Winning out seems a disctinctly better possbility today than it did early Saturday afternoon and our ranking, too, has much more credibility than before.

Can there be serioius, indeed ANY doubt, that Texas has the talent to beat deeply flawed teams like Tech, A&M, OSU, the horribly mediocare Nebraska?  Many much stranger things have happened this year.  Moreover, as you've written and as seems more obvious by the week, our best chance of doing so likley consists in playing the young guys and building for 2008 and 2009 in the process.  

As for the ranking - as you've written and as I've commented on a thread bellow - there is every reason to view Texas as a quality team today than there was last week or, indeed, at any other point in this season.  Nothing on the Horns resume, including the games with TCU (especially in retrospect) and Rice (meaningless) justified a ranking and what standing we had was predicated solely on reputation.  Well, this Saturday we not merely played even with but perhaps outplayed what is almost certainly (and again there is quite the paucity of certainty in anything in College Football this year) a top 7 or 8 or perhaps a top 5 team going forward.  We cannot, with 2 losses, claim a much higher ranking, but top 25 or even slightly better seems entirely justified.

Strangely and disturbingly I have to say that in I feel better about our program today (especially in retrospect) than at any time since that glorious morning of in January 2005.  Sure, the recruiting was strong (alhtough some big fish got away) and last year was more than OK.  We were very highly ranked at the beginning and most of the season and could attribute our problems at the end to Colt's injury.  There were other issues with running game and pass defense to be sure but we could be confident in the talent and hopeful that the coaching staff would address the schematic issues with at least some effectivness.  The first few games of this season, however (and again one can take only so much solace from Rice) exposed physical flaws in the team an inability or unwillingness to adjust on the part the coaches and a general lack of fire that gave incerasing cause for worry and culminated in a crescendo of despair in the loss to KSU.  The OU loss to CU served as but a meagre paleative.  Against OU, however, although we hardly played the perfect game we showed the talent, the measure of coaching competence and the intensity that bodes well for this year and even moreso going forward.

For the record, and much to my regret, I cannot forecast another MNC during the Mack Brown era.  10 to 12 win season, Big 12 Championships, wins over OU and BCS bowls will hopefully come in more or less greater abudnance.  Without some incredible luck or the appearance of another VY (some piece of luck that would be too) Texas reaching the summit of college football in the next 10 years seems unlikely.

I would concur with SaintBevo that all is not lost. As exhibit A, look at USC's "crisis," as described by SI.com. Three weeks ago, pundits everywhere wrote of Pete Carroll and USC as this impregnable juggernaut, perpetually overflowing with talent, not being afraid to play freshmen, and scheduled for BCS bowls into the next century.  Now, if they lose at Cal but win every other game, we'll be playing them in the Holiday Bowl (We'd better bring our A game to that one). For more on this, see my "Tale of Two Cities" diary.

I suspect that the progression of the offensive line, their movement along the learning curve, will really dictate where this season goes.

There's two kinds of positive change the Horns can undergo in the next five games. There is the week-to-week growth of younger players getting more and more experience - and more and more feedback and coaching. The O-line and the DB should be getting better and better; this is normal for a younger team.

The regressive factor would be injuries, which could deplete a position and interfere with unit development - and both the O-line and DBs are units unto themselves, which implies a certain level of cohesion and maturity within the unit. And while the growth would seem to be gradual, this is football with a powerful laboratory for results; the games are both catalysts and weekly quizzes. The growth in both individual and units can take on quantum characteristics: both the illusion that the rate of change is linear and maybe not that visible at all and the illusion that things aren't changing, when in fact they are changing all the time and that change can be dramatic at any given time.

I know that sounds sorta scientific for football, but change is our topic. The LBs offer a different situation. The elder crew - two seniors and a junior - is the product of years of training and it's rate of change is slower and some would say definitely maxed out (middle LB tacklin' the ground while RB goes 65) while the junior corp brings not only more talent but a higher learning growth curve. To back up PB here, the junior corp needs to be on the field a minimum of 50% of the game and 100% of the time when it is critical. A stronger front seven will shield that younger DBs, although it can't help senior safeties who bite hard on play fakes.

What Chiles and Harris don't have is play judgment nor managing the game experience that Colt does. This is what the young QBs desperately need despite the coach's fear factor and so does the team next year. The luxury of three experience QBs going into spring training cannot be dismissed; errors of judgment are as great as errors of commission in terms of team play. There is a cost to gain that judgment and experience and that should be an investment the Horns make in the rest of the season; we can afford that chance of a loss this season much better than next season.

If there is one directive to give to MB (and GD this season), it would be to make this team dangerous, a true predator on the field on either side of the ball. True predators aren't self-conscious - they're hungry all the time. They don't show off and preen - they stalk and kill the opposition. They utilize their speed and strength to the max of their ability. They no fuckee around - they go for the throat. And that's what they do best.

It is an innovative time in football and I'd like to think the premier state university is cognizant of the dynamic developments offenses have made to use their speed and talent. The innovations have been about getting speed into space, from the LOS to the EZ, a letting that speed wreck the defense. The Horns have some world class speed but how many dangerous plays does that speed make a game? Once established, it opens up the rest of the game.

True, the O-line must give Colt time to find that speed, but, then, that should be the objective in the first place. Whatever enhances that development - whether more traditional running game and play action or the spread offense - should be the means to that end. And go after it early, when the legs are fresh, when there's extra energy to pump into the rockets.

Barring wide-scale injuries (ala last year), this should be an improving team on both sides of the ball through every remaining game this season. I harp on the offense because it needs to shift a whole level. The Horns have a stellar D-line and they will stabilize the D. Maximizing the offensive potential is the real experiment at this point.