Started By
Message
re: Sorry if Teutons: Texas state rep to file bill reviving A&M/TU rivalry
Posted on 1/29/13 at 11:57 am to TeLeFaWx
Posted on 1/29/13 at 11:57 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
the rivalry isn't dead. The game is just on hiatus. The rivalry has been more intense this year than it has in a whole hell of a long time.
This. The rivalry will never stop as long as both flagship institutions are active, no matter how much parties on sides wish it were so.
0
Posted on 1/29/13 at 11:59 am to texashorn
hey sip, get you facts straight. It was John Sharp who ran for governor. He lost every time.
His problem was he was an old time conservative democrat who didn't switch parties when the Reagan revolution hit.
If he would have switched, he would have won.
Bad political mistake on his part.
Fact remains, people still remember the train wreck of Ann Richards (who used her power to keep Baylor in the Big 12) who kept A&M from heading to the SEC and texas from heading the the Pac-10 sixteen years ago.
Politicians like Guillen, Richards, et al should stick to being politicians.
Reminder: what makes Texas politics better is that we only allow them to meet every two years instead of annually.
If they don't meet...they can't raise taxes.
His problem was he was an old time conservative democrat who didn't switch parties when the Reagan revolution hit.
If he would have switched, he would have won.
Bad political mistake on his part.
Fact remains, people still remember the train wreck of Ann Richards (who used her power to keep Baylor in the Big 12) who kept A&M from heading to the SEC and texas from heading the the Pac-10 sixteen years ago.
Politicians like Guillen, Richards, et al should stick to being politicians.
Reminder: what makes Texas politics better is that we only allow them to meet every two years instead of annually.
If they don't meet...they can't raise taxes.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 12:00 pm to lsutothetop
The fact that the guy who initiated the bill is an Ag is embarassing. The whole thing is a twisted media ploy. Can't believe our legislature doesnt have better things to wrk on. 
Posted on 1/29/13 at 12:20 pm to agswin
quote:
hey sip, get you facts straight. It was John Sharp who ran for governor. He lost every time.
You would have been better served had you read my response to him before you posted this...as your post is incorrect as well.
Sharp ran for Lieutenant Governor in 1998 against Perry after Bob Bullock retired, then died. George W. Bush was the incumbent Governor during that election.
In 2002, when Perry was running for election (as he became Governor when Bush became President), Sharp ran again for Lieutenant Governor and was defeated by Dewhurst.
John Sharp never ran for Governor, nor did he run for Senator. (He intended to challenge for Hutchison's Senate seat, but backed off after becoming A&M Chancellor)
Posted on 1/29/13 at 12:20 pm to VonDaMan
quote:
The fact that the guy who initiated the bill is an Ag is embarassing.
Not surprising though.
The most disappointing thing about the SEC move is how it had to be sold.
For many of us, the brand benefits of the SEC were obvious enough in 2010 to leave. For other Ags, the move wasn't ok until it was about sticking it to Texas for the LHN. This second narrative was needed to create buy-in in the base and old army.
For those of us who didn't need the anti-tu narrative, them not playing us was a calculated gamble. We didn't need the extra hard game on the schedule early on in the SEC and we wanted a new identity without them.
For this latter faction, the rivalry ending was all Texas's fault and an unforeseen side effect to the move. To this group the world is right again once the game continues, and using any force -even otherwise evil government power- to get it back on the schedule is ok.
In a lot of ways its a generational divide in Aggieland, and this Representative either believes the BS or he sees a way to use the narrative to help his political ambitions.
Either way it sucks, but its not surprising.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 12:21 pm to cardboardboxer
He's basically the State Legislature equivalent of Chet Edwards.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 12:31 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
We didn't let him go year 4 like we should have due to finances and because he beat Texas that year.
beating Texas had nothing to do with keeping him.
It was a combination of the ridiculous deal he had and the BMAs who got him hired refusing to acknowledge they screwed up. I know exactly who was responsible for spearheading his hire and they still to this day are loath to admit it was a bad hire.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 12:36 pm to Dr RC
Good info. I knew about the extension but I could never understand why he got a year 5.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 12:44 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
One side became apathetic about it to the point they didn't care much when it was gone.
Now, one side, *cough tu cough*, really does not want to play aTm. All the UT fans I know say they are glad they don't have to play JFF. Shocking???I think not.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 1:07 pm to Bubbles Up
quote:
The Balinese Club
What is wrong with your responses to most Ags on here is not that you want to continue you the game but that you feel that legislation should be involved in forcing it.
We have made it clear we will play them any time any where. They will always have a place on our schedule. Forcing them to play us via legislation is not only a poor use of the legislatures time and an over stepping of their power it achieves nothing for the school.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 1:09 pm to 10888bge
What was really adorable was the sips that were wanting OU to beat us in the CB after they told us for years that OU was their main rival.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 1:32 pm to BigAggie06
quote:
Forcing them to play us via legislation is not only a poor use of the legislatures time and an over stepping of their power it achieves nothing for the school.
Especially for a school that prides itself on its conservative image, the idea of government intervention is almost hypocritical.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 1:52 pm to ChrisTAMU
quote:
What was really adorable was the sips that were wanting OU to beat us in the CB after they told us for years that OU was their main rival.
I got so much joy out of this. So much.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 1:53 pm to Dr RC
quote:
I know exactly who was responsible for spearheading his hire and they still to this day are loath to admit it was a bad hire.
Lowery Mays, right?
Posted on 1/29/13 at 2:02 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
quote:
To me we exorcised the "obsessed with Texas" demon fully when we fired Fran on the night he had just beaten Texas for the 2nd year in a row. If a coach can't save their job by beating your rival 2 years straight that rival no longer defines you.
To be fair, Franchione was fired as soon as the secret VIP newsletter was made public and had already "resigned" before the Texas game.
You are actually making my point for me. If we were truly "obsessed with Texas" there is no way we fire Fran regardless of anything he was doing. A lot of folks thought we would beat Texas that last time so it wasn't a complete shock. The VIP newsletter was always just an excuse to get rid of him with a lower buyout anyway. Fran got fired for a lot of reasons but he did beat Texas, that is the point. He even had a winning season and went to bowl games his last 2 years but that wasn't good enough. No way could you fire him after '06 when he won 9 games and went to the Holiday Bowl along with the road win over a Top 10 Texas team.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 2:07 pm to ChrisTAMU
quote:
What was really adorable was the sips that were wanting OU to beat us in the CB after they told us for years that OU was their main rival.
the best were the sip friends on my FB that were talking crazy trash before the game suddenly flipping and claiming they wanted us to win all along.
Its like, dude, I see check your feed. All those posts you made ripping on us and the SEC are still there.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 2:40 pm to BigAggie06
quote:
What is wrong with your responses to most Ags on here is not that you want to continue you the game but that you feel that legislation should be involved in forcing it.
No! Please quote me where I said I am in favor of the legislation forcing it! My responses were to those that simply think we shouldn't even play tu anymore. I also used examples that the legislation isn't that far fetched, considering that many of our peer SEC schools have legislation forcing them to play their in state, OOC rivals.
I do get seriously pissed off when someone tells me "I'm what's wrong with A&M" because I think the game with tu should be played when it can come back.
In reality, the bill won't even make it to committee, much less get voted on.
That doesn't change the fact that the game should be played, and those saying it shouldn't are insane.
This post was edited on 1/29/13 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 1/29/13 at 3:05 pm to Bubbles Up
quote:
That doesn't change the fact that the game should be played, and those saying it shouldn't are insane.
dey be cray cray bruh
Posted on 1/29/13 at 3:08 pm to Bubbles Up
quote:
No! Please quote me where I said I am in favor of the legislation forcing it!
Second page you stated:
quote:
I can't believe all the pussy Ags that don't want to play the sips anymore. We LIVE for beating the shite out of tu. It would be even that much better now. I'd LOVE for them to "have" to play us! This game would be a huge advantage for us, just as it is for USC, UGA, and UF.
That sure sounds like you are in favor of the legislation.
Posted on 1/29/13 at 3:28 pm to BigAggie06
Again, you are taking my meaning out of context. I would find it hilarious, comical, and highly entertaining if they HAD to play us. Why? Because it would be a slap at Dodds!
Do I "believe" that this legislation should be pursued, advocated, and endorsed? Absolutely not! It isn't the role of government.
But make no mistake, I want the game back.
But don't take me saying how "I'd love for them to 'have' to play us", as a shot at Dodds, to mean that we should spend serious effort pushing this bill.
I really couldn't give a rats arse about the bill, and I think people are taking it way too seriously when it has a snowball's chance in hell of seeing daylight.
Do I "believe" that this legislation should be pursued, advocated, and endorsed? Absolutely not! It isn't the role of government.
But make no mistake, I want the game back.
But don't take me saying how "I'd love for them to 'have' to play us", as a shot at Dodds, to mean that we should spend serious effort pushing this bill.
I really couldn't give a rats arse about the bill, and I think people are taking it way too seriously when it has a snowball's chance in hell of seeing daylight.
This post was edited on 1/29/13 at 3:34 pm
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News