, 10-3, 9-4, and 11-2. The pattern suggests that he will lead the Red and Black to a national championship with the emergence of Knowshon Moreno.
Once again, I am grateful to Orson and Peter for having me on the show and I appreciated getting the opportunity to defend Georgia. As always, your thoughts go in the comments below.
Go 'Dawgs!
0 recs |
10
comments
Comments
Devil's Advocate
- How do you know for sure that Knowshon Moreno will lead you to a national title? After all the SEC has had some great players on great teams, like Peyton Manning in 1995-97 or Rex Grossman in 2001 to name two, that didn't win it all.
- No one may have open dates before Georgia, but South Carolina has Vandy on a Thursday, Arizona State has UNLV, Alabama has rebuilding Arkansas, Tennessee has hapless NIU, Florida has depleted Kentucky at home, and Auburn has a I-AA school. No, they're not bye weeks but they aren't exactly taxing games either, and I know you don't think that Tennessee or Auburn will be preparing for nothing but NIU or Tennessee-Martin the entire week with Georgia looming the next.
- The 6-1 record against defending champs is a wonderful stat, but ultimately a great coincidence. What happened in 1965, 1982, 1991, and 1997 doesn't matter this year because none of the players or coaches from those years are still playing or coaching for Georgia this year. Georgia beat Florida last year because Florida had one of its 5 worst defenses of the last 25 years, not because of some cosmic power the Dawgs have over defending champs. After all, UF scored 30 points on Georgia, more than any other SEC team except Tennessee.
- Early season nonconference games go both ways. Auburn played USC in 2003... and didn't win the national title. Virginia Tech played USC in 2004... and didn't win the national title. Ohio State played Texas in 2005... and didn't win the national title. Virginia Tech played LSU in 2007... and didn't win the national title. How do you know for sure which side of that you're on?
As I said above, Georgia will be great, and it should be a terror to opponents on both sides of the ball. I just want to get your opinion on those matters before you go all Dedede on us and crown your team king.
by Year2 on Apr 9, 2008 11:47 AM EDT 0 recs
Schedule
But the Clemson, Boise State and Oklahoma State games were all the very first of the season. They weren't just sometime in August/September.
Arizona State is our fourth game. We play South Carolina before we go to the desert. Our first game of this season is undeniably a cupcake, and the second is not too far from that designation, no matter how powerful their offense.
You can't say that playing a tough opponent in your fourth game is the same as playing one in your first game.
However, I don't think the negation of that particular point washes out you prediciton. In fact, I think the early schedule will help us on the road to the National Championship. Here's why:
- We can't lose our first game. It's basically a scrimmage. Our back-ups will get a lot of work, our offensive line will gel even further, we'll build depth, etc.
- But we won't get soft because of the game because next week brings a more difficult challenge. We'll be facing a different (and high scoring) offense, but we still are in no real danger of losing. More depth, more gelling, etc.
- We play our first legitimate opponent with two games of experience and the confidence that comes from two consecutive blowouts. South Carolina is good enough to exploit over-confidence, but we've got the trump card there - a desire for revenge. We won't be trapped, we'll play a quality opponent, etc.
- Then our first big challenge. There is no chance we won't be focused and prepared. We'll be on national TV for the first time (I assume) this season. And, our opponent is not more talented than we are, nor better coached.
Go Dawgs.
by randomterrace on Apr 9, 2008 1:23 PM EDT 0 recs
Audio difficulty
by NCT on Apr 9, 2008 7:59 PM EDT 0 recs
Thanks all around
College Buddy called me today and asked whether I was tempting fate by embracing the high expectations so brazenly; I'll tell you what I told him:
- Orson and Peter asked me to defend the 'Dawgs, so defend them I did. (As evidenced by the inadvertent omission of a "the" or two here and there, the above posting was converted from "talking points" notes to actual prose.) Obviously, all of us are going to be wrong about a lot of it and most of the folks who are right may well be right for the wrong reasons. I stated a case, which may or not play out as expected, which is one of the beauties of sports.
- As C.J. Cregg once put it, when you can't lower expectations, you have to meet them. I very well could be wrong, but that's why I think this team will achieve at the highest level, even if it doesn't. Maybe there's nothing magical about Georgia playing a defending national champion, or about Ohio State being 0-9 against the S.E.C. in bowl games, or about Florida wearing blue pants or Georgia wearing black jerseys, but a trend is a trend until it ends and, as long as football is a game of emotion, stuff like that is worth noting. Crash Davis was right when he told Annie Savoy that, if you think you're on a winning streak because of X, then you are, and you have to respect the streak.
by T Kyle King on Apr 9, 2008 8:35 PM EDT 0 recs
Talk of NC too early
Nice article and I admire your enthusiasm for the 2008 Dawgs, but all your points are cursory and filled with wishful thinking that will only add fossil fuel to the fire of dilusion among ill-informed Dawg fans.
One point noticeably absent from your list is the constant threat of injuries. This CAN NOT be overlooked and with a schedule like ours it would be foolish to think we could go through the season without sustaining some key injuries. If Stafford gets hurt early in the season, say adios to any NC title hopes. If we have a series of injuries across our OL, kiss a NC good-bye. If Knowshon goes down that would strike a blow right through the heart of this team.
Lastly, it takes LUCK to win a NC - don't believe me then just ask Florida. Back-to-back blocked field goals against SC... yeah no luck there. How about against Arkansas when Captain Moron tries to catch a punt over his shoulder inside the 10 yard line. Katy bar the door after that play. So in summary, the Dawgs are going to need an extraordinary amount of balls bouncing in its favor to navigate a schedule like ours and come out the other end in contention to play for a BCS Championship. As much as I love the Dawgs I try to keep the dilusions to a minimum.
by Dr Merkwurdigliebe on Apr 10, 2008 11:27 AM EDT 0 recs
Misinterpretation?
But, again, maybe it's just me.
by NCT on Apr 10, 2008 8:49 PM EDT 0 recs
Nah, you're right, NCT
Just as Orson and Peter were playing devil's advocate in offering criticisms of the 'Dawgs they didn't necessarily believe, I was offering defenses that may or may not hold water. Certainly, Dr Merkwurdigliebe makes a fair point that injuries and luck play a major role, and there is no way to anticipate those in advance.
I feel very confident about the Bulldogs heading into the 2008 campaign and I think they have a distinct shot at the crystal football, but anyone who says he knows who's going to finish No. 1 is wrong.
Even if he lurches uncontrollably into the correct answer (as I fervently hope I have done here), he was right for the wrong reasons, with respect to which all I will say is that Antonin Scalia is correct when he describes concurring opinions as dissents that merely, and quite coincidentally, share a common outcome with the majority.
by T Kyle King on Apr 10, 2008 9:33 PM EDT 0 recs
Let's Be Realistic
- Unlike Tiger Woods, we don't play well with the lead, aka massive attention/expectations/etc. We do better when we're under the radar a bit and the overwhelming pressure to live up to the hype is not as massive, so all this crazy speculative MNC talk does not help at all in my opinion- it only serves to distract and allow people to lose focus over the things on which we have a direct control {the actual games}.
- After last season's insanity/upsets/etc, speculation of any kind, although an entertaining way to pass the time, is just silly. Forget any such MNC talk, let's focus on getting past Ga. Southern, then W. Michigan, then S. Carolina, etc. Just do what's in front of us and if on the first weekend in December it happens for us, great.
- Dr. M is exactly right- it takes tons of luck, etc. to get to the MNC. Furthermore, speculation discounts the fluidity of the season, ESPECIALLY THE AFFECT OF MAJOR INJURIES, that will significantly alter every team's season in one way or another.
by Kanu on Apr 11, 2008 4:12 PM EDT 0 recs
Kanu . . .
by T Kyle King on Apr 11, 2008 6:35 PM EDT 0 recs









