From the stadium, financial resources, and brand name perspectives, A&M has done very well since moving to the SEC.

A&M and Mizzou have played 4 games against each other since joining the SEC and split them 2-2.

Since moving to the SEC, Texas A&M is 97-54.

Mizzou joined the same year and your record is: 77-65. You guys have had 5 losing seasons, A&M has had 1.

So I don't know where you come off with that talk.

And if it's just about the stadium, even then we had you beat if we were even your competition. Let your own past AD tell you:

quote:
Athletic director Ross Bjork, who formerly worked at Missouri from 1997 to 2003, said he was frequently asked about A&M and the SEC when conference realignment was in full swing while he was athletic director at Western Michigan. "Wow, that's perfect," he said. "The reason why is the size and scale of the institution, the flagship nature, the traditions, the fan support. I mean that's, that's really what the SEC is known for. I came to Kyle Field in 1998, 2000 and 2002 and saw the passion, the size and scale of Texas A&M and to me, there was really no place like it in the Big 12." Bjork said from afar, it was clear that Texas A&M was serious about providing the resources to compete in the SEC. "Kyle Field is the prime example of that," he added. "Normally people come and kind of retrofit, they add on pieces here and there. A&M decided to tear down three sides of the stadium and build, really, a brand-new stadium. Not many institutions do it that way."

LINK