Connect with your Facebook Account

• Contact

Football Articles

33

This Team

Posted by TaylorTRoom on January 11th, 2009 under Football

This group has definitely over-achieved. They are one of the top few teams in the nation, although by any metric the talent in the program should be less than many other programs. Don’t believe me? Let’s look at the talent that came in, via recruiting. Using Rivals, here are the average ratings of the past five classes of select programs and the weighted averages using this formula: (1X2008 rating + 2X2007 + 3X2006 + 4X2005 + 3X2004)/13. The reason the 2004 classes are weighed no more than the 2006 class is that typically some of the most talented players don’t stay for five years.

1. USC (Ave. rank) 2.6, (wt. ave.) 1.69

2. Florida 5.6, 7.8

3. Georgia 7.2, 7.31

4. FSU 7.6, 5.92

5. OU 8.0, 7.46

6. Michigan 9.0, 8.38

7. LSU 9.2, 10.31

8. Miami 9.8, 9.62

9. tOSU 10.4, 11.15

10. Texas 10.8, 11.46

11. Alabama 11.0, 13.15

Wow. Would you have guessed that so many other programs out-recruited us over the past few years? Would you have guessed that the OU program that has lost to Texas 3 of the last 4 years had that significant of a recruiting advantage? I think it’s interesting that Texas’ recruiting is closer to resurgent Alabama than to the Sooners. As for programs doing less with more, how about Miami, Michigan, FSU and Georgia?

How about what the conference coaches think about our current talent? We had four players selected to the Big 12 all conference team this year, compared to three Red Raiders and nine Sooners. In other words, the Big 12 coaches think Texas has good, but not great talent. They think OU has great talent. Here’s a comparison of all Big 12 players from UT and OU, per the coaches:

Year UT OU

1998 3 1

1999 6 0

2000 4 5

2001 4 5

2002 5 7

2003 4 9

2004 6 8

2005 9 5

2006 5 5

2007 2 6

2008 4 9

When OU was beating UT five straight games (2000 – 2004), OU had 34 all-Big 12 players to UT’s 23. That made sense…OU was better. Since 2005, UT has had 11 all-Big 12 players, and OU has had 20. So, OU has out-recruited Texas by a significant margin, and has turned its larger number of super-blues into a notably larger number of elite players. Given that Texas has beaten OU 2 of those three post-2005 seasons, perhaps we should revisit the conventional wisdom about which staff relies on overwhelming talent to win, and which staff can game plan for a big game.

How talented is this roster compared to other Texas teams under Mack? I think a good metric for pure elite star quality talent is the number of NFL-quality players on a team. By this measure, this is not one of Mack’s most talented teams. The 2005 squad was the most talented, with an amazing 18 future NFLers (V. Young, Hall, Thomas, S. Young, J. Charles, Sweed, Sendlein, Scott, Blalock, Studdard, Robison, Crowder, Okam, Lokey, Brown, Ross, C. Griffin, M. Griffin and Huff). The 2001 team was probably second, followed by the 2004 and 2006 squads. Who on the 2008 Longhorn team looks likely for the NFL? Orakpo, for sure, despite not being truly healthy until this year. Roy Miller, probably. Kindle, probably, for his physical potential if not his actual position skills. After that, there’s just a bunch of guys who might be low second day draft picks or free agents (Cosby, Muckelroy), or very young players who might turn into major talents (Thomas, the young OL). Frankly, this team did not have the raw talent of a third of Mack’s teams at Texas. I would estimate the 2005, 2001, 2004, and 2006 teams to have more elite talent. The 2000, 2002, and 2003 teams are comparable talent-wise. Prediction- OU, Missouri, and Texas Tech will all have more players drafted in 2009 than Texas.

So, we’ve established that this team is not one of the most talented that Texas has had under Brown. How good was it, though, as a team? Pre-season, the AP pegged Texas as #11(and they sure didn’t have Utah ahead of us). Let’s compare final AP rankings and Sagarin rankings (his Predictor model where available) of past teams under Mack:

Year Record Sagarin AP

1998 9 – 3 87.76 (16) 15

1999 9 – 5 83.19 (18) 21

2000 9 – 3 88.59 (10) 12

2001 11 – 2 96.35 (3) 5

2002 11 – 2 90.33 (5) 6

2003 10 – 3 89.27 (6) 12

2004 11 – 1 84.33 (15) 5 (I have no idea why Sagarin’s “Predictor” model had us so low; I am concluding there was an error)

2005 13 – 0 106.03 (1) 1

2006 10 – 3 85.85 (13) 13

2007 10 – 3 85.13 (12) 10

2008 12 – 1 95.25 (4) 4

The 2005 team was Mack’s best, followed by the 2001, 2004, and 2008 teams in some order. Judging by record, and quality of wins, I’m saying the 2008 team was the second-most accomplished squad coached by Mack. Look at it this way. I was a freshman in 1981, when Texas finished second in the nation. Texas beat OU, TAMU, and won a major bowl game that year (the Cotton Bowl was a big one back then). That has only happened twice since then- 2005 and 2008 (Texas beat OU, TAMU, and MSU in the Cotton Bowl in ‘98, but the Cotton Bowl was second tier by then).

Texas beat this MNC-winning coach this year…

This was a terrific season, as amazing in its own way as the 1998 and 2005 seasons. In the Big 12 this year, there was a head coach winning big by out-talenting opponents with a bunch of highly-touted blue chips the NFL was salivating for, and another head coach winning bigger by outscheming opponents with a less touted group of overachievers. The former is Bob Stoops and the latter is Mack Brown. Earlier this season, I wrote this team is the toughest out in college football. I still mean that. In baseball, a “tough out” is a batter whose effectiveness at the plate exceeds his raw ability. A “tough out” won’t be fooled by the same set up twice, will foul off a great pitcher’s best stuff until the pitcher makes a mistake and grooves one. A “tough out” makes the most of every opportunity given. Texas showed up flat for one game this year, in Lubbock, and came within seconds of stealing a win. That’s a tough out.  Texas lost three games last year, saw its best big play producers, Jamaal Charles (who was key in beating NU and OSU last year) and Limas Sweed drafted, and improved significantly.  This team got it done with savvy and determination.

…And this MNC-winning coach…

Why was this team so much greater than the sum of its parts? The usual reasons- coaching and character. Mack has changed his approach, and some key new coaches were added. Mack has reverted to his 2004 – 2005 emphasis on physical practices. This is key. Mack spent his formative years as a head coach at talent-poor programs where the worst thing that could happen in practice was to lose one of your very few talented players to injury. He learned to emphasize non-physical practices, and trying to get as much done as possible with no more hitting than needed. In 2004, Tomey pointed out to him that his 2nd teamers at Texas were much more talented than his second teamers at Tulane or UNC (or Tomey had in Arizona), and that Mack really should be worrying about the risks of going into games soft, rather than with dinged starters. Mack has gone back to physical practices, and we now have one of the more physical Longhorn teams in Mack’s tenure this year.

…and this MNC-winning coach.

Another change is the emphasis on earning starting spots. It’s easy for coaches to get lazy with the depth chart. They have a ridiculous amount of work to do during the season, and when you’re winning, why spend much time thinking about changes to the depth chart? The danger to this approach is that starters get complacent knowing they won’t be challenged, and reserves check out mentally knowing only an injury will get them playing time. This attitude gives you teams that can’t get better during the season. This year, Mack made a conscious decision to restore depth chart competitiveness, and it has helped this team keep its edge. A friend once pointed out to me that the only thing that makes college football enjoyable is playing. All the other stuff- supervised workouts, drills, meetings- are pure drudgery without the benefit of actually getting to play in a game. Having a system where a guy can earn playing time (or conversely, lose it) hones a team’s edge. One of the earliest, and most interesting, examples is at the kicker position. Bailey has been a very good kicker the last 1 ½ seasons. He was beaten out this year by Hunter Lawrence. If you’re going to have competition, why not at every position, even if it’s the one position coaches most like to just find a capable guy and forget? Other examples are in the secondary, where freshmen Gideon and Thomas jumped players a couple classes ahead of them to get starting positions, or DE, where converted RB Melton escaped the dog house and forced Lewis to DT.

Muschamp has made a huge difference on defense. We had the best defense in the Big 12, and by a mile. This was despite seven new starters on defense, including two freshmen in the secondary and a converted RB on the DL. This defense went up against all of the best offenses in the Big 12, and held them all below their scoring averages. It made great adjustments, holding OU to only 2 TDs in the 2nd half (one gifted by a wrong “roughing the kicker” penalty), and keeping them from crossing UT’s 39 yard line on three possessions after Texas took the lead. Until Crabtree’s great catch and run, Tech’s offense only had 3 2nd half points.

On the offensive side, the changes from prior years were not as obvious, but still were significant. First, the team recognized its identity from the start. It didn’t spend the first half of the season trying to run a pro-set scheme it lacked the personnel and coaching for. Perhaps this was due to reports of ones scrimmaging against ones during fall practices- we had our illusions squashed before the real games started. Any way, we embraced the offense we could run- a basic spread that relied on the QB as a running threat. If we had a Jamaal Charles or a healthy Limas Sweed in this offense, we’d be as good as we were in 2005. We don’t, and we aren’t, but we are as effective as these guys’ performance can make us. They wring every drop of performance out of their ability, and this is one of the nation’s best offenses.

This leads to the other factor this year- character. These guys are fighters. They never gave up, never packed it in. They came closer to winning all of their games than any team in the country. Lacking game breaking talent, our star players compensated by doing everything else under their control well. Remember Cosby’s downfield blocks against OU and tOSU? When Collins refused to let an injury stop the no huddle just before Cosby’s Fiesta Bowl game winner? Ogbannaya may not be an elite runner or receiver, but he did everything needed from a running back at a competitive level. Kindle didn’t always know which gap to charge through, but when picking the wrong one he kept going full speed and often cleaned up broken plays afterwards. There’s a time in great teams’ seasons when the schemes aren’t enough to win the day, and the players have to take ownership of their season. This team did that in October.

At season’s end, this team with tenth-best raw talent ended up arguably the best team in the nation. No conference championship, no BCS championship, and no need to back down its claim as the nation’s best one iota. This team finished with scoreboard over #5 OU, and #9 tOSU, both at neutral sites. The schedule gave us games against coaches with three D-1A MNCs (Schnellenberger, Stoops, and Tressell), and three other coaches with BCS games on their resumes (Price, Petrino, and Mangino). Texas beat them all.  I know the final polls only had us at #4.  This kind of team- the kind that wins with smarts and determination- always does better in the objective results on the field than in the subjective assessment of the polls.

I thought about finishing this report with a forecast for next year’s team, but this isn’t the right time for that. Let’s save that for the summer. I will make this prediction- a lot of these players are going to be very successful in life, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lot of them become very successful coaches.

Article Tags:

,

More from this Barker


Share This

  • StumbleUpon

33 Responses

  1. Texas_Dawg said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 7:07 pm

    As for programs doing less with more, how about Miami, Michigan, FSU and Georgia?

    A couple notes in defense of Georgia:

    1) #2 last year (with all but a couple starters from the ‘04-’08 classes)
    2) 3 starters (including 2 of our 5 most important players) lost for ‘09 by the first week of September; countless other starts lost
    3) Playing in the same division as the MNC team

    Yeah… not a very good year given the talent… but not exactly a complete waste of these classes either.

  2. uttuck said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 7:07 pm

    Great article. I loved this team, and I hope that next year’s season is as enjoyable to watch as this one. Hook’em

  3. Texas_Dawg said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 7:08 pm

    A couple

    A few

    D’oh.

  4. Buzz Kill said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 7:34 pm

    Taylor,

    I thought, and Quan brought this up during one of his interviews after the Fiesta Bowl, that this team really came together prior to the Holiday Bowl last year. He was correct, this team hasn’t been the same since. Your thoughts on that.

    Thanks for the article.

  5. Stuck in MN said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 7:57 pm

    I wonder if this is a result of Mack’s recent change of recruiting philosophy. Does trying to avoid bitches getting kicked also lead to an overachieving team?

  6. Phenomenal Smith said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 8:17 pm

    The recruiting numbers are even more interesting when considering that Texas has nearly double the number of players in the NFL as Oklahoma.

  7. Tim said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 10:34 pm

    Yet, UT still got out-played and lost to a team that didn’t average Top 25 talent over the same time period.

  8. flamingmonkeyass said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 10:40 pm

    Yet, Tech still lost to a team that didn’t average Top 50 talent and had a would-be Longhorn third string QB as their starter.

    Hey, shit happens.

    Tell me again, how does Tech do when they’re not at home? Oh that’s right.

  9. douche bag alert said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 11:07 pm

    DING DING DING

  10. Ron Weaver said:

    January 11th, 2009 at 11:53 pm

    Tim:

    If you ever wonder why Tech gets treated like the annoying little brother, it’s because of inane posts like the one you just made. Instead of actually contributing to the discourse (like dedfischer does), all you ever post is stupid shit like “Don’t forget that one time we beat you, Whorns!” Just like that annoying little brother, no one takes you serious and everyone just laughs at you. Try to grow up a little bit, man — we know you can do it!

  11. 98 said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 12:36 am

    OT- some chatter on OB about u getting a TJ fordesque PG commit today..anyone here have info on kabongo or any other Pgs we are targetting..

  12. Parlin Hall said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 1:26 am

    Great analysis, TaylorT. I recall reading a statistical breakdown of recruiting once that concluded something similar, though on a national level. While a top-15 recruiting class wasn’t enough for a MNC (e.g. OU, ND, et al.), few teams get in a position to play for the MNC without a top-15 class.

    In ten years’ time, it may be clear that the Muschamp/Applewhite combination had a lot to do with this team’s special chemistry.

  13. TaylorTRoom said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 3:49 am

    I think the coaches’ new approach (and the new coaches’ approach) have a lot to do with it, but it would be a mistake to downplay the impact of player leadership.

    I hate to bring up OU, but their 2000 MNC team was a remarkable achievement. That Sooner bunch overachieved amazingly. The conclusion everybody drew was that the main reason was exceptional coaching. Years later, and with Stoops unable to recreate the 2000 formula, it’s looking more and more like exceptional leadership and character from Calmus et. al. was a bigger factor than originally thought.

    If you were to peek into the heads of coaches of underachieving teams, their innermost thoughts are probably about how much they wished they had better leadership. In 2008, the Texas coaching staff had no such concerns.

  14. dedfischer said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 5:56 am

    My admiration for Brown has always been that his teams overachieve and do more with less than any program in the country. It’s amazing how he gets any talent to Austin.

  15. t1climb1 said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 6:07 am

    Ded,

    Was your tongue planted in your cheek when you wrote that? Forgive me, I’m slow.

  16. dedfischer said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 6:42 am

    Oh no, I’m dead serious.

  17. BrickHorn said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 6:53 am

    Earlier this season, I wrote this team is the toughest out in college football. I still mean that. In baseball, a “tough out” is a batter whose effectiveness at the plate exceeds his raw ability. A “tough out” won’t be fooled by the same set up twice, will foul off a great pitcher’s best stuff until the pitcher makes a mistake and grooves one. A “tough out” makes the most of every opportunity given.

    Would you say that this team is the Ecksteiniest team in college football?

  18. TaylorTRoom said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 6:54 am

    Well, ded, that’s what’s impressive about this team- that they overachieved.

    It’s like if Texas Tech were to ever play with heart in a big game on the road.

  19. dedfischer said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 6:58 am

    It’s a talent issue. We’re always playing over our heads. We get out recruited by Missouri, Colorado and Oklahoma State.

  20. TaylorTRoom said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 7:12 am

    Well, this post was about a Texas team that exceeded reasonable expectations, and you have turned it into a referendum on those scrappy Red Raiders, and how great they are to ever have any success aginst Texas, the Great Satan. Thanks.

    I’m not going to drop any more acerbic comments on TT, because I actually like TT.

  21. dedfischer said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 7:21 am

    Ha. Speaking of talent, my neighbor is a part owner of Purgatory (the Dallas athlete club) and brought me a Tech cap signed by Crabtree. Apparently, he’s already partying like a pro. My neighbor also claims to be Vince Young’s uncle, which is a whole ‘nother story, but he has a lot of VY swag to prove it and did broker a reality show for him. Didn’t intend to hijack this thing.

  22. SlickStreet said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 7:21 am

    Nice stuff, TTR.
    I think, to an extent, the Rivals rankings are misleading, only because they focus too much on volume over quality. Texas, for a few years, signed very few players, which hurt its overall ranking, but the per-player average was still highly competitive with pretty much every school not named USC.

    I totally agree on the focus of intangibles. I still say that loss to a&m in ‘07–hideous as it was–turned out to be a blessing, as Mack since opened up competition. I personally think that should have always been the case, regardless of all the staff has to handle, but the fact is Mack did make that a policy, and the program’s far more better for it.

  23. Art Vandelay said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 7:34 am

    Great post TTR. You hit the nail on the head regarding this team, and you backed it up with interesting data as well. Well done.

    A fantastic season by the Horns!

  24. Nordberg said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 7:36 am

    We get like 95% of the guys we target to commit. However, that 95% may not always jive with the top of recruiting lists. Then you hear that Texas was “outrecruited by ______” when in reality we got basically everyone we wanted, like always.

  25. JDLooneyII said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 8:08 am

    Spot-on, TTR. This team was pure pleasure to watch, unlike some of the underachieving squads that Mack fielded pre-2005. I maintain that the greatest substantive contribution to this year’s club came from Muschamp, who insisted that his inexperienced defensive players make their mistakes at full speed. At the college level (in contrast with the NFL), all-out effort and desire still cover a multitude of sins.

  26. The General said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 8:34 am

    Our recruiting may be rated surprisingly low, but again, Rivals bases alot on quantity.

    Attrition is the real reason this team is not as talented as some (Particularly in the skill positions and defensive backfield)

    Jamal Charles
    Jermichael Finley
    Jerrel Wilkerson
    Myron Hardy
    Robert Joseph
    Michael Houston
    James Henry

    And guys that did not work out or aren’t going to work out:

    George Walker
    Philip Payne
    Montre Webber
    Bobby Tatum

    I don’t see a talent drop off anywhere else from teams in the past. This OL was as good as any except the 04-06 group, and the D line is the as good as any but the Hampton/Rogers group.

    Thank God for Muschamp and the Colt-Quan-Ship triumvirate.

  27. hodad said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 8:45 am

    It is worth noting that both Rivals and Scout tend to underate early commits in favor of late commits. They have a vested interest in doing so – the longer the top rated recruits are undecided, the more money they rake in via subscribers.

    Both Rivals and Scout also have a tendency to uprate players who are being recruited by more top programs – getting an offer from USC and Florida virtually guarantees a player at least 4 stars regardless of onfield performance.

    Texas recruiting class rankings tend to suffer because most of them commit so early that Rivals and Scout have no vested interest in pumping up their ratings.

  28. uttotop said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 8:53 am

    TRoom, thanks for your research & efforts in accurately defining this overachieving TEAM(my Top 2 fav teams in recent history)…as a former player, I can attest to your analysis of the importance of TEAM leadership/chemistry, meaning both the players and the coaches…all too often fans dismiss a critical trait of any championship-level team…

    I believe that had USC(with their uber talent), or ANY of the underachievers(I count 5 in that list above) had our TEAM’s cohesiveness & consistent, dogged attitude to fight back, there would have been considerably more controversity in selecting who was to play in the MNC game this year…granted, save Georgia’s Stafford, there was a common factor amongst them–a glaring lack of experience or talent at the QB position…all the more reason for us to celebrate Colt McCoy’s return for next year!!

    I contend that attitude & effort trumps talent many times and use USC post 2005 as a very good example of underachieving teams(not that they did not “look” good in a considerably weaker Pac 10 conf, even if they did well in bowls this year)…we had a similar experience back in the era of the 2000 recruiting class…Mack will likely tell you(privately) he understands this as well…yet, it might be some time before there will be two teams as loaded with NFL talent as were our 2005-2006 NC team & USC’s as well…that is still a record that will likely stand over time!

  29. TaylorTRoom said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 9:33 am

    I disagree with those who think UT’s recruiting was under-rated. First, if we were recruiting so great, and got anybody we want, why did we not have a RB with more than 400 yards this year?

    Also, large classes should grade higher than small classes. The more players you bring in, the more busts you can stand, and the greater the odds you “hit” at a position.

  30. dasmithjones said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 9:46 am

    TaylorTRoom: I used to read all the Texas blogs. Then I read BC. This post is an example of why I no longer bother reading the others (except an occasional glance at OrangeBloods for Chip Brown’s stuff). Kudos to you and the rest of the principles here. It easy enough to ignore the comments from folks who add ZERO to the discourse.

  31. The General said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 4:00 pm

    So if Jamaal Charles stays, then our recruiting is underrated?

  32. Kafka said:

    January 12th, 2009 at 4:58 pm

    Taylor:

    This is not a point that you addressed but I bring it up since it is relevant to recruiting.

    Mack’s model of very early signing has been great for UT recruiting but I wonder if this approach needs to be rethought.

    Nowadays, there is a greater risk that UT will lose a guy early to the NFL or that a recruit do something criminal (or criminally stupid) and get kicked off the team. Injuries also introduce a level of uncertainty in the personel situation.

    Maybe it is time that for Mack to sign fewer early recruits and reserve more scholarships for late signees. This would enable him to respond just in time to personnel requirements that change late in the recruiting season.

    It would also be hugely advantageous to be able to sign a JC guy in an emergency. This would be especially helpful when you desperately need a lineman because a JC guy has had two extra years to get big and strong enough to compete in the Big 12.

    OU’s Loadholt was a JC guy and so was the awesome nose tackle for Alabama this year, so there are some quality JC guys available.

  33. topo said:

    January 13th, 2009 at 12:22 pm

    Hey barkers. I agree with the post above. Your work here is fantastic. I quite reading the statesman and other website.

Leave a Reply

Follow Us

Related Articles

Hot Forum Topics

Activity