This story is also posted in the Harvard Independent.  A lot of this you may already know, but if you're like me you never get tired of hearing it.

We are all taught in school, when we’re very young that history repeats itself, unless we do something about it.  In sports the history tends to go on repeating itself unchecked, since there are no real catastrophes to avert.  Sure there are travesties, like a Cubs fan providing the perfect metaphor for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, but the very fact that we can find irony in the situation prevents us from taking it seriously enough to try and avert it the next time around.

Beyond the inevitable, inexorable historical principle, sport tends to repeat itself in a much shorter cycle, since, unlike in our world, the rules and situations never change enough to have a serious effect on history’s cycles.  Witness, therefore, one of the inevitable déjà vu moments that comes from watching sports religiously.

Two years and about a month ago, Pete Carroll’s USC Trojans were driving for what they were referring to as a three-peat (or three-pete to be cute).  Many of those who didn’t live at the mercy of that particular team’s success or failure, would continually doubt the championshipness (championshipity?) of their first claimed championship, since they hadn’t actually played in the National Championship Game (always a bit of a barrier) and were chosen as champions by the AP in an act of almost pure contrarianism (even if they had deserved a shot at LSU or Oklahoma in said championship game, LSU’s convincing win over Oklahoma gave them the more impressive championship resume).

It was the year where Matt Leinart came into the season as the defending Heisman winner, and a budding sports agent would buy the Heisman for his teammate Reggie Bush (conveniently voted on before what would be a convincing display of how wrongly the voters had chosen in the National Championship Game).  What cannot be disputed is that they were riding an impressive 34 game win-streak coming into that game.  ESPN would spend hours of TV time on its legion of networks playing out imaginary match-ups between the Trojans of that year and great teams of the past (is the story starting to seem familiar?  Stop me any time).

As for the game itself, the 2006 Rose Bowl, USC vs. Texas, the game stayed close in the first half before USC started to pull away, as everyone seemed to expect.  The Trojans pulled their lead to 12 with 6:42 left in the game, and everyone who lived outside the biggest state in the lower 48 (for you geography buffs, that’s Texas), believed that the game was over, the dubious three-pete was imminent, but those people obviously hadn’t seen enough of a young fellow with a heavy accent, a student-athlete from inner-city Houston, Vincent Paul Young.  Indeed if they had seen more of him he may not have ended up second in the Heisman voting to the player, who earned the highest percentage of Heisman votes ever.  Had they known Young as any more than an elusive and strong runner playing quarterback, they would have seen a strongly repeating pattern (some historical cycles come by coincidence, this one was driven by the pure will of one of the best athletes ever to play the college game), the pattern that his biggest victories were invariably snatched from the jaws of defeat.

So it was on that mild January night in Southern California.  Vince drove the Longhorns down the field twice with a controlled passing game, which pundits (and evidently the Trojan coaches) doubted he had the patience to maintain, and, of course, his electrifying runs.  In between the two drives, came a magical defensive stand, where the Trojans, consistently successful earlier in the game at pounding the bowling ball, Lendale White, up the middle, tried to run out the clock with headfirst runs up the middle.  It came down to fourth down with a yard and a half to go.  Pete Carroll, knowing that putting the ball back in Young’s hands, no matter what yard-line he was on, was a dangerous situation, having watched Young cut through his defense like the proverbial hot-knife through butter, and possessing what many would call a propensity to gamble, decided to stake the game on that fourth down.

In one of the most beautiful scenes one can see in a football game, the Longhorn defense played immovable object to Lendale White’s unstoppable force, stopping him cold behind the line to gain.  Even before chains were brought out and an official ruling was made, a sense of jubilation permeated the Texas sideline, victory was considered almost inevitable, despite the five point deficit that still remained.  Young’s last touchdown run on a fourth-and-five seemed almost an afterthought, and the resulting Longhorn victory left the USC sideline, and thousands of Californians, who had caught on to the Trojan craze, in a sense of shock.  Trojan players, who lived the lives of Hollywood stars, had felt they were entitled to this victory.

Matt Leinart, who had stayed in school for his senior year, which many draft experts believe cost him ten spots in the draft, since he would have been a favorite for the #1 pick in the previous spring’s draft had he come out, though as it turned out he seems to have benefited by being drafted to Arizona with such great offensive weapons as Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin rather than to San Francisco, where Alex Smith, who was taken #1 in that draft still struggles, went so far as to claim that the better team had not won the game, as though there were any other way to determine which team was better.

Let us now draw some parallels with this previous Sunday’s Super Bowl, where the ballyhooed New England Patriots (that’s right I wrote ballyhooed) tarnished an otherwise perfect record by losing to a team they had beaten only a month earlier, quarterbacked by a man, who despite his string of success in the playoffs, is but a poor reflection of his older brother (not all aspects can be parallel).  Like the Trojans, the Patriots were compared on numerous ESPN broadcasts to their great predecessors.  Bradshaw’s Steelers, Ditka’s Bears, Walsh’s and Montana’s 49ers, Jimmy Johnson’s and Barry Switzer’s Cowboys all took their turn to face of with the Pats in a purely hypothetical exercise that served as filler when there was nothing more interesting to report during SportsCenter.

Though Boston is about as geographically removed as you can get from Hollywood without crossing international borders, Patriots players, like their USC counterparts took on all-star personae.  Tom Brady, though not as shameless in his list of endorsements as his rival Peyton Manning, took on a public face by dating supermodels and being followed by tabloid photographers daily.  Randy Moss, delighted at finally playing for a winner, quieted the loquacious comments that had plagued him with some of his other teams, but even he had the chance to revel in his celebrity in a post-game press conference, saying "I mean hell, I’m Randy Moss, what do you expect."

While commentators at sports networks were arguing over what Patriot would win the MVP of the Super Bowl, the Giants were preparing revenge for their Week 17 loss.  They shocked the world and the Patriots’ bench with their two fourth-quarter touchdowns, and their constant pressure on pressure on Tom Brady.  The much debated MVP went to Eli Manning, though it probably should have gone to a defender, since they held a Patriots offense that had scored under 30 points only three times previously this season and had never scored less than 21, any of which numbers would have been enough to beat the Giants’ meager 17, to only 14 points.  Justin Tuck, Osi Umenyiora, or Michael Strahan all deserved recognition for turning Tom Brady’s pocket into a shooting gallery.  Also deserving would be rookie Cornerbacks Aaron Ross and Kevin Dockery, who held Randy Moss to only 62 yards and 1 touchdown.  If the defense as a whole could receive the MVP, I have no doubt they would have, for holding the Patriot’s to only 7 points for three quarters while they waited for Eli Manning to get his act together and actually score.

But apart from the specific details, the lesson remains, sports history repeats itself more than regular history.  Pride always comes before the fall, and ESPN can predict the fall of dynasties by comparing them to previous great teams.  Let this be a warning to all you aspiring sports dynasts and future ESPN executives, who happen to be reading.  Beware.

--AR--

I think beating OU is completely within the realm of possibility, if the team in fact pulls together instead of breaking apart, yet I am a creature of eternal optimism.

Under what conditions would you believe that the Longhorns could win the game this Saturday despite our troubles?

--AR--

We're all a little angry with Greg Davis, so here's the question.  Take one play out of his playbook and add one play in.

I'll bet the Bubble Screen makes it into about %80 of the comments.

--AR--

I meant to post this yesterday, but we don't always get what we want and I'm over it.

Some of the questions in yesterday's Mack Brown press conference included

Along with softball questions about Rice and the like.

Now the question

If you got your hands a press pass and had one question, how would you use it?

--AR--

For new readers, the Two Cents segment is a dailyish thing where I ask a question and you readers discuss it, and call me an idiot.  --AR--

In PB's offensive review of the TCU game he writes:

There's no doubt that Colt is clutch, but he hasn't looked as sharp in general since the beginning of the season.  The question then is:

Has Colt McCoy taken a step back, either because of his injury or some other unforseen reason, or is he about to come out of his shell?

The Washington Huskies

Now I don't think we can tell too much from a shellacking of Syracuse.  Even I have been known on occasion to drive to upstate New York and run over and around Greg Robinson's squad, but Washington did look much improved while doing it.  New quarterback Jake Locker, though he I wouldn't say he's a white Vince Young as the ESPN commentator did, looked great running and passable from the pocket.  Willingham's squad has a chance to make it to the level of a bad Oregon season, giving scares to the better Pac-10 teams and losing to one lower level team a year.

Colorado...

Now has a quarterback with their coach's balls.  It's hereditary.  A gutty comeback win against their in-state rival Colorado State almost insures that the Buffs won't be losing to any more Championship Subdivision teams any time soon.  They'll leave that to certain other teams...like Rice.

Presence of Mind

Something I've never seen before happened in Washington State's loss to Wisconsin.  On WSU's first scoring drive their punter saw his punt blocked, then picked it up and ran for a first down.  Heads up play.

Nebraska 52-Nevada 10

Something almost immediately evident, Nebraska has some kicker.  I believe he cleared the end zone 6 times, while kicking from the 30.  To compare, Hunter Lawrence landed the ball between the goal line and 5 yard line every kick against Arkansas State.  As for the rest of the game, Marlon Lucky was great, and as for the passing game...well...Marlon Lucky was great.  It seems like Callahan put a damper on the passing game after Keller threw an early pick six.  I would have assumed it'd be hard to run a West Coast offence without having a lot of confidence in one's quarterback.  Well, Callahan's the genius.

Andre Ware strikes again

Tommy Tuberville's lucky that our least favorite system quarterback didn't get assigned to the Kansas State/Auburn game, because if he was he would have willed the Wildcats to hold on for the win and called Tuberville Tooberville most likely.  As it turned out.  Ware drew the Mizzou/Illinois game, where SMQ has this to say:

I will only add that it's Chase Daniel, not Chase Daniels.  He's a man with two first names, not the heir to a whiskey fortune.

--AR--

With Brad Lester out does Kansas State have a chance at the upset?  I will cite the Georgia game last year as evidence that relying on Brandon Cox's arm is not an optimal situation for Auburn.  Does that give "uber-QB," Josh Freeman, and Kansas State a chance?

Editor's Note: AR returns! Welcome back, sir. For those new to the site, Andrew is our esteemed intern and the source of every great BON-produced video you've seen around here.

In any season opener against a Sun Belt cupcake you're going to end up with your fair share of rushing yards.  For the 'Horns since 2002, rushing in the opening game has been somewhat indicative of future success.  

In 2002, North Texas shut down Cedric Benson and the 'Horns to the tune of 42 total rushing yards and in 2003 the 'Horns only rushed for 168 yards, a fairly decent sum against a top shelf team, but pretty lame against New Mexico State, whereas the 2006 team, which was a weaker rushing team, broke 200 going for 212 against the Mean Green.

But in the two most successful seasons in that span, 2004 and 2005, they rushed for 513 and 418, respectively, presaging great things.

Now I'm completely on board with the idea that the Texas offense in 2007 should use the pass to set up the run, but in the first game the benefits of rushing the hell out it are easy to enumerate.

1. It's fun

No one would argue that LSU's win last night was fun, but Arkansas State can't defend the run like a bottom of the pack SEC team.  Passing causes a lot of anxiety, a couple errant passes can stall a drive, not to mention interceptions.  If you can run with impunity, there's really no reason to pass.  It's also fun for your linemen.  Ask any lineman, attacking, mauling, pancaky run blocking is tons more fun than back-em-off pass blocking that is  only a stall no matter how good it is.  I'm sure these green linemen are excited to get out and maul some overmatched defenders.

2. It's a great way to break in the revamped run game

The passing game is pretty good.  We get our key guys back, and we should be fine for the rest of the season.  What's still a question mark is the run game, and Arkansas State is the perfect opponent to build confidence against.  The more big runs JC breaks the better.  It'll be great!

3.  Running the clock faster: It's just classy

There are definite benefits to being classy.  Other teams respect you.  Everybody likes you more.  Isn't that what you want?

So here's to a season where the offense thrives on tossing the ball around, and an opening game in which we rush for more than 300 yards.

--AR--

...And it's even longer and harder for Henry Melton.  We might call the state in which Melton currently resides as Longhorn Football purgatory, but for a player at such a high profile program, that's probably worse than hell.

It wasn't too long ago when everyone was in love with Henry Melton.  They called him "Hank the Tank" and other endearing nicknames.  No one could sweep up a ULaLa or a North Texas like Henry, but multiple key failures in short yardage, including two in games that ended as disappointing losses, relegated him to hell in our minds.

The problem was that big Henry is Jamaal Charles trapped in Ron Dayne's body.  I'll confess I'd never seen a 270 pound running back try to make the corner on fourth and inches, but big Henry, he went for it and failed miserably.  With luck, though, rock bottom is far from the end of the story.

Luckily for Henry there are two positions suited for a 270 pounder who's "fast for his size."  Short yardage running back didn't work out, but guess what you're a defensive end now.  The coaches say he's showing improvement, but they said that last spring too, and we all know how that turned out.  Everyone that doesn't get hurt in Spring football is showing improvement, but there's definitely a chance for playing time with Crowder and Robison off to the big leagues.  Orakpo has one starting spot locked up, but Melton, Eddie Jones, and Aaron Lewis are all in the mix for the other end.

I for one, want to believe in him, because I want to believe in second chances, and I want to root for Henry again.

--AR--

Earlier in the season AW listed 4 stats that would most accurately chart The Horns' success througout the season.  They were Free Throw Attempts, Rebounding Margin, Assist/Turnover Ratio, and Field Goal Percentage Defense.  I want to follow up on this statistical thread in a string of posts about statistical trends for this squad.  Today statistical trends in losses.

Texas has lost 5 games (Michigan State, Gonzaga, Tennessee, Oklahoma State, and Villanova) and won 15.  8 of those 15 wins were played against legitimate opponents, and I've decided to stick with those, because I don't think this squad could have had a bad enough shooting percentage to lose to Texas State.  Here are some statistics that seem to be particularly worse in our losses than in our wins (stats from all overtime games have been normalized to reflect the extra minutes played):

In every loss, the Horns have shot below 41%.  In fact the Horns have only beaten Centenary when shooting below that mark.  Two of UT's worst wins have come close to 41%; we shot 42.37% against Baylor and 42.31% against Nebraska.

The correlation is fairly obvious here.  The better you shoot, the better you play.  This is compounded by our weakness down low, which denies us second chances at the basket, and our less than stellar defense, which forces us to shoot well to keep up with our opponents.

Rebounding in general is important, but offensive rebounds in particular show a stronger correlation to success for this squad.  Probably the three worst losses for the 'Horns (Gonzaga, Tennessee, and Villanova) were also the only three games where they had less than ten offensive rebounds.

Common failures to hold teams on the defensive end make each Texas possession that more important, so offensive rebounds are twice as important.

In every loss the Horns have failed to reach 12 assists, though they also didn't make 12 against Arkansas (11) and LSU (8).

I think assists are a sign of the offense clicking.  DJ Augustin is always a great distributor, but assists tend to go up when one player has particular offensive success, because the defensive will tend to shift toward him leaving open teammates for him to feed.

PB and AW have pointed out before that this team often lives and dies by the three, and it's reflected in the stats.  In 4 out of our 5 losses (OSU excepted) we've attempted 26 or more three pointers, whereas only against Nebraska and Baylor in our wins over legitimate opponents have we even reached 26 three point attempts.  On the other hand all of our losses have come when we've shot less than 37% from three, while LSU alone of the legitmate opponents we've defeated have held us below that mark.

When our opponents have more than 37 rebounds and shoot better than 36% from three they tend to beat us as well.

In every loss, the Horns have attempted at least 61 field goals, while they've only attempted 61 or more in two wins over legitimate opponents (Colorado and St. Johns).

I'm at a loss for why that is.  Anyone have any idea?

These are just some raw statistical trends.  I'll keep you updated as they play out in our future contests.  I hope this has been more exhaustive than exhausting

--AR--