I would like to draw everyone on this board's attention to an article that was brought to my attention today, written by Sports Illustrated's Andy Staples.  Here is the link: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/08/25/richt-miles/index.html.  The story, in a nutshell, discusses the sensibility and even likelihood of Richt and Les Miles being on the hot seat and even ending up fired at year's end due to the harshness of expectations in the SEC.  Some of you may recall that last week I posted a link to my story on, peculiarly, the exact same issue.  Also, ironically, my story was posted two days BEFORE this well respected college football writer wrote his. And here is the link to mine:  http://www.trackingthesec.com/2010/08/richt-and-miles-2010-farewell-tours.html. By no means am I accusing Staples of plagiarising my story, obviously my blog (nor I)  is qualified or experienced enough to warrant the eyes of an SI writer.  However,  this board ripped my story, and myself, to shreds.  I was called an ignorant blogger, someone who doesn't understand the UGA football culture, etc.  Obviously I was not the only sportswriter that found this topic worthy of discussion.  Some accused me of writing this story to "garner pageviews", but I wonder if Staples had that in mind when writing categorically THE SAME STORY (Staples even used the exact same comparisons to Phillip Fulmer and Tommy Tuberville in 2008).  The reality seems to be that Mr. Staples and myself, among others, do have a valid argument here.  Obviously, I took some of the comments personally, but don't want an apology out of this.  I simply wanted to point out that maybe my article wasn't as "ignorant" as this board seemed to believe at first, and maybe it is worth a read.  Because let's be honest, Sports Illustrated is never wrong, right?