Offense:
- LT - Trinton Sturdivant (season)
RT - Kiante Tripp
OG - Chris Little (season)
TE - Tripp Chandler -will miss the next 2 games
TE - Bruce Figgins - will miss most of the season
FB - Brannon Southerland
FB - Fred Munzenmaier (multi-game suspension)
WR - Tony Wilson (season)
WR - Kris Durham
WR - Tavarres King
- DT - Kade Weston
DT - Jeff Owens (season)
DE - Rod Battle
DE - J. Lomax - playing with injured toe
MLB - Dannell Ellerbe (missed 1 game & will be hampered vs UT)
MLB - Marcus Washington (season)
MLB - Charles White (season)
S - Quinton Banks
DB - Donovan Baldwin (dismissal)
DE - Michael Lemon (dismissal)
If you want to know why we don't look like the #1 ranked team in the country, that's why.
See Also:
-- More than half of LBs wearing green - AJC
-- Dent and Gamble man the middle - ABH
-- Ellerbe hopes to play - UGAsports.com
-- Getting healthy fast - DawgPost
-- Dawgs want more sacks - DawgPost
PWD
25 comments:
this is so sad. Reminds me of what McCann said about the Braves' pitchers: "But you can't lose Smoltz, Glavine and Hudson and think things are going to be OK." Ohhhh, come on, Dawgs.
Add Marcus Dowtin to the list. He was in green yesterday and could be out for quite a while.
Paul, you left off Tanner Strickland who was going to be involved in the OL by all accounts but has been dinged up since late august.
The sad thing is, Tony Wilson and Baldwin are the only scrubs out of the group.
That is 18 quality players. Just think of how good we can be next year if we stay healthy, get Stafford and Knowshon(without a mohawk) back and have the much easier schedule. Of course, we will lose at least 1 game in blowout fashion.
I think we are in danger of losing 4-5 games this year. It just isnt looking good at this point. I am scared to death of UT. They have beef up front on both sides of the ball and we could be manhandled again in the trenches.
THat's not the only reason we don't look like the number one team in the country pwd - come on! Marinez is a big part of the problem
"twenty players is"? Good grammar
> "twenty players is"? Good grammar
Me no have editor at 12:18 AM.
You gets whats yous pays fors.
apparently excuses are also like blogs, everybody's got one (or in this case, 20).
Just guessing on the anon 906 team affiliation....but should we be comparing 20 players missing time to.....
Saban hasn't gotten all the trouble makers off the team yet.
Franklin hasn't got the qb he wants to run the offense
Tebow's shoulder had a boo boo
The administration won't let SOS recruit all the players he wants to
Someone opened a new donut shop too close to the football facility.
Yeah, I guess everyone has one.
How'd that many guys get injured on defense with us playing a soft zone? Were they on the wrong side of a collision with thin air?
Walter Hill
Not to be that guy, but "twenty players is" is actually more appropriate in this case than "twenty players are." Something is being predicated to the entire group, not the individual players. So the sentence is the structural equivalent to "X is Y," not "Xs is Y."
It's like "twelve donuts is a baker's dozen." Nothin' wrong with that sentence.
Now my fellow nerds and I will retire to the nerdery ...
Geeez-us! I knew it was bad but I didn't know it was this bad.
The loss of Owens and Washington are killing us on defense. Owens was a clog in that line and there's a noticeable drop-off when Ellerbe is not in the game. Plus the Sturdivant and Little injuries are more significant than anyone thought.
We were fortunate to avoid the injury bug last year (for the most part) but it's come back to bite in the ass this year.
Anon 9:54
Thanks. I think you're right.
The irony here...the odds are extremely high that I'm a much higher paid professional writer than the guy correcting me. ;-)
If I really was convinced that he's right....or cared...I would have changed it. lol.
That said...I think the sentence is the same as saying "The Group is..." Or "The Team is...."
It's a different sentence structure than "Twenty guys are coming for you." In my sentence, the 20 guys aren't "doing" something. They are "being" something....a group.
/nerd
Injuries suck. He couldn't coach/play/write his way out of a paper bag. Why do we play him all the time??!!1!!1one?
"...and have the much easier schedule"
I don't know that I would go so far as saying the 2009 schedule will be "much easier"
2009 Schedule
=============
@ Oklahoma State
South Carolina
@ Arkansas
Arizona State
LSU
@ Tennessee
@ Vanderbilt
OPEN
Florida
Tennessee Tech
Auburn
Kentucky
@ Georgia Tech
We're going to have to push all the chips forward this week and next, then do what we can at LSU. We have to win the next two. We can lose to LSU and still win the east (just beat Florida). Of course, if LSU shows something this w/e, all the better.
The Dawgs are going to win the east.
I'm amazed at all the "sky is falling stuff" from UGA fans. The worst Richt has ever done is lose 4 games, and both of those seasons included freshmen QBs. College football is all about the QB position, and we don't play another team with a better QB than us. Now, one might play better on any given day, but to think that we're headed toward a 4-5 loss season is ludicrous. Stafford will make too many plays and the other guys won't make enough.
Let's deal with the injuries and see what we can do. And, yes, we have a chance to be loaded in '09.
What a crock! If college football was all about who's the better QB, then we wouldn't have lost to Bama.
Even the best QB's can't overcome young, thin, inexperienced, smaller lines.
And that doesn't magically get better with one bye week and a gazillion injuries.
You must not have read all of what I said. Any given QB can play better on a given day. JPW outplayed Matthew this year. But, the QB position is simply the most crucial position in college football and teams CAN compensate for deficiencies elsewhere but not QB. 2004 -- who were the best QBs in college football? Jason White, Jason Campbell, Matt Lienhart, and Alex Smith. 2005 -- Lienhart, Vince Young, DJ Shockley. 2006 - Troy Smith. The list goes on and on. Look at the top 10 and see what the difference between them and other teams is...QB. Arkansas, Miss. St, UT, Auburn and others can't win for one reason: QB.
Matthew can't magically make injuries and a young line go away, but he will keep us in every game simply because he's an outstanding player. To think that we'll lose 4-5 games with such an outstanding player at that position just seems pretty crazy. Over the next 7 games, he will outplay most QBs on our schedule and that will give us a great chance of winning. That's my only point.
I might be wrong. It's happened before. But it's hard to imagine us tanking it with that much talent at that key position. As for all the other stuff getting better...
The only answer is that sometimes it does and that's why we love the game. I was in Knoxville and Nashville last year, and for the life of me I can't believe that was the same team that showed up in Jacksonville Municipal Stadium a few weeks later. Let's all hope that same switch got flipped this year.
Georgia doesnt look like the #1 team b/c Willie Martinez always has atleast one half a year where the UGA defense gets lit up. (UT 06, UT 07, Bama 08,--> LSU 08, UF 08, GT 08). Other schools deal with injuries as well. Get over it.
PWD = Mark Schlabach
C,
Shouldn't Purdue have been a powerhouse for years?
I think you make a good point, but with at least 24 players contributing, this isn't basketball where one player can make a team.
I'm with you. It's not a failsafe. And they did go to a Rose Bowl with Brees, so that ain't too shaby (especially considering the state of Purdue football now).
I'm just responding to the "we could lose 4-5 more this year" mentality. I'm just saying that's hard to imagine because teams that go 8-4 or 7-5 generally have pretty sub-par QB play for the much of the season (see UGA '06). That's kind of hard to imagine this year.
Go Dawgs!
Post a Comment