I’m having trouble wrapping my head around this Monday afternoon post from David Hale. It’s nothing to do with Hale’s writing but rather the “star of the team is the team” approach taken by Mark Richt.

Chemistry is a very real issue with any organization, and we’ve all seen otherwise talented teams that just didn’t click. In that sense, Richt’s observation that the players “really decided that they have to come together as a team and work their tail off and get after it” is very positive. We’ve been treated since the end of the season to dozens of hazy accounts about leadership and chemistry on last year’s team, and most everyone has been quick to point out how different things are this year. I’ve said my peace about that, but we’ll go along with it.

I don’t get the connection though between all of that and the downside of “relying on a Stafford or a Moreno to carry the team.” If we’re talking about the Patrick Ewing Theory here, fine. Sometimes teams do have successful seasons when stars leave, and sometimes teams can get caught up waiting for the stars to take over. I can even see where that can have an impact on chemistry if others resent the attention. Is that what Richt is really getting at?

But was leaning on Stafford and Moreno really near the top of the list of last year’s shortcomings? The Georgia offense was 3rd in the SEC in scoring and 2nd in yardage. It seems as if they were up to it, even behind a patchwork line. Of course the Dawgs won’t have those two to lean on again this year, and that’s where comments apply about a stronger offensive line taking some of the pressure off.

Teams lean on, single out, and promote stars all the time. Of all of the things that made “last year one of the toughest years,” I’m having trouble seeing how “the Bulldogs fans and the media (focusing) on those two guys” was unfair or misplaced attention. They deserved it, and they much more often than not delivered. What did too much attention on Stafford and Moreno have to do with the SEC’s #10 scoring defense or a secondary whose interception total was challenged by the defensive line?

Here’s another thing: fans and the media are going to continue to focus on certain standout individuals even on a team that claims that “the team is the star.” It’s what we do. Fans and media focused on Stafford and Moreno last year, and they’ll focus on A.J. Green, Rennie Curran, and the Owens/Atkins tandem this year. We’re going to expect Green to make incredible catches and big plays – he’s going to have to with so little returning production at WR. We’re going to be looking for Curran to fly all over the field because someone has to be the spark on the defensive side.

The team-first approach is important, and whatever gets these guys ready to play together can only be a good thing. But few teams, especially at this level, succeed without bona fide stars. Successful teams have players who understand and embrace their roles whether they get top billing or are among the supporting cast. The trouble with last year’s team wasn’t so much leaning on some of the biggest stars ever to suit up for the Bulldog offense; it was that not enough of the rest of the team rose to that level of play.

With the recent announcement of three verbal commitments from the Jacksonville area, Georgia’s recruiting success in the state of Florida is getting some notice. They’re not just finding recruiting success in Jacksonville; the incoming Bulldog class contains three high-profile prospects from further down the peninsula, and two more from the Orlando area have pledged to sign in 2010.

Is it the Georgia-Florida game’s proximity to Jacksonville? Proponents of keeping the game in Jacksonville (of which I am one) sometimes claim that a game in the area helps the program stay on the mind of prospects and high schools in south Georgia and north Florida. I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. As the Times-Union points out, these three recent commitments are more than Georgia’s landed from the Jacksonville area in seven years (Chapas and Evans). Besides, it’s not as if the WLOCP has been the best advertisement for Georgia football lately.

There’s a simpler explanation.

“You look at Georgia’s staff, and they have strong connections here,” Sullivan said. “Assistant coach John Lilly was at Florida State for 13 years, so he’s recruited here for a long time. Coach Stacy Searels recruited this area when he was at Auburn. Their recruiting coordinator, Rodney Gardner, also has strong ties here.”

That’s just the start. Defensive coordinator Willie Martinez grew up in, played college football in, and coached in the state. Even John Jancek has coaching experience in Florida and was just this year offered the chance to join the Univ. of South Florida staff. Lilly wasn’t only an assistant at FSU; he also served as recruiting coordinator with impressive results.

Under Lilly’s direction, four of FSU’s recruiting classes between 2002 and 2007 were ranked in the top four in the nation. The Seminoles’ 2001 and 2005 classes were ranked number one nationally in some polls.

There have also been shifts in the college football landscape. Those of us with a little gray in our hair likely have a much different perspective about the in-state choices for the Florida prospects. They weren’t alive during Miami’s glory years in the 1980s. Current recruits were in the second grade when Steve Spurrier won his last SEC title and FSU last finished in the AP top 10. Urban Meyer has guaranteed Florida’s relevance for the near future, but what about the other programs?

Since the arrival of Mark Richt (and the third grade for current prospects), Georgia has won 10 more games than Miami and 15 more games than FSU. Since these recruits entered high school in the fall of 2006, FSU has gone just 23-16. Miami is just 19-19. Georgia is 30-9. South Florida, Wake Forest, and even troubled programs like Michigan, Tennessee, and Auburn have won more games than FSU and Miami during the high school careers of the current class of rising high school seniors. Certainly most of these recruits aren’t without a sense of history, and they’re not oblivious to the legacies of success at FSU and Miami, but those schools’ relative performance during these formative years has opened the door not only for in-state competition at Florida but also for schools like Georgia.

It’s natural that some will question whether too much emphasis is being placed on out-of-state prospects especially after so much talk about “closing the borders” earlier in Richt’s career. But offering top out-of-state targets early is a pretty common tactic, and sometimes you have to go where the talent is if a certain position is a little soft in the home state. Both Florida and Georgia currently have five out-of-state commitments (though Florida has six more pledges overall). Make no mistake – Georgia’s top in-state prospects know who they are and are getting plenty of attention from the staff.

We noted earlier in the week that there was some uncertainty about the broadcasting crews in the wake of Georgia’s record marketing and broadcast deal with ISP Sports. Damon Evans has cleared up at least the biggest question: Scott Howard and Eric Zeier have been named the permanent broadcast team for Georgia football.

“This is a proven broadcast team,” said Evans. “Scott is a Bulldog calling Georgia Bulldog games. He’s been one of our radio personalities going on 20 years and has done an exceptional job with all the Bulldog sports he has broadcast over a long period of time. Eric gives us not only a former Bulldog player but the special analysis that a former quarterback can bring to the table.”

I think this was the best possible outcome. Short of someone like Brad Nessler, I wasn’t too keen on someone with few ties to the Dawgs coming into the broadcast booth. People might have stylistic issues with Howard, but he’s a comfortable and familiar voice to guide us through Saturdays. Zeier’s taken to the role of analyst quickly and definitely adds something to the broadcast that had been missing.

Evans’ announcement still leaves some questions unanswered. The personnel for the pregame and postgame shows, sideline reporting, and crews for other sports are still unannounced.

Georgia’s $92.8 million deal with ISP Sports for marketing and media rights is official now. It’s a big deal on several levels. The deal represents well over 10% of athletic department revenue ($84.2 million at last report).

For comparison, Georgia Tech recently re-upped with ISP to the tune of $50 million over the life of a 10-year deal. FSU’s deal with ISP signed back in 2007 was worth a reported $66 million over ten years. Auburn’s 2006 nine-year deal with ISP was for $51.3 million. The Dawgs, on an annual basis, now have one of the highest-paying marketing deals in the nation.

Make no mistake, ISP is going to make their money back somehow. If you haven’t become numb to the barrage of advertising at Sanford Stadium yet, you won’t like what’s ahead. At least with Cingular becoming AT&T, there should be less orange and blue around. The additional time (possibly 9+ hours of total broadcast time on a football game day) added to the pregame and postgame shows will surely be advertising-heavy. I’d also expect the enhancements to online and mobile content to come with a price tag. If they can make it more reliable than G-Xtra, it might be worth it.

For many fans, the most interesting development to watch will be this one:

With the ISP deal in place, Georgia expects to announce its radio broadcast teams for the coming season soon.

Scott Howard called the football and men’s basketball play-by-play last season. Eric Zeier provided football color commentary.

“Certainly we look forward to working with the stable of folks that have been working with us before and potentially adding others into the fold,” Thomas said. “You will continue to see a lot of those that you’ve seen involved in the broadcast.”

The last line gives us a bit of hope, but I’m a little apprehensive at the direction this could take. Howard and Zeier were never going to be a permanent arrangement, but I’d be just fine leaving that intact. No one is going to replace Munson, but Howard is at least competent and, most important (to me at least), a homer and comfortable bit of continuity from the Munson days. I dread the day when some polished outsider is brought in who is bland and detatched or, worse, from the cheeseball Mick Huber mold. There are so many ways it could go bad and so many people who would be worse for the job than Scott Howard. It could have a silver lining – the broadcast team could end up being bad enough to force fans to leave the headphones at home for once and actually get into the game.

Of course there’s more to it than the guys in the booth. Sideline reporters and pregame and postgame hosts will have to be sorted out, so we’ll have to see what the announcement brings and where the changes will be made. Basketball and baseball could also see a shakeup – will Jeff Dantzler still be a part of the picture?

I also wonder about Hondo and the guys managing the broadcast network for WSB. WSB will still be the Atlanta broadcast affiliate, but the network is managed by ISP now instead of Cox/WSB. Hopefully they’ll still have a role in the new arrangement after the great work they’ve done.

Atlanta and Nashville were the big winners when the SEC announced upcoming sites for the men’s and women’s basketball tournaments. Through 2014, the 2012 men’s tournament is the only event that won’t take place in the Nashville or Atlanta areas. It’s great news for Georgia fans – Atlanta and Duluth are obviously convenient, and Nashville is a 4-hour drive and an enjoyable place to spend a March weekend. If Mark Fox can build a competitive team, traveling to follow the Dawgs into the first stages of the postseason isn’t going to break the bank.

The Georgia Dome was the (initial) site of the legendary 2008 SEC men’s tournament, and the conference will tempt fate (and weather) by bringing the tournament back in 2011 and 2014.

The news is even better for Lady Dogs fans: the women’s SEC Tournament will return to Duluth’s Arena at Gwinnett Center for 2010, 2013, and 2014. Though the SEC is typically the strongest women’s basketball conference, Atlanta is the only SEC-area city with a WNBA franchise. The SEC has to hope that an increased awareness of women’s basketball in Atlanta (not to mention the short drive from Tennessee) will help to fill the seats.

Men’s Tournament future venues:

• 2010: Nashville, Tn.
• 2011: Atlanta, Ga.
• 2012: New Orleans, La.
• 2013: Nashville, Tn.
• 2014: Atlanta, Ga.

Women’s Tournament future venues:

• 2010: Duluth, Ga.
• 2011: Nashville, Tn.
• 2012: Nashville, Tn.
• 2013: Duluth, Ga.
• 2014: Duluth, Ga.

It’s news today that Georgia football brought in more money last year than any other program except Texas.

I’m not exactly sure what constitutes “football revenue”. Bowl money surely counts. Hartman Fund donations were less than $30 million, and ticket sales can’t account for more than a couple million dollars per game. Is the SEC distribution figured in? It would be interesting to see the breakdown…I’ll have to check the Hartman Fund annual report.

Though football revenue is among the best in the nation, overall revenue is “only” 13th among all programs. Football revenue accounts for 80% of what the Athletic Association brings in. Football at a school like Georgia is always going to lead the way, but it also demonstrates the problems with and potential for the other men’s sports.

Basketball is a big moneymaker for a lot of schools, but Georgia hasn’t been in a position to do much with its hoops programs lately. Demand is barely palpable, the Coliseum doesn’t offer much in the way of generating revenue (suites, sponsorship, etc.), and no postseason money is coming in. Hopefully Mark Fox will begin to change all of that; it’s certainly an expectation that’s implied by any major college coaching job. Even baseball has potential. The product is quality, but the media deal is negligible (a single local AM station), and the facility is among the smallest in the conference and becoming more outdated by the year.

It’s great that football is doing so well, but any business person knows the dangers of relying too much on a single product, vendor, or customer. In addition to increasing revenue from the other sports that have been poor performers, the Athletic Association is looking at other ways to bring in more cash.

That brings us to another story in the news: Georgia is close to signing a deal that would move its broadcasting rights from Cox/WSB to ISP Sports.

Georgia is nearing a lucrative deal with North Carolina-based ISP Sports, which currently holds the school’s marketing and sponsorship rights. Contracts have been drawn up for the extended rights deal. The deal would include radio, TV, Internet and digital content.

Under the deal with ISP, the pregame show would increase to four hours in length, and, including the game and postgame show, “the broadcast programming window would grow to at least nine hours.” That might sound like great news to those who tune in to the pregame show, but that deal’s going to have to be paid for somehow. If you think the current broadcasts and Sanford Stadium experience have become commercialized, ISP has a reputation for making that seem like an interruption-free PBS broadcast by comparison.

Congratulations to Georgia sophomore basketball player Trey Thompkins who was one of 17 players invited to the 2009 USA U19 National Team Trials. Following the trials this week, the group will be pared down to a roster of 12 for the 2009 FIBA U19 World Championship in New Zealand this July.

We should also learn in the next few weeks whether Ashley Houts will make the U.S. National team headed to the World University Games in Serbia. International experience and training with some of the top college players in the nation is invaluable, and we hope that both of these Georgia stars will get that opportunity.

Seven UGA student-athletes won individual NCAA titles over the past academic year:

• Chris Hill repeated as javelin champion over the weekend with a throw that was 20 feet longer than the next best.
• Courtney Kupets (four individual gymnastics titles)
• Haylie Jayne (equestrian)
• Allison Schmitt (swimming – 500 freestyle)
• Wendy Trott (swimming – 1,650 freestyle)
• Troyden Prinsloo (swimming – 1,650 freestyle)
• Neil Versfeld (swimming – 200 breaststroke)

The 2010 game at Colorado might be standing in the way of Georgia opening the season at the Georgia Dome (not necessarily a bad thing), but I’m looking forward to seeing a game in a setting like this:

Photo comes from National Geographic’s Photo of the Day site.

HeismanPundit takes Georgia associate AD Arthur Johnson to task for Johnson’s candid comments about how an SEC program looks at scheduling. The title of his post is tongue-in-cheek of course, but it does raise the issue of the incentives that guide the behavior of many of the nation’s top programs.

HP’s site is valuable and his analysis (of the Heisman landscape) typically accurate because, as he frequently must explain to critics, “I analyze the Heisman race in the context of how it is, not how it should be.” Fair enough, right? You might not like that the Heisman more or less ignores defense or favors certain schools, but you have to accept those realities if you hope to follow the Heisman race with any kind of perspective, insight, and accuracy.

With that maxim guiding his site, you’d expect him to recognize that Johnson’s comments are cut from the same cloth. It’s not the job of Johnson and his peers to schedule in a way that would sit well with fans of the game. The incentive system for major college football programs – as it is – values wins (or, more correctly, lack of losses) far more than strength of schedule. It’s one of the tradeoffs of making the regular season count for so much. Teams schedule accordingly.

If scheduling reform is necessary, it’s because incentives are out of balance. When you look at what gets rewarded, Johnson’s approach is completely rational. Strength of schedule *is* overrated. Even when it’s a question of deciding who plays for the national title, other factors like conference championships or poll position often come in to play before strength of schedule. Additional wins for major conference teams mean higher rankings, bowl games, TV appearances, and money. If you can do it at home and collect the gate receipts, all the better. That the Pac-10 would consider dropping its round-robin schedule in the pursuit of more bowl-eligible teams shows how strong the pull of the financial incentives are.

Bringing about more attractive or aggressive schedules means either changing the incentives or compelling teams through top-down rules to schedule in ways that are contrary to the current incentives. Unfortunately, the same conference-based organizational structure that works so well as a money-making machine would surely be as resistant to further scheduling restrictions as it was to the idea of Congress meddling with the BCS.

As an aside, Johnson’s best comment was this:

You’d love to have a national name [opponent] that’s in a valley one of these years. It still looks great. You just don’t know when people are going to be up and down.

It’s so true. How much credit is Georgia getting for scheduling mediocre Arizona State and Colorado teams?

Since we’re in off-season if-I-were-king mode…if you really want the best regular season schedule, take HP’s 10-team conference model and use relegation to determine membership instead of geography. You’d have nine conference games and can use the other three on regional rivals in other divisions or however else you’d like. Scheduling wouldn’t matter – winning the first division (or earning promotion) would be what it’s all about. And what matchups every week…

If you’ve dipped your toe into the waters of the 2010 recruiting pool, you’ve heard of Nick Montana. Yes, son of that Montana. Montana is rated the #12 pro-style passer in the nation by Rivals.com and had offers from, among others, LSU, Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia, Notre Dame, and several schools closer to his home in California.

It’s no surprise when a prospect decides to stay within his own time zone, but Montana’s Tuesday commitment to the Washington Huskies is definitely getting a few double-takes. The Huskies were 0-12 last year and haven’t had a winning season since 2002. New Washington coach Steve Sarkisian brings a resume that includes work at Southern Cal with Carson Palmer, Matt Leinart, and Mark Sanchez, and Montana explained, “You just have to look at all the guys he’s put into the pros.” The Montanas are taking the gamble that Sarkisian will bring that same Midas touch with him as he starts to rebuild the reeling Washington program.

Another key piece of the future of Georgia’s passing game was added today when Calhoun (Ga.) receiver Da’Rick Rogers gave his verbal commitment to Georgia. Rogers, at 6’3″ and 206 lb., is currently rated as the #4 receiver and #22 overall prospect by Rivals.com. He’s currently the top-rated prospect according to Rivals.com at any position from the state of Georgia.

Rogers becomes Georgia’s 5th verbal commitment for the class of 2010.

The commitment is significant on several levels. Of course landing top Georgia prospects is a big priority for the coaching staff. The receiver position still isn’t incredibly deep, but the talent level is starting to pick up to a level that can match the quarterbacking talent that will be in place. Rogers was also an important target because of Georgia’s lukewarm interest in Markeith Ambles, another highly-rated Georgia receiver prospect. Other schools are reportedly backing off of Ambles which sheds a little light on Georgia’s lack of interest, but that strategy put all the more pressure on getting Rogers.

More information:

• Rogers’ other offers included Alabama, LSU, Florida, FSU, Ole Miss, and West Virginia.
• As a high school junior, Rogers caught 66 passes for 1,300 yards and 11 TD.
• Calhoun HS is also the home of redshirting Georgia receiver Kris Durham.
• In 2008 Calhoun reached the class AA state championship game before falling to Buford. They’ve won their region every year since 2001.

OK, I can buy that Mark Richt and Damon Evans have different takes on the appropriate strength of schedule for Georgia football. There’s certainly nothing approaching a consensus among the fans, so it’s understandable that Richt and Evans might not see exactly eye-to-eye. Fine.

But to take this ABH article about the nonconference schedule at face value, I find myself having to ask these two questions: does Mark Richt really have limited input as to his own team’s schedule, and does the dismissive “I’ll listen to his opinion” comment really sum up Damon Evans’ view of the coach’s role in setting the schedule?

It doesn’t work that way for Georgia’s other sports. Bringing up the “Harrick approach to scheduling” will get a knowing nod from Georgia basketball fans. David Perno adjusts his schedule each year.

Sure, football is a different animal than the other sports. A single nonconference game can carry a commitment of almost one million dollars of athletic department money, so of course some oversight and due diligence is necessary. Most nonconference games, especially against quality opponents, are now set years in advance, so annual tweaking isn’t really possible. Football is also your biggest product with fewer discretionary games and opportunities to showcase the program than any other sport. I realize why Evans would want to be involved in the process.

Still, regardless of our personal preferences as fans, the coach needs to be the one who drives the scheduling philosophy. It’s not something to be handed down from on high by the athletic director. Saying “I’m sure (Richt) has some valid points” is way too late in the game to have a meeting of the minds about the schedule. At the same time, knowing how involved the coaches are in determining the schedules for Georgia’s other sports, I’m skeptical that Richt has had as little to do with setting the schedule as it seems.

Since it’s all about Phil Steele this week (Rivals subscribers can check out a more focused look at Georgia by Steele that can be summed up as "Georgia is undervalued"), here’s a look at how well he’s done pegging the Dawgs during the Richt years versus the consensus (numbers courtesy of Chris Stassen’s invaluable site). Of course Steele (and most everyone else) makes his predictions before many of the developments (injuries or otherwise) leading up to the season take place, so attribute the results to serendipity or skill as you like. I love his preseason annual, and his track record speaks for itself.

If there’s anything resembling a trend, it’s that it took a few years for Steele to jump on the Richtwagon. No problem there…a lot of our own fans had the same issue. Of the three times he’s varied significantly from the consensus on Georgia, 2008 was the only time he came out ahead.

Just for thought…what does it mean when Steele has mostly praise for Georgia and Richt, thinks Georgia will be better than most expect, yet predicts a finish at #13 that would be below the median for Richt’s teams? Have the (national) expectations fallen that far? We’ll find out as the consensus builds, but Athlon ranking Georgia at #14 isn’t exactly a sign that Steele’s going to be the outlying contrarian this year when it comes to the Bulldogs.

The University of Georgia officially opened the Tate Center Expansion this week, and the building promises lots of additional meeting and event space, services, and amenities for students (at a $60 million price tag). A more formal ribbon-cutting will take place later in the summer.

That’s great for the students, but as selfish alums and football fans, what’s in it for us? Several things:

• Lots of additional indoor space near the stadium in which to hang out on game day. Large open areas seem ready-made for a large crowd waiting for a football game. “The Tate addition is so football-friendly, one student exploring the expansion wondered out loud if the building were designed with football Saturdays in mind.”
• While you’re inside staying cool or just killing time before the game, check out the 24-foot projection TV screen in the third-floor lobby. If you can’t make it into the game, they’ll be showing it on this screen. Yes, 24 feet of Gameday goodness.
• Several hundred parking spaces were lost when this construction took away the better part of the Stegeman Hall parking lot, but this facility includes a 508-spot parking deck that will surely be used for premium (and perhaps handicapped) parking on game days.

One other effect of the Tate expansion will be to refocus the Dawg Walk. We’ve looked before at how this building will play a role in the continued revitalization of the central campus. Though the project is nowhere near complete, a future Alumni Development Center between the Tate Center and Lumpkin Street as well as an “Alumni Quad” between the two buildings will form the heart of a central campus park complete with a Dawg Walk Overlook. The sketch below shows where this is (tentatively) headed.

Click for a much larger version.