http://www.bookfinder.com/author/albert-a-nofi/ I just read Nofi's book on TWI a couple of years ago. Basically, TWI was a near run thing.
Here are some PODs
1) 1835 was similar to say 1774: The northern provence was in rebellion, but they were agitating for legal reform, and only when that failed did they start talking true secession. If Mexico City had been willing to follow the current constitution as written, no revolt.
2) 1836-1 For political reasons, Santa Ana wanted a quick end to the rebellion, so he grabbed the nearest troops that could be fielded immediately, and marched north. His professional military pushed for a gradual buildup, and then overwhelming force. As it was, with the Texicans basically hiring mercenaries, the troops on hand were only equal to the defending rebels.
3) 1836-2 There were no true battles in 1836. The Alamo was a small garrison facing a complete field army. The Matamoro and Goliad forces were out maneuvered and surrendered. OTOH, at San Jacinto the two armies set up camp within sight of each other. The next morning the Mexican sentries watched the Rebels form up in battle array, march forward...
If the Mexican army had actually y'know *faught* it might have been a four zero victory, and the Texicans would have been crushed.
Note to the true researchers: I'm committing the cardinal sin of using only a single source here.

Other sources may find other conclusions.
