“Show your work.”

So, Juddgate made it to the august pages of the Washington Post.  Let’s just say the AJ-C doesn’t come off too well.

So, the AJC’s original story was running an astounding reportorial deficit. After it was published, the university requested more information from Judd. “I’ve elevated this to my bosses, who will discuss and decide whether to make an exception to our policy on releasing unpublished material,” Judd told the university, according to messages a university official shared with the Erik Wemple Blog. That was a strange formulation, considering that the university asked for details to support a claim that was published.

Well, yes.

Given the stakes attached to Bulldog coverage, you’d expect that the AJC would put such a damaging story through all the editorial paces — and that a piece with 11 examples of bad behavior would have 11 corresponding bullet points. What’s more, the AJC didn’t present sufficient detail to the football program before publishing, according to Claude Felton, associate athletic director. “The AJC never — before or after the story ran — identified the 11 players it claims ‘remained with the team after women reported violent encounters to the police, to the university, or to both,’” wrote Felton in an email. (The AJC says that it presented the number of players to the university a day before publication; to date, it still hasn’t published any names other than the two in the original story.)That sort of omission suggests that the consequences should extend upward from Judd and into the AJC’s editing ranks.

Exactly!  Not that I’m holding my breath.  (Of course, if the paper does in fact can an editor or two, it probably won’t publicize that.)

The important thing to take away here is that it’s another example of the AJ-C’s reputation taking a major hit in the media.  That’s probably as good an outcome as UGA could reasonably expect under the circumstances.

“I have no doubt we’re going to be just fine.”

It’s a good thing Nick Saban likes a challenge, because it sure seems like he’s got one this season.

Two of the best players in the program’s history — quarterback Bryce Young and linebacker Will Anderson Jr. — are gone. Of the three quarterbacks on the 2023 roster, no one has emerged to grab the starting job. And for the second consecutive year, Bama enters a season without the title “reigning champion.”

That’s just for starters.

In one preseason magazine (Phil Steele), Bama is listed as one of the least experienced teams in the country (127th out of 133, last in the SEC). Take the label for what it’s worth. In that ranking, which considers returning senior starters, percentage of returning yards and tackles, etc., Colorado is last (makes sense) but Missouri is No. 8 (huh?).

It’s a worthy jumping off point for this comeback story. Let’s settle on this: The 2023 marks some of the biggest turnover Saban has experienced during his reign. Only nine starters return at Alabama.

“I think experience matters, I really do, but I also think that when you have young players who are hungry and have great energy and enthusiasm, that’s helpful to the team chemistry as well,” Saban said.

Hey, nobody should be counting ‘Bama out this year.  He’s still Nick Saban, GOAT.  His program has recruited at the highest level and has one of the top two or three talent laden rosters in the country.  2022 was an off season for the Tide, and they still won eleven games playing in the SEC.  I expect them to be in the thick of things in 2023, at least until they prove otherwise.

But they sure aren’t making it easy for themselves.

They’ll do it every time.

Assuming they don’t bring on a new school or two, the Pac-12 will become a ten-team conference once Southern Cal and UCLA depart for greener pastures.  The conference currently plays a nine-team conference schedule, which means they would fall into the best format for determining a conference champ, a round robin arrangement where every school plays every other team in the Pac-12.  It’s pure and it’s perfect.

So naturally, they can’t leave well enough alone.

The Pac-12 is exploring whether to shrink its conference schedule to eight games starting with the 2024 football season, commissioner George Kliavkoff told 247Sports Friday.

The conference has formed a four-person committee of athletic directors to explore eight- and nine-game schedules. The committed is charged with preparing proposals, which are expected to be pitched to the 10-school membership by the end of the year. A decision should be finalized before January, Kliavkoff said…

“First question is how many teams are going to be in the league?” Kliavkoff said. “Obviously, if you’ve got 10, playing a nine-game schedule is pretty clean. Everybody plays everybody. Listen, the downside of playing nine conference games is we beat each other up, right? There are some conferences that play eight games and they add a cupcake and that helps long-term with the [College Football Playoff]. The flip side of that is when you’re on the West Coast, if you go down to eight (games), it’s tougher to find that additional nonconference opponent just because the density of football programs in the West is much less than it is in the southeast, for example. Those are the trade-offs.”

Taking a shot at the SEC to defend your own cravenness is the mark of a true asshole.   Well played, George.  By the way, how’s that new media deal coming along?