Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:48 pm to SunHog
No. I understand numbers perfectly well. Do you understand drawing reasonable conclusions?
In the last 30 years of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 10-20 against Arkansas.
A&M being 7-9 at Kyle Field.
In the last 20 years of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 8-12 against Arkansas.
A&M being 6-4 at Kyle Field.
In the last decade of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 5-5 against Arkansas.
A&M being 4-1 at Kyle Field.
If you don't see the drastic approach to parity, you're blind. You see. In see, in statistics, we use numbers to draw conclusions.
If A&M was able to drastically change its record against Arkansas, in fact in it's last decade in the same conference, it maintained and .800 record against them at home, when in the previous ten year stretches it held a .400 record and a .200 record at home... we might want to say that student enrollment might have had an effect on record and performance if there was a correlation with an increase in enrollment. In fact, there was.
Seriously, you are retarded.
In the last 30 years of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 10-20 against Arkansas.
A&M being 7-9 at Kyle Field.
In the last 20 years of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 8-12 against Arkansas.
A&M being 6-4 at Kyle Field.
In the last decade of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 5-5 against Arkansas.
A&M being 4-1 at Kyle Field.
If you don't see the drastic approach to parity, you're blind. You see. In see, in statistics, we use numbers to draw conclusions.
If A&M was able to drastically change its record against Arkansas, in fact in it's last decade in the same conference, it maintained and .800 record against them at home, when in the previous ten year stretches it held a .400 record and a .200 record at home... we might want to say that student enrollment might have had an effect on record and performance if there was a correlation with an increase in enrollment. In fact, there was.
Seriously, you are retarded.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:50 pm to wmr
quote:
"running out of time"
Well played.
I miss all those old Aggie jokes as a kid. We will certainly have new ones with an entire conference learning them soon enough.
We don't even need to explain. The SEC will see for themselves what the term Aggie truly means as they do it to themselves over and over again.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:50 pm to SunHog
quote:
Explain this to me.. How does Arkansas with less of a fan base (Student Body Wise), smaller stadium, further removed from fertile recruiting ground who played Texas A&M since 1910 have such a dominate Record against them? You still realize in 1974 Arkansas barely had 14,000 students. Texas A&M is the most underachieving program of all time. Explain how Arkansas dominates you?
So what is your argument... do you want me to agree with you that A&M is a better school, has a larger student body, better access to talent, is a horrendously underachieving program historically, and the fact that is has lost consistently to Arkansas despite all these fundamental advantages over Arkansas is inexplicable?
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:53 pm to SunHog
Cynthia Ann Parker could not be argued with and truly considered herself to be a Comanche by that point. She just couldn't give up the Comanche lifestyle. It was too deeply ingrained in her.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:53 pm to OldSulRoss
quote:
and the fact that is has lost consistently to Arkansas despite all these fundamental advantages over Arkansas is inexplicable?
.500 against them in the last decade of the SWC with Arkansas in it is not losing consistently.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:56 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
In the last 30 years of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 10-20 against Arkansas.
A&M being 7-9 at Kyle Field.
1961 - 1991 (Arkansas 21-10)
quote:
In the last 20 years of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 8-12 against Arkansas.
A&M being 6-4 at Kyle Field.
1971-1991 (Arkansas 12-9)
quote:
In the last decade of the SWC(with Arkansas in it):
A&M was 5-5 against Arkansas.
A&M being 4-1 at Kyle Field.
1981-1991 (Arkansas 6-5)
Present.
2009-2011 (Arkansas 3-0)
History continues.
Thank you for helping prove to the Rant how shitty TAMU is against Arkansas. Need a link to check facts here. LINK
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:57 pm to SunHog
One does not simply win an argument with SunHog...
Posted on 2/17/12 at 2:59 pm to OldSulRoss
quote:
So what is your argument... do you want me to agree with you that A&M is a better school, has a larger student body, better access to talent, is a horrendously underachieving program historically, and the fact that is has lost consistently to Arkansas despite all these fundamental advantages over Arkansas is inexplicable?
What do you think? Since no one answers direct questions around here I'll just join the party.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:11 pm to SunHog
I agree that A&M is a better school.
I agree that A&M has a larger student body.
I agree that A&M is better situated for recruiting (and has recruited better).
I agree that A&M is a wretched underachiever.
I agree that A&M should have been beating Arkansas regularly over the past 30 years, and I can't explain why we haven't been.
But calling A&M an underachiever and not being able to explain why A&M hasn't fared better against Arkansas is predicated on the assumption that A&M is capable of being better. Tried to figure it out with Fran and that was a wet fart. Tried to right the ship with Sherman, and that was a wet fart too. So instead of doing the same thing and expecting different results, we traded the Big 12 for the best conference in America, and then we traded a never-ending succession of old, gray-haired coaches for a collection of young guys with energy.
Will it fix A&M so that we're no longer the "most underachieving team in history" despite being like No. 26 all time in wins? I hope so. But I bet you guys don't.
I agree that A&M has a larger student body.
I agree that A&M is better situated for recruiting (and has recruited better).
I agree that A&M is a wretched underachiever.
I agree that A&M should have been beating Arkansas regularly over the past 30 years, and I can't explain why we haven't been.
But calling A&M an underachiever and not being able to explain why A&M hasn't fared better against Arkansas is predicated on the assumption that A&M is capable of being better. Tried to figure it out with Fran and that was a wet fart. Tried to right the ship with Sherman, and that was a wet fart too. So instead of doing the same thing and expecting different results, we traded the Big 12 for the best conference in America, and then we traded a never-ending succession of old, gray-haired coaches for a collection of young guys with energy.
Will it fix A&M so that we're no longer the "most underachieving team in history" despite being like No. 26 all time in wins? I hope so. But I bet you guys don't.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:17 pm to OldSulRoss
quote:
I agree that A&M is a better school.
I agree that A&M has a larger student body.
I agree that A&M is better situated for recruiting (and has recruited better).
I agree that A&M is a wretched underachiever.
I agree that A&M should have been beating Arkansas regularly over the past 30 years, and I can't explain why we haven't been.
Well done you get a cookie. ha.
quote:
But calling A&M an underachiever and not being able to explain why A&M hasn't fared better against Arkansas is predicated on the assumption that A&M is capable of being better. Tried to figure it out with Fran and that was a wet fart. Tried to right the ship with Sherman, and that was a wet fart too. So instead of doing the same thing and expecting different results, we traded the Big 12 for the best conference in America, and then we traded a never-ending succession of old, gray-haired coaches for a collection of young guys with energy.
Here is the difference Texas A&M no longer or hasn't for a while (a money advantage over Arkansas $EC) You no longer have a stadium advantage or history advantage. You will still rank behind Arkansas in money and merchandise even with the SEC money because we get richer also. We aren't talking endowment here so don't bring it in.
Arkansas is expanding our stadium and y'all must renovate to even catch up to the SEC standard. The game has changed and you will never dominate Arkansas (You never even did)nor will LSU or Auburn. We just can't seem to win against Alabama at the moment.
What I'm saying is all these positives you are talking about for Texas A&M the same is going for Arkansas while we continue to improve on a dominate record against TAMU.
You can actually access Fayetteville by multiple 4 lane highways and a good mid-sized airport. We have 24,000 students and it's increasing. Your fellow Aggie wants to talk about TAMU growing in the past 35 years. It's nothing compared to the growth percentage of Arkansas in the past 10 years alone.
Welcome to the big boy league and I'm glad to have TAMU back in the league because Arkansas' name will thrown all over Texas once again.
This post was edited on 2/17/12 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:18 pm to SunHog
Again, how was .500 against Arkansas in the last 10 years of the SWC, shitty? That seems about even, then we would most likely have to use other barometers to determine who was better?
82-91:
Conference Championships?
A&M: 4 SWC Football Championships
Arkansas: 2 SWC Football Championships
Advantage A&M.
Overall Conference record?
A&M: 55-21-2
Arkansas: 51-27-1
Advantage A&M.
Overall Win Percentage?
A&M: .6695
Arkansas: .6639
Advantage A&M.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
82-91:
Conference Championships?
A&M: 4 SWC Football Championships
Arkansas: 2 SWC Football Championships
Advantage A&M.
Overall Conference record?
A&M: 55-21-2
Arkansas: 51-27-1
Advantage A&M.
Overall Win Percentage?
A&M: .6695
Arkansas: .6639
Advantage A&M.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:21 pm to SunHog
quote:
Your fellow Aggie wants to talk about TAMU growing in the past 35 years. It's nothing compared to the growth percentage of Arkansas in the past 10 years alone.
Wrong.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:23 pm to TeLeFaWx
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:24 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Again, how was .500 against Arkansas in the last 10 years of the SWC, shitty? That seems about even, then we would most likely have to use other barometers to determine who was better?
82-91:
Conference Championships?
A&M: 4 SWC Football Championships
Arkansas: 2 SWC Football Championships
Advantage A&M.
Overall Conference record?
A&M: 55-21-2
Arkansas: 51-27-1
Advantage A&M.
Overall Win Percentage?
A&M: .6695
Arkansas: .6639
Advantage A&M.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
It's pretty easy to tell you bet on the come while preaching trends.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:28 pm to SunHog
No. Because in craps the game never changes. With A&M obviously a lot has changed. Which, I'm not even sure if you have acknowledged at this point.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:33 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
No. Because in craps the game never changes. With A&M obviously a lot has changed. Which, I'm not even sure if you have acknowledged at this point.
You have no idea what I said do you? What does a come bet represent? What is a trend? What am I talking about?
You don't have a clue do you?
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:34 pm to TeLeFaWx
A&M is 0-3 vs Arkansas this century
A&M is 24-41-3 all time.
The late 80s & early 90s were your best years ever and you broke even against us.
That's great.
I don't really care about the Aggies too much, so I won't be all the surprised when we go 4-0 vs you this fall.
I'm sure TeFeLoTaDiDo will find some way to rationalize that, too. Its ok with me.
The ownage will continue, no matter what.
A&M is 24-41-3 all time.
The late 80s & early 90s were your best years ever and you broke even against us.
That's great.
I don't really care about the Aggies too much, so I won't be all the surprised when we go 4-0 vs you this fall.
I'm sure TeFeLoTaDiDo will find some way to rationalize that, too. Its ok with me.
The ownage will continue, no matter what.
Posted on 2/17/12 at 3:38 pm to wmr
quote:
The late 80s & early 90s were your best years ever and you broke even against us.
That's great.
Broke even but were clearly the better overall program in every imaginable way.
quote:
The ownage will continue, no matter what.
No it won't!
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News