re: A question for all Ags...

quote:

---

Amen. I agree with this wholeheartedly.

It's not hardly just "one Aggie" who understands that, either. I'd say it's pretty much an entire generation of Aggies, or rather, a couple of generations. I'd say, about everyone who has graduated since, roughly, 1990 feels that we're an impedement to our own success in many ways.

Our problem with changing (and we've been inching toward fixing some of these image problems for years but we're rapidly accelerating the change right now with the SEC move and the hiring of Kevin Sumlin who isn't a hick, old, or interpersonally challeneged ) is our cadre of Old Ags. It's hard to explain to an outsider, but we have a unique situation where a lot of our funding and a high degree of influence has come from a group of men who were students back before the Modern Era of A&M, who went to A&M when it was Corps-centered and see A&M as a monolitic instituation that should reflect that experience and those values and never change in the slightest way. We're talking reactionary conservative, and I don't mean politically necessarily, but more accurately, culturally reactionary. These guys have been complaining that Sumlin plays rap during practice. I mean, think about that. That's what we're dealing with.

Now, many of these fellows have served with distinction in the military and have been very, very successful businessmen and pillars of their communities. I'm trying to avoid slagging them too hard, they're good guys, but they are what they are as far as outlloks and beliefs, and their "kind" has controlled A&M for a long time, but that influence is dwindeling as they die. I'm not cheering that, I don't want to be weird or morbid, but it's a fact of life - those generations are passing away from this earth. In their wake, the younger men and women with a much more modern perspective will gain a much larger voice and the university and AD will have to worry about appeasing the Old Ags much less. This will allow us to take steps we haven't been able to in order to revamp our image while still honoring and paying tribute to our past and our traditions.

As far as a dance team, it needs to happen. We should keep our yell leaders: what outsiders don't realize is they have utility, they serve an important purpose - they lead the yells we are famous for. But we need attratcive female eye-candy for the cameras. It doesn't matter what they dance to, or if they dance. They just need to be there. Yes, it's objectivication: that's what all other teams do with cheerleaders and Golden Girls, or what have you, let's be real.

Also, it should be clear to everyone Corps Block needs to be broken up. The Corps didn't want it when it started and it isn't even a tradition. It's relatively new and it's bad PR because all the cameras do (naturally) is focus on that section, giving the public, and most importantly, recruits the impression that A&M is an all military school. I think the Corps would be in favor of this, the AD would be in favor of this, teh marketing guys would be in favor of this, and Sumlin would be in favor of this. The only reason I can figure they haven't done it yet is that all of those folks are newer than the Corps Block "tradition" and don't know it's only been around for 16 some-odd years.

As far as Corps guys, yes, some are absurdly dorky, but I personally knew some pretty awesome guys who happened to be CTs, so all I'll say about them is that they're like any large group or cross-section of society - some are cool, some are jerks, some are dorks... BUT what the commander on down needs to realize is they are VERY PUBLIC representatives of the university - the spotlight is on them and they need to be aware of that, however fair or unfair that is and be very careful to not embarrass us. They need to pass a sure, solid, absolute directive against activites like "the squeeze" and anything else of that nature.

---