Started By
Message
re: For Texas A&M Fans
Posted on 11/28/12 at 1:16 pm to TeLeFaWx
Posted on 11/28/12 at 1:16 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
No. Sticking it to the Horns wouldn't have been possible without the SEC. Success in the Big 12 would not marginalize them the way success in the SEC has.
Now this is revealing. It sounds like marginalizing Texas is the goal and you think that A&M has achieved that. Also, don't you think that beating Texas soundly and winning the Big 12 and playing ND for the MNC would go further to marginalize Texas than to crow about going 10-2, beating Bama, & playing in the Capital One Bowl?
Think about that for a second. Nobody on this board was alive the last time the words Texas A&M and National Championship were mentioned in the same sentence (unless they were talking about your stadium decorations).
My opinion - A&M would have had OU & KSU at home & beaten both. Most likely gone undefeated & would be playing for MNC.
2
Posted on 11/28/12 at 1:21 pm to Big12fan
quote:
Now this is revealing. It sounds like marginalizing Texas is the goal and you think that A&M has achieved that.
Well, now it's no real secret that marginalizing A&M has been the goal all along. Dodds/Mack/Sips are just less willing to be covert about it.
quote:
My opinion - A&M would have had OU & KSU at home & beaten both. Most likely gone undefeated & would be playing for MNC.
There is NO WAY Dodds/BigTwat would have allowed A&M to play in the MNC game. The longhorn-centric media would have downplayed A&M's success as "a down year for the Big 12" or JTaylor and the other longhorn zebras would have found a way to frick it up.
The whole "our schedule is full" bullshite from Droopy Dodds is NOTHING MORE than an attempt to marginalize A&M. Who is winning the marginalization game right now?
Posted on 11/28/12 at 1:47 pm to Big12fan
quote:
Now this is revealing. It sounds like marginalizing Texas is the goal and you think that A&M has achieved that.
Not the goal, but absolutely a welcome consequence. Both programs can be successful simultaneously, but it is more likely that A&M can maintain perpetual success with a marginalized tu. A marginalized A&M was good for tu wasnt it? tu won MORE conference championships in the 90s than it did in the 2000s, but the 2000s are viewed as much more successful. If you don't think that had anything to do with A&M's lack of success in the 2000s and domination in the 90s, you're a moron.
quote:
Also, don't you think that beating Texas soundly and winning the Big 12 and playing ND for the MNC would go further to marginalize Texas than to crow about going 10-2, beating Bama, & playing in the Capital One Bowl?
Not with a tu chance to rebuttal. OU went to 3 BCS games from 2000-2004 and won the RRR all 5 years. Then VY comes, and OU's Texas recruiting still has not recovered.
quote:
My opinion - A&M would have had OU & KSU at home & beaten both. Most likely gone undefeated & would be playing for MNC.
Maybe. If Sumlin is a better coach than Stoops and Brown, A&M would have been successful. No doubt. But the SEC move has the potential to create a systematic and fundamental advantage going forward that is institutionalized by the conference and its dominance of quality it possesses over the Big 12 in to perpetuity. It was a 100 year decision. Not one for the new coaching staff.
I know that that is hard for you to deal with. That is why the Big 12 homers want to talk about "top to bottom" nonsense as if it holds any weight. Your conference has two power programs. The SEC has 7 or 8.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News