Georgia Bulldogs: You Are What You Eat?

If Joe Tereshinki's decision to keep tabs on player's plates and meal choices has had the affect on every guy, on Georgia's roster, that it seems to be having on wide receiver, Tavarres King, I'll take "more of that, please" for $1, Alex.

Said King, in an interview by UGASports.com's Anthony Dasher, "I've seen a lot of changes just with the personality of our weight room; it's very business-like. Nothing against the old way that we did things, but we need to be disciplined right now and we needed some changes in the way we behaved."

That last statement falls squarely under the category of, "ya think?"

It became very apparent last season that the team was a group of individuals with very different agendas on the football field—only a portion of which actually involved playing consistently good football.

King, Washaun Ealey, that other King [Caleb], and even A.J. Green, all made some very bad decisions that resulted in bad on-field play which attracted an even bigger off-field microscope. It was tough to see guys, whom many felt were high-caliber football players, play like lost puppies.

It was a sickening experience which many would just as soon forget—2011 couldn't get here fast enough.

That said, it truly feels like the attitude being fostered by Joe Tereshinski within the weight room is rubbing off on the outside of it as well. King gave credence to that point with the following statement,

"With some of these workouts, I think we'll definitely be a stronger fourth-quarter team. Last year we really couldn't finish in the fourth quarter and I feel like these workouts will eliminate those fourth-quarter struggles...maybe we were (in shape), maybe we just couldn't take a few shots to the mouth in the fourth quarter and fight back, but I think these workouts are doing something to us physically, by giving our body endurance, as well as mentally." (Anthony Dasher, UGASports.com, 3/3/11).

If that is indeed the case, 2011 is looking much better for this Georgia team—assuming the banter we keep hearing isn't just the usual coach/player-speak to which we've all grown accustomed—and for that alone I have to tip my hat to Mr. Tereshinski.

Georgia Bulldogs: Weeding Out The Bad Apples and Cultivating The Seeds

Photo Credit: WES BLANKENSHIP

Make no mistake about it, changes are being made at Georgia. The installation of the new S&C program has brought out the bad, and the good and, for some players, that means a stern reality check has made it's way into their hands—much to their dismay.

Washaun Ealey has been indefinitely suspended after failing to show up for a punishment run and this latest transgression could turn out to be the denouement on a career marred by missteps.

While nothing has been said, publicly, about Ealey leaving Georgia to seek opportunities elsewhere, the writing is on the wall this time and the indefinite suspension doesn't appear to bode well for the young man's future prospects with the team—particularly with Isaiah Crowell on board.

If Ealey decides to transfer (which is merely speculation at this point), Caleb King, Ken Malcome, and Carlton Thomas would be left to split carries along with Isaiah Crowell—assuming Crowell come in ready to play—unless, of course, King runs into more eligibility issues.

Recall that King  was forced to miss time on, at least, two occasions last season due to academics so there is zero guarantee that he will be ready to get on the field by this spring.

If King is also out of the equation, Carlton Thomas will be the lone returning tailback with game experience.  Ken Malcome (who didn't play a down last season) and the incoming Crowell would round out thee depth chart. Scared yet? Well, don't be, the situation could be massively inconvenient, but don't know that it qualifies as dire—especially if the changes in the S&C program lends to less injuries on the field.

The vast majority of SEC teams last season weren't more than two-deep at tailback, and while that isn't ideal, it happens, and many teams have been able to succeed using a two-back rotation.

What should be of greater interest to fans is Georgia's burgeoning commitment to changing the culture of the program. For the first time, in a long while, it actually looks like Richt is trying to get a handle on this team. The good and bad apples are being separated from the bunch and that's great news!

The following tweet, made by a former athlete (non-football) at Georgia, caught my eye last night:

People complained of the players being soft and out of shape, this is Tereshinski's response to that criticism and the players, apparently, aren't happy about it.

Again, a hard-nosed approach was needed if Georgia's team was going to show any improvement and, if nothing else, this approach is helping to weed out the guys who want to work from the ones who don't and, in my humble opinion, it's about time.

Georgia Bulldogs: Sometimes, Perception Is Everything

Playing the "what if" game is always dangerous, but let's do it anyway—just for today—and rewind to Georgia's first championship season under Mark Richt.

It was 2002, and that David Greene led squad was pegged by many as the best team in the SEC, ending their regular season at 12-1 while securing their first SEC title in twenty-years.

The only thing standing between them and a BCS bid was a loss by either Ohio State or Miami.

Unfortunately for them, both teams won out and, eventually, played each other for a shot at the national title.

Now, fast forward to the here and now and ask yourself, if given today's college football landscape, you could see a scenario where a one-loss SEC team is overlooked in favor of an undefeated Big East one.

I'll go on the record and say it wouldn't happen—not today.

The media is securely on the SEC's bandwagon. Many sportswriters and pundits believe that even a two-loss SEC team is better than most any undefeated WAC, Big East, or Mountain West one.

However that wasn't the case in 2002 when Miami was still the media darling and considered, by many, to be unbeatable.

So when did the SEC become king?

Well, despite BCS Championships by Tennessee (1998) and LSU (2003), the shift officially began in 2006 when
Urban Meyer actively campaigned for his one-loss Gators to be extended a bid to the BCS title game based on the premise that their schedule was tougher.

He felt, and this appears to be the reigning sentiment even now where SEC teams are concerned, that there was no schedule more grueling than an SEC one.

He won the argument, much to Michigan's chagrin, and Florida played Ohio State for the national title.

The rest is history.

In 2007, LSU benefited from the same logic, as they were offered a spot in the BCS title game as a two-loss team—and won—giving further credence to the idea that the SEC is "the toughest conference in the nation".

Now, what if Georgia were given those same benefits in 2002?

It seems fair to argue that they would have leap frogged either Ohio State or Miami for a spot in the title game—undefeated records or not—and then who knows?

Now, I know what you're thinking, I'm taking a whole lot of license with this argument, and I probably am, but it has to make you think...just a little bit.

Of course, most would be quick to point out that even though you can't get 2002 back, you still have to justify the lapses since.

A loss to Tennessee in 2007 left room for LSU to make their move.

A bad loss to Alabama in 2008 negated Georgia again.

Add to that, attrition, injuries, coaching changes, and a rising level of competition, and the perception of your program, within the SEC, as a stand-alone product—particularly judged against the successes of LSU, Alabama, and Florida—becomes as much a factor as the play itself.

Coach Richt deserves responsibility for recruiting misses (the years he failed to close the borders and great talent got away) and being too loyal to both coaches and players (redshirting Knowson Moreno, keeping Willie Martinez for too long, and starting Joe Tereshinski over Matthew Stafford in 2006). By no means can Richt be let off the hook—and he isn't.

The only point here is to state that the perception of the SEC, since 2006, has played as much a role in the opportunities that have been granted as anything.

Sure, LSU and Tennessee won titles in 1998 and 2003, respectively, but ask anyone how many people—outside of Knoxville and Baton Rouge—thought they would?

The SEC was still playing second-fiddle to the Big 12 (Oklahoma), the Big East (Miami), and the ACC (Florida State/Virginia Tech) in those early BCS years—and the teams in those conferences were given far more respect.

Georgia's luck in 2002 might have been different had that team played in today's landscape.

Perception is everything, and sometimes, too, it's just bad timing.

What say you?

Georgia Football: S&C Is A Lot More Than Just Strength & Conditioning

BEAU CABELL/The Macon Telegraph

The Leather Helmet (a great blog that, it must be said again, should be bookmarked by every UGA fan) posted some comments coach Richt made regarding changes in the strength program.  It was clear from his statements that he understood the need for a change and felt that Georgia had to make some adjustments in their approach. 

Said Richt:

"...I think there are different ways to skin a cat in strength, different philosophies. We aren’t saying that Coach Van isn’t a good strength coach, I’m not saying that at all, but I think there are different ways to do things, and I want to go a little bit more old school I guess. We’ll get after it a little bit differently. Like something I mentioned before, and by no means am I saying it’s just the strength area that we need to improve on when it comes to winning the fourth quarter and finishing, because coaching has to do with a lot of things. I’m sure that will be a big emphasis in our program is to make sure we truly finish the drill. We say finish the drill but are we really doing it? Did we do it this year? We did not."

Clearly, coach Richt wasn't blind to the lack of execution displayed on the football field this year. The team did not play up to their potential in 2010 and every one knows it.

Now, no one is saying that the hiring of Joe Tereshinski fixes all of those issues. However, the prevailing sentiment—amongst those who doubt the importance of the S&C program's impact on the overall product on the football field—is that the move doesn't matter much for next season's prospects. 

For those who believe that, no disrespect, but you are missing the overall point. S&C is as much about mental toughness, and a fighting mentality, as it is about lifting weights and running laps.

Heck, just read the mission statement:

The mission of the Strength & Conditioning program at the University of Georgia is to provide each student-athlete with the opportunity to perform at the highest level possible throughout his or her career. This is accomplished by helping the athletes become as physically and mentally competitive as possible...

...From a mental aspect, the athletes learn the importance of hard work and dedication. Each athlete is held accountable for not only their own work, but for that of their teammates as well. Each athlete is expected to be on time for all workouts, and work their hardest to get as much from his or her opportunity as possible. [emphasis added]

How many games were lost in the fourth quarter this season because Georgia failed to execute? How many defensive plays were blown due to poor focus? How many times did you watch Georgia's line play and think to yourself, "these guys look tired and defeated by halftime"?

One of the most telling quotes about the team came from Justin Houston after the Auburn Loss, "There were just blown assignments. People weren’t where they were supposed to be and they capitalized on our mistakes. … Some guys weren’t as focused as they need to be and it hurt us. It’s been hurting us all season" [emphasis added].

Does that sound like a guy playing on a team that is Prepared? Communicating with each other? Mentally strong in the clutch?

No one here professes to be a coach, a player, or an expert, but here's what is known: Georgia players were not always accountable, they weren't always physically prepared, and they certainly did not perform at the highest level—at all times—and those things are all about strength and conditioning.

Should Richt escape criticism for not making a move quicker? No, absolutely not, I have been amongst a few that have pointed the finger at Richt and stated as much. That said, if Richt wasn't going to be the man to go, then a change in the culture of Georgia football had to start somewhere and there was no place better than the S&C program—period.

Will this change translate into a 10 or 11 win season next year? That remains to be seen, as Richt stated "...the proof will be in the pudding..."

However, if nothing else, we can be assured the status quo will no longer be tolerated and, no matter your personal opinion on the issue, you have to agree that's a good place to start.