Tag Archives: Georgia Bulldogs

The next Brock Purdy: Which 2023 NFL Draft prospect could repeat the rise of the 49ers QB?

Who is to blame for Brock Purdy being so ready to jump from Mr. Irrelevant on draft weekend to the undefeated starting quarterback of the 49ers heading into the NFC Championship Game against the Eagles?

Eagles coach Nick Sirianni — at least partially.

OK, let’s back up.

Sirianni played receiver at Division III powerhouse Mount Union. Tom Manning played left tackle. They became friends, and both went into coaching. In 2018, then-Colts offensive coordinator Sirianni hired Manning — then Iowa State’s offensive coordinator — to be the Colts’ tight ends coach. Manning spent a year in Indianapolis before going back to Ames, where Purdy had spent his freshman season in 2018 making the Cyclones’ offense his own. When Manning returned to Iowa State, he brought a revamped offense that operated much like the one Frank Reich and Sirianni used in Indianapolis.

That’s why Purdy could go into NFL team interviews this time last year and rattle off a play call like this with no difficulty whatsoever:

Sync right flex, F near, Flash 61 Y Vista left X post with F cards.

Purdy explained that call — and the Manning coaching history that generated it — last year during an interview before the NFL combine. Some college offenses require that level of memorization by the quarterback, but not many. At Iowa State, Purdy had to manage a ton of pre-snap motion. Guess who else has to manage an abundance of pre-snap motion? The quarterback in 49ers coach Kyle Shanahan’s offense.

We’ve spent a lot of time the past few months trying to discern how a QB who clearly has the skill to play for a long time in the NFL fell to the final pick in the draft. The truth? There are multiple reasons. The Athletic’s Bruce Feldman obtained a scouting report on Purdy from a team and then interviewed the author to perform an autopsy of sorts on what was missed. One takeaway? Purdy, who started 46 games in college, may have had too much tape. This allows the evaluator to see the warts again and again, and it may obscure some of the overwhelmingly positive takeaways from a celebrated college career.

GO DEEPER

How 49ers’ ‘Mr. Irrelevant’ was described on one team’s NFL Draft scouting report

So let’s examine other factors NFL evaluators might have missed. Then let’s use those to see if there are any quarterbacks in the 2023 draft who might be able to follow Purdy’s path from under-drafted to immediate production.

One key factor NFL personnel people appear to have overlooked with Purdy is how much he had to do to simply make Iowa State competitive. In college, Purdy usually was a member of the less talented team on the field. That’s unusual for a QB in a Power 5 program who led his team to a .630 win percentage as a starter. According to the 247Sports team talent composite, which combines the recruiting rankings for every player on a team’s roster in a given year, Purdy started 27 games in which the Cyclones had inferior talent. Iowa State’s record in those games: 15-12. That’s just above .500, but it also means Purdy went 14-5 when his team had equal or better talent than the opponent.

To put those numbers in perspective, Ohio State quarterback C.J. Stroud — a likely top-10 pick in April — played one game (the 2022 Peach Bowl against Georgia) in two full seasons as the Buckeyes’ starter in which the opponent had a higher team talent composite rating than Ohio State.

Compare that to Purdy’s situation now. He had some quality skill players at Iowa State. David Montgomery was Purdy’s starting tailback in 2018, and Hakeem Butler was the leading receiver. Purdy enjoyed three seasons with Breece Hall as his primary back. But that doesn’t compare with having dual Swiss Army knives in Christian McCaffrey and Deebo Samuel, a field-stretching receiver in Brandon Aiyuk and a magician at tight end in George Kittle. Oh, by the way, the 49ers also have left tackle Trent Williams. Iowa State didn’t have an offensive lineman drafted while Purdy was there. Now he plays with one of the best on the planet.

Many of the flaws in Purdy’s tape involved him trying to extend plays that had broken down and then making an ill-advised throw. In the NFL, most teams have about equal talent to their opponents. Perhaps more weight should have been given to Purdy’s performances when his teammates were facing opponents of generally equal talent.

Meanwhile, Purdy’s familiarity with a popular NFL offense also should have been taken into account by teams looking for a rookie who could jump in and play. Though NFL coaches have adjusted to help players coming from college offenses that don’t require as much from the QB pre-snap, there still is a learning curve. That gives players such as Purdy or Josh Allen, who was required at Wyoming to perform many of the same pre-snap tasks an NFL quarterback performs, an advantage when asked to play early.

So what does that mean for the QBs entering the NFL in 2023? Is there a player who could follow Purdy’s path from low draft pick to critical player on a good team?

There are a few intriguing candidates.

We’ll leave out the players who appear likely to be selected in the first three rounds. Whether they’re ready or not, Stroud and Alabama’s Bryce Young probably will be selected with the idea that they’ll start as rookies. The same could go for Kentucky’s Will Levis. Florida’s Anthony Richardson will need time to develop, but his combination of arm and athleticism could make an executive or coach fall in love and draft Richardson ahead of where he probably should go. At 6-foot-6 and 228 pounds, Stanford’s Tanner McKee has the body type NFL scouts dream about — even if his college numbers pale in comparison to the ones produced by most of the QBs who will be drafted below him.

Tennessee’s Hendon Hooker is coming off an ACL tear suffered in November, but his combination of college production, prototypical size and intangibles should intrigue a team in the upper half of the draft.

GO DEEPER

Dane Brugler’s 2023 NFL Draft rankings: Who are the top 15 players at each position?

That leaves a host of QBs who don’t appear to be obvious fits in the NFL — including the two who started in the national title game. Meanwhile, there’s a tough-as-nails competitor who finished his career playing for the same coach who helped bring along Aaron Rodgers, the son of a pro arm-wrestler who lit up Division II and a QB who kept throwing touchdown passes in 2022 despite horrific injury luck for his receivers.

Let’s start with the players who just faced off for the national title.

Who could be the next Mr. Irrelevant?

Max Duggan, TCU, 6-1, 211

Duggan’s listed height and weight are almost exactly the same as Purdy’s combine height and weight (6-0 5/8, 212), and Duggan played a similar damn-the-torpedoes style in the same conference. Like Purdy, Duggan emerged as his team’s best QB option as a freshman. But Duggan had to have heart surgery before the 2020 season and played most of the 2021 season with a broken bone and a torn tendon in one of his feet.

Longtime TCU coach Gary Patterson, who was fired midway through the 2021 season, tweeted in November 2021 that Duggan declined surgery so he could keep playing and help the team. While Purdy’s junior season was his team’s best, Duggan’s was a nightmare. And when Sonny Dykes was hired to replace Patterson, he initially chose Chandler Morris as the Horned Frogs’ QB1.

Duggan took over as the starter in TCU’s second game and led the Frogs to a 13-2 record while completing 63.7 percent of his passes and averaging 8.8 yards per attempt with 32 touchdowns and eight interceptions. Unlike Purdy for most of his Iowa State career, 2022 Duggan had the luxury of a likely first-round receiver in Quentin Johnston, who caught 60 passes for 1,069 yards and six TDs.

Also unlike Purdy, Duggan played in the Air Raid offense for all of his college career. Patrick Mahomes has shown that an Air Raid QB can succeed in the NFL, but there is a steeper learning curve.


Max Duggan finished second in 2022 Heisman Trophy voting. (Mark J. Rebilas / USA Today)

Stetson Bennett, Georgia, 5-11, 190

It will be interesting to see what Bennett weighs during the pre-draft process. While the NFL has absolutely welcomed smaller QBs in recent years, 190 is very light. Purdy and some of the other recently drafted smaller QBs are thick through their lower bodies, which should theoretically offer more durability.

Bennett couldn’t be more unlike Purdy in terms of the type of talent he played with in college. Georgia almost always had the superior talent. The Bulldogs ranked No. 1 in the nation in team talent in 2020 when Bennett first began starting games. The only two games he played when the Bulldogs had inferior talent were against Alabama in the 2021 SEC title game and against the Crimson Tide in the national title game a month later.

Still, it’s interesting to compare Bennett and Purdy. Their arms seem similar. Both were effective scramblers and runners, but Bennett probably is a tad faster. Like Purdy, Bennett played in an offense more similar to an NFL scheme than a college one. Bulldogs offensive coordinator Todd Monken was Jameis Winston’s offensive coordinator in Tampa and had been on the Cleveland Browns staff the season before he joined Georgia. Bennett, who played in three different offenses in college, should be capable of quickly assimilating any NFL team’s playbook.

GO DEEPER

Stetson Bennett didn’t just overcome public opinion. He ‘overcame us,’ the UGA coaches

Monken also pointed out something that could make Bennett potentially valuable to NFL teams. “You create value by being able to play and not take reps,” Monken said before the Peach Bowl. “Everyone will say ‘Well, they played the backup this week because in practice they saw something.’ Backups don’t get any reps. I don’t know what they’d see in practice besides running a card. They just make a decision.”

This seems especially important days after watching Chad Henne come off the bench and lead the Chiefs on a 98-yard touchdown drive following an ankle injury to Mahomes.

Here’s another way to compare Bennett to Purdy. What would Bennett have looked like had he played on a team more like Iowa State? The guess? Probably a lot like Purdy. Bennett, his teammates and coaches pointed out that a recognition of the talent around him probably tamped down some of Bennett’s gunslinger instincts. Had he been forced to elevate the level of a team that didn’t always have a talent advantage, his college playing style might have looked very similar to Purdy’s.

Tyson Bagent, Shepherd, 6-3, 210

The Athletic’s Dane Brugler recently profiled Bagent, who smashed records at his Division II school and whose father is the real-life equivalent of the people Sylvester Stallone’s character competed against in the 1980s classic “Over The Top.”

It’s tough to compare Bagent to QBs who played against FBS competition. But we’ll get a much better look at him playing with and against NFL-bound talent next week at the Senior Bowl.


Clayton Tune tied for third in the nation with 40 passing TDs in 2022. (Maria Lysaker / USA Today)

Clayton Tune, Houston, 6-3, 220

Tune has more of a prototypical QB body than most of the players discussed in this story, but his lack of consistent winning during a college career that only feels as if it took 27 years likely will raise questions in the pre-draft process. He may have a satisfactory answer, though.

Tune filled in for injured starter D’Eriq King as a freshman in 2018 and then did the same in 2019. He then spent three full seasons as the primary starter for Dana Holgorsen’s Cougars offense.

The 2020 season was a mess as the Cougars kept having games postponed or canceled because of COVID-19 protocols. The following season, Tune raised his completion percentage from 59.6 to 68.3 and averaged 8.4 yards per attempt while throwing for 30 TDs with 10 interceptions. He led Houston to a 12-2 record. Houston went 8-5 in 2022, but Tune’s numbers were fairly similar. He completed 67.4 percent of his throws while averaging 8.2 yards per attempt and throwing 40 TDs with 10 picks. Tune attempted 76 more passes despite playing one fewer game because the Cougars had little choice but to keep chucking. The biggest statistical difference between 2021 and 2022 came on defense. In 2021, Houston allowed 20.4 points a game. In 2022, the Cougars allowed 32.2 points a game.

Jaren Hall, BYU, 6-1, 205

Hall started two seasons at BYU, and it’s impressive that his completion percentage and touchdown-to-interception ratio went up (with only a slight dip in yards per attempt) when you consider that his No. 2 receiver from the previous year (Gunner Romney) played only two games because of injury and the player who was leading the Cougars in receiving in October (freshman Kody Epps) was lost for the remainder of the season to injury in game eight.

Hall still averaged 8.4 yards per attempt and threw 31 TD passes with six interceptions despite never having the kind of weapons around him that he’d expected going into the season. He spread the ball around to good receivers, but more talent around Hall could produce bigger numbers.

Dorian Thompson-Robinson, UCLA, 6-1, 205

Thompson-Robinson was one of the toughest QBs in the country. He kept taking hits, and he kept playing. Another example of his resilience? Even though it was obvious UCLA coaches were trying to replace him with UCF transfer Dillon Gabriel last offseason, Thompson-Robinson hung in and bided his time. When Gabriel instead wound up transferring to Oklahoma after Caleb Williams’ transfer to USC, Thompson-Robinson reassumed his role at the head of the UCLA offense and raised his completion percentage from 62.2 percent in 2021 to 69.6 in 2022.

Thompson-Robinson’s numbers were fairly similar in each of his final three seasons. We’ve never seen him outside of Chip Kelly’s offense, so it’s unclear whether his talents were maximized by that scheme or if he might thrive playing a different style.

With all that said, here is the QB who Brugler and I agree has the best chance to follow in Purdy’s cleat marks …

Jake Haener, Fresno State, 6-1, 200

Just watch this final sequence from the 2021 Fresno State-UCLA game and try not to love Jake Haener. (You’ll also get a good look at Thompson-Robinson.)

UCLA coach Kelly called what Haener did to his team one of the best QB performances he’d ever seen. Just watch this final play, and remember that Haener made it shortly after taking a shot that would have knocked a lot of QBs out of action for weeks.

But Haener’s career was a lot more than that one game. He was remarkably consistent — and remarkably tough. We might be talking more about Haener now had he followed former Fresno State coach Kalen DeBoer to Washington last offseason. It would have made sense. Haener started his career at Washington before transferring to Fresno State. He could have returned as a conquering hero. Instead, Haener elected to stay at Fresno State and play for Jeff Tedford. Michael Penix Jr. transferred to Washington from Indiana and wound up leading the nation in passing yards per game while playing in DeBoer’s offense.

Playing for Tedford allowed Haener to learn from the same coach who mentored Aaron Rodgers at Cal. But it didn’t seem like that connection would last long when Haener broke his ankle in Week 3 at USC. Instead of shutting it down and preparing for the draft, Haener sought a second medical opinion and found that he could play despite the injury.

He returned to the lineup in October and led Fresno State, which was 3-4 at the time, to seven consecutive wins. On the season, Haener completed 72 percent of his passes and averaged 8.3 yards per attempt with 20 TDs and only three interceptions.

Purdy has been successful so far in San Francisco for reasons that we outlined above, but part of his success has to do with the same intangible qualities that made Iowa State coach Matt Campbell willing to turn over the team to Purdy as a true freshman in 2018. Those qualities — intelligence, toughness, the ability to inspire teammates to be more than their talent suggests — are the same ones Haener showed over and over again at Fresno State.

So no matter where Haener gets chosen in April, there is a great chance he might wind up being just as relevant as Purdy at some point down the line.

(Top photo of Brock Purdy: Thearon W. Henderson / Getty Images)



Read original article here

Who will replace Jeff Brohm at Purdue? Watch for Dino Babers, Troy Calhoun and more

Jeff Brohm is leaving Purdue to return home to Louisville, opening up another Power 5 job. Brohm did an excellent job with the Boilermakers and leaves the program on a high note. He won 17 games the past two seasons, the Big Ten West this year, and finished 12-6 in Big Ten play. Purdue is a tough job, though, and it probably has only gotten tougher with Michigan continuing its ascent, Illinois springing back to life under Bret Bielema and Nebraska and Wisconsin adding top-tier head coaches in Matt Rhule and Luke Fickell respectively.

Purdue has produced a lot of good NFL talent but big success on the field in the Big Ten has been spotty. The program hasn’t won 10 games since 1979 — the school’s only 10-win season. Joe Tiller did well a generation ago but prior to Brohm’s arrival Purdue had a dud of a decade of football. We suspect the Boilermakers will lean toward an offensive mind, since most of their success came under Brohm and Tiller.

Head coach candidates

Dino Babers, Syracuse: Babers spent three seasons as a Purdue wide receivers coach in the early 1990s. He’s a good offensive coach and has a lot of presence. Babers is 61, but seems at least 10 years younger. He also knows the area well from four impressive seasons as head coach at Eastern Illinois and Bowling Green. He’s been up-and-down at Syracuse in his seven seasons there; this year, the Orange went 7-5 but peaked at No. 14 in the nation before losing five in a row. And that’s a program that is in a really tough place to win now.

Troy Calhoun, Air Force: Calhoun has done well at Air Force for a long time. He coached in the MAC at Ohio for a half-dozen years in the 1990s. He’s 33-11 the past four years. He’s a really good coach and very good on offense. The Oregon native is 56 and might make a lot of sense for the Boilermakers.

Jason Candle, Toledo: Candle, 43, is another really good offensive mind who Miami almost hired a year ago as offensive coordinator. He just led Toledo to a MAC title and he’s been on a lot of athletic directors’ radars for awhile. He got off to a fast start there, succeeding his buddy and former Mount Union teammate Matt Campbell, going 11-3 in his second season. Since then, his teams have been good more than great, but he has shown he can be a consistent winner.

Kane Wommack, South Alabama: Wommack has a strong defensive background and is a rising star in coaching. The 35-year-old knows the Big Ten well. His defense at Indiana in 2020 played a huge role in the Hoosiers finishing No. 12. He took over a program that has never had a winning season in 11 years at the FBS level and the Jaguars went 10-2; their two losses this year came by a combined five points, including a one-point loss to top-10 UCLA. If Purdue is not locked in on an offensive coach, he should get strong consideration.

Assistant coach candidates

Among these rank four men with strong Big Ten ties we think might get some consideration and a fifth who might be an attractive option.

Todd Monken, Georgia OC: The latter is Monken, who is actually from Wheaton, Ill., two and a half hours away. The 56-year-old won the national title last year and has put the Bulldogs in good position to win a second. He’s helped turn former walk-on Stetson Bennett into a Heisman finalist and has created unique ways to exploit the talent of tight end Brock Bowers. A former NFL OC,  Monken did an outstanding job as a head coach at Southern Miss, taking the Golden Eagles from 1-11 his first year to 9-5 in his third season despite big administrative challenges.

Jim Leonhard, Wisconsin defensive coordinator: Leonhard, who went 4-3 as the Badgers’ interim head coach this year, will leave his alma mater after the bowl game. Right after he took over, the Badgers beat Brohm and the Boilermakers 35-24. He’s shown that he’s one of the brightest defensive minds in football. Expect Leonhard to be a hot commodity in college and the NFL for places looking to upgrade the defense. Would be a fit for Purdue as a leader? We’ll see.

Sherrone Moore, Michigan co-OC/offensive line coach: Moore has been a huge asset to Jim Harbaugh and has proven to be a very good play caller this year. The 36-year-old’s O-line won the Joe Moore Award and this year’s unit is even more deserving of it.  Moore has been critical for Jim Harbaugh staff, turning this team into the bully of the Big Ten and dominating arch-rival Ohio State the past two years. The Wolverines rushed for 549 yards in those two games combined. We know Moore is going to be a very choosy about his next move and is locked in on trying to win a national title, but Purdue brass might want to still reach out.

Ryan Walters, Illinois DC: Walters has made a big impact in the Big Ten in helping the Illini breakthrough, turning one of the country’s worst defenses into the second-best (at 4.26 yards per play allowed). The 36-year-0ld Colorado product, who came from Missouri, has risen up the ranks fast and is a name to remember.

Brian Hartline, Ohio State passing game coordinator: Hartline was a candidate at Cincinnati and might be in play here. The 36-year-old is arguably the top position coach in college football for his work recruiting and developing the Buckeyes’ incredibly stacked receiver room. The Ohio native would have to consider a solid Big Ten job if offered. We know he can get talent.

Wild cards

Kevin Sumlin: The former Purdue linebacker has deep ties inside the school. Sumlin, 58, was the hottest coach in college football a decade ago. He fizzled out at Texas A&M after leading the Aggies to their first top-5 season in a half-century. (He went 51-26 there, which is actually better than his successor Jimbo Fisher has done there since.) Sumlin then took Arizona and that proved to big a big mistake for both him and the Wildcats. He had a dismal run, going 9-20. If he’s re-energized and re-focused, this could be an interesting fit.

Dan Mullen: The former Florida and Mississippi State head coach had two top-10 seasons before the bottom dropped out on him in 2021 after a lot of bad recruiting caught up to his program. Mullen, 50, spent a season doing TV. If he’s re-dedicated and can put together a good staff, he also might be an attractive option.

(Top photo of Dino Babers: Rich Barnes / USA Today)



Read original article here

5-star RB Rueben Owens commits to Texas A&M hours after decommiting from Louisville

Five-star running back recruit Rueben Owens committed to Texas A&M on Wednesday night, hours after decommitting from Louisville. Here’s what you need to know:

  • Texas A&M is the third school Owens has committed to since his recruitment began. Before Louisville, he committed to Texas in February 2021, but decommitted four months later.
  • Owens, from El Campo (Texas) High, had been committed to the Cardinals since June and was their highest-ranked prospect in the 2023 class at No. 23 overall.
  • Before Owens joined Wednesday, Texas A&M had no offensive skill position players in its 2023 recruiting class.
  • Owens is the second five-star recruit in A&M’s class. The Aggies have 12 commitments so far.

Backstory

At the time of his commitment to Louisville, Owens was the second-highest-ranked recruit the Cardinals had landed in the modern recruiting era, according to 247Sports. After decommitting from Texas in June 2021, he kept his recruitment open for a year but committed to the Cardinals after an official visit this summer.

Coaching changes sparked Owens’ decommitment from Louisville. Scott Satterfield, the Cardinals’ head coach when Owens committed, accepted the Cincinnati job earlier this week.

Shortly after his decommitment, Owens said Wednesday that he was waiting to see if Louisville running backs coach De’Rail Sims would stay with the program but said, “Coach Sims called me today and said he won’t be at Louisville anymore.”

What Owens is saying

“I was just like … a new staff, I don’t know them,” Owens told The Athletic. “So I was like, ‘I’m gonna decommit.“’

Hours after his decommitment, Owens announced on social media that he would be choose his new school at 8 p.m. (CT) Wednesday.

What the commitment means for Texas A&M

It’s a huge win for coach Jimbo Fisher and the Aggies at a need position. Starting running back Devon Achane, who led the team with 1,102 rushing yards, declared for the NFL Draft this week.

The Aggies have talented young backs in sophomore Amari Daniels and freshman Le’Veon Moss, but the two combined for only 63 carries this season. Adding a productive playmaker like Owens opens intriguing possibilities for the Aggies’ offense, which will have a new coordinator in 2023.

In four seasons at El Campo High, Owens rushed for 7,089 yards and 101 touchdowns and caught 29 passes for 489 yards and four scores.

Required reading

(Photo: Courtesy of Rueben Owens)



Read original article here

Georgia draws Ohio State in College Football Playoff: 5 early thoughts

ATHENS, Ga. — Georgia and Ohio State are two power programs that have been watching each other from a short distance the past few years, contesting each other in the recruiting rankings, seeing Justin Fields go from one program to the other, but for all this time not meeting on the same football field.

That changes in this year’s College Football Playoff semifinal, where they face off in the Peach Bowl on Dec. 31. It’s the game that for a while seemed destined for the championship but instead will be for a chance to get there. Plenty of analysis awaits the marquee matchup, but here are initial thoughts from Georgia’s angle.

Did Georgia get a raw deal?

Plenty of people, including those not given to conspiracy thinking, always will assume the members of the Playoff selection committee made sure not to create a Michigan-Ohio State rematch in the semifinals. The result being that top-seeded Georgia ended up with what’s perceived as the harder game (than Michigan-TCU) against fourth-seeded Ohio State.

Still, committee chairman Boo Corrigan came armed with data points when asked about it Sunday.

“When you look at TCU, 6-1 over teams over .500, 2-1 against ranked teams,” he said. “Ohio State had the good wins over Penn State and Notre Dame, played Michigan close for three quarters of the game, but at the end of the day, we came back to TCU, and there was nothing that occurred during that game against Kansas State (in the Big 12 championship game) that we didn’t believe moved them out of the No. 3 spot.”

Convincing? Not really. But there’s not exactly a huge chasm between TCU’s and Ohio State’s resumes. It’s just the name brand and perceived talent base that makes Ohio State seem like the much better team.


Stetson Bennett and the Georgia Bulldogs are 2-0 at Mercedes-Benz Stadium this year with a third game coming up in the Peach Bowl. (Dale Zanine / USA Today)

What’s more, Georgia and Michigan aren’t miles apart in their resumes. Both are unbeaten. Michigan has the most impressive win (at Ohio State) while Georgia has more wins over ranked teams (five versus two).

So it almost seems like a split-the-difference situation: Michigan gets (perhaps) the easier matchup, but Georgia gets to play on essentially a home field. Speaking of which …

Hometown factor will be real but not decisive

This will be Georgia’s third time in four months playing at Mercedes-Benz Stadium, but it’s almost certain Georgia won’t have the dominant crowd split it had for its first two times. Oregon had much farther to come, and LSU fans saw their enthusiasm dampened by being out of the Playoff hunt.

Ohio State, however, will receive a guaranteed allotment — it was 12,500 for Michigan State last year in the Peach Bowl — and its fans are likely to hit the secondary market hard, considering the stakes of the game.

Still, Georgia should have the majority of the crowd, it’s just a matter of how much. And it will know the stadium and be comfortable there.

“You’re playing the defending national champions in their backyard. It’s going to take everything we have to win this game,” Ohio State coach Ryan Day said, making clear later he wasn’t complaining. “When you get to this point of the season, this is what you’ve got to do. You’re going to be in these electric atmospheres. If you’d asked me at the beginning of the season you’d be playing Georgia in the Peach Bowl for the national semifinals, of course, you’d cut off your right arm for this opportunity.”

Well, probably not literally.

Kirby Smart, for his part, pointed out that in Georgia’s two previous semifinal trips, it traveled to Los Angeles and Miami. This just happened to be the year in the rotation that Atlanta was a semifinal. Smart also went a bit Norman Dale on the zoom call.

“The field is the exact same length as any other field we play them on,” Smart said.

Balance

By reputation, this is a sexy matchup of Ohio State’s offense versus Georgia’s defense. Peach Bowl chairman Gary Stokan pointed out Sunday that Ohio State had the nation’s second-ranked scoring offense and Georgia had the second-ranked scoring defense.

But it would be a little simplistic to look at it that way. For one thing, Georgia’s defense is coming off a game in which it gave up more than 500 passing yards to LSU. That was an anomaly — Georgia entered the game ranked first in the SEC in pass defense — but it gave Smart a talking point for the next few weeks.

“We can’t play defense the way we did last night, or we aren’t going to be any kind of champions,” Smart said.

Georgia’s offense, of course, put up 50 points in the same game, and that was only the second-most points it has scored this season. The Bulldogs rank second in the SEC in yards per play, behind only Tennessee, and against the five ranked teams they have faced, they have scored 49 points (Oregon), 48 (South Carolina), 27 (Tennessee in a game where rain hit in the second half), 45 (Mississippi State) and 50 (LSU).

Ohio State, meanwhile, certainly looked vulnerable on defense against Michigan. But the Buckeyes still rank 18th nationally in defensive yards per play and are 13th in scoring defense. They aren’t perfect — ninth in the Big Ten in pass defense — but this isn’t exactly Southern California’s defense, either.

Mindset

Smart told his team Sunday that last year’s Georgia team “had a different frame of mind than maybe our team right now.” The point was obvious: Last year’s team was propelled emotionally by the SEC championship loss, while this year’s team needed to make sure being 13-0 didn’t lead to any complacency.

Smart also pointed out Ohio State is feeling something different. Critics may say the Buckeyes backed into the Playoff, but they’re coming off a loss and were humbled. That’s similar to what Alabama had entering the 2017 Playoff, and look how that turned out.

“With Ohio State, there’s a breath of fresh air of opportunity,” Smart said. “The excitement that provides and the energy, it’s like it’s a kick of momentum that we have to understand that, and we have to be able to match that and understand that there’s a piece of that that you’ve got to know.”

This will be hard for Georgia

These two programs have met only once, and that was 29 years ago, but Smart has seen the Buckeyes within the past decade: the 2014 CFP semifinal when he was at Alabama.

“Long day. A long day,” Smart said. “That was Ezekiel Elliott, right?”

Yup, an Ohio-based reporter replied.

“He shredded what was a pretty talented Alabama defense,” Smart said.

Day didn’t join Ohio State’s program until the 2017 season. But he has kept the program’s same basic, explosive approach. He also has recruited at a high level: Ohio State has the nation’s third-most talented team, per the 247Sports Talent Composite, behind only Alabama and Georgia.

Last year there was a sense entering the Playoff that Georgia was headed for a rematch with Alabama if it didn’t trip up against Michigan. This year, the perception in some quarters may be that the tougher opponent is first, which may be a product of looking too much at preseason perceptions. Either way, it looks like Georgia will have to go through both of the Big Ten powers. If this year’s Georgia team repeats as the national champion, it will have earned it.

(Top photo of Kirby Smart: Steve Limentani / ISI Photos / Getty Images)



Read original article here

College Football Playoff: What would the 12-team expanded field look like this week?

Though not officially finalized, the expanded 12-team College Football Playoff is expected to debut with the 2024 season. Each week for the rest of the season, The Athletic will test drive the proposed format using the CFP committee’s latest Top 25 rankings.

Here’s how the bracket would be seeded and the site locations determined using the committee’s Nov. 22 rankings and a 2024-25 calendar. Note: The Orange and Cotton Bowls were previously scheduled to host the 2024-25 semifinals and Atlanta was selected as the national championship game.

Top four seeds (first-round byes):

1. Georgia (SEC champion)
2. Ohio State (Big Ten champion)
3. TCU (Big 12 champion)
4. USC (Pac-12 champion)

Under the CFP board’s approved model, the top four seeds will be reserved for the four highest-ranked conference champions. For our purposes, we’re designating each conference’s top-ranked team as its champion. That means No. 1 Georgia (SEC), No. 2 Ohio State (Big Ten), No. 4 TCU (Big 12) and No. 6 USC (Pac-12) would get a bye into the quarterfinals.

Nos. 5-12 seeds:

5. Michigan (at large)
6. LSU (at large)
7. Alabama (at large)
8. Clemson (ACC champion)
9. Oregon (at large)
10. Tennessee (at large)
11. Penn State (at large)
12. Tulane (AAC champion)

Under the same model, the six highest-ranked conference champions are guaranteed berths along with the six highest-ranked at-large teams. Were the season to end today, the fifth- and sixth-highest-ranked conference champions would be No. 8 Clemson (ACC) and No. 19 Tulane (AAC).

Joining them in the field would be the six highest-ranked remaining teams: No. 3 Michigan, No. 5 LSU, No. 7 Alabama, No. 9 Oregon, No. 10 Tennessee and No. 11 Penn State.

The CFP schedule

All times Eastern.

First round

Friday, Dec. 13

  • No. 9 Oregon at No. 8 Clemson, 7:30 p.m.

Saturday, Dec. 14

  • No. 12 Tulane at No. 5 Michigan, noon
  • No. 11 Penn State at No. 6 LSU, 4 p.m.
  • No. 10 Tennessee at No. 7 Alabama, 8 p.m.

The four first-round games will be played on the campuses of the No. 5-8 seeds over the third weekend in December. Which games get placed in which slots would likely be determined by ESPN, with Tennessee-Alabama as the obvious Saturday prime-time selection.

Quarterfinals

Tuesday, Dec. 31

  • Peach Bowl: No. 3 TCU vs. LSU-Penn State winner, 7:30 p.m.

Wednesday, Jan 1

  • Fiesta Bowl: No. 4 USC vs. Michigan-Tulane winner, 1 p.m.
  • Rose Bowl: No. 2 Ohio State vs. Alabama-Tennessee winner, 5 p.m.
  • Sugar Bowl: No. 1 Georgia vs. Clemson-Oregon winner, 8:45 p.m.

It is expected the current New Year’s Six bowls will rotate hosting the quarterfinals and semifinals, with a goal of playing most quarterfinals on New Year’s Day. And the CFP board said in its announcement the top four seeds will be assigned “in consideration of current contract bowl relationships.”

Using those parameters, No. 1 Georgia would go to the SEC’s contract bowl, the Sugar Bowl, and No. 2 Ohio State to the Rose Bowl as Big Ten champion. The Peach and Fiesta bowls do not have conference partners, but No. 3 TCU would likely get preference over No. 4 USC, and Atlanta is closer. That conveniently allows the Trojans to stay west.

Semifinals

Thursday, Jan. 9

  • Cotton Bowl: No. 2 Ohio State/No. 7 Alabama/No. 10 Tennessee vs. No. 3 TCU/No. 6 LSU/No. 11 Penn State, 7:30 p.m.

Friday, Jan. 10

  • Orange Bowl: No. 1 Georgia/No. 8 Clemson/No. 9 Oregon vs. No. 4 USC/No. 5 Michigan/No. 12 Tulane, 7:30 p.m.

The commissioners have not officially determined the dates of the semifinals, but they would have to be at least a week later than the quarterfinals, and the CFP would avoid scheduling them opposite the NFL’s Wild Card weekend (Jan. 11-13). That likely means placing one Thursday night and the other Friday night.

In the CFP board’s announcement, it said “the higher seeds would receive preferential placement in the Playoff semifinal games.” That would depend on which teams win their quarterfinals, but if No. 1 Georgia advanced, Miami is closer than Arlington.

Monday, Jan. 20

  • National championship game in Atlanta, 7:30 p.m.

The title game is expected to remain Monday night, as the NFL’s Divisional Round has a hold on potential weekend dates. The CFP had already selected Atlanta as its site for the 2025 national championship game, and it is expected to remain so even though the game will now likely be played two weeks later than planned.

And here’s how we predict the tournament would unfold in the quarterfinals and beyond:

  • No. 9 Oregon beats No. 8 Clemson
  • No. 5 Michigan beats No. 12 Tulane
  • No. 6 LSU beats No. 11 Penn State
  • No. 7 Alabama beats No. 10 Tennessee
  • No. 1 Georgia beats No. 9 Oregon
  • No. 5 Michigan beats No. 4 USC
  • No. 6 LSU beats No. 3 TCU
  • No. 7 Alabama beats No. 2 Ohio State
  • No. 1 Georgia beats No. 5 Michigan
  • No. 7 Alabama beats No. 6 LSU
  • No. 1 Georgia beats No. 7 Alabama

Check out last week’s projection here. 

(Illustration: Sean Reilly / The Athletic; photos: Tom Pennington, Jeff Moreland, G Fiume / Getty Images)



Read original article here

College Football Playoff rankings: Georgia is new No. 1; Michigan, TCU enter top 4

Georgia, Ohio State, Michigan and TCU are the top-four teams in the College Football Playoff selection committee’s second batch of rankings, with Tennessee and Oregon sitting as the first two teams on the outside looking in. Here’s what you need to know:

  • Georgia is back on top after winning the national title last season. The Bulldogs were No. 1 in the AP poll last week, but were just No. 3 in the CFP’s first week of rankings. That changed with a win Saturday over last week’s No. 1 CFP team, Tennessee.
  • Michigan jumped two spots to No. 3 after coming in at No. 5 last week. The Wolverines struggled for a half at Rutgers before beating the Scarlet Knights by 35 points. Two teams that were in front of Michigan lost this past Saturday.
  • LSU, which had the biggest disparity between its AP ranking (No. 15) and its CFP ranking (No. 10) last week, jumped up to No. 7 this week after beating then-No. 6 Alabama. The Tigers are in the driver’s seat in the SEC West, and they appear to be in control of their own CFP destiny despite having two losses this season.
  • Alabama fell three spots to No. 9 after its second loss of the season. The lowest that the Crimson Tide have ever been ranked in the CFP poll is No. 13, during the final rankings release in the 2019 season.

What does the committee think of the ACC after Saturday?

Clemson fell from No. 4 to No. 10 after losing by 21 points Saturday at Notre Dame, which entered the rankings this week at No. 20. The ACC had five ranked teams last week but just four this week, as both Syracuse and Wake Forest fell out of the rankings following their respective third losses of the season. Florida State entered at No. 23.

Who has the inside track for the Group of 5’s New Year’s Six bowl bid?

Tulane is once again the highest-ranked Group of 5 team, checking in at No. 17 after a 14-point win at Tulsa. The 8-1 Green Wave, who moved up from No. 19 last week, are once again joined this week in the rankings by fellow Group of 5 school UCF, which moved up from No. 25 to No. 22 this week.

Are the Pac-12’s Playoff hopes alive?

In short, yes. The Pac-12 has sent just two teams to the previous eight iterations of the four-team Playoff, but with two top-10 teams in this week’s rankings, and four in the top-13, there is plenty of meat left on the bone for contenders to prove themselves. No. 6 Oregon plays consecutive ranked teams in No. 25 Washington and No. 13 Utah before traveling to rival Oregon State, which was No. 23 in last week’s rankings.

And a potential Pac-12 title game will almost certainly be a top-10 matchup. No. 8 USC and No. 12 UCLA play each other next week in what figures to be a CFP elimination game, and the Trojans then close with rival Notre Dame, which is now ranked at No. 20. If the Pac-12 champion emerges at 12-1 overall, it is hard to see the conference being left out of the final field of four.

Full CFP rankings

(Photo: Steve Limentani / ISI Photos / Getty Images)



Read original article here

Can Tennessee beat Georgia? Can Dawgs repeat? Are Vols for real?: Coaching confidential

Is Tennessee’s leap for real, and has its rocket ship ride in Year 2 under coach Josh Heupel made it a legitimate national title contender?

“I think so. People say, ‘Oh, spread teams can’t win the national championship.’ No, teams that can’t run the ball can’t win the national championship,” one assistant who has faced the Vols this year said. “Tennessee can run the ball.”

Is Georgia’s juggernaut program already capable of reloading from a national title run, after losing five first-round picks and the Butkus Award winner, to capture back-to-back titles?

“Last year’s defense was historic, and they’re not quite on that level, but they’re still really good,” said a coordinator who faced Georgia this year. “They don’t bust coverages. They don’t make mistakes. They just don’t give you anything easy.”

On Saturday, the two historic SEC East powers will face off in a matchup of No. 1 (Tennessee) and No. 3 (Georgia), according the College Football Playoff rankings. This week, The Athletic spoke with eight people, including head coaches, coordinators and position coaches around the SEC and among those who have faced the Bulldogs and/or the Vols, to get insight into the matchup.

They were granted anonymity for competitive reasons and to allow for a more unfiltered look at the matchup from the perspective of coaches.


Kirby Smart’s Georgia Bulldogs are 8-0 entering their showdown with Tennessee on Saturday. (Dale Zanine / USA Today)

Tennessee’s offense has been the story of the season’s first two months. Hendon Hooker is the Heisman Trophy front-runner. Receiver Jalin Hyatt exploded onto the national scene with five touchdown catches against Alabama and may win the Biletnikoff Award. Even though neither Heupel nor anyone on his staff coached under Art Briles at Baylor, they’ve used his system to reboot the Tennessee program in just more than one season.

“Peak Art Briles Baylor, his last few years, the Bryce Petty Years, this Tennessee team is the closest to that of any other team that’s tried to run that,” a coordinator said. “Kendal Briles, Jeff Lebby, Dino Babers, everyone has evolved. Kendal and Lebby added some of (Lane Kiffin’s) stuff. Sean Lewis and Kent State evolved up north with weather and body types after he left Dino. But Tennessee runs the most stripped-down version of peak Baylor. They don’t run a whole lot of plays. They just get wide, get athletes in space and run by people.”

Arkansas and Ole Miss also run Briles’ Baylor system in the SEC, along with programs like Oklahoma and Syracuse. But why have the Vols separated themselves from other programs that run similar schemes and taken this offense into hyperdrive?

Multiple coaches pointed to personnel.

“They have a quarterback who can run and throw the deep ball. So all of a sudden you have to defend both edges of the field, you gotta defend him running and you have to defend the field vertically,” an assistant said. “That’s just a lot.”

Last year, Tennessee ranked 17th in offensive yards per play, at 6.47 yards. It was much improved from 2020 and great, but a step short of elite. This year, it has made the leap to 7.4 yards per play and third nationally, almost a full yard more per play through seven games. Why?

Several coaches pointed to Hooker and the receivers having a deeper understanding of the offense.

“He has much better feel for reading routes, and he’s on the same page as receivers. They seem to all be working together and understanding if a corner is playing on top of them, they’re going to come back down the stem. If they feel like they have the corner beat, they’re going to run past them,” one coordinator said. “He and the receivers are just in tune. That’s the difference.”

Added another assistant: “The quarterback understands where the ball needs to go when different things happen. And the receivers have gotten better. He’s more accurate because he understands where to go with the football earlier.”

Alabama failed to stop Tennessee on the way to 52 points in a loss — the most an Alabama team has surrendered since 1907.

As simple as the offense is on paper, it gets complicated when the ball is snapped, and the Vols are enjoying the fruits of experience this year.

“A lot of their routes are read routes. There’s one play call, but there are a number of different combinations of what the route can end up being. It can be one play call, but you can get a stop and a go, you can get two goes, you can get two stops,” one head coach said. “And they pair that with in-breakers. The switch release, the outside guy can have a go or a stop, and the inside guy can have a go or a dig. There aren’t a lot of calls, but there are a lot of variations of what the routes can become based on the read.”

Can Georgia at least slow the red-hot Vols?

Multiple coaches pointed to two ways to do it: slow Tennessee’s run game and pressure Hooker. But both have to happen with only five or six bodies. Georgia is one of just a few teams with the talent level and depth to do it.

“Georgia can give them issues in the run game. Everyone focuses on the pass game, but what makes the Baylor offense go is the run game,” a coordinator said. “I think Georgia can take away the run game, but where they’ll have issues is covering these guys in the secondary. Kelee Ringo is one of the best corners in the country, but there’s a drop-off after him, and they have some depth issues at corner. That’s Georgia’s only weakness.

“When Tennessee throws four receivers at you going vertical over and over and over, at some point something’s gonna pop.”

Tennessee’s offense is built around numbers: If there are too few bodies in the box, Hooker will hand the ball off to backs and have them run behind the experienced, physical offensive line. If the box is stacked with six or seven defenders, that means at least one receiver is left single-covered. If defenses play too soft, receivers will cut off their route and take 10 yards. Oklahoma infamously learned the hard way in 2014 that loading the box and then playing off receivers to prevent deep balls won’t work.

If defenses stack the box and play up to let corners run on the outside, Tennessee leans on its speed to outrun them.

And in the case of last week against Kentucky, their route combinations can be lethal. Tennessee used Cedric Tillman and Hyatt stacked together to Hooker’s right side, with Tillman drawing attention from a safety on a switch route inside to free Hyatt on a vertical route up the sideline for a pair of long touchdowns.

“Tennessee runs that switch-vertical like eight times a game,” one coordinator said. “When you’re running that play and you’ve got the receivers they’ve got and the quarterback they’ve got, it’s kind of unstoppable.”

Ultimately, stopping — or at least slowing down — Tennessee comes down to having the talent to win one-on-one matchups, multiple coaches said. Most teams don’t, especially with what the Vols have at receiver this year. But Georgia might. And if it does it enough, the Bulldogs can limit Tennessee enough to outscore it.

“I don’t know how great Georgia is at corner. No. 3 in Kelee Ringo, I don’t know if he’s a speed guy, and every time I watch Tennessee, their guys are running past somebody. They make you get one-on-one matchups and that’s the Achilles’ heel of Georgia,” a coordinator said. “I don’t know if they can run with them in their matchups.”

Tennessee’s lightning-quick tempo has been a problem for everyone it has faced, and coaches who faced Georgia’s defense have seen pace be an issue for the Bulldogs.

“I think Tennessee can give them problems with that. The biggest thing Georgia struggles with is exotic formations and bunches in the boundary. I know Georgia killed Oregon but that staff, Dan Lanning, they know Georgia’s defensive scheme really well. Oregon tried to do a ton of that. Quads in the boundary and exotic shifts and motions,” a coordinator said. “Tennessee is going to play fast and do similar things.”

Tennessee uses tempo to catch defenses out of position and in the middle of receiving defensive calls, as well as to tire out defenses. But that constant threat of tempo means most defenses install game plans knowing they’ll struggle to make pre-snap checks. And the Vols use that against defenses.

“When you play with the threat of snapping the ball quickly on any play, it really vanillas out what you can do defensively,” one head coach said. “They will also use dummy cadence, and coach Heupel and his staff will diagnose what you’re doing and then get into the right play.”

Georgia learned this week that linebacker Nolan Smith will miss the remainder of the season with a torn pectoral muscle. One position coach felt Georgia could lean on its depth and recruiting strength to play without him. A coordinator who faced Georgia was far more skeptical.

“He’s special. He kind of makes them go,” he said. “He’s their best pass rusher. They move him all over the place. He plays extremely hard. He’s probably a first-round pick. That’s a huge loss for Georgia.”

No coaches contacted by The Athletic felt Georgia could severely limit what Tennessee’s offense can do.

“I think Georgia will take away the run, but Tennessee will have some big plays,” a coordinator said. “If they can do it against Alabama, they can do it against Georgia.”

One obvious key for Georgia will be putting up enough points to keep control of the East against an offense expected to score. Nearly every coach raved about the Bulldogs’ tight end room, led by Brock Bowers and Darnell Washington.

“(Bowers) is special. I came away from that game thinking this might be one of the greatest tight ends of all time,” a coordinator said. “Everyone talks about (Michael) Mayer and the Utah kid (Dalton Kincaid), and I’m like, ‘Why is no one talking about Bowers?’ They’ve got a historic tight end room. Those guys are really special.”


Georgia tight end Brock Bowers has scored six touchdowns this season. (John David Mercer / USA Today)

Bowers led the national champs in receiving last year as a true freshman and is doing it again this year, but Washington has grown into a much bigger role in the offense.

“They do a great job of designing stuff to get guys the ball. They’ll have some designed plays to get Bowers the ball. And they’ll have some plays for (Washington),” one assistant said. “He looks like an offensive tackle playing receiver. It’s ridiculous.”

Bowers was the only person on Georgia’s offense who left multiple coaches raving, although several noted that quarterback Stetson Bennett gets shortchanged when people divvy out credit for Georgia’s success. The word “special” came up multiple times in regards to Bowers.

Earlier this year, Bowers broke a 75-yard rushing touchdown on an end-around.

“He’s just an incredible player. I’ve never seen anyone do that,” an assistant said.

One coach pointed to the absence of running back James Cook and receiver George Pickens as two pieces Georgia has been unable to replace in 2022, to the detriment of the offense.

“I don’t think they have that kind of playmaker at running back, but Stetson has taken his game to another level,” one coordinator said.

Added another coordinator: “The only reason Stetson Bennett was a walk-on and why he gets undersold is because he’s short. But he can make every throw.”

Every coach who faced Georgia liked the Bulldogs’ chances to move the ball on Tennessee’s defense. Multiple coaches said Tennessee’s cornerbacks are known for playing physically and toeing the line of interference, daring officials to throw pass interference flags more than they prefer.

“The things they do defensively allow them to get their offense back on the field and not give up a ton of points. It’s not a bend but not break style, but they’re willing to give up some stuff underneath they can rally to,” one head coach said. “They’re not going to give up big plays over their head. (Defensive coordinator Tim) Banks does a good job of keeping everything in front of them while also creating negative plays.”

Tennessee ranks 20th nationally with just five plays longer than 40 yards surrendered. That’s the same number as Michigan and Alabama.

The Vols have done that while also blitzing more than five rushers on 37.7 percent of snaps, the highest percentage in the SEC and 13th nationally.

“More of their pressure is on third-and-medium-plus, rather than first or second downs,” one head coach said.

This season, that has helped Tennessee produce 16 takeaways in seven games. Only 13 teams have more.

But one coordinator felt Georgia’s offense was well suited to take advantage of Tennessee’s defensive front and exploit matchups with their tight ends.

“Georgia has the firepower and the balance on offense if they can control the game and play complementary football to keep Tennessee’s offense off the field and let the defense recoup,” he said. “That’s their best way to win the game.”

As for Georgia’s defense, one coach saw this year’s group as almost as good as last year, but it has spent much of the first half of the season adjusting to new faces and a new coordinator in Glenn Schumann.

“I don’t think anyone will be able to accumulate the level of talent they had last year, but they’ve figured out what they’re good at and not good at on defense, and they’re starting to play to those strengths,” one coordinator said. “Last year, they were more disruptive. I mean, they had the No. 1 overall pick with (Travon) Walker, the big D-lineman (Jordan Davis). Nakobe Dean, the other guy, went third round. They had a bunch of experienced dudes. This year, they’re less disruptive schematically. They’re not doing as much this year as last year.”

Georgia pressures opposing passers on just 35 percent of dropbacks. That’s No. 39 nationally, down from No. 25 last year.

“Last year, they had some exotic stuff. They’re not as exotic this year, going in and out of funky fronts and mixing D-linemen and linebackers in twists and movements. Last year, they had a lot more exotic stuff,” one assistant said. “It might be youth, and it might be a new play caller and not wanting to put kids in bad situations. All play callers have different philosophies.”

As for why Georgia struggled against Missouri? Multiple coaches pointed to Missouri doing what Tennessee needs to do defensively.

“They know what you’re going to present. So you have to do different things they haven’t done and haven’t seen or repped,” an assistant said. “(Missouri) had played mostly base defense prior to SEC play, and as they got into SEC play, with Georgia as one of their first games, they did a ton of different things in that game they hadn’t shown on film. They were bringing pressure from the field and boundary and created turnovers.”

That gave Georgia’s offense issues, and the Bulldogs lost the turnover battle 2-0 in the game, too.

One coordinator pointed to true freshman Mykel Williams and freshman defensive back Malaki Starks as a pair of future budding stars.

“Mykel Williams, they move him all over and he’ll even play some linebacker. He goes inside. That’s really impressive as a freshman. He’s going to be the next household name on Georgia’s defense. He’s special,” he said. “Malaki Starks, they move him all over. They’ll play him at safety and move him to linebacker in their dime stuff. I know they were five stars, but to come in as freshmen and be as versatile as they are is really impressive. Both those guys are going to be big-time.”

Every coach agreed on the central truth about Georgia: The talent is elite, and the Bulldogs use it as well as any team in the country, even if this team lacks the star power of last year’s national champion.

“They play really hard. They rally to the ball better than anybody in the league. There are always six, seven, eight guys to the ball. They’re coached well. They never seem to misfit run gaps. It’s a really good group,” one assistant said.

One assistant believed defensive lineman Jalen Carter’s return to health could be a game-changer and argued Carter was the best talent on last year’s defense. This spring, another SEC head coach suggested Carter was the best player on Georgia’s defense last season.

Another assistant said the collective football IQ of Georgia’s defense jumps off the film, suggesting the defense takes film study seriously and, as a result, excels at anticipating what opposing offenses will do.

“Obviously, they’ve got incredible players and have recruited well, but what makes them special is they’re extremely well-coached. They’re disciplined. They don’t make mistakes. You see a lot of teams that recruit at a high level, but they can’t get on the same page and play unselfish football,” a coordinator said. “Kirby (Smart) does a phenomenal job of that. They play really hard.”

So what will happen when they finally match up? No coach thought Georgia would win big. Several thought it would be close. But the majority believed Tennessee would win as an underdog in Athens.

“I felt like Tennessee was going to beat Alabama. Georgia matches up with them a little better, but I think Tennessee is going to win,” an assistant said. “Bryce Young played one of the best games of his career or else that would have been a 10-14 point win.”

Added a coordinator, “I see Tennessee winning by 7 or so.”

Every coach expected a high-scoring game.

“It could be a deal where it’s whoever has the ball last. Georgia will be able to move it consistently on Tennessee’s defense,” a coordinator said. “I’ll say 45-42, Georgia. Just because they’ve been there before and it’s in Georgia.”

One head coach asked what the betting line was for the game. Georgia is favored by nine points.

“Nine? Really?” he said, surprised. “That’s interesting. It’s going to be a heck of a matchup. I don’t know if I’d ever discount what coach Smart and (offensive coordinator Todd) Monken are doing over there, but I think it could go either way.”

(Top photo of Hendon Hooker, right, and Jabari Small: Eakin Howard / Getty Images)



Read original article here

With first CFP rankings of 2022 released, what would a 12-team expanded field look like?

While not officially finalized, the expanded 12-team College Football Playoff is expected to debut with the 2024 season. Each week for the remainder of the season, The Athletic will test drive the proposed format using the Playoff committee’s latest Top 25 rankings — and predict how it will play out.

Here’s how the bracket would be seeded and the site locations determined using the committee’s Nov. 1 rankings. Note: The Orange and Cotton bowls were previously scheduled to host the 2024-25 semifinals and Atlanta the national championship game.

Top four seeds (first-round byes):

  1. Tennessee (SEC champion)
  2. Ohio State (Big Ten champion)
  3. Clemson (ACC champion)
  4. TCU (Big 12 champion)

Under the CFP board’s approved model, the top four seeds will be reserved for the four highest-ranked conference champions. For our purposes, we’re designating each conference’s top-ranked team as its champion. That means No. 1 Tennessee (SEC), No. 2 Ohio State (Big Ten), No. 4 Clemson (ACC) and No. 7 TCU (Big 12) would get a bye into the quarterfinals.

Nos. 5-12 seeds:

5. Georgia (at-large)
6. Michigan (at-large)
7. Alabama (at-large)
8. Oregon (Pac-12 champ)
9. USC (at-large)
10. LSU (at-large)
11. Ole Miss (at-large)
12. Tulane (AAC champ)

Under the same model, the six highest-ranked conference champions are guaranteed berths along with the six highest-ranked at-large teams. Were the season to end today, the fifth- and sixth-highest ranked conference champions would be No. 8 Oregon (Pac-12) and No. 19 Tulane (AAC).

Joining them in the field would be the six highest-ranked remaining teams: No. 3 Georgia, No. 5 Michigan, No. 6 Alabama, No. 9 USC, No. 10 LSU and No. 11 Ole Miss.

The CFP schedule

All times Eastern.

First Round

Fri. Dec. 13

  • No. 9 USC at No. 8 Oregon, 7:30 p.m.

Sat. Dec. 14

  • No. 12 Tulane at No. 5 Georgia, noon
  • No. 11 Ole Miss at No. 6 Michigan, 4 p.m.
  • No. 10 LSU at No. 7 Alabama, 8 p.m.

The four first-round games will be played on the campuses of the Nos. 5-8 seeds during the third weekend in December. Which games get placed in which slots would likely be determined by ESPN, with LSU-Alabama as the obvious Saturday prime-time selection. (Oregon would not be expected to host a noon ET/9 a.m. PT game on Saturday.)

And hey, Big Ten fans’ long-held “SEC team has to go play up North in December” fantasy finally comes to fruition with Ole Miss playing at Michigan.

Quarterfinals

Tue. Dec. 31

  • Peach Bowl: No. 3 Clemson vs. Michigan-Ole Miss winner, 7:30 p.m.

Wed. Jan 1

  • Fiesta Bowl: No. 4 TCU vs. Georgia-Tulane winner, 1 p.m.
  • Rose Bowl: No. 2 Ohio State vs. Alabama-LSU winner, 5 p.m.
  • Sugar Bowl: No. 1 Tennessee vs. Oregon-USC winner, 8:45 p.m.

It is expected that the current New Year’s Six bowls will rotate hosting the quarterfinals and semifinals, with a goal of playing most quarterfinals on New Year’s Day. And the CFP board stated in its announcement that the top four seeds will be assigned “in consideration of current contract bowl relationships.”

Using those parameters, No. 1 seed Tennessee would go the SEC’s contract bowl, the Sugar Bowl, and No. 2 seed Ohio State to the Rose Bowl as Big Ten champion. The Peach and Fiesta bowls do not have conference partners, but geography suggests No. 3 Clemson would go to Atlanta, leaving No. 4 TCU for the Fiesta Bowl.

Semifinals

Thu. Jan. 9

  • Cotton Bowl: No. 2 Ohio State/No. 7 Alabama/No. 10 LSU vs. No. 3 Clemson/No. 6 Michigan/No. 11 Ole Miss, 7:30 p.m.

Fri. Jan. 10

  • Orange Bowl: No. 1 Tennessee/No. 8 Oregon/No. 9 USC. vs. No. 4 TCU/No. 5 Georgia/No. 12 Tulane, 7:30 p.m.

The commissioners have not officially determined the dates of the semifinals, but they would have to be at least a week later than the quarterfinals, and the CFP would avoid scheduling them opposite the NFL’s Wild Card weekend (Jan. 11-13). That likely means placing one on Thursday night and the other on Friday night.

The CFP board’s announcement said “the higher seeds would receive preferential placement in the Playoff semifinal games.” That would depend on which teams win their quarterfinals, but if No. 1 seed Tennessee advanced, Knoxville is effectively equidistant between the two sites so could theoretically go to either. We picked the Orange.

Mon. Jan. 20

  • National championship game in Atlanta, 7:30 p.m.

The title game is expected to remain on Monday night, as the NFL’s Divisional Round has a stranglehold on potential weekend dates. The CFP had already selected Atlanta as its site for the 2025 national championship game, and it is expected to remain so even though the game will likely be played two weeks later than first planned.

And here’s how we predict the tournament would unfold in the quarterfinals and beyond:

  • No. 8 Oregon beats No. 9 USC
  • No. 5 Georgia beats No. 12 Tulane
  • No. 6 Michigan beats No. 11 Ole Miss
  • No. 7 Alabama beats No. 10 LSU
  • No. 1 Tennessee beats No. 8 Oregon
  • No. 5 Georgia beats No. 4 TCU
  • No. 6 Michigan beats No. 3 Clemson
  • No. 2 Ohio State beats No. 7 Alabama
  • No. 5 Georgia beats No. 1 Tennessee
  • No. 2 Ohio State beats No. 6 Michigan
  • No. 2 Ohio State beats No. 5 Georgia


Related reading

Check out all of our CFP rankings coverage.

(Top and inline illustrations: John Bradford / The Athletic; Top photos: Ben Jackson, Donald Page, Mark Brown/ Getty Images)



Read original article here

Staples: Ranking 13 teams eligible for College Football Playoff (even if they aren’t top 4 this week)

Every Saturday night, Andy Staples and Ari Wasserman react to the weekend’s slate of games on The Andy Staples Show & Friends. On Mondays, Andy revisits his and Ari’s biggest takeaway from Saturday night’s instant reaction. This week: Ari gave everyone homework — rank the 13 teams eligible for the College Football Playoff.

The only rankings that actually matter debut on Tuesday. And even these don’t truly matter. Remember, the first time the College Football Playoff selection committee released a ranking in 2014, these were the top four:

  1. Mississippi State
  2. Florida State
  3. Auburn
  4. Ole Miss

How many of those teams actually made the inaugural CFP? One. The Seminoles went 13-0, entered the bracket as a No. 3 seed and got crushed by Oregon in the Rose Bowl. So don’t despair if your team isn’t in the top four on Tuesday when the committee reveals its first ranking of the 2022 season.

As long as your team is one of the Lucky 13, of course.

On the postgame edition of The Andy Staples Show, Ari and I determined which teams remain eligible for the CFP. We might be wrong, but eight seasons worth of selections have established a fairly reliable pattern. The committee has yet to place a two-loss team* into the top four. You don’t have to be a conference champion to make the top four, but you’d better not have a blowout loss. (Unless you avenged said loss in the conference title game or beat the team that blew you out earlier in the season.) At the end of the show, Ari gave all of us a homework assignment: Rank these 13 teams.

*You’ll notice two-loss LSU is omitted from the Lucky 13. This is based on committee precedent. Should LSU beat Alabama and then beat Georgia or Tennessee in the SEC title game, perhaps that changes this year. A two-loss Auburn probably would have made the bracket in 2017, but the Tigers lost their rematch against Georgia in the SEC title game.

Entering this week’s games, these are the 13 teams that can still make the CFP, listed by conference.

ACC

Big 12

Big Ten

  • Illinois
  • Michigan
  • Ohio State

Pac-12

SEC

  • Alabama
  • Georgia
  • Ole Miss
  • Tennessee

That this many teams remain in the hunt means we’ve had a pretty fun season so far. Also, it doesn’t feel as if there are one or two teams that would absolutely smash everyone else still in the hunt. When the CFP expands to 12 in a few years, we’ll be able to measure the teams still in the hunt at this point by the dozen. But for now, let’s be happy the number is this high.

To complete Ari’s assignment, I tried to imagine how I’d vote as a committee member. I collected some stats I know are important to the committee. I also used some that I find important. I used the SP+ predictive ranking created by ESPN’s Bill Connelly. This is my favorite of the predictive ranking formulas, but I won’t quibble if you want to use ESPN’s Football Power Index or Jeff Sagarin’s rankings. (Bill’s formula can’t seem to accept that Texas isn’t back this year, but I’m willing to forgive that.)

I do like the FPI’s strength of schedule measurement, though. So I also used that. The FPI also has a handy measurement of remaining schedule strength, but that isn’t necessary for this exercise since we can only go by the games that have already been played. I also used the FPI’s strength of record, which measures how difficult a team’s record is to achieve based on the strength of its opponents, travel time, rest time and other factors.

One stat I love is net points per drive. This is the number of points a team’s offense averages per drive minus the average number of points that team’s defense allows on each opponent drive. Brian Fremeau keeps this stat on his excellent site. He also keeps available yards, which is another fun one. If a team gets the ball at its own 20, it has 80 yards available. If it scores a touchdown, then it gained 100 percent of available yards. I didn’t want to get too in the weeds, though. So I left that out.

Instead of using wins against Top 25 teams, which seems fairly arbitrary and also would require me to rank 25 out of 131 teams, I stole a concept from the NCAA Basketball Selection Committee. In basketball, the committee weigh Quadrant 1 (games against teams in the top 25 percent of the NET ranking) wins heavily. Football doesn’t have as many data points, so I decided to count Quadrant 1 and Quadrant 2 wins using SP+ as the ranking. Quad 1 is the teams ranked No. 1 through No. 30. Quad 2 is the teams ranked No. 31 through No. 60.

I also wanted to use some raw numbers that aren’t adjusted by any proprietary formula. So I went with tried-and-true yards per play gained and yards per play allowed. This adjusts for tempo better than total offense and total defense, and it also helps identify outliers.

Even though I know enough about these teams to make educated guesses as to their identities based on their numbers, I stripped the team names off my spreadsheet before I started sorting stats. My hope was that I would forget which team corresponded to which letter. That way, I could rank based solely on what the team had done this season and not on brand name, past success or failure or conference affiliation.

Does that make this ranking objective? Of course not. Rankings are by their nature subjective. At a certain point, I have to look at two (or three or four) data sets that seem quite similar and decide which one to place above the other(s).

Here’s my spreadsheet. Feel free to rank the teams as you see fit…

 

The actual committee chooses a bucket of about six teams in order to select its top three. It then scrubs through the list three at a time until it reaches 25. The six that seemed to belong at the top here were teams E, F, K, J, M and L.

So I moved them into a different spreadsheet and tried to parse them. Team J leads everyone with four Quad 1 wins but has a loss. Team M has three Quad 1 and two Quad 2 wins and the No. 1 strength of record. But Team M is one of only two on this list with a yards per play number above No. 15 in the nation. Its defense is No. 39 in yards per play allowed. But its offense is No. 3 in yards per play gained, and it is No. 5 in net points per drive. In other words, its defense might be giving up yards, but Team M usually is winning its games by a healthy margin.

Team K and Team F look cleaner. Neither has a loss, and both have single-digit ranks in the yards per play stats. Team K is No. 2 in net points per drive and has one Quad 1 win and three Quad 2 wins. Team F is No. 2 in strength of record and No. 1 in net points per drive. The drawback to these two? Their schedules haven’t been as difficult as Team J or Team M’s schedules.

Still, these two have been so consistent that I feel like I need to place them in the top two. So I’ll make Team F No. 1 and Team K No. 2. I’m only choosing the top three now, so I have to decide between Team J and Team M and then send the remaining team back to the pool. Team M’s No. 1 strength of record suggests that’s who I should pick, but I suspect Team M handed Team J its loss. I like using head-to-head results as a tiebreaker. (Otherwise why bother playing?)

So I peek at my key, which confirms my suspicion. Team M will be No. 3. Team J goes back in the pool.

My top three look like this:

  1. Ohio State (Team F)
  2. Georgia (Team K)
  3. Tennessee (Team M)

Now let’s move on. You’ve probably guessed by now that Team J is Alabama, but let’s try to ignore that knowledge and compare it with the next group.

We take the three remaining teams from the first group (J, E, L) and add three more teams (H, C, G).

The two that jump off the page are Team J and Team E. We’re trying very hard not to make any assumptions because we know who J is. What happened from 2009-21 is not important here. E has a similar strength of record, two Quad 1 and two Quad 2 wins and a better net points per drive rank. It seems the defense has been stingier but the offense isn’t quite as explosive. The biggest difference is strength of schedule. Team J’s strength of schedule is 10th out of 131. Team E’s is 79th, the lowest in this grouping of six. So let’s give the nod to Team J. Then Team E.

I’ve ranked:

4. Alabama (Team J)

5. Michigan (Team E)

Now let’s choose No. 6 from the remaining four on our list (H, C, G, L). All of these teams have more flaws than the others, and those flaws seem to show up on defense. Team G has a loss but only one Quad 1 or Quad 2 win. So that team goes back in the pool. Team C’s strength of record is No. 3, meaning it has achieved something difficult relative to its schedule. Team L has the best net points per drive rank and has two Quad 1 wins and one Quad 2 win.

I think I’m going with Team C. After peeking at my key, I see I’ve ranked:

6. TCU (Team C)

I’ll spare you most the gory details, but I ranked the next 13 the same way:

7. Ole Miss (Team L)

8. Clemson (Team A)

9. Oregon (Team G)

10. UCLA (Team H)

11. Illinois (Team D)

12. USC (Team I)

13. North Carolina (Team B)

The biggest surprise? Ole Miss at No. 7. If I had the team names next to the stats, I probably would have placed Ole Miss around No. 10. After watching the Rebels against Auburn, LSU and Ole Miss, I have no faith in their defense to hold up enough to allow them to beat Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi State and the SEC East champion. But their defensive stats are not as bad as I thought, and Clemson’s were not as good as I thought. Plus, Ole Miss has an elite offense and Clemson has a pedestrian one.

That said, I think it’s much more likely that Clemson goes undefeated and makes the CFP than Ole Miss goes 12-1 and makes the bracket. But after looking at these numbers, I have less faith in the Tigers to beat Notre Dame, Louisville, Miami, South Carolina and the Coastal Division champion (probably North Carolina) in consecutive weeks than I did before. Taken individually, Clemson should beat each of those teams. But it feels as if the Tigers aren’t playing with the same margin for error they had when they were making the CFP every year. Another game as sloppy as their Syracuse matchup could result in a loss.

But that’s why they play the games. Clemson could prove me wrong and wind up in the field.

The bigger question: Will this be a Lucky 13 next week? The Tennessee-Georgia loser probably stays on the list. But can everyone else?

(Photo: Eakin Howard / Getty Images)



Read original article here

College football picks against the spread: Bruce Feldman’s Week 9 picks

I went 5-6 last week against the spread, dropping me to three games under .500 against the line for the season. The good: nailing my upset special with Liberty handling BYU. The bad: picking Toledo to beat Buffalo by double digits. The ugly: picking Iowa to keep it sort of close against Ohio State.

(All point spreads come from BetMGM, click here for live odds, all kickoff times Eastern.)

Notre Dame at No. 16 Syracuse (-2.5), Noon, ABC

The Orange offense has sputtered for most of the past month, going over 400 yards only once, against FCS Wagner. The defense, though, has been outstanding, and should be able to handle a very inconsistent Notre Dame attack.

Syracuse 23, Notre Dame 17
Pick: Syracuse 2.5

No. 2 Ohio State (-15.5) at No. 13 Penn State, Noon, Fox

This is the first big test for the Buckeyes, who have a ton of firepower. I think the Nittany Lions respond after getting embarrassed in the trenches on both sides of the ball at Michigan, but ultimately Ohio State’s edge at quarterback will be the difference in the second half.

Ohio State 38, Penn State 27
Pick: Penn State +15.5

No. 7 TCU (-7.5) at West Virginia, Noon, ESPN

The Mountaineers defense, especially against the pass, has been savaged this month. Now it faces a faster team than it’s seen before and with a hotter quarterback. Uh-oh.

TCU 40, West Virginia 24
Pick: TCU -7.5

No. 20 Cincinnati at UCF (-1), 3:30 p.m., ESPN

Both defenses are really good, but the Bearcats’ is better and has been more consistent.

Cincinnati 28, UCF 24
Pick: Cincinnati +1

No. 1 Georgia (-22.5) vs. Florida, 3:30 p.m., CBS

It feels like it’s time for the Bulldogs to flex their muscle again. I think Kirby Smart will have them primed to slow down dual-threat quarterback Anthony Richardson and a Gators run game that has come alive since losing at Tennessee last month.

Georgia 42, Florida 21
Pick: Florida +22.5

No. 9 Oklahoma State at No. 22 Kansas State (-1.5), 3:30 p.m., Fox

Mike Gundy’s team gives up a ton of yards but the offense has been so good, it’s been able to overcome the defensive woes. I think it will again.

Oklahoma State 35, Kansas State 31
Pick: Oklahoma State +1.5

No. 19 Kentucky at No. 3 Tennessee (-12.5), 7 p.m., ESPN

I like Will Levis’ playmaking ability and Chris Rodriguez has really heated up since returning, but I just can’t pick against the Vols at home right now.

Tennessee 44, Kentucky 31
Pick: Tennessee -12.5

Even when Michigan has won in this heated rivalry in recent years, MSU has managed to keep it relatively tight and prevent the Wolverines from covering. But my sense is this Michigan team is different from ones in the past and will keep its foot on the gas.

Michigan 45, Michigan State 17
Pick: Michigan -22.5

No. 15 Ole Miss (-2.5) at Texas A&M, 7:30 p.m., SEC Network

Lane Kiffin will face his old defensive coordinator DJ Durkin and the Aggies should have some answers, but I don’t see them being able to wake up what has been a dreadful offense against the SEC’s top pass rush.

Ole Miss 28, Texas A&M 20
Pick: Ole Miss -2.5

Pitt at No. 21 North Carolina (-3), 8 p.m., ACC Network

The Tar Heels return home after two road trips to face a Pitt team that lost by two touchdowns at Louisville. Go with UNC. Drake Maye has a 13-0 TD-INT ratio in games at Chapel Hill.

UNC 31, Pitt 20
Pick: North Carolina -3

Upset special: Illinois (-7.5) at Nebraska, 3:30 p.m., ABC

The Huskers have played really hard for Mickey Joseph and I think they’re overdue for a big upset win, although I almost talked myself out of this one considering that Nebraska’s defense was on the field for 101 plays last week and the Illini’s was only out there for 42.

Nebraska 17, Illinois 16
Pick: Nebraska +7.5

(Top photo: Dale Zanine / USA Today)



Read original article here