Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/9/16 at 11:37 am to cardboardboxer
Let's examine the two 6-0s.
2016 in their 6-0 run beat #16, #17, and #9.
1994 in their 6-0 run beat #15 and #17.
If we beat Alabama, it would be the first 7-0 start since 1994.
If we run the table, it would be our first 12-0 start since 1992.
A&M has never won 13 or more games.
2016 in their 6-0 run beat #16, #17, and #9.
1994 in their 6-0 run beat #15 and #17.
If we beat Alabama, it would be the first 7-0 start since 1994.
If we run the table, it would be our first 12-0 start since 1992.
A&M has never won 13 or more games.
Posted on 10/9/16 at 12:43 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
Is 1992 that year that doesn't count because of cheating but would have been a modern national championship if it did? I honestly forget.
Posted on 10/10/16 at 7:16 am to Old Sarge
It's Monday morning and I still feel 
Posted on 10/10/16 at 8:22 am to cardboardboxer
We lost to ND in the Cotton Bowl in 92, we were also only ranked #4( and finished #7 in AP) at the time because Alabama and Miami were undefeated and FSU was ranked #3 even though they had lost to Miami. If we had beat ND we could have said we shared the title with Alabama at least.
Posted on 10/10/16 at 8:29 am to Raid05
I just wish I could talk shite at work. Only thing discussed is how trash the ducks are and how the beavers won their first PAC 12 game in 2 years
Posted on 10/10/16 at 8:34 am to agalloch
Radio station I stream at work is 750am The Game out of PDX and that's all they wanna discuss, too 
Helps that half my office is Ags, though. Errbody's happy
Helps that half my office is Ags, though. Errbody's happy
Posted on 10/10/16 at 9:45 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:you're thinking of 94. In 92 we were 12-0 in the regular season and ranked like #3 and then got murdered in the cotton bowl by a Bettis/Waters led ND
Is 1992 that year that doesn't count because of cheating but would have been a modern national championship if it did? I honestly forget.
In 94 we only had the one tie but we weren't nearly as good as 91-93. We played 1 ranked team all year and it was OU in the 2nd game of the year but they finished 6-6. Had we been allowed to go to the CB that year we'd have been destroyed most likely.
91 was the best team of that era. None were ever really in the discussion for MNC but given we kept losing the CB that seems obvious
Posted on 10/11/16 at 2:23 pm to Old Sarge
re-watched the game on sunday and I had goosebumps at Verne's comment at the end of the Game.
" the aggies..are 6-0..for the first time since 1994"
that happened to be the peak of our hayday.
" the aggies..are 6-0..for the first time since 1994"
that happened to be the peak of our hayday.
Posted on 10/11/16 at 2:39 pm to CavalryAg07
I honestly can't believe that stat though. We've been trash for fricking decades while having an awfully high opinion of ourselves.
Posted on 10/11/16 at 3:59 pm to tmc94
quote:
In 94 we only had the one tie but we weren't nearly as good as 91-93. We played 1 ranked team all year and it was OU in the 2nd game of the year but they finished 6-6. Had we been allowed to go to the CB that year we'd have been destroyed most likely.
I dunno about that.
CB opponent that year was a 7-3-1 #21 USC who blasted a 6-5 Texas Tech team. Tech only got in b/c there was a 5 way tie in the SWC standings at 4-3. Tech hadn't been to the Cotton since 1939 so they got the nod over #25 8-4 Texas (last CB 1991), 7-5 Baylor (1981), 7-5 TCU (1959), and 5-6 Rice (1954).
Sure USC beat the pants off Tech while A&M beat them by 6 and the Ags did tie SMU in a pitiful mistake filled game but A&M also beat Baylor worse than USC and the Trojans lost to a very mediocre UCLA.
This post was edited on 10/11/16 at 4:02 pm
Posted on 10/13/16 at 7:14 pm to Dr RC
I agree but disagree
We likely wouldn't have played USC. The Cotton Bowl opponent was heavily influenced by who the SWC rep was. For the 6 years prior to that game, the SWC champ came in with a top 10 ranking. In each of those years, the CB matched them with another top 10 ranked team. The 7th year prior (88), A&M was #13 and got matched with #12 ND.
I think #21 USC was merely a product of a crappy 6-5 Tech.
We likely wouldn't have played USC. The Cotton Bowl opponent was heavily influenced by who the SWC rep was. For the 6 years prior to that game, the SWC champ came in with a top 10 ranking. In each of those years, the CB matched them with another top 10 ranked team. The 7th year prior (88), A&M was #13 and got matched with #12 ND.
I think #21 USC was merely a product of a crappy 6-5 Tech.
Posted on 10/13/16 at 9:07 pm to tmc94
Thanks tmc, I always wondered what the best 90's team was and if any were in the national title hunt. I came in in 2003 so I have just seen a lot of bad football.
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:25 pm to tmc94
quote:I was at that game. Colder that a witch's tatas.
The 7th year prior (88), A&M was #13 and got matched with #12 ND.
"Tim Brown" my arse.
Page 2 of 2
Latest Texas A&M News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News