The legacy of pseudo-scientific anthropometric studies of the past is still deep rooted in India (at least with people who are interested in history, anthropology...others don't count anyway). Many physical anthropologists had wild and free run classifying Indians. I strongly feel the whole field is absurd.
First of all, the stature and skull shape of Homo Sapiens have never been constant. It changes because of changing food habits and changing geographical conditions. Also, if you compare the present haplogroup clans with those 'racial groups' you can clearly appreciate the futility of whole exercise.
The popular understanding is simple. India was initially inhabited by short and dark Australoid. Most of them were massacred by more robustly built also dark Mediterranean Dravidians. These Dravidians were later subjugated by light skinned Aryans from Europe.
I don't want to go on discussing about these self-sustaining myths (or science at a particular point of time). I would like to make few observations for my group, Dravidians.
If you observe Central India then it must be evident that the Dravidian tribes have in fact recognized the Austro-Asiatic tribes' religious supremacy in the regions where those tribes are dominant. The priests who officiate rituals of Dravidian tribes are from Austro-Asiatic tribes. That probably shows higher level of society belongs to Austro-Asiatics than Dravidians.
Second, there is no Dravidian marker if you go by genetic studies. In fact, there is no uniform distribution of dominant male genetic lineages among three biggest Dravidian groups like Telugus, Tamils and Kannadigas. J2b, H , R2 and L all dominate among different groups. Compare this wih Indo-Aryan speaking population and Austro-Asiatic population. There you can clearly associate R1a1 with IE and O2a with Austro-Asiatics. But not in the case of Dravidians.
This is the precise reason I believe the Dravidian languages are part of South India since the beginning. In north India you can find isolated languages like, Nahali, Burushaski and probably now extinct Bhil language. But not so in the case of South India. Therefore, in my opinion, Dravidian languages have been sustained by Dravidian females through multiple male migrations. Any words related to West Asian languages may be just loans from later arrived males.
Ravi Mundkur blogs about a new study that talks about distinct Koraga(a tribe in coastal Karnataka region) language. But by my understanding it is impossible that south Indian tribes have ever lost their languages. It should be noted here that mainstream Dravidans(along with majority of Indo-Aryans in the north) have maternal lineages that they share with these tribes and not only that nearly 30% male lineages(Haplogroup H) too.
If Dravidian languages have been imposed by the newly arrived males (probably J2b who make up 15-20% of the population and who qualify as "Mediterraneans") then I find it difficult to explain distinct Dravidian language branches among central Indian tribes. Some of these tribes(also J2b is hardly observed among Dravidian tribes) are so remote(Bison Horn Maria) and until recent times were totally cut off from mainstream.
I would propose Dravidian languages are matrilineal.