An interesting list but what about the 1983 Texas football team?

They lost the NC because of a 1 point loss to Georgia due to a late fumbled punt and a no called holding call. Yet they include 1983 Auburn a team we beat 20-7 that year.

http://www.mupro.net/college-footba...lege-football-national-championships-SO-CLOSE

 

20-7 and it wasn't that close.

 

If 2008 Texas had beaten Tech, we would have been the only team in college football history prior to the playoff to have beaten 4 top 15 teams in a row. Apparently no team has ever been able to beat more than three in a row.

 

They used a ratings system, so it wasn't subjective. I don't remember a lot about that team other than that we beat them pretty handily. But that Texas team struggled a lot offensively even though the defense was dominant. The guy who actually created the system points it out it's not a good system for ranking quality of teams.

From the site:

• The numbers it spits out are easy to interpret - if Team A's rating is 3 bigger than Team B's, this means that the system thinks Team A is 3 points better than Team B. With most ranking algorithms, the numbers that come out have no real meaning that can be translated into an English sentence. With this system, the units are easy to understand.
  
• It is a predictive system rather than a retrodictive system - this is a very important distinction. You can use these ratings to answer the question: which team is stronger? I.e. which team is more likely to win a game tomorrow? Or you can use them to answer the question: which of these teams accomplished more in the past? Some systems answer the first questions more accurately; they are called predictive systems. Others answer the latter question more accurately; they are called retrodictive systems. As it turns out, this is a pretty good predictive system. For the reasons described below, it is not a good retrodictive system.
  
• It weights all games equally - every football fan knows that the Colts' week 17 game against Arizona was a meaningless exhibition, but the algorithm gives it the same weight as all the rest of the games.
  
• It weights all points equally, and therefore ignores wins and losses - take a look at the Colts season chart above. If you take away 10 points in week 3 and give them back 10 points in week 4, you've just changed their record, but you haven't changed their rating at all. If you take away 10 points in week 3 and give back 20 points in week 4, you have made their record worse but their rating better. Most football fans put a high premium on the few points that move you from a 3-point loss to a 3-point win and almost no weight on the many points that move you from a 20-point win to a 50-point win. - NOTE - any system like that is going to hate the 1983 Texas team, which was beating teams like TCU 16-14.
  
• It is easily imressed by blowout victories - this system thinks a 50-point win and a 10-point loss is preferable to two 14-point wins. Most fans would disagree with that assessment. - Texas blew out Rice, Arkansas and A&M. That's it. They only scored more than 30 points three times. In a system that looks at points scored, Texas was an average team or worse that year.
  
• It is slightly biased toward offensive-minded teams - because it considers point margins instead of point ratios, it treats a 50-30 win as more impressive than a 17-0 win. Again, this is an assessment that most fans would disagree with. See above
  

 

We did have a great defense but we lost our RB Edwin Simmons in the SMU game (I think) to a season ending injury. He was really on his way to a great year and this was a big blow to our offense. We probably would have beat GA in that bowl game if we had had him.

 

It was the Arkansas game - I remember watching that play and just being sick... and then Mike Luck was basically the guy that we had to use that game. It still amazes me that for a program as deep and talented as that one, we really only had one tier 1 running back on the squad. Terry Orr might qualify, I suppose - he definitely flashed some ability, but it never seemed like he had consistency.

 

Yeah, I remember RB Edwin Simmons absolutely exploding versus ou in 1983 and then it crushed my soul to see his season end vs. Arky.

Like BIS, I too have always thought if Simmons had stayed healthy, the O would have been more prolific during the season and UT would have beaten GA and won a NC. Without him we had to rely on Mike Luck, others and vs. GA a plodding Ronnie Robinson and on Jeff Ward FG's. However, the Horns still nearly won that game with a smothering D and an anemic O. Didn't Ward miss at least 1 FG and maybe a second in that game? Take away the muffed punt or the holding call on GA that was not called. Now I sound like aggy.

Oh, gawd how I loathe that game.

 

Yeah he went 3-for-5. Apparently the wind was pretty tough that day. The offense moved pretty much at will between the 30s, but Georgia (which had a pretty good defense itself) made the plays and we didn't. I can't remember a lot of specifics, I just remember that Georgia was completely incapable of driving the ball that game. And then they figured out that if you tackle Mark Lang on an option play, you have a chance to score. So they did that...

 

The one play that remains burned in my memory of that game was the dropped screen pass by Robinson. The play developed right in front of me and when the pass was thrown, I stood up and signaled and yelled TOUCHDOWN....and then he dropped the ball. I imagine poor old Robinson is still trying to catch that ball in his sleep.

Also, the ref is looking directly at Lange being tackled.

 

Gosh I had forgotten that dropped pass by Robinson. It was a TD if he catches it

 

I was at the game. Hang on to the punt and boom! NC!!

 

Ya dang rite! Strung me up by my heels, slit me from stem to stern, and watched my guts just fall out on the floor at that moment.

I'm sorry; please forgive me. I have various immutable emotional issues associated with certain UT losses.