Started By
Message
1
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:37 pm to BigBro
quote:
If some of that money is funneled into the players via NIL deals, that could make a huge difference.
I agree with your post in general and with this point. NIL will make a difference and you would think teams with big boosters will benefit more, but we'll find out. Nobody really knows how this will play out or what more drastic changes are still coming.
And for the record up to this point the last 30 years or so it was certainly possible that Texas or A&M could have had big time success, and Texas did there for a while. It is this notion that it is some kind of birth right and unavoidable that that I found absurd.
This post was edited on 7/29/21 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:41 pm to Montezuma
quote:
50-7? Were you paid a million dollars and then carried on with the rest of your Mountain West conference schedule?
Naw, man. That was the best, most dominant team that ever played the game in the history of college football, led by a QB making his case for the Heisman, coached by Nick Saban’s role model, played in the most intimidating venue in all of sports against the rival they measure their successes by.
I’m amazed we kept it that close.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:42 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
You’re right. Most recent games are most relevant.
I did basically the last 30 years.
Why don't you do the same for LSU-A&M
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:44 pm to Ag Zwin
Do you Ags get whiplash from how quickly you move the goalpoasts?
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:46 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
I did basically the last 30 years.
Why don't you do the same for LSU-A&M
I fully admit that stretch won’t look as good as it could. Now, if LSU hadn’t bitched out by cancelling the series once the beat down became an annual event,…
This post was edited on 7/29/21 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:47 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
Now, if LSU hadn’t bitched out by cancelling the series once the beat down became an annual event,…
Aggie must've suffered quite tDecline since those days.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:48 pm to SidewalkTiger
And we won 3 natties
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:50 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Aggie must've suffered quite tDecline since those days.
Note to Berkeley Bevos: This is how rivals trash talk about football without being total, insufferable douchebags.
OU guys seem to have these skills, too.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 1:56 pm to South Georgia Dawg
You kind of have to go back until 1975 when scholarship caps were put in place to understand the dynamic well.
Like LSU & others, UTA literally recruited every kid worth a damn, while A&M was a fledging state school after dropping military requirements & allowing women in.
Like LSU & others, UTA literally recruited every kid worth a damn, while A&M was a fledging state school after dropping military requirements & allowing women in.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:00 pm to r2d2
quote:
quote:
2018-2019 Financials from USA Today - LINK
This information is exactly the proof of what I get tired of saying: neither A&M nor Texas are in a position to just ouspend others and buy success. Otherwise results would be different.
They bring in cash, but there are 5 or 6 other SEC programs right there. When your sales are 10-25% more than these many quality competitors you go to the tank if you just start writing checks.
A&M and Texas act like they are a billion companeies competig vs a few small players that barely reach 7 figures. That couldn't be further from the truth.
Add that pound for pound Texas talent isn't as good as advertised and there is your explanation for 1 for 50 and 0 for 80 production.
The point you are missing is A&M and Texas are doing that with mediocre results on the field. Anyone can make money when they win. What do you think happens when that happens for Texas and A&M?
Texas' absolutely exploded in the '00s when they had a run and they got so rich it led to them going for the LHN and imploding. A&M hasn't really had a big run since the '80s and early 90's.
Fundamentally you are still talking about 2 schools with about 1 MILLION LiVING ALUMNI and are cranking out about 25k graduates per year. Those schools also are in a very rich state with nearly 30 million people and football is THE sport. The potential for A&M and Texas is honestly a little scary from a pure financial standpoint if both programs actually started winning in a way like UF/FSU/Miami did years back.
Money does not equal winning, or at least up to now it hasn't. NIL could change that though. Texas and A&M have truly ridiculous amounts of cash and resources they can use with a LOT of very rich alumni, for A&M that is because our alumni are all over the O&G business primarily. For Texas they have O&G money but are more spread out.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:01 pm to UTprideofTX
quote:
Like LSU & others, UTA literally recruited every kid worth a damn, while A&M was a fledging state school after dropping military requirements & allowing women in.
Somebody gets it.
Fact is, A&M, Texas, and even the Dallas Cowboys all fail to live up to the hype of “Football in Texas”. Can’t escape that.
As far as the series between A&M and Texas, though, context does matter.
Or is Vandy really that dominant of a program over Texas?
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:01 pm to UTprideofTX
quote:So A&M little brother status confirmed?
Like LSU & others, UTA literally recruited every kid worth a damn, while A&M was a fledging state school after dropping military requirements & allowing women in.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:02 pm to sugar71
Ah, so that's your angle.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:03 pm to Ag Zwin
I don't mean it as complete disrespect, as I do respect A&M. But that score is rough.
For reference, the MWC's Aggies of Utah State got about 1.4M or so to get bodybagged 42-6 by LSU that same year.
For reference, the MWC's Aggies of Utah State got about 1.4M or so to get bodybagged 42-6 by LSU that same year.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:09 pm to aggressor
quote:
The point you are missing is A&M and Texas are doing that with mediocre results on the field. Anyone can make money when they win. What do you think happens when that happens for Texas and A&M?
There would be an increment in their revenue, but still not anywhere near enough to just bully 6-7 other alpha male pograms that are right there in terms of resources. That's the point Texans don't get. In any industry you need to bring in 10 or 20 times more cash than competitors to be in position to make it impossible for others to compete at the same level.
This post was edited on 7/29/21 at 2:11 pm
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:11 pm to South Georgia Dawg
Was actually surprised to see A&M has a winning record against Texas since 1975, 19-18.
The previous 35 meetings Texas went 31-3-1 from 1940-1974
The previous 35 meetings Texas went 31-3-1 from 1940-1974
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:11 pm to sugar71
quote:In the 60s and 70s? Sure.
So A&M little brother status confirmed?
Now? We are older, bigger, and have had more success on the field over the last 10 years.
Both schools have a shite ton of money. Not many will dispute that the Longhorn brand gets more attention and merchandising.
This post was edited on 7/29/21 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:17 pm to sp22
quote:
The previous 35 meetings Texas went 31-3-1 from 1940-1974
Give credit where it’s due: Royal had them rolling in the 60’s.
That stretch, though, is when the whole game changed in a big way. The Army’s and such would never again be able to compete, yet A&M was basically a slightly larger Citadel.
The fact that we won ANY of those games should be a little surprising.
Posted on 7/29/21 at 2:53 pm to sp22
quote:
Was actually surprised to see A&M has a winning record against Texas since 1975, 19-18.
The previous 35 meetings Texas went 31-3-1 from 1940-1974
Yeah, honestly most adults discussing the rivalry these days have seen A&M and texas play almost exactly .500 against each other.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News