Started By
Message
re: Do you see A&M and Texas..
Posted on 12/20/11 at 10:54 pm to PrideOfTheSouthland
Posted on 12/20/11 at 10:54 pm to PrideOfTheSouthland
Texas A&M isn't entering the SEC in the best of shape. Arkansas and South Carolina can attest to what that is like. Regardless, Texas owns the Aggies like no other. The series history is in favor of the 'Horns 76-37-5. Under Mack Brown, Texas is 10-4 versus Texas A&M. With the Aggies uncertainty entering the SEC, coupled with Texas' domination of them, as well as their stronghold on the state, things aren't going to change right away for Texas A&M. Regardless of conference affiliation, it's a long road ahead for them to cut into the Longhorns' position in the state of Texas.
4
Posted on 12/20/11 at 10:59 pm to Hubbhogg
Agree. Look at Notre Dame now. They are arguably the most recognizable college football team. They fell. Michigan fell. Tennessee fell. Alabama has fallen at times. USC has, and is about to again.
It can happen. The dynamics of college football change constantly. And aTm to the SEC is a huge change.
Remember when LSU couldn't keep their talent in state? They sucked. They lock the state down, now look at them.
It can happen. The dynamics of college football change constantly. And aTm to the SEC is a huge change.
Remember when LSU couldn't keep their talent in state? They sucked. They lock the state down, now look at them.
This post was edited on 12/20/11 at 11:05 pm
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:04 pm to CapstoneGrad06
That history is all well and good, but with all due respect doesn't mean shite going forward.
aTm can sell these Texas recruits on playing in the premier conference of college football and stay in your home state.
I'm not saying it's etched in stone. I'm saying there is a opportunity there and if the new coach and recruit those top instate kids to go with him, there could be a major momentum shift.
aTm can sell these Texas recruits on playing in the premier conference of college football and stay in your home state.
I'm not saying it's etched in stone. I'm saying there is a opportunity there and if the new coach and recruit those top instate kids to go with him, there could be a major momentum shift.
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:11 pm to PrideOfTheSouthland
The only way I see things changing in College Station, is if the Aggie administration finds the next Nick Saban at some point in the future. Texas A&M is like LSU before 2000, in some ways. Lots of potential that has been severely neglected, outside of a few brief periods throughout the program's history.
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:18 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
The only way I see things changing in College Station, is if the Aggie administration finds the next Nick Saban at some point in the future. Texas A&M is like LSU before 2000, in some ways. Lots of potential that has been severely neglected, outside of a few brief periods throughout the program's history.
So we agree they have a lot of potential and a huge opportunity to seize it. Don't know if it'll happen or not, but it'll be fun to watch.
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:42 pm to willow2
quote:
you would fit right in at college station my friend
What is your dog in this fight? Your program, despite Pickens and the success over the last four years, is a perennial afterthought in in TX recruiting.
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:43 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
The series history is in favor of the 'Horns 76-37-5.
Your perspective, and general premise, would be enlightened if you educated yourself for the reasons why the record is what it is.
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:45 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
The only way I see things changing in College Station, is if the Aggie administration finds the next Nick Saban at some point in the future. Texas A&M is like LSU before 2000, in some ways. Lots of potential that has been severely neglected, outside of a few brief periods throughout the program's history.
This is pretty much true. Part of the reason why Aggies are so delusional is because we recognize how utterly unnecessary our futility in football over the last decade + is.
Unfortunately, our downfall has become an identity and the house needs cleaning in the worst of ways. Hopefully Loftin's move and Sumlin's angle will help eradicate our issues.
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:53 pm to DWag215
Texas' domination of the last 14 years tends to reflect what has happened over the course of the series.
Posted on 12/20/11 at 11:59 pm to CapstoneGrad06
Again, understanding why your statement is correct will help you gain perspective of the actual landscape and A&M's potential.
This post was edited on 12/21/11 at 12:00 am
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:09 am to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Texas A&M isn't entering the SEC in the best of shape. Arkansas and South Carolina can attest to what that is like.
Was a little rougher for Ark considering there wasn't really a national coverage and more of a regional coverage back then and we depended heavily on Texas recruits at that time. ATM will still beable to get texas recruits so they should have a little easier time adjusting.
quote:
Regardless of conference affiliation, it's a long road ahead for them to cut into the Longhorns' position in the state of Texas.
Agreed. I honestly think its better for aTm that Texas is refusing to play them because it will help them with a recruiting spin and If they were still playing and Texas started to constantly beat them it would most likely kill their recruiting.
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:12 am to DWag215
Yes, lets neglect what happened before a certain time period to make ourselves look better. Oklahoma fans like to do the same thing towards Texas. I have no slant in this argument. I am not a Texas fan. In fact, considering the point of your argument I should be neglecting Alabama's 1-7 record against UT because some of those wins came before Alabama became a football power in the 1920s. However, I don't see the point. It is what it is. Texas A&M has potential. I have stated as much in this thread. However, it's going to take a lot more than potential to remove Texas from its position in the state of Texas.
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:21 am to CapstoneGrad06
It's not really a b.s. argument seeing how literally the entire school was decimated in population as well as the availability of decent athletes when it was still an all male military school during UT's legitimate rise (the Royal years).
If you look at the worst eras of A&M football prior to the past decade, they directly correlate with dates of duration of major wars or the decade following them. It's pretty simple really.
If you look at the worst eras of A&M football prior to the past decade, they directly correlate with dates of duration of major wars or the decade following them. It's pretty simple really.
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:24 am to DWag215
And yes, A&M required mandatory service for the time period referenced.
After A&M allowed females to be a part of the student body and the NCAA instituted scholarship limits, you see a stark change in the competitiveness of the rivalry.
If I'm not mistaken, the series is tied over the last 36 years (which traces back to the date thats within about a decade of when A&M began admitting women).
Again, it's simple.
After A&M allowed females to be a part of the student body and the NCAA instituted scholarship limits, you see a stark change in the competitiveness of the rivalry.
If I'm not mistaken, the series is tied over the last 36 years (which traces back to the date thats within about a decade of when A&M began admitting women).
Again, it's simple.
This post was edited on 12/21/11 at 12:26 am
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:28 am to DWag215
Why should Texas apologize for its success over the last 100-plus years, because of the type of school Texas A&M was for much of its history? UT captured the hearts and minds of the population of Texas from the beginning. That has been handed down from generation to generation. That's not something that's going to change in a swift move to another conference, to forcefully end competition with them. This argument is about more than just wins and losses on a football field, and why Texas A&M has a less than stellar record against Texas. UT is the flagship school of the state of Texas. It will take a long and difficult effort to start to remove that.
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:37 am to CapstoneGrad06
With all due respect, you're just not that informed about Texas A&M.
The myopic point of view you have would have been true about 25 years ago. The fact now is that A&M is one of the largest and best over all universities in the country with the differences between it and Texas being negligible (except in some sports).
So, to counter your "much deeper than wins and losses" point, the reality is that Texas A&M's backseat to Texas is simply a matter of perception and not substance.
And of course no one is blaming Texas for being who they are. I'm simply explaining why the record is lopsided and how it's not indicative of A&M's place in the state or it's potential in athletics. The better barometer would be to look at what A&M has done on the field since it's allowed itself to become a modernized institution.
The myopic point of view you have would have been true about 25 years ago. The fact now is that A&M is one of the largest and best over all universities in the country with the differences between it and Texas being negligible (except in some sports).
So, to counter your "much deeper than wins and losses" point, the reality is that Texas A&M's backseat to Texas is simply a matter of perception and not substance.
And of course no one is blaming Texas for being who they are. I'm simply explaining why the record is lopsided and how it's not indicative of A&M's place in the state or it's potential in athletics. The better barometer would be to look at what A&M has done on the field since it's allowed itself to become a modernized institution.
This post was edited on 12/21/11 at 12:42 am
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:40 am to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
UT captured the hearts and minds of the population of Texas from the beginning. That has been handed down from generation to generation
I will agree that if you did not go to either school (or one of the other large schools in TX) that this is true. However, that's not because of some inherent position that TX holds which you allude to, but rather because TX has built it's dominant brand through athletics.
The point is that there is not some innate difference in characteristics that creates a dichotomy between the schools. While there may have been an argument in the past justifying that position, it simply does not exist today.
This post was edited on 12/21/11 at 12:41 am
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:44 am to DWag215
quote:
DWag215
quote:
dichotomy
Dick-Hot-oh-my?
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:44 am to DWag215
Perception is often reality...
Posted on 12/21/11 at 12:45 am to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Perception is often reality...
Perception is stronger than reality.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News