Started By
Message
re: TU is all hat and no cattle
Posted on 9/2/21 at 2:54 pm to TomRollTideRitter
Posted on 9/2/21 at 2:54 pm to TomRollTideRitter
This is a masterpiece.
0
Posted on 9/2/21 at 2:54 pm to BigBro
Well you averaged
4 losses per season in the 70’s
5 losses per season in the 80’s
5 losses per season in the 90’s
And 5 losses per season in the 2010’s
The 2000’s is the only decade you’ve done better in the last 4 decades
You tell me, if a successful 10 year average for you is 4 losses, then fine by longhorn standards you’ve had 2 successful decades out of the last 4
I counted 169 losses for texas university in the 70’s 80’s 90’s 2010’s
4 losses per season in the 70’s
5 losses per season in the 80’s
5 losses per season in the 90’s
And 5 losses per season in the 2010’s
The 2000’s is the only decade you’ve done better in the last 4 decades
You tell me, if a successful 10 year average for you is 4 losses, then fine by longhorn standards you’ve had 2 successful decades out of the last 4
I counted 169 losses for texas university in the 70’s 80’s 90’s 2010’s
This post was edited on 9/2/21 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 9/2/21 at 2:56 pm to charminultra
BigBro
He was already on it to begin with
and chuckling over every bite his alters produce.
quote:
Get off the SEC rant
He was already on it to begin with
and chuckling over every bite his alters produce.
This post was edited on 9/2/21 at 2:58 pm
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:07 pm to TomRollTideRitter
This is not very welcoming Tom for our new conference mates. They've assured us they will most certainly be back by the time they join the league.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:24 pm to TomRollTideRitter
Pushy boosters and a faculty that idolizes Cal-Berkeley has helped turn what should be the best coaching job in the nation into a tough job.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:27 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
4 losses per season in the 70’s
We won a NC and played for another in the 70s
We won 6 Conference Championships in the 70s
I would consider that successful..
quote:
5 losses per season in the 80’s
We played for a NC in the 80s..
We won 1 CC in the 80s..
I would consider that NOT successful..
quote:
5 losses per season in the 90’s
We won 4 CC during the 90s..
I would consider that decent, but NOT successful
quote:
The 2000’s is the only decade you’ve done better in the last 4 decades
We won a NC and played for another..
We won 2 CC..
I would consider that successful
quote:
And 5 losses per season in the 2010’s
I would consider this past decade NOT successful.
So I would consider 2 of the last 5 decades successful, and another one of those 5 that was decent.
Would you say A&M has had any successful decades in the past 50 years?
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:34 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
TU is all hat and no cattle
You know you're the big dick in the room when fans of a team with 6 national titles since 2009 are getting scared.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:44 pm to BigBro
No
And you stretched the truth tremendously in your “summary”
In the playoff and bcs periods half of your “successful moments”. Would not have occurred.
But you danced around whether you consider 4 losses per season or 5 losses per season a successful 10 year period
And you stretched the truth tremendously in your “summary”
In the playoff and bcs periods half of your “successful moments”. Would not have occurred.
But you danced around whether you consider 4 losses per season or 5 losses per season a successful 10 year period
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:50 pm to Old Sarge
Tell me all about A&Ms successful moments during the BCS and playoffs?
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:55 pm to TomRollTideRitter
"All real, no fakes"
"All hat, no cattle"
"All gas, no brakes"
"All hat, no cattle"
"All gas, no brakes"
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:56 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
And you stretched the truth tremendously in your “summary”
Where exactly did I stretch the truth in my summary? It was factual. 2 decades were successful.. 1 was decent.. and 2 were not successful.
quote:
But you danced around whether you consider 4 losses per season or 5 losses per season a successful 10 year period
I didn’t dance around it at all. I don’t care about average losses per decade at all. If we win a NC in a decade, it is successful. Outside of that, it takes several CC to be decent.. otherwise it is not successful.
I realize why you define success that way, but average number of losses is meaningless to me.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 3:59 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
In the playoff and bcs periods half of your “successful moments”. Would not have occurred.
This makes no sense to me..
Are you saying that #1 Texas wouldn’t have made the playoffs or BCS in 1970 or 1977?
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:07 pm to BigBro
Being shite talked by Aggy about football success is comical. More comical than the past decade of Texas football.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:07 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
You tell me, if a successful 10 year average for you is 4 losses, then fine by longhorn standards you’ve had 2 successful decades out of the last 4
Look, I'm all for piling on Tejas, but you've arbitrarily selected decades as your measuring stick. If you want to measure successful "ten year averages," as your post states, then it's clear Tejas has had some incredibly successful. They just haven't put it together for years 19X0 - 19X9 or 20X0 - 20X9.
1961-1970 - 89-17-2 (1.7 losses per season)
1967-1976 - 85-24-2 (2.4 losses per season)
1968-1977 - 90-20-2 (2.0 losses per season)
1977-1986 - 86-31-2 (3.1 losses per season)
2000-2009 - 110-19 (1.9 losses per season)
This post was edited on 9/2/21 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:10 pm to BigBro
If there was a four-team playoff, Texas would have possibly made it in 1961, 1963, 1965, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1972, 1977, 1983, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2008, and 2009.
This post was edited on 9/2/21 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:15 pm to BigBro
The 1970 team that you claim a NC with but lost the Cotton Bowl by 2 TD's?
While A&M's NC's are old at least they were all undefeated seasons, 1919 was undefeated, untied, and unscored upon.
To answer your question, A&M was decent in the '80s and '90s. 7 Conference Titles plus another undefeated season and a B12 South Title. The last 50 years A&M has generally been a very good program on the edge of great several times but hasn't climbed the mountain. We have never had the combination of coaching, talent, and resources we have now though so the next decade should be fun.
In the meantime what is your bet on Sark with an over/under of 3 years? Or do you seriously think he is going to be the one to lead you back to the NC in spite of never winning more than 9 games in 7 seasons of coaching at quality programs in the weak PAC?
While A&M's NC's are old at least they were all undefeated seasons, 1919 was undefeated, untied, and unscored upon.
To answer your question, A&M was decent in the '80s and '90s. 7 Conference Titles plus another undefeated season and a B12 South Title. The last 50 years A&M has generally been a very good program on the edge of great several times but hasn't climbed the mountain. We have never had the combination of coaching, talent, and resources we have now though so the next decade should be fun.
In the meantime what is your bet on Sark with an over/under of 3 years? Or do you seriously think he is going to be the one to lead you back to the NC in spite of never winning more than 9 games in 7 seasons of coaching at quality programs in the weak PAC?
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:17 pm to TomRollTideRitter
Great post!
TEXASS stay in the 12.
TEXASS stay in the 12.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:36 pm to aggressor
quote:
In the meantime what is your bet on Sark with an over/under of 3 years? Or do you seriously think he is going to be the one to lead you back to the NC in spite of never winning more than 9 games in 7 seasons of coaching at quality programs in the weak PAC?
Over. I like Sark, but I especially like the staff that he hired. He runs a good offense, and especially if he can get some dudes to play for him. TBD if he has any dudes this year.
PK is a great defensive coordinator. I think Texas is a lot better than anyone knows.. and that is understandable after the past decade.
I think Texas plays for the Big 12 title this year. Oklahoma will be really good, so I’m not sure if we will win the title, but I think it we will play in the game.
In summary.. I really like the staff that Sark hired. TBD if they are any good at Texas, but I like our chances.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:43 pm to STATEofMIND
quote:It's definitely going to be fun, just not for the reasons you think. I give it maybe two seasons before you dipshits are throwing the Horns down to the sideline camera at games where the Horns aren't even playing, completely oblivious to the message you're sending.
Nice Horns down. This is going to be fun having Texas in the conference.
Posted on 9/2/21 at 4:45 pm to aggressor
quote:Ah, the FedEx years. Good times for aggy indeed. And it only cost you a bowl ban and a TV ban. Not a bad return on your investment in the grand scheme of things.
To answer your question, A&M was decent in the '80s and '90s.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News