The Trouble With Aggies
by Peter Bean on Jul 16, 2011 4:14 AM CDT
in Texas Longhorns Football
Email
PrintThings remained relatively quiet for a year after the Big 12 was rescued in the eleventh hour, but as the kick off to the 2011 season draws near -- and, with it, the launch of the new Longhorn Network -- the lesser stars in this drama are once again beginning to grumble about their place on this totem pole.
Most vocally (and comically), of course, are the Aggies, who are lighting up boards and blogs with renewed commitment to establishing their persecuted status. As Aggies see it, Texas now has all of ESPN in its back pocket, and every day that Texas A&M remains in its present position is acquiescence to second-class citizen status.
In lieu of rational analysis in evaluating both Texas and their own status in the Big 12 conference, the Aggies continue to do what they do best -- play the victim:
If texas continues acting as a conference of one, acting in their own best interests instead of in the best interests of the conference as a whole, I have no problem believing A&M will act in their own best interests, and leave the 10-team Big 12 behind. I think the whole perception issue of "which team acted to blow up the Big 12" is really overblown, and A&M's leadership won't have a problem lighting the fuse if texas continues on their current path.
What, exactly, is the basis for the above-stated proposition? None is offered; as far as I can tell because Aggies consider the conclusion to be self-evident. The only way to make sense of that viewpoint, really, is to view the situation through the prism of "A&M as UT's victim," a mindset Aggies willfully spotlight themselves via the dull and childish cut-downs ubiquitous in the Aggie lexicon: "texas, not Texas." "tu, not UT." And -- dagger! -- "t-sips, to remind them just who is more prone to the repulsive sin of sophistication." It would be mystifying that such gimmicks could survive so many years if it were not part and parcel with the broader Aggie mindset, in which their own identity is forever defined by their rival. Texas A&M stands as much for 'Not Texas' (or 'Not texas,' as it were) as it does for itself.
That mindset is what can make it difficult to decide if Aggies are willfully ignorant, or simply stumbling through a fog. Whatever the case, it is most confusing (albeit endlessly amusing) to listen to Aggies try to navigate the complex realities of the world of modern college athletics, hamstrung as they are by the requirements of ideological purity. To be an Aggie is to accept unequivocally a certain set of ideas -- however fantastical they may be -- as facts, a mindset which leads not only to the relatively harmless idiosyncrasies like 'texas' and 'tu,' but also to the much more consequential mode of thinking that precludes useful, tracking-the-real-world analysis.
It's problematic because you wind up with an awful lot of fans who are incapable of engaging an idea on its actual terms, when doing so requires accepting premises that are antithetical to the core ideology -- namely, "texas is the bad guy. tu is at fault. The sips are just trying to keep us down." Even if it's possible that's the case, it shouldn't be accepted as gospel, let alone that which most defines you.
Ultimately, that's why it's useless to listen to so many Aggie fans themselves on these topics: whatever extent their vantage point overlaps with reality at any given moment is purely accidental. All too many Aggies continue to evaluate their situation through the prism of the victimized fan, as evidenced by the solutions they offer, which revolve around escaping or bringing harm to UT tu. As much bravado as Aggies convey, it is ironic that so many want to win by taking their ball and going home.
A More Rational Analysis
This is going to feel dirty, but let's do their dirty work for them and pivot from Aggie delusion to the rational discourse I'm mystified they aren't interested in engaging. Cock your whoop rifles high and imagine that you are a Texas A&M fan.
What's the proper mode of analysis here? First and foremost, it is to approach the problem unencumbered by a persecution complex. Yes, Texas is to be hated as the prime rival, and yes, Texas's advantages are to be bemoaned and factored in to our analysis. But no crying about it -- and specifically, no letting our displeasure with being second fiddle prevent us from performing a real analysis about us, our situation, and what's best for us.
Is it possible to conclude that a move to the SEC is in our best interest? It's not impossible, but to the extent the case is based on escaping or punishing Texas, it is a failure. That's what many real Aggies do, but here we're interested in figuring out what's in fact in the best interest of A&M athletics. In that light, a move to the SEC is risky at best, and it's very difficult to escape the conclusion that it's not simply a move to make against Texas rather than a move to help ourselves. When you really think it through, it's just incredibly difficult to see how it would be more advantageous for A&M to compete in the deepest and best football conference in the country, rather than one that is eminently conquerable. And especially when rising to the top of the Big 12 also means -- by definition -- bettering Texas.
Perhaps the risk could be justified if there were clear financial advantages to A&M, but here, too, pesky reality gets in the way. While Aggies would certainly have incentive to bolt for greener pastures if staying in the Big 12 meant giving up big chunks of money while Texas just got richer, in reality the present situation in the Big 12 is a rising-tide-lifts-all-boats situation. Texas is getting richer either way, so the question is really whether A&M gains anything by leaving. In fact, the money is more than fine for A&M right now, and they are a potentially pretty-big fish in a small pond (Big 12) rather than a small fish in a shark-infested sea (SEC). Leaving Texas behind would not harm Texas, but easily could harm A&M, and only makes sense if your worldview is that doing something to spite Texas is -- ipso facto -- a worthy objective.
Continuing our make-believe as Aggies interested in reality and rational analysis, let's instead consider the possibility that Texas's prominence -- however despicable, being as they are our rivals -- is in many ways a boon to A&M. Kansas definitely considers the Big 12 rescue project a boon (disaster averted!), but even though A&M would have had options that Kansas would not, it does not follow that this new Big 12 arrangement is inferior to those other options. Let's consider, instead, that keeping the SEC out of Texas, and our position in the richest (financial and talent) football state in the country -- even if not quite as strong as that of hated UT -- is potentially a source of tremendous benefit. It is beneficial to A&M in recruiting, it is (if we play our cards right) beneficial to A&M financially, and it is beneficial to A&M from a competitive landscape perspective. All A&M has to do is beat Texas on the field.
After all, should Aggies really care if Texas is stuffing its coffers with cash without winning the conference? What's really the goal here? If the goal is to 'out-Texas' the University of Texas, we're setting ourselves up to fail, no matter what we do. If, instead, we simply want to best them in athletics, well, maybe we ought to evaluate our options in a different light. Hell, if we can be a strong No. 2 in the state of Texas, while competing in a diluted Big 12, and while making sufficient money to be a nationally relevant football program, isn't that just about ideal? I mean, short or being the No. 1 most advantaged program in Texas?
Ending our little role playing experiment, are you as mystified as I am that Aggies seem incapable of even considering this conclusion? And more troubling, that there isn't at least a minority counterculture that peddles in reality? For a fan base so rabidly obsessed with school spirit, how dispiriting is that? It sort of makes you wonder if A&M is destined to cut off its nose to spite its face.
There are lots of amusing -- mostly harmless and irrelevant -- ways to poke fun of Aggies and celebrate the ways that our own culture is different from theirs, but it's that prideful embrace of perverted reality amongst Aggies that I find so depressing, and which continually makes me wonder how such otherwise intelligent people can willfully embrace such an unsatisfying, often counter-productive, culture.
If an Aggie needs to imagine me typing that while sipping tea and daintily nibbling a biscuit, ultimately that's their problem, isn't it?
And that's really the biggest problem that Texas A&M faces: themselves.
339 comments
|
9 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There are SO many problems with aggy
You’ve managed to delve into the mind of aggy (shudder) and seemingly return to us sane and relatively normal? I think the thing that I have the most trouble with is ,,they just keep on waking up breathing and being aggy. Once I get past that slight irritant-actually I don’t usually get past that.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
Good article Peter, when did miketag become the reasonable one?
Billy Liucci, the best known journalist focused on TAMU coverage, expressed very similar thoughts as beergut this week. Link: http://v4.texags.com/Stories/2411
What chance is there for a rationale discussion when the Aggies’ leading journalist buys into the UT world domination conspiracy theories and ignores fundamental facts?
Fact 1: Show me tangible, physical evidence that TAMU has an open, stand alone invitation to join the SEC. Thanks to the magic of Open Records Requests, emails and other communications would have to be released to the public. I’ll concede that there were meetings between TAMU and the SEC, but every article I’ve read about it is full of rumors, conjecture and anonymous sources. If the SEC offer is real, at the very least, a source from the SEC or TAMU would go on the record about it. No source has come forward. If Aggies keep saying it, it must be a fact, right?
Fact 2 : TAMU will make more TV revenue in the Big 12 than the SEC. Each SEC institution receives $ 18.3 million a year in TV revenue. Dan Beebe has promised at least $20 million a year for Texas, OU and TAMU. The Big 12 got a very favorable deal from Fox with the Tier 2 television rights recently. Given the current way college football is trending, it’s reasonable to expect the Big 12 will receive a very generous deal from ESPN / ABC when the Tier 1 television rights are renegotiated in a few years. After the Tier 1 contract is signed, TAMU will easily exceed $20 million a year in television revenue.
Fact 3 : The SEC is under a long term television contract with CBS / ESPN. If TAMU were to join the SEC, each member institution would have to accept significantly less money to cut TAMU in. Good luck proposing less money at a SEC meeting. The SEC seems very happy with it’s 12 current members.
Fact 4 : The SEC was only looking to expand as a response to possible super conferences in the Big Ten and Pac 12. Again, the SEC is content with it’s 12 members and current television contract. Why mess up a good thing?
Fact 5 : After Colorado and Nebraska left the conference, the Big 12 is in the process of approving harsh exit penalties for members that leave the conference prematurely. Good luck selling an already reluctant TAMU Board of Regents on paying a large exit penalty to leave the Big 12 for a less profitable conference.
Aggies ignore these fundamental truths when writing SEC articles. They sell you on anonymous sources, winds of change within the TAMU administration, and SEC fantasies. Have they ever stop to think that TAMU decision makers are content with the Big 12 Conference? They’re making money hand over fist.
Aggie is welcome to create their own television network to broadcast conference games and Texas high school football games. Hell it’s sanctioned by the Big 12 Conference. Instead of wasting your time on SEC fantasies, show some courage TAMU and create your own television network to compete with the Longhorn Network. Y’all do endorse capitalism and a free market right?
Aggies are amusing. First they said no one would watch Women’s Rowing and Men’s Tennis on the Longhorn Network. When Texas and ESPN take steps to make their programming more attractive by adding Texas’ football season opener and a conference football game, they gripe that’s it’s unfair. After all, why should Tech or Oklahoma State fans have to buy the Longhorn Network to watch their teams play? I think even the most indigent Red Raiders and Cowboys fans can afford an additional $.40 to $.90 cents a month on their cable /satellite bill to watch their teams play Texas.
Aggies have also said ad nauseam that Texas is violating NCAA rules by broadcasting Texas high school football games. Well it’s difficult for a violation to occur before it has even happened. Texas has excellent attorneys, so does ESPN. Do Aggies honestly think that Texas and ESPN’s legal teams didn’t look into the compliance issues before announcing that the Longhorn Network would carry Texas high school football games? Whatever the compliance issues are / were it appears they have been worked out. Aggies have accused Texas of having the NCAA in their pocket. I wish The University wielded that kind of power.
What are the largest facts that Aggies ignore? TAMU has one contested national championship from 1939, one top 5 finish since 1956, and a 37 – 75 – 5 record against Texas. Ouch.
billfromlaketravis (Austin Pace)
Please follow me on Twitter @BFLT_at_BON
by billfromlaketravis on Jul 16, 2011 8:25 AM CDT reply actions 6 recs
BFLT
Do you honestly believe that beergut, miketag and texags will let facts get in their way? Well written post, by-the-way.
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
by Snide Aside on Jul 16, 2011 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Thanks Snide
I forgot to mention the Texas Legislature factor, another obstacle for TAMU to overcome in their imaginary SEC move.
billfromlaketravis (Austin Pace)
Please follow me on Twitter @BFLT_at_BON
by billfromlaketravis on Jul 16, 2011 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Are they ignoring that fact?
“What are the largest facts that Aggies ignore? TAMU has one contested national championship from 1939, one top 5 finish since 1956, and a 37 – 75 – 5 record against Texas. Ouch.”
If being in the same conference with Texas has been so good to A&M, how come those are the results? The reality is that, while not being explicitly mentioned, A&M wants to change that and believe the only way that’s possible on a long-term basis would be a move to the SEC. It’s still about recruiting and they can sell SEC football—“the deepest and best football conference in the country”—to Texas high school recruits.
I’m under no illusion that they have or had an offer to join the conference. I do disagree with point 3 in that the SEC would ask for a renegotiation of a TV contract IF membership were to change. Whether it nets more money for the current SEC teams, I do not know.
I do think the move, should it ever occur, is more likely to fail (hello, Arkansas) than succeed, but if A&M wants to TRY to change its long-term fortune then it at least makes sense because given everything else being equal Texas should be the better program, as the last 75 years have proven.
SEC Television Contract
Yes it could be renegotiated, but it’s rather large and rather long term contract. It would be very complicated to say the least. CBS and ESPN could easily say they have no interest in reworking the contract and tell the SEC to live with the current dollars. Additionally, the SEC would have to negotiate with 2 separate entities in CBS and ESPN. What does the SEC do if ESPN is interested, but CBS is not? There are a lot of variables there.
Mike Slive is well aware of these headaches. Hence, the SEC is very reactionary with their expansion plans. The SEC will only look to expand if they believe that super conferences are on the way.
This likely the reason that Beebe and the Big 12 are not interested in expansion. Beebe has figured out a way for the dollars to work for 10 teams, not 11, not 12, 10.
billfromlaketravis (Austin Pace)
Please follow me on Twitter @BFLT_at_BON
by billfromlaketravis on Jul 16, 2011 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions
"There are a lot of variables there."
So you’re agreeing with what I wrote.
You originally wrote: “The SEC is under a long term television contract with CBS / ESPN. If TAMU were to join the SEC, each member institution would have to accept significantly less money to cut TAMU in.” The implication being A&M would simply cut into every other member’s slice. I simply pointed out that that wasn’t necessarily the case, although it is possible that a renogiation still leaves every SEC team poorer.
The SEC will expand if they believe it’s good for the SEC. IF, and I think it’s a pretty big if, they think A&M will give them a presence in Texas, contribute positively to the bottom line, add to the SEC brand, and don’t believe a 14-team conference will cause more headaches than their worth then I could envision an invite being extended regardless of what any other conference does.
I figured the Big 12’s not interested in expansion because there’s nobody left to take. Who’s the Big 12 going to get that can add anything to the bottom line at this stage?
Actually, these two teams COULD expand the bottom line
Who’s the Big 12 going to get that can add anything to the bottom line at this stage?
Arkansas and LSU – lthe odds of adding them seem remote, but think about it. The Big 12 enhances it’s image, conference power and media $$$ leverage by adding them. As far as the schools themselves – Arky would love to be relevant again and LSU widens it’s recruiting base and is able to protect a few of it’s own. AND, the money for both teams is potentially better because of new media negotiations and significant bowl game appearaces that won’t be available to them in the SEC. Finally, the SEC is appearing to be rotten to the core and the NCAA’s wrath is about to descend upon them.
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
I was wondering about that . . .
“Let’s consider, instead, that keeping the SEC out of Texas . . . is potentially a source of tremendous benefit.” — This really makes no sense in a debate over A&M joining the SEC. If the SEC gets into Texas by way of Texas A&M joining the SEC alone, that would be a DREAM scenario for the Aggies; they would be the only school in the most talent-laden state able to offer the opportunity to play in the SEC. Yes, the Big XII Texas schools would suffer a tremendous talent bleedoff to the SEC . . . but Texas A&M wouldn’t be a Big XII Texas school anymore! They would be stop #1 on that pipeline heading East into SEC country (which would begin in College Station).
The only rational thought that stands in the way of Texas A&M joining the SEC is that the SEC might not be interested. While the potential for huge benefit is there, there are also several risks. And since we’re currently sitting pretty with the sweetest football situation in the country, we’re probably not all that motivated to take risks right at the moment. But if should ever decide to, there is absolutely no sane reason for A&M not to leap at the opportunity to join the SEC. It would be nothing but upside for them in every conceivable way except perhaps basketball.
Assuming you are actually interested in engaging in discourse and not hyperbole, I'll reply
To respond to your “facts”:
1) I’m not sure how to find “tangible” evidence of an offer, because I think the offer was a verbal one, offered in person when Mike Slive visited College Station last Summer. Unless you think he visited because he likes Freebird’s Wold Burritos?
2) Not necessarily. We’re guaranteed $20 million a year in the Big 12 under a deal where all first, second, and third-tier media rights are sold to networks. Under the current SEC television contract, all schools control their own third-tier television rights. If we were a member of the SEC, and even looking at making “only” $18.3 million per year from first and second-tier rights, we’d be able to sell our third-tier media rights to a network, and take all of the profits. This is a better deal than the collective one negotiated for the Big 12 right now. Arkansas makes $6 million a year off their third-tier television rights. If A&M was a member of the SEC, we’d need to only sell half of our current alumni base a subscription service for $12 a year, and we’d reap an extra $3 million. Do I think 50% of our fanbase would be willing to shell out $1 a month to be guaranteed to see every single A&M football, men’s and women’s basketball, baseball, softball, track, etc, game or match or event on television? Yes, I do. Such a deal would also put as us $21.3 million in television revenue, which is currently better than the current Big 12 deal.
3) That current long-term contract with ESPN/CBS contains language allowing for renegotiation if the league membership changes. With the addition of the Houston and Dallas television markets to the SEC’s geographic footprint, I’m fairly certain the SEC membership would want to renegotiate that contract, and all league schools will come out richer for the deal.
4) The SEC would not say no to an enhanced television presence in Texas, not to mention the recruiting territory it would open up for all conference members in Texas. If A&M went to the SEC and said we’re interested in joining the conference, the SEC would welcome us with open arms.
5) Assuming these stiffer penalties are currently in place (have they been officially approved yet?), I think our leadership would be fine with taking a one year hit in revenue in exchange for the long-term stability and increased revenue membership in the SEC would offer.
These aren’t “fundamental truths” you’re espousing here, they are your opinions which you are claiming as truth.
I remain unconvinced that a single-school network showing only content for that school will be a sustainable entity that can be profitable over the long term. The fact that the lhn is having to look to show Texas high school football games and Big 12 conference games on their network to try to attract/force viewers to pay for their network supports my position.
With women’s rowing and men’s tennis and other texas sports content on the lhn, your network is nothing more than bevo-d featured on ESPN. I don’t think anyone gives a damn about the opener against Rice, and I have yet to see anyone complain about that one game. The issue with adding a conference football game is that there is a chance an opposing team in the conference will have its fanbase forced to pay money to ESPN (and by extension texas) to watch their own team play on television. If you claim you don’t understand why this would piss opposing fans off, you either want us to be believe you’re ignorant, or stupid. The issue isn’t that Red Raider or Cowboy fans can’t afford a cable bill, it is that why the hell should their fans have to pay ESPN (and texas) to watch THEIR OWN TEAM in a Big 12 conference football game? Are you actually going to argue that fans of Texas Tech or Oklahoma State should be happy to pay to watch their team on television when all of the money will go to benefit texas?
I don’t know of anyone who has said that you are violating NCAA rules by broadcasting high school football games, but I have read of several people saying that the potential for abuse exists. I’m sure ESPN and texas looked into compliance issues before announcing the intention of the lhn to broadcast high school games, but I think they only looked into it enough to make sure that they make it outwardly appear that there is no violation of rules, i.e. Dodds coming out and saying ESPN would choose all the games to be broadcast.
I’m sorry, what is contested about our 1939 national championship? We finished as the AP national champions after the 1939 season. Are you actually going to say you buy USC’s claim 65 years later that they were the national champions after finishing 3rd in the AP poll?
well then...congrats on your national chamionship 70+ plus years ago
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
Beergut
We can argue back and forth on what’s an opinion and what’s a fact all day. I made my points without calling anybody stupid or ignorant as you did in your rebuttal. I love how you made a run at me, but you didn’t dare challenge Peter.
Here’s a little reality for you on a Sunday morning: http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/38591/aggies-shouldnt-run-from-new-ut-network
Have a good Sunday.
billfromlaketravis (Austin Pace)
Please follow me on Twitter @BFLT_at_BON
by billfromlaketravis on Jul 17, 2011 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions
You missed the point
I don’t think either you or Peter are stupid.
I do think both of you are intentionally ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the potential for the new network to indirectly pay high school coaches to funnel recruits to texas. I notice neither of you address that point.
As for the link
I am shocked shocked SHOCKED that a writer for ESPN would want everyone to maintain the status quo. Seriously, I never saw that coming.
The fact that it is David Ubben, someone who is notorious for being less-than-educated, shall we say, about college football and football in general, makes it worse. All Ubben did was rehash the arguments he made last Summer, so this is nothing new. Quoting Bill Byrne just detracts from his argument, because Byrne wasn’t involved in the realignment talks.
Sorry, but “you shouldn’t do this because there is a chance it will fail” is never a good argument against a new undertaking. The lhn might fail; does that mean texas should abandon their new network?
ESPN & SEC
Are both partners and advocates of the status quo in college football. The ramifications of the SEC taking A&M (and possibly Clemson or Georgia Tech) would most likely move things towards another Superconference scenario (Big East/ACC, Big 12/Pac12). These are things that both ESPN and SEC would be hesitant to endorse and would probably seek to stop. The invitation that the SEC extended to A&M (during the Superconference scenario) has expired.
wow...
i have to agree with Beergut on this one.
"A job well done is better than a job well said."
by I bleed Red and Black on Jul 18, 2011 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions
i personally find all the SEC talk from the aggies to be funny
And I encourage them to leave and go to the SEC just because I have heard that Texas made it clear that if A&M wasn’t in the same conference as Texas we wouldn’t be eager to schedule them in other sports. And let’s fave it they would look pretty stupid singing their war song and doing all their saw’em off stuff while playing LSU when they don’t even play Texas anymore
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 8:48 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
Meh
Tradition is tradition and I doubt anyone would think twice about us singing the fight song that was created in 1920 save for you guys who think that everyone is obsessed with the all and mighty powerful TEXAS.
Tell me why TEXAS wouldn’t schedule us in sports? Is it because they don’t think they can beat us? After all don’t ya’ll have a 75-35 (or something like that) football lead over us? No, the real reason why TEXAS said they wouldn’t schedule A&M is because it’s a strong arm tactic.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Texas wouldn't schedule aggy in sports...
…because, like a powerhouse team playing a patsy in a bowl game, there’s no upside. If you win, you were supposed to, and if you lose, you got embarrassed (see OU/Boise State). When you have a 75-35 advantage over a “rival,” history has shown that you are supposed to win.
Playing Texas is a lot more important to aggy than playing aggy is to Texas. I have no idea (or interest, for that matter) who aggy’s non-conference opponents are in the coming years, but Texas has scheduled USC and Notre Dame, among others, and frankly, I’d be perfectly happy replacing aggy with another “name” opponent. It’s harder for aggy to reciprocate, because Texas is about as big a “name” opponent as a team can schedule.
If the world was a school, we'd be homecoming king...
by adt2 on Jul 17, 2011 8:59 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
False. Your tsip arrogance is appalling. If you care to examine “modern day football” eras, I will give you 2 different demarcation points for reference.
Let’s look at 1973 when the NCAA split Football schools into Div. 1, 2, and 3 schools. Since that time the overall A&M vs. texas record is 18-19.
How about a viewpoint of 1980 when the spread of cable television and broadcasting became popular? It was right before the 1982 SMU recruiting scandal and while some teams were already playing on television, the smaller market schools were not. Also ESPN was created in 1979 thus could be considered the new “modern era of football” with national highlight reels and sports updates. Since 1980 the overall A&M vs. texas record is 15-15.
So you’re right, you own us in football and WE NEED YOU, oh so bad, because you have murdered us repeatedly. Please texas, can you keep us on your schedule so that you can lose 50% of the time, but still have the arrogance to think that you’ll beat us every year?
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 17, 2011 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Sweet...so, since we are beginning in 1980:
I would imagine you are scrapping the 1939 national title from the aTm record books?
I am quite thankful that at DKR, I do not have to listen to chants of "Big 12" echoing throughout.
by Mulliganville on Jul 17, 2011 8:15 PM CDT up reply actions
The great thing about being the superior half of this relationship
is that we don’t have to rationalize, or delude ourselves, regarding our place in this thing. So…what’s it like?
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 18, 2011 2:39 AM CDT up reply actions
well hell i can do that
since 2000 Texas has only lost to A&M 3 times. anybody can name a point in history and make their team seem better than it is. thats like saying since 2010 TCU and Auburn are the winningest programs in history
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 18, 2011 3:21 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I'm a fan of neither team (just followed a link)
but this comment is so arrogant and short-sighted, I can’t believe it. You aren’t concerned about no longer playing an in-state rivalry game with 110 games of history? I can tell you from afar, people all over the country have a lot of respect for the Horns/Ags rivalry. I love the Thanksgiving weekend game. When UT wins, it’s a feather in their cap, no doubt. To think that Horns fans would be ok with taking that game off the schedule to play a “name school” (A&M is a name school, btw) blows my mind. Then again, your example of a powerhouse/patsy matchup was Oklahoma/Boise, so maybe you just aren’t that astute when it comes to the realities of college pigskin.
/still think A&M to the SEC movement is non-sensical, whiny, and ultimately unlikely
First you take a drink, then the drink takes a drink, then the drink takes you. - F. Scott Fitzgerald
by videoartistknoxharrington on Jul 20, 2011 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Well said!
Resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die. ~Malachy McCourt
You lost me at "imagine that you are a Texas A&M fan"
Because I did and then there were entirely too many letters and symbols for me to even try to read. Also, not enough pictures.
Sunkist, they're aggies. They live off-guard.
-whills
by Kahuna on Jul 16, 2011 8:59 AM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Now this is funny!
Boren sounds like such a jackhole trying to dance around the fact that Oklahoma wouldn’t and especially A&M would be going to any conference without Texas being invited first. And then to claim that they didn’t go to the SEC because Texas wasn’t invited? Boren is a jester! Aggies can’t help being average, but Oklahoma has to try to get such non-people… Looks like OU’s program will be going in the pits…
Also, Texas is the undeniably wealthiest school in the country bar none. Not even USC’s doctors can compete with 100 year old oil money. Furthermore, Texas passes out more money to other schools than any other school. So my question is why would Texas need a conference in the first place? Everyone wants to play Texas because of profits alone… This is a non issue.. Everyone bow down to the mighty Horns!!
I took it different
I actually respect what 0klahoma said. I took it that there was no way OU was going to walk away on almost 100 tradition. They aren’t whiney whores like Nebraska and Ark. Imagine a season without playing a rival. What’s the pt of CFB. The way we are moving lets just call it the NFL development league. Aggies pride themselves on tradition, but want to walk away so they can lose in state recruits to bama and lsu? If you ask me every single fan of CFB lost when OU/Neb stopped their annual game. It would be a travesty if the red river game ended. To a lesser extent Texas/TAMU (for the nation, maybe not the state of Texas) We can’t have a playoff because of the “bowl tradition”, but over the last 20 yrs we have systematically destroyed the integrity and tradition of CFB at every opportunity. I am just glad someone hasn’t forgot what made CFB great, even if it is a sooner
by codaxx on Jul 16, 2011 12:05 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 3 recs
A minor contradiction
If you ask me every single fan of CFB lost when OU/Neb stopped their annual game.
Agree, but then you say:
I am just glad someone hasn’t forgot what made CFB great, even if it is a sooner
when it was a Sooner, specifically OU AD Donnie Duncan, who refused to entertain the notion of playing Nebraska as a permanent cross-division game, or as a non-conference game during the off years.
So it was the Sooners who killed the NU/OU game, no one else.
by Albino Tornado on Jul 19, 2011 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Brother...
OU is beginning to whine like no other. Check out Land Thieves. Or just follow him @landthieves to understand what I am talking about.
I am quite thankful that at DKR, I do not have to listen to chants of "Big 12" echoing throughout.
by Mulliganville on Jul 19, 2011 10:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Eh
That’s generalizing.
New Orleans, here we come.
by KratosWasASooner on Jul 20, 2011 1:06 AM CDT up reply actions
I've just noticed a good bit more whine...
coming from out neighbors to the north. They are mostly distraught over the high school games on Thursdays.
I am quite thankful that at DKR, I do not have to listen to chants of "Big 12" echoing throughout.
by Mulliganville on Jul 20, 2011 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions
A&M vs. OU
I’ve discussed this before, but one thing that has surprised me over the last couple of years is the increased respect I have for OU, especially compared to A&M. Don’t get me wrong: I still hate OU, but at least they’re not the insecure crybabies like our cousins to the east.
A&M, all things considered, just had a very good year athletically — better, I would argue, than the one we had. National titles in women’s hoops and track, a resurgent football team, a CWS appearance. Probably one of the best all-around years A&M has had in a long time.
Yet the continued insecurity just seeps through the monitor when one visits an A&M-centric site. They’re not claiming “scoreboard” over a better year. They’re instead still whining about what advantages we have and are often still playing with their toy soldiers and imagining that they’ll finally get that invite to go on an overnight sleepover with those oh-so-elusive SEC friends soon. It’s really rather sad.
Compare that with OU. The main feel I developed about OU’s mentality during the whole realignment mess was one of self-confidence. OU didn’t view realignment as an opportunity to deal with its Daddy issues. Instead, OU wanted to stay with Texas, as they realized that this regional partnership was good both for its athletic department and the university as a whole, and in indicating a desire to stay tied to us, one got the sense that they believed they could beat us no matter what conference we were in. Again, I hate them, but I respect that a hell of a lot more than I do the pathetic whining of the Aggies.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 9:18 AM CDT reply actions 7 recs
A&M: The new whiner in chief
They have taken Nebraska’s place
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 9:22 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
As a Sooner...
That’s one of my favorite comments that I have seen over here and I feel the exact same way about you guys and the Ags. A respectful hatred for Texas, a “really Aggies?” for A&M
The Ralphie Report - University of Colorado Athletics
SB Nation Denver
by Jon Woods on Jul 16, 2011 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well said
A “respectful hatred” of OU is certainly the way I feel about our neighbors to the north.
billfromlaketravis (Austin Pace)
Please follow me on Twitter @BFLT_at_BON
by billfromlaketravis on Jul 16, 2011 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions
With all due respect,
OU still respectfully sucks.
by bevosbackside on Jul 16, 2011 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions 9 recs
Well said brother...
50 daysish. I cannot freaking wait.
Wasn't this system designed to prevent this from happening?
2010/11 Final BCS Standings
1. Auburn 14-0
2. TCU 13-0
by Mulliganville on Jul 16, 2011 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions
I was going to make a similar comment
regarding the Aggies V. Sooners, but this is way better than what I was going to write.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 16, 2011 10:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, when Duke & Duke are cornering the market, it's not surprising that Randolph wants to stay with Mortimer.
I find it hilarious that Texas is blatantly carving out huge stacks of revenue from the conference stream for themselves and have the nerve to look over their shoulder at the Aggies with some kind of Bill Laimbeer “WHAAAAT?!?!?!” face.
Bravo, Peter.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
"Randy Quaids"
I have never seen any single entity more bound and determined to meet the characterizations of their own shameful, embarassing stereotype. Reading beergut (notice the lowercase) I envision a 50-something dude wearing his aTm beercan batting helmet, sitting in his grandmother’s basement in the middle of the day, with his boxers down around his ankles, tapping out on his computer how aggies are going to the SEC…In my own perverted way I kind of wish that they would go to the SEC…I have never seen a prison rape live on tv…
Now, about this LHN thing…Texas must be careful not to meet YOUR own shameful, embarassing stereotype…if you want to go independent then get on with it…but I guess you are not really sure if that would fly…I am not sure that this LHN is going to be a ratings bonanza worth the cost to ESPiN over the haul…in effect, it is a ’closed circuit" network similar to what you might see at a major corporation but of no interest to anyone else outside the company…If my cable company forces me to take it as part of a package I will immediately cancel my service… Wreck ’Em
"Fill it up again". "It's so good! Once it hits your lips it's so good!" -Frank the Tank
Can we revisit this in a year or two?
If my cable company forces me to take it as part of a package I will immediately cancel my service
Because, if you live in Texas, within a year or two your choices will almost certainly be (1) accept that you are “forced” to take the LHN or (2) cancel your service.
And since you’re not an Aggie, I really don’t think you’d cut off your nose to spite your face . . . or would you? :)
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
you can hear me now or listen to me later... I will contact my carrier to communicate my intentions.
"Fill it up again". "It's so good! Once it hits your lips it's so good!" -Frank the Tank
Can you use the following words in a sentence?
Nose, spite, face
Your bill ain’t going up when LHN appears on your channel lineup. It’ll simply replace some other channel you’re not watching – Lifetime, The Shopping Channel, one of the six or eight ESPN channels, etc. You’re going to cancel your cable service and quickly find (especially if you’re in Texas) that the only medium NOT carrying LHN involves rabbit ears.
On a related note, I don’t remember this big uproar when the Big Ten Network went on-air. My DirecTV bill didn’t go up, but the BTN appeared a few years ago, and I actually watch it from time to time simply because it’s the only channel with interesting sports on – even if it’s teams I don’t care about. Some football is better than no football, especially in June.
If the world was a school, we'd be homecoming king...
There was a huge uproar when BTN went on the air.
If you’ll recall, there was a lot of brinksmanship, a very public battle, ads on the air coming from both the cable companies and the BTN, and threats about which games would be available where, and whose fault it was going to be if you (as a consumer) were upset. BTN finally forced their way onto the basic cable package…the economics were never going to be there otherwise…and they’ve produced re-runs of football games ever since. I certainly wouldn’t pay for the product.
And yes, your cable bill did go up when the BTN appeared on it . . .
. . . they just didn’t tell you it was for the BTN. That was the crucial point of the Big Ten insisting on their network getting added to the basic cable packages. That made it essentially impossible for cable subscribers to opt out of it without cancelling their entire cable service. Which means that one of those $1 or $2 increases that showed up in your cable bill one month with a notice of a “new terms and agreements” document ([i]“available online”[/i]) was covering their expense of adding BTN to your basic package. And if you, personally, got no increase because of some locked-in contract rate, then they just made it up on all the new subscribers and people who had to renew in the meantime, and will get yours when your rate is up for adjustment.
And no, the cable company is not going to just tell you that if you ask them. But if you actually do go and read those “terms and agreements” documents (or whatever they happen to call them) sometime, they will contain language providing the cable company to increase the rates to cover rising costs for “additional content” or “new programming” or something similar. And that’s the BTN (among other things).
Bottom line, nothing is free, and they darn sure did not just give you a few extra channels of sports because they’re just that sweet.
Spot on PB, but...
try as I might, I can’t bring myself to “imagine that you are I am a Texas A&M fan”.
Burnt Orange Nation
Follow Along on Twitter @TXStampede
Has anyone bitched that every skilled position top prospect in the state of Texas
is at the Fox Sports Network 7×7 state football tournament in College Station this weekend?
"Fill it up again". "It's so good! Once it hits your lips it's so good!" -Frank the Tank
Bitched?
One of the very best recruiting tools imaginable for UT is to send kids to that town for a few days.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
by OnMySignal on Jul 16, 2011 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 11 recs
Lol I drove through the outskirts of college station once and I got a headache
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 6:07 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I’m originally from Austin, born and raised, and went to school at A&M. It’s definitely true that the landscape in College Station is not nearly as nice as Austin, nor do they have museums or site attractions like the capitol, but I’m pretty sure an 18 year old kid isn’t worried about going to museums on Friday’s and Saturday’s.
Bars, my friend, are the key and College Station has them. Northgate, in case you don’t know what that is, is the location right off of campus where all of the best bars are. Take a night, go out there, and I almost guarantee you a blast of a time not to mention a whole lot safer than 6th street.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 7:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed to an extent.
I’ve done a few months in CS for the Fire Academy, and Northgate was outstanding; however it is a different feel that what Austin has to offer. I’m sorry but for live music, bars, clubs, and the overall ambiance of nightlife….Austin wins hands down. And safety is the last thing on my mind when I go out to 6th street. Its the city…its supposed to have some danger. Plus you can play bum BINGO.
Eight Walls
<> a new MMA blog from Fantake
Never try to use logic with the agriculturally-inclined!
I don’t doubt for a minute that a significant number of ag fans, and some officials, want to “punish” UT by heading off to the SEC. I don’t get their rationale, but hey, they’re aggy…
Here’s the truth, and they don’t have to like it. The agricultural school is going nowhere if UT, Tech, Baylor, and the legislature don’t want them to, and there’s nothing they can do about that without SERIOUSLY hurting their state funding, which keeps them open for business.
I agree with the viewpoints above that aggy is way too parochial, too cultish, and has swallowed way too much maroon Kool-Aid to get that the Big 12-2 is hands down their best deal, maybe their only deal that matters. Now that it’s established that UT’s going nowhere for a while, and that super conferences are still just an idea out there, I don’t see the SEC beating down agricultural’s door to join them. OU has surprised me in all of this by recognizing that they are best served by staying affiliated with UT. Ag’s inferiority complex will never let them realize that, so the best the rest of us can hope for is that aggy replaces the corn as the biggest whiners in the Big 12-2, while making money hand-over-fist, something they wouldn’t do in the SEC, even if the SEC really wanted them, which they really don’t.
Sorry ags, you’re stuck doing what’s best for you, even if you REALLY want to cut your own nose off to spite your face.
"I'd rather die while I'm living than live while I'm dead." (Jimmy Buffett)
I think....
I just felt Beergut’s beergut explode…there goes what’s left of his brains:)
by Dawnpatrol on Jul 16, 2011 11:13 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
Magnificent article
I would suggest to aggy they experiment with trying to win a few games they play against SEC teams before they jump off the precipice.
Maybe the reality of that will serve as electo-therapy to bring them back into reality!
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
When I read "grumble about their place on this totem pole"...
I knew I was in for a treat. Thanks for this PB. I have a friend who’s a senior at UF and while he was in town a couple of weeks ago, I asked him about bringing in the ags to their conference. He said they don’t want A&M in their conference. If they were to get anybody, they would choose Texas because of all the obvious reasons. In other words, A&M isn’t good enough for the SEC. That’s probably the reality of it in a nutshell.
Hook Em Horns!
aggies talk to PSU fans
Before TAMU thinks of going to the SECOND they should talk to PSU fans. Joe Pa owned the northeast. They started losing in the big 10 and before you know it buckeyes and wolverines came in. If you think recruit against Texas is hard, wait until Bama comes into town. Watch who you invite to your BBQ, because they just may stay in your backyard
by codaxx on Jul 16, 2011 12:11 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
If it makes our Aggie friends feel any better,
I read this article while enjoying a hot cup of tea.
The most rational argument that they put forth is that playing in the SEC will somehow increase the quality of recruiting. I haven’t seen an explanation as why they think they’d compete recruiting wise with Alabama, Florida, Auburn, and LSU and not end up as another Miss St. (even a similar color scheme).
Agreed
Just because the teams you play against every year have good recruits in their state doesn’t mean you can waltz into Florida and Georgia and Alabama and grab some commitments.
Sally, will you meet me at the airport?
by TxHorns247 on Jul 16, 2011 12:58 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Wow, y'all are missing the point there
They aren’t looking to join the SEC to gain a recruiting edge in Bama, Louisiana, Florida and Georgia. They’re looking to gain a recruiting edge in Texas. The only thing UT offers Texas kids now is the opportunity to go the best program in Texas (probably). If A&M joins the SEC, then they can offer Texas kids a Texas program in the best, biggest, most prestigious, most watched and most admired football conference in the country, with chances to play in places like The Swamp, Tiger Stadium, Neyland, Bryant-Denny, Between the Hedges, etc. What would Texas offer them? They chance to play in Lubbock, Manhattan, Dallas and Stillwater? Heck, they won’t even get to go to Memorial Stadium or Boulder anymore.
A&M joining the SEC would be a huge boost to their recruiting. The biggest loss would obviously be for the remaining Texas schools who would see the steady pipeline of their talent to the SEC schools turn into a tsunami. And one of those SEC schools would indeed be Texas A&M.
Aggies and the hipsters that have taken over Austin have a lot in common.
They delude themselves into thinking they’re sticking it to what they perceive as their enemy- Aggies’ “tu” and hipsters’ “establishment”- and the best result it could yield them is a pat on the head and a “awww, you ARE special.” All the while, they somehow fail to realize that they’re mission is hypocritical at best, self-defeating at worst.
"The only sport that should be cried over is tee ball."
- don't remember who said it, but I like it.
woops *their mission
"The only sport that should be cried over is tee ball."
- don't remember who said it, but I like it.
Have you noticed not a single comment from that school in college station on this post?
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
To be fair
I think there are only about 5 readers total over at beergut’s site. Just playing the odds, it’s possible, even likely, that they haven’t seen it yet?
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
that is strange
If this was a article on how we have confidence in a player for next season there would be 90 comments from them already
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 3:37 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Realistically, though
“them” = beergut and miketag. There just aren’t that many readers over there.
the Automatic Teller Machine will never succede
as long as they maintain this "cult"ure of victimism. In the end they are nothing without Texas. They can hate all they want but they are only hating that which is in us that actually makes them.
Great Article by Mr. Bean
But I feel, much like everyone else, that it will fall upon deaf ears. Plus, I have a feeling that aggies will use this article as another example of our arrogance.
Who are you?!
I'm Kick Ass!
Yup
My initial reaction was to post this fantastic read on my facebook for all to see, but after thinking about it, I just don’t want to get into that tired debate of “delusion v. arrogance” with my Aggie friends. It just wasn’t worth it to me.
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
"I have a feeling that aggies will use this article as another example of our arrogance."
/notsureifserious
You do realize that the entire article — word by word — is nothing but a diatribe of how pathetically inferior Texas A&M is to Texas, how pathetically inferior Texas A&M fans should feel to Texas fans, and how pathetically grateful they should all be that the benevolence of Texas allows them to continue to exist. Seriously. If you try reading it without orange glasses on, it becomes abundantly clear that the entire article conveys no meaningful concept more clearly than “We are Texas, and we are unbelievably arrogant.”
And I hate the aggies and think y’all are way, WAY better. But let’s not pretend like y’all aren’t the most pretentiously arrogant snobs on the block (like Bama fans, only with money, education and better music).
like Bama fans, only with money, education and better music
I’ll take it.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 22, 2011 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Where are all of the Aggies that usually chime in here?
For some reason they have simply Caspered on this post. *Shocking.
*Fully expected
Wasn't this system designed to prevent this from happening?
2010/11 Final BCS Standings
1. Auburn 14-0
2. TCU 13-0
Now that we've made fun of Aggie delusion and pretended to "Role-Play"
Let’s leave the barbs behind and ask a series of simple, real-world questions:
Did the Big XII commish and front office participate in the UT/ESPN/FOX negotiations for the second Longhorn network game?
If they didn’t, what message does this send to conference members?
If they did, and didn’t notify those who were likely to be affected (Texas Tech and Oklahoma State), then again, what message does that send to Big XII members?
Conferance of One?
I have never had that Idea of Texas… We are in a conference of 2. Texas and the Thieves. Geez Aggies, do not forget the Thieves are also in TV network talks and dominate you too.
And that is what makes it funny. They are willing to go from fighting for the #3 spot in a conference to fighting for the #4 spot of a division in the SEC.
This is amusing
Ran across this article in a news feed and couldnt help but read it.
Whats so interesting is that some Longhorn fans make such a big deal about Aggies caring so much about Longhorns. Sure, there are a few but every following has a over the top individuals, even amongst the Longhorn faithful.
Fact is, most Aggies dont care about UT. Most dont give a $hit about the network. Hell, I applaud the marketing genius of UT. And, almost all Aggies dont care what channels they have just as long as they can watch their team.
Texags is likely trying to get readers and hopefully thats all this article is doing b/c if any Longhorns feel that the majority of Aggies care then you are delusional. Dont flatter yourselves. By going all out to try and make someone look stupid you just make yourself look foolish.
UT going independent or A&M going to the SEC and all other similar talk is stupid. Everyone should just focus on what is really important and that is maintaining a strong conference together.
by Jason Abernethy on Jul 16, 2011 4:54 PM CDT reply actions
Heh
Fact is, most Aggies dont care about UT.
Your entire fucking fight song is about Texas.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 6:50 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
Doesnt the first or second line of UT’s fight song directly mention A&M? You know what that means? Our great grandparents might have cared. You know what that means today? Nothing.
Seriously, the vast majority of Aggies dont care, dont entertain UT conspiracy theories and really dont have a problem with UT. Hell, if UT is playing football on the LHN and A&M isnt on at the same time then I will likely watch UT, just b/c I like football.
Seriously, those songs were written about 90 years ago. Therefore, you that was a stupid point to make. I do love Whataburger though.
by Jason Abernethy on Jul 16, 2011 7:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh yes Texas Fight mentions A&M once in passing “And its goodbye to A&M” that makes it the same as a song that is just one big insulting song aimed towards your big brothers in Austin
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 7:38 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Heh
Therefore, you that was a stupid point to make.
I just love me a good dose of grammatical incoherence in intelligence-related smack talk.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 7:38 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Maybe it was just a typo b/c I was in a hurry. Seriously guy, if all we did was point out bad grammar on blogs then we would never discuss the important points.
And are you all still so concerned with antiquated fight songs? Both Texas teams are rich on tradition and should hold on to that.
I guess we are all missing the point, Ags and Horns alike.
by Jason Abernethy on Jul 16, 2011 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions
That's why Aggies still belt out the lyrics
“saw varsity’s horns off!!!” with a maniacal sense of purpose, even when they play Kansas St.? Written 90 years ago or not, the passion is fresh. Seriously, who are you trying to kid?
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 16, 2011 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Varsity?
Do they really call us that?
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
I believe before he came bevo, your mascot was named Varsity
read that somewhere, but no idea where.
Double Heh
This type of comment from Longhorns always bothers me. The reason for this might possibly stem from the the fact that not a one of you knows your own fight song, but a more realistic rationalization is that it’s because you choose to ignore facts-the hypocrisy is hilarious.
So, with that in mind, let me remind you what the first 2 lines of your Fight song reads:
“Texas Fight! Texas Fight!
And it’s good bye to A&M…”
I guess if our Board of Regents finally decides to listen to their student body, and stop treating our University as one big “good ’ol boy” network by hiring friends irregardless of qualifications or best interests (thank god Mike McKinney left before Rick Perry became available), and we leave for a different Conference, then I guess you’ll have to change your fight song as well.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions
We can do that. It’ll be a lot easier than what A&M will have to change no more doing your whole “saw’em off” thing (btw id love to see a aggie actually try to saw the Horns off Bevo) plus you’ll have to change a whole song or at least a whole section of it
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 7:44 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
wouldn't be too difficult to do
(btw id love to see a aggie actually try to saw the Horns off Bevo)
One of our vet students would just have to walk over to the vet school and do it.
Or were you unaware of the fact that many of the live animal mascots in the Big 12 are treated at A&M’s vet school, and bevo lives there in the offseason?
im just curious beergut?
but you do know that a&m isn’t in the sec right?
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
Bevy lives at his owner’s ranch outside of Austin, not in college station.
Sally, will you meet me at the airport?
by TxHorns247 on Jul 17, 2011 1:38 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Yes, you are correct, I used a double negative, but wanted to show emphasis of our Board of Regents regard for the student body. Thank you for correcting me, you must be an English major.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 7:48 PM CDT up reply actions
And you must have been A&M's valedictorian
Or is that honor reserved for the dog as well?
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 8:03 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Snarky Snarky my friend. But no, Reville, a huge part of the University and our beloved mascot, has never been a Valedictorian. She does go to class though….
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions
just a friendly question for ya
when your dog dies do you guys really give it a Military funeral? ive heard people say that but never got it confirmed
formerly "Horns102591"
Probably so but I can’t answer that with 100% certainty. I would think she does because she’s the highest ranking member of the Corp of Cadets.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:38 PM CDT up reply actions
I would think she does because she’s the highest ranking member of the Corp of Cadets.
And you wonder why we think Aggies are complete nutjobs?!
Because we respect our mascot we’re nutjobs? Since she’s one of the most visible aspects of our University then we treat her with pride and dignity. I guess if that makes us nutjobs, then so be it.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 17, 2011 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions
She's a F*@$ing DOG!
And she’s a “ranking member of the Corp of Cadets”. Correction: not just A ranking, the HIGHEST ranking… The fact that you glaze over that point proves mine.
I didn’t glaze over anything. Yes, she is a dog. Yes, she is our mascot and is treated with pride and thus awarded the honor of “Highest Ranking member of the Corp”. I do not agree with your statement that it makes us nutjobs but if you do then that is your prerogative.
Per your “point”, I would like to apologize that we do not keep our Mascot outside with every other animal on campus and give her Purina dog chow since she is a F*@$ing dog. That’s not how most would treat someone that is in their family, thus Reville is not treated that way.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 17, 2011 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions
Respect is one thing
The level of obsession A&M has for their mascot is unhealthy at best, psychotic at worst.
Is she learning to spell her own name?
Because I’m pretty sure it’s “Reveille,” not “Reville.”
If the world was a school, we'd be homecoming king...
Actually
You used a “word” that isn’t even a word.
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
You're quite right
Good bye to texas university So long to the orange and the white Good luck to dear old Texas Aggies They are the boys who show the real old fight “the eyes of Texas are upon you” That is the song they sing so well So good bye to texas university We’re gonna beat you all to… Chigaroogarem , Chigaroogarem Rough, Tough, Real stuff, Texas A&M Saw varsity’s horns off Saw varsity’s horns off Saw varsity’s horns off Short! A! Varsity’s horns are sawed off Varsity’s horns are sawed off Varsity’s horns are sawed off
demonstrates the exact same level of obsession as:
And it’s good bye to A&M
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 7:44 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Oh I think it does anybody can see that our simple 6 word phrase demonstrates the same level of obsession
*sarcasm
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 7:50 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Never said it did. I merely wanted to point out that unlike what many of you like to allude to, there is a mention of a rival in your fight song. I don’t see mention of any other schools in there, do you?
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions
I don’t know about anyone else but I love to sing “Give’em Hell, Give’em Hell OU SUCKS!”
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 7:52 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
You might like to sing it, but it’s not “officially” part of the song. Believe me, I grew up watching the horns and going to games back when the stadium was just “Memorial Stadium”.
With that being said, we also know that the Longhorn obsession does lie with OU, so that’s not that big of a surprise that you sing about them.
I guess that means you’re obsessed with us too?
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions
No see at Texas the obsession is with winning Championships and seeing teams live up to the standard Darrell Royal and his teams set. Our obsession isn’t beating one particular team
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 8:06 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
If that’s the obsession, then last year and the year before that, and the year before that, and the year before that, and the year before that must have sucked- football wise, anyway.
But I will play along. Fair enough, if winning Championships is your stated obsession then I would like to remind you that you’re still 2 behind the Darrel K. Royal day’s. Maybe after you win those the name can be changed to the “Darrel K. Royal Mack Brown Memorial Stadium.”
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:17 PM CDT up reply actions
that made no sense dude
last year (2010) yea they didnt live up to that standard but how did they fail in 2008 and 2009? both of those teams were Championship caliber teams yea they didnt win the Title but both were close to it i wouldnt exactly call 12-1 and 13-1 failures.
and yes Mack is two behind Darrell Royal but i would remind you Royal is in the Hall of Fame and id also like to state for the record. Mack has won the same amount of Titles in 13 years that A&M has won in its whole history
formerly "Horns102591"
“WINNING CHAMPIONSHIPS”, emphasis on WINNING was your stated obsession, no?
Mean what you say. If you meant, that being championship caliber is what you’re obsessed with, then state that. Just showing you that you have not WON a championship since 2005.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:24 PM CDT up reply actions
We’re not talking about A&M here. We’re currently talking about Texas’ obsession.
Yes, you are correct. We have 1 National Championship in Football. Great, everyone knows it. Again, that’s not what horns1025 and I were were talking about.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:27 PM CDT up reply actions
we are talking texas obsession?
and you are a a&m fan, on a texas blog…but were obsessed? i feel lkle im taking crazy pills
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
HAHAHA. Your arguments are laughable here bud. This is the first time I’ve posted on this blog, yes I read it, yes I am an Aggie. The only way to learn about things and argue coherently is to know both sides. I do that in my everyday life as well as with my hobbies such as sports. Instead of being an ignorant fan with blinders for my school only, I choose to read up on my rival teams or about viewpoints that differ from my own.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:33 PM CDT up reply actions
well i am glad we both agree i am funny...
and you have such vaild arguements…you are so amazing…why cant i be like you
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
Because you have burnt orange colored blinders on and a Dwight Schrute picture. I’m leaning towards number 2 because Dwight is white and I am Asian.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:42 PM CDT up reply actions
haha that couldnt be further from the truth
your not asian…
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
and also can you point on something i said
that would make you think i wear blinders? i dont need blinders brah cos im like ray charles, i just dont see you…
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
and like i thought
there isnt anything to point out…game set match…
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
you….are….right….you….are….the….smartest…person….on….this….planet. very….dwight…..schrute…..like.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:52 PM CDT up reply actions
thank you asian man
you didnt need to say that….besides be white i guess i am like you
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
Yeah, this little mini-thread looked eerily similar to an ESPN blog thread.
"The only sport that should be cried over is tee ball."
- don't remember who said it, but I like it.
His statement was ....
he was obsessed with WINNING championships. He did not that his obsession was admiring WON championships. This is a healthy thing – being obsessed with winning championships – it’s not healthy being obsessed with your hated rival, only!
Reading comprehension is an 6th grade course in Austin – what is it in College Station?
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
by Snide Aside on Jul 16, 2011 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Would you care to look at what you just wrote and ask me about my reading and writing skills again?
By the way, I grew up and spent 21 years of my life in Austin. If you’re saying that my reading and writing comprehension is not up to par, then all I can say is that learned it in Austin.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 17, 2011 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
What exactly
would that have to do with the University of Texas?
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
You grew up in Austin and still went to AtM?
It is pretty obvious NOTHING took on you – school choice AND reading comprehension!
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
by Snide Aside on Jul 18, 2011 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
yea they fell short i said that
but they werent total failures and they didnt suck
formerly "Horns102591"
I agree 100%. They were great seasons and they certainly had the talent to win it all but they didn’t.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:29 PM CDT up reply actions
I would actually go a step further and say that last year was especially bad because of the preseason expectation level set upon the football program. 5-7 won’t happen again for a while, in my personal opinion.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 8:47 PM CDT up reply actions
the standard of Darrell Royal...
..eh? Well, I am sure he shed a few prideful tears when Baylor walked into that humungous stadium you named after him and whooped your collective asses up and down the field..
"Why not us?" '04+'07='11.
I actually believe in Tommy Tuberville.
im sure he shed a tear when we brought a NAtional Championship Trophy back to the Stadium we named after him
oh im sorry you’re a Tech fan ok let me explain…… you see a Championship Trophy is this thing you get when you are the best team in the nation
formerly "Horns102591"
Oh..
I didnt realize the “NAtional Championship Trophy” excuse worked in defense of missing a 5-7 team.
"Why not us?" '04+'07='11.
I actually believe in Tommy Tuberville.
every team has a bad year
Not every team has a National Championship. Pretty sure Tech has gone under .500. And I am also pretty sure their National Championship trophy case is empty.
"A lot of people look for the easy way to do anything, in swimming there is no easy way." - Eddie Reese
Chigaroogarem
WTF?
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
by Caradoc on Jul 17, 2011 8:05 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
pleae tell me how the first verse says anything about texas
Your entire fucking fight song
If you’re going to talk smack, you might want to make sure your facts are correct.
Oh...pardon us...
Your entire student body and former students begin with verse 2. That is an aTm issue. Tell the masses to sing the first verse if you are so irked by this little factoid.
I am quite thankful that at DKR, I do not have to listen to chants of "Big 12" echoing throughout.
by Mulliganville on Jul 19, 2011 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm impressed, Peter
It takes a lot of arrogance to take a post asking if Oklahoma will be willing to leave texas behind if conference realignment does happen, and make it all about A&M and texas, and specifically about A&M having an inferiority complex about texas. This is an incredible reach, even for you.
5 out of your last 15...
posts on your blog have been about Texas, so its not THAT big of a reach…
by TowerPower on Jul 16, 2011 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
See my post above
so predictable. it’s not even a challenge anymore.
Who are you?!
I'm Kick Ass!
by TexasGarcia37 on Jul 16, 2011 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Err
You just wrote a post titled “ESPN Will Be Texas’s Will Lyles.”
I’m pretty sure I’m not reaching. Even for me.
You ain't hurt...
you're joking?
He’s writing articles accusing us of violating NCAA rules? Maybe he should check his school’s history
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 6:26 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I know we haven’t got what is it 7 major infractions? In fact you rank right up there with Auburn
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 7:56 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
hmmmm
texas was hit once or twice for major violations under Royal
you got hit twice for major violations in the 1980’s
you got hit again for major violations in 2002 for baseball
that makes either 4 or 5 instances of major NCAA infractions, the most recent being 2002
Yeah, where the hell did I get the idea that you would ever break the rules.
nothing...thats why they are cheating
they have nothing else to do
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
they keep getting hit in men's basketball
although last time included academic fraud in football, too
Date: October 12, 2006
Violation Sumary: Violations in the men’s basketball regarding impermissible inducements and benefits involving representatives of the university’s athletics interests. Violations also occurred in the football program regarding academic fraud involving two former graduate assistant football coaches and impermissible inducements to prospective two-year college transfers.
Penalty Summary: Additional penalties imposed by the committee were: public reprimand and censure; three years of probation ( the institution has self-imposed a two-year period of probation); reduction in the total of grants-in-aid award in the men’s basketball program to no more than 12 during the 2007-08 and 2008-09 seasons; also reduced the total of official paid visits by a total of eight from the maximum number allowed during the 2006-07 and 2007-8 academic years; a show cause provision placed on a former graduate assistant coach for a period of three years; dissociation of a representative of the university’s athletics interest for a period of four years; annual compliance reporting required.
not claming equivalence
you’re upset at the implication texas may be cheating
I’m simply pointing out that y’all do have a history of breaking the rules.
LOL
never heard Joe Pa say he wasnt gonna leave College Football to the Barry Switzer’s and Mack Brown’s of the world or the Barry Switzer’s and Darrell Royal’s of the world. have people cheated at Texas? yes of course they have when you have a 100 year long history yea someone is gonna break the rules eventually. but we have a bigger history of being clean. and when your program has 7 major infractions you have no room to accuse anyone of cheating.
formerly "Horns102591"
JoePa said that when Sherrill was at Pittsburgh
Regardless, our history does not preclude us from pointing out the potential for someone else to break the rules.
my point is
when your program has a LONG history of breaking the rules it might be best for you to just sit there and not point the finger at someone.
pot meet kettle
formerly "Horns102591"
my point is
when someone has the potential to indirectly buy recruits, I’m going to point it out, regardless of A&M’s history with the NCAA
Given that texas is right there with Baylor, Kansas, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma in schools committing major violations in the last decade, it is a relevant topic to bring up.
and how many times has Mack Brown bought a recruit?
considering almost everyone knows Texas doesnt have to buy recruits your theory that we might start is just stupid
formerly "Horns102591"
Rice and Arkansas
Arkansas has since made up for their lack of activity, getting hit 3 times since 1997
which, not coincidentally
follows their move to the SEC, something from which one could fashion yet another cogent argument as to why it would be entirely f#cking stupid for TAMU to run away to a conference in which cheating is subject to escalation.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 17, 2011 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions
That Bama isn't on that list suggests they may be the most corrupt of all.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 16, 2011 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions
It's reaching
Equating “here is why there is a potential for abuses in recruiting if the lhn televises high school football games” to “Aggies have an inferiority complex about texas” is a reach.
How does writing about how the lhn will allow texas to bypass traditional recruiting avenues and pay high school coaches indirectly to funnel recruits to them equal an inferiority complex?
Dude
You can’t even bring yourself to capitalize our school’s name. Who does that? I mean, besides children?
You ain't hurt...
Answer my question, please.
To answer your question, anyone who is belittling a rival school on the internet.
I’m assuming that is the same reason people write “aggy” on here. Does this mean they have an inferiority complex to A&M?
Dude, you are the manager of an sbnation blog.
You, unlike commenters, are expected to maintain some semblance of being impartial. Do PB or any of the writers here use “Aggy” in their posts?
Being an editor/manager of an SB Nation blog means we are inherently biased
Are you unaware of the whole reason for the creation of SB Nation?
In your defense,
you are not just the manager of an SBNation. You are basically also 50% of it’s active membership as well.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 17, 2011 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
This is very close to best post on this thread
I’d put you 1b behind bevosbackside “OU respectfully sucks”. Noice.
Burnt Orange Nation
Follow Along on Twitter @TXStampede
It's in the post, but okay
I’ll spell it out for you again. When you read/listen to Aggies, many (not all) of them are riddled with classic victimization. For example: “Texas is going to unfairly use ESPN to recruit kids, just like Will Lyles.”
It’s always the same: “Texas is not just evil, but is holding us down, and if only our administration had the balls we could shed these chains and finally be free and reach our potential.”
And, it goes on, “Let’s go to the SEC and punish those arrogant whorns.”
The point of my post was to call out that mindset as being wrongly focused on punishing UT (naive) and mystifyingly counter-productive. Instead of talking about how to maximize your performance in the real world, all too many Aggies prefer to embrace fantasies.
That’s fine for certain purposes, but not for optimally tackling real world problems. Going to the SEC wouldn’t punish Texas and is hugely risky to A&M. Go for it, if you like, but don’t be surprised that we’re snickering at you for thinking it a good idea. It’s dumb and — to a lot of us — signals that the real priority is escaping Texas, not beating us.
Amazingly, y’all can’t seem to figure out that you’d be better off sticking around, enjoying what’s a much better situation than you’re willing to recognize, and trying to just, you know, beat us. That’s all you have to do.
Instead, you want to run to the SEC.
Pretty sad.
You ain't hurt...
First off
We just beat you and will do it again on Thanksgiving
Secondly, no one has ever said they want to “punish Texas.” show me a link anywhere that says that. What we want to do is move to a league where can maximize our potential. Again, it has nothing to do with you.
by miketag on Jul 16, 2011 9:23 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
You really don't get it
That’s right: all you have to do is beat us and this is a great arrangement for you. That’s not a tall order, y’all have done it several times in recent years, and you want to… go to the SEC? Only an Aggie could come up with that logic. Amazing.
You ain't hurt...
CMON PETER!!
its not about you! a&m has a richer history, better football program , more national titles and wants to show the sec how to play football….
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
It’s always the same: "[t]exas is not just evil, but is holding us down, and if only our administration had the balls we could shed these chains and finally be free and reach our potential."
I don’t think texas is “holding A&M down” as much as I think they are trying to maximize every advantage, real and perceived, that they can come up with. Utilizing a network to indirectly pay high school coaches to steer recruits to texas is a perfect example of this. Is it “holding A&M down”? No. Is it taking advantage of an opportunity available only (for now) to texas? Yes.
Is this “victimization”? No. It is simply pointing out another way texas is trying to maximize the advantages they have or are creating for themselves. It is a big reach to go from “look at how texas can use this to their advantage” to “we’re the victims here!!!”
And, it goes on, "Let’s go to the SEC and punish those arrogant whorns."
This is where your narcissism is kicking in. A&M moving to the SEC has nothing to do with “punishing” texas, and everything to do with helping A&M. To simplify, what is better for A&M? To be in a conference where texas has their own network run by ESPN, where ESPN will be doing everything they can to extol the virtues of texas, or to be in a conference which ESPN currently has the rights to televise football games, and regularly claims is the “top football conference in the nation” every chance they get? For A&M, we’re at a disadvantage in the former situation, but able to move into an advantageous position in the latter situation. “Punishing” texas (I know of few, if any, Aggies who refer to y’all as ‘whorns’, I think that is a Sooner thing) never comes into the equation.
The point of my post was to call out that mindset as being wrongly focused on punishing [texas] (naive) and mystifyingly counter-productive. Instead of talking about how to maximize your performance in the real world, all too many Aggies prefer to embrace fantasies.
The problem with your post is that you frame is as to how if effects texas, and not how such a move to the SEC would be advantageous to A&M.
Going to the SEC wouldn’t punish [t]exas and is hugely risky to A&M. Go for it, if you like, but don’t be surprised that we’re snickering at you for thinking it a good idea. It’s dumb and — to a lot of us — signals that the real priority is escaping [t]exas, not beating us.
Like I said, the point isn’t to punish texas, but to look at what is best for A&M for the next ten, twenty, fifty years. If our only priority was beating texas, we’d be talking about staying in the Big 12, because let’s face it, three of the last five years, we’ve done exactly that in football. With the possible exception of maybe men’s basketball, I’m not sure what other area texas can claim that they are superior to A&M, athletically speaking.
Amazingly, y’all can’t seem to figure out that you’d be better off sticking around, enjoying what’s a much better situation than you’re willing to recognize, and trying to just, you know, beat us. That’s all you have to do.
While I’m not surprised you would try to convince us we’d be better of sticking around in a situation where texas will have an advantage with their new network, I do think you would recognize that if it was just about beating you, we wouldn’t be talking about leaving the conference.
Not even remotely convinced
There’s nothing in your response that demonstrates — at all — that a move to the SEC helps A&M. Your response boils down to (1) a vague reference to the quality of the SEC in football (which only begs the unanswered question as to why it would be a good idea to go become a middling member of that conference rather than seek to be an alpha dog in the Big 12), and (2) escaping Texas.
The first response is unanswered and, as I’ve noted repeatedly now, a huge risk that Aggies aren’t even acknowledging, let alone trying to evaluate realistically. The second part is, well, the point of the post. Thank you for affirming what I was saying all along.
This is about escaping Texas, and doing so without a good answer for why it helps A&M.
You ain't hurt...
There is no guarantee we would be
A middling member in that conference. You probably think we will, but I bet you also thought you would beat Baylor at home last year too.
I already addressed this issue once. A move to the SEC would give us something to offer in state recruits that no other school in the state would have, a chance to play in the best football conference in the country. It would also open some doors in Louisiana.
Your entire argument is basically that we shouldn’t go to the SEC b/c we would be an average football team there. What about all the other sports? What about the increased revenue a new tv contract would bring? The only reason you can come up with for A&M to stay in the Big 12 is that well, the football isn’t as tough.
by miketag on Jul 17, 2011 1:45 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
A move to the SEC would give us something to offer in state recruits that no other school in the state would have, a chance to play in the best football conference in the country
University of South Carolina can say that too. But their only claim to football fame is the chant “Love me some Cocks!” Guess you’d fit right in (see Hopkins pictures below).
by divinebovine on Jul 17, 2011 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions
SC won the East/made it to the SEC CCG--lost but made it...
and are a favorite in the East this year; their recruiting has improved a ton over the last five to ten years—their baseball team is not shabby either if you have not noticed.
"Fast Eddie: No bar?
Cashier: No bar, no pinball machines, no bowling alleys, just pool... nothing else. This is Ames, mister."
From the movie--The Hustler
GET TO THE RIM HEAT (and SKY)! ATTACK THE PAINT!
I know the baseball is good at SC.
Kansas has good basketball. But I mentioned the football.
Just because someone made the SEC CCG doesn’t make them good. I admit, we sucked last year. So did SC. I usually try to watch their games when they are on. The Seattle Seahawks made the NFL playoffs this past year. Were they good? Hell no.
by divinebovine on Jul 19, 2011 9:58 PM CDT up reply actions
I admit, we sucked last year. So did SC.
I disagree, SC may not have been a great team, but they were certainly better than average at least if not good.
"Fast Eddie: No bar?
Cashier: No bar, no pinball machines, no bowling alleys, just pool... nothing else. This is Ames, mister."
From the movie--The Hustler
GET TO THE RIM HEAT (and SKY)! ATTACK THE PAINT!
Keep holding on to 2010 and our lackluster performance across the board...
It is obvious that one bad year in Austin is something that you are going to choke the life out of until you cannot do it any longer. aTm would get owned by just the Mississippi schools. Don’t even bother with LSU, Auburn, Alabama, FL, GA, etc.
I am quite thankful that at DKR, I do not have to listen to chants of "Big 12" echoing throughout.
by Mulliganville on Jul 17, 2011 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions
How does a move to the SEC help A&M's football program?
Being able to tell recruits they can stay at home and still play in the best football conference in the nation will help A&M’s recruiting. Being able to tell recruits that we’re the only Texas school in the SEC will help recruiting.
The potential for more television revenue than we’re currently promised in the Big 12 is also another reason to like a move to the SEC.
As for your second point, you seem utterly convinced this HAS to be about texas, which makes explaining this to you pointless, because you won’t listen to anything that tell you otherwise. Again, your narcissism is getting in the way reality.
I find it funny that you and miketag both...
truly believe A&M will be successful in the SEC. You’re marginally successful in the Big XII, but suddenly you’ll be able to be exponentially better in the SEC.
You’re point regarding recruiting misses, clearly, on the essence of recruiting. Football players don’t want to play to get beat. They want to play to win. (Assuming a move to the SEC) A&M doesn’t have the prospects of winning in the SEC that you think they do. Therefore, instead of reaping the benefits of said recruiting, you’ll be opening the door for LSU, Alabama, Florida, etc to come into Texas and take the recruits you think you’ll land.
I call bullshit.
Being able to tell recruits they can stay at home and still play in the best football conference in the nation will help A&M’s recruiting.
How’s Vanderbilt recruiting nowadays?
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 17, 2011 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions
My point is:
Being in the SEC does not guarantee that your recruiting will improve.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 17, 2011 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions
How many Texas universities are in the SEC?
Vanderbilt is a private school in Tennessee, so they are no comparison to a public university in Texas. Different recruiting areas, alumni bases, missions expectations, etc.
You don’t have another example to compare this move to because there isn’t one.
by Beergut on Jul 18, 2011 12:11 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
You don’t have another example to compare this move to because there isn’t one.
By the same logic, you don’t have another example, either. In fact, as you point out, there isn’t one. You’re the one asserting that moving to the SEC would be better for A&M recruiting. You need to justify this claim. And, as you point out, you have no example to draw from.
Burden of proof’s a bitch ain’it it?
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 18, 2011 12:36 AM CDT up reply actions
South Carolina
South Carolina’s recruiting vis a vis Clemson is dramatically improved now over where it was before joining the SEC. And there is no shortage of guys from the Palmetto State saying they chose South Carolina over Clemson to play in the SEC.
No matter how you're looking at it
The competition level increase would far outweigh the benefit of getting a few additional prospects if it even works out that way. The few you’d gain would be enough to get you into basically the same position you’re in now in the big 12. Just on the cusp, but never seeming to break through to the top.
TEXAS FIGHT
The entire "lower case" charade that exists in college station <---- see how stupid that looks...
makes your entire fan base and alumni appear juvenile. It is as bad as when Texas fans call you “faggy.” This group here calls our own on this. But, in College Station, whorns and t.u. appears to be the norm and encouraged.
Wasn't this system designed to prevent this from happening?
2010/11 Final BCS Standings
1. Auburn 14-0
2. TCU 13-0
by Mulliganville on Jul 17, 2011 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions
My mistake lower down.
I had just returned home from an 18 hour shift and had beer in hand. I will try not to make that mistake again. I will remember I before E except after C and not to use Ys.
by divinebovine on Jul 17, 2011 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Beergut
please, have some dignity. Its sad that we’re more embarrassed by your remarks than you are.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 16, 2011 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions
aggy network?
Since the Cartoon Network is already taken, those girls down in junior college station will have to find another way to broadcast their “games” out to Hooterville.
Your narcissism never ceases to amaze me
It is not all about you. Ags want to go to the SEC because it is a better option for A&M than the Big 12. I want to see 90K fans at Kyle every home game, not just when we play Nebraska. SEC fans travel and a move to the SEC will necessitate and expansion of Kyle. You are talking about an extra $1 million per home game from ticket revenue alone. We can improve all sports with that revenue. The SEC will renegotiate their tv contract once the Texas market is open to them (which is why they want A&M). The SEC contract with A&M and whoever else they bring in will top every other conference in revenue. Aggies want to take road trips to Baton Rouge, Oxford, and Gainesville more than they want to go to Ames, Lubbock etc. The argument that the conference would be tougher in football is laughable. I am willing to bet it would be tougher right now. I also think we will adjust. The move is not about the next 5 years. It is about what is best for A&M ten, twenty, and fifty years down the road. Even if you want to make the argument that we will be no better than an 8-4 (Tech-line) team in the SEC for the next 50 years there is more than one sport than just football. We have proven on the field that we are competitive on a national level in every sport save volleyball right now. Even if you were to concede that we would be average in football (I think we will be competitive from the get go) we would still be able to compete for conference and national titles in every other sport immediately.
I guess you could argue that A&M leaving for the SEC and the breakup of the conference would hurt Tx. I think you want to go independent so we would be helping you. Either way, that has nothing to do with my (or any Aggie’s) motivation to join the SEC. It is a better deal for A&M. What it does to Tx does not enter the equation. I know it may be hard for you to believe, but it is not all about you.
There are a lot of recruits who want to play for the best football conference in the country. I know there are a lot of Aggies who believe that being the only school in the state to offer that opportunity would be a boost to A&M’s recruiting. I think many believe that the LHN will give Texas a recruiting advantage (specifically putting HS games on tv) and one way to counteract this advantage is to offer something that Tx does not offer. I think this is a very valid argument.
I find the frustration with being called tu and sips rather amusing. Considering how many posts on this blog refer to “aggy” I do not know where the complaints come from. You do not see any Auburn fans whining about being called “barners” do you? It is part of a rivalry. Maybe you should put you man panties on and learn to deal with it.
As for the LHN, I still do not think it will be a success. I do not think there will be enough content to produce a viable product. The Big 10 Network struggles to fill their programming and they have 10 different schools worth of content. Even for the most die hard fan, I doubt watching the 2010 season on repeat for the 3rd time appeals to anyone. As I have said before, how many people are going to tune in to watch your crew team?
Tx wanted to go to the Pac 10 and thought everyone would step in line behind them. A&M did not and then you threatened to never play us again in any sport (who is taking their ball and going home?). When some of your influential boosters started contacting Belmont and asking why Tx was going to be playing in Pullman,WA at 10 PM on the Fox Regional West channel while A&M was going to be playing in Baton Rouge at 7 PM on an ESPN national broadcast, you started to re-consider your decision. A&M said fine, go play with yourself and the state legislature started rumbling about who Tx thought they were trying to break up the conference. Belmont decided maybe we should try to get more money and spin this, and you stayed in the conference. The inference that A&M did not have an offer to join the SEC despite articles like the one linked above is laughable, but i guess if it helps you sleep better at night then more power to you.
Sad thing is
That’s about the best y’all can hope for this year
by miketag on Jul 17, 2011 1:34 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
you know your bowl record is below .500
and your win percentage .599…
I don’t believe you, continue.
---Dwight Shrute
Oh please dude. The SEC does not want you as much as you think. I know OU fans who think it was a way of trying to tempt the big dog and the real money maker. I agree with them the SEC wanted Texas in the past according to a former SEC Commissioner it was almost a done deal until the legislature said “you want Texas you gotta take A&M too” well guess who the SEC didn’t want? That’s right A&M.
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 8:04 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
yes i believe i addressed that.
they wanted you to try and lure us in. lets face it A&M is not the big money producer Texas is. what does the SEC want? MONEY and lots of it. who would produce more? Texas or A&M? i think you can figure that one out
formerly "Horns102591"
What does Tx have to do with it?
I am talking about whether A&M had an invite. No one mentioned Tx
by miketag on Jul 16, 2011 9:16 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Btw
Tx was never going to the SEC. In the early 90s A&M was looking at going to the SEC while y’all were looking at the PAC 10. Your OU friends don’t know a lot.
by miketag on Jul 16, 2011 9:18 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Texas wanted to join the SEC in the late 80’s, but would only be given the stamp of approval from its state legislature if Texas A&M could join them. The SEC balked on that demand which led to Arkansas and South Carolina coming on board instead. That’s the story at least from former SEC commissioner Harvey Schiller this past week on the Paul Finebaum radio show.
“The natural associations were certainly Arkansas and South Carolina but the one that really made sense to us was Texas. So I spent some time with (Texas athletics director) DeLoss Dodds and he really wanted to join the conference. However, the state legislature somehow got wind of it through Texas A&M and said you have to bring in both schools or you can’t take Texas. And we couldn’t do that for a variety of reasons.”
Unfortunately, the natural follow up question which was not asked was what were the reasons that prevented the Aggies from being a worthy addition to the conference? Any coach worth his salt in recruiting will tell you he takes on “package deals” all the time when you’re talking about a “player” like Texas. If this story is true, as told, this has to count as one of the major gaffes of the last quarter century in collegiate athletics.
The Longhorns and Aggies would eventually help the Big 8 morph into the Big 12 as the Southwest Conference dissolved into nothing but a debaucherous memory.
The SEC added Arkansas and South Carolina which led to… a few years of decent Nolan Richardson basketball?
At least they captured that massive Columbia television market…
formerly "Horns102591"
interesting
You do realize you’re talking about two different decades, right?
miketag is talking about the early ’90s, when texas looked at the Pac-10 and A&M looked at the SEC.
You’re talking about the late ’80s, when A&M was beating the snot out of texas, and (if you believe the rhetoric being spewed on here) texas was looking to escape to the SEC.
There is nothing to prove or disprove this story, but I’m wondering the reason the SEC didn’t want to take on A&M, if this story is true, was because of the success we were having in football at the time. During the 1980s, LSU was struggling, Florida had yet to become the giant they would morph into under Spurrier, and Auburn and Pat Dye were considered elites.
but I’m wondering the reason the SEC didn’t want to take on A&M, if this story is true, was because of the success we were having in football
Wow. Just wow.
Jesus, Beergut, do you ever think about anything? Or are you merely a programmed response system generated by some mediocre psychologist with the aim of reinforcing the most oversimplified theories on human defense mechanisms, commonly found in armchair conversations and mid-20th Century introduction to psychology textbooks?
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 16, 2011 11:42 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Dude slow down.
He doesn’t know what any of those words mean.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 17, 2011 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Pot, meet kettle.
You’re talking about the late ’80s, when A&M was beating the snot out of texas, and (if you believe the rhetoric being spewed on here) texas was looking to escape to the SEC.
Why is it that when we want to leave, we’re “looking to escape,” but when aggy wants to leave it’s purely a drive to better themselves?
If the world was a school, we'd be homecoming king...
I don't think anyone is looking to escape anyone
the idea that someone looking to join another conference for a better situation for their institution is “looking to escape” is rhetoric propagated here by PB and others.
Kind of like the propaganda
that you are spreading on your shanty of a blog about how the LHN is going to indirectly pay coaches to funnel recruits to Texas? You can’t have it both ways, Beergut. So again, pot, meet kettle.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
who said anything about indirectly?
I think it is pretty obvious that the network would directly be paying the coaches. btw, where are you coaching at these days?
It is in one of Beergut's previous posts
you see, if you follow along with the adults then that wouldn’t be hard to understand.
btw, what company that was dredging the cesspool of working age adults hired you?
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
If you want to post
your place of business along with all your personal information like home address, phone number and date of birth that can be obtained once I post my place of business I will meet you there.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
It isn't that complicated
Direct payment would be from texas to the coach. This is indirect b/c texas is choosing the games for the network and ESPN is doing the paying.
by Beergut on Jul 18, 2011 12:17 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
yea Mack really needs to bribe recruits
tell ya what when you have proof and not just stupid accusations come back until then stop crying about the LHN and HS games
formerly "Horns102591"
You really like dealing in theoreticals, don't you?
1) Your contention that A&M will benefit from recruiting while joining the SEC is a theory that is completely unfounded. Yet you imply that it is inevitable. Not likely.
2) You theorize that Texas will (will – not “might”) be paying coaches to sway recruits to Texas. Again, completely unfounded. Texas has no history of infractions under Mack Brown. None. Your just hoping Texas would pay for recruits so you can say “I told you so.” You’re just throwing shit on the wall hoping something sticks.
Would the coach even be the one getting the money?
I’d think the money would go to the school and the coach might get some additional cash from the school.
TEXAS FIGHT
The coach would get no money
please don’t listen to a guy that has no idea what he is talking about. Any television money a school would get would most likely go to the districts general fund with some being kicked back to athletics.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
This is funny
and where does the wide chasm of coaches pushing kids towards Texas because of this get bridged? You see, actually being in the profession and knowing a wide variety of coaches I haven’t ran across many that don’t have the best interest of their kids at heart and value their integrity more than a few more dollars in their athletic budget (which, whatever television money they did get would most likely in every district end up in the general fund with a small amount set aside for athletics).
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
During the '80s, LSU was 3-1 vs. the Aggies
It wasn’t until the ’90s we started losing much in that series.
Wait, I'm very confused
I want to see 90K fans at Kyle every home game, not just when we play Nebraska.
You mean you don’t sell out every game? I THOUGHT YOU HAD THE BEST FANS IN ALL OF TEXAS THE ENTIRE COUNTRY THE WHOLE WORLD THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE!!!!!!! At least that’s what you always like to say.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions
but but but
but they never sit down!!!!!!
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 16, 2011 8:24 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
So I guess the worthiness of watching your team play
is directly dependent on who you play. It isn’t enough to see your team play and play well.
Who are you?!
I'm Kick Ass!
by TexasGarcia37 on Jul 16, 2011 8:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Or it could be a commentary on
The ability of opposing fanbases to bring 10K to a game.
by miketag on Jul 16, 2011 9:14 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Just FYI, the stated capacity for Kyle Field is a little over 83k fans. I’m pretty sure miketag was talking about overselling the stadium for games with football powerhouses like Nebraska.
by TAMUAggie2007 on Jul 16, 2011 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions
And thanks for clearing this up
When some of your influential boosters started contacting Belmont and asking why Tx was going to be playing in Pullman,WA at 10 PM on the Fox Regional West channel while A&M was going to be playing in Baton Rouge at 7 PM on an ESPN national broadcast, you started to re-consider your decision.
Yes, that’s EXACTLY how realignment went down. Thanks for clarifying!
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, this thread turned into a slap fight.
"The only sport that should be cried over is tee ball."
- don't remember who said it, but I like it.
Yup. Just like this.
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
Why do we do this?
As an avid Longhorn alumnus and fan I read this post and I agreed with every aspect of this post whole heartedly. That said, I knew very well that there was not a single Aggie out there who was going to agree with it, and a shit show was going to ensue. It’s the same reason why I decided not to share this on my facebook page. I knew that my Longhorn friends would eat it up while my Aggie friends would take offense. It just wasn’t worth the frustration of the arguments that were sure to come. I see a lot of that on this thread
It’s a rivalry, and, accordingly, there is going to be banter, and ultimately these types of posts are going to surface on fan sites of both schools, respectively (see the number of posts on iamthe12thman regarding their take of LHN). That said, why do we engage one another in such a vile manner? Every post on this thread can essentially (obvious over-generalization) be boiled down to these two camps:
Longhorns: aggy is delusional, and they’re jealous of our success and want to bail to get away from “big brother. Why the hell?”
Aggies: tu is arrogant and misinformed. We’re a proud fan base, and we think tu is going to unfairly get benefits from this deal. We don’t like it and want to leave.
So, why do we do this? We KNOW we are on diametrically opposed ends of this particular spectrum. We KNOW that we are going to disagree about mostly everything, and we KNOW that these venom soaked arguments are going to ensue following a post like this. Why do the Aggies come over here and try to argue their viewpoint against a community that is clearly bent against them on the issue (and the opposite can be asked for Longhorns that post on Aggie fan sites when similar posts are made regarding us)? Then, why do we Longhorns engage them and participate in a discussion that will almost never reach a consensus, agreement, or, likely, even a mutual understanding?
I’m all about argument when the two sides are willing to listen to one another. But, in this case we don’t like them, and they damn sure don’t like us. There is an aspect of brotherly rivalry that surfaces every now and then, but mostly this is the world we live in: Longhorns and Aggies will never get along. Reading everything back and forth makes me feel like everyone is arguing with a brick wall, and I genuinely don’t understand why we do this to ourselves.
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
Why do we do this?
We’re still 48 days out, what the hell else do we have to do? This has been very entertaining!
I've been fueling my dreams eating greens and beans...
by 16thLonghorn on Jul 16, 2011 11:44 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Because...
I genuinely don’t understand why we do this to ourselves.
…it’s so damn easy and so damn funny!
I can’t believe we’ve gone this deep into this thread without this:
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 16, 2011 11:47 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bless you, HH. Bless you.
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
Eye bleach, please?
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
Eh, it's July
Thankfully, Texas football isn’t in the news right now. And about the most interesting thing going on was a big chunk of Aggies starting clamor yet again for a SECession.
No surprise that the thread is a shit show. And I try to limit my examinations of the Aggie mind to once a year or so.
You ain't hurt...
Because were like bears near the end of hibernation
and we’re starting to feel the electricity in the air, and our balls are dropping, and we’re in the mood to chest-bump, and kick some ass, and start some smack-talk.
Hook Em Horns!
What the hell does this mean?
JoePa said that when Sherrill was at Pittsburgh Regardless, our history does not preclude us from pointing out the potential for someone else to break the rules.
I Am The 12th Man.com
by Beergut on Jul 16, 2011 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Do you own a butter knife? Then you have the "potential’ to be Jack the Ripper – give me a break!
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
By the way, Peter...
…thanks for starting a thread that afforded me and so many others the opportunity to do this:
Anytime I think of Aggy,
I just think “chocopockets.” And then I start crying I laugh so hard.
by divinebovine on Jul 16, 2011 11:58 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
That post was class A material...
I’ve reread it about 5 times….and each time, hilarity ensues.
Wasn't this system designed to prevent this from happening?
2010/11 Final BCS Standings
1. Auburn 14-0
2. TCU 13-0
by Mulliganville on Jul 17, 2011 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Poor Aggies
Good-bye and please do take the land thieves with you. I call.
Don't be such a baby.
by Wrangler86 on Jul 17, 2011 3:27 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
haha...all in.
I am quite thankful that at DKR, I do not have to listen to chants of "Big 12" echoing throughout.
by Mulliganville on Jul 17, 2011 8:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Do Aggie fans really want to go to the SEC?
By joining the SEC, their chances of ever winning a national championship in football goes exponentially lower. They have a much better chance in Big 12. not sure if i get the logic really..
by nyclonghorngal on Jul 18, 2011 11:37 AM CDT reply actions
Aggies are too blind to know what is in their best interest
However, their pipe dream that the Sooners are equally stupid isn’t going to fly. NO WAY does Stoops allow OU to be sucked into the $EC. OU is dominating and has a national exposure as one of the lead dogs of the Big XII and there is no reason for them to subject their program to the competition of the $EC. OU gains nothing out of a move to $EC except a competitve disadvantage for a track to a BCS bowl game or MNC.
OU stays as is. If Agggie goes, then Big XII brings in BYU or someone else. Texas will likely cut all ties with Ags—no games PERIOD. Ags will become meaningless in $EC and will challenge Miss. State and Ole Miss for bottom honors.
Don't be such a baby.
Speaking as a fan of the Big 12, and also a fan of a school totally dependent on the Big 12's survival and thriving in its current configuration...
I’m really glad the people making the decisions at aTm are professional adults and not the Aggie representatives I regularly encounter on the Internet.
by BracketCat on Jul 19, 2011 10:33 AM CDT reply actions 5 recs
Agreed BC
"If you don't want to work, become a reporter. That awful power, the public opinion of the nation, was created by a horde of self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditch digging and shoemaking and fetched up journalism on their way to the poorhouse." - Mark Twain
Forgive my ignorance of stupid college phrases, but what does "t-sips" mean?
I honestly thought nothing could be a dumber phrase than “Rock Chalk Jayhawk” (what does it MEAN?!?!?), but “t-sips” is even worse. Even faithful wikipedia didn’t help, it just dragged me to a page (after page after page) of ridiculous A&M nutswinging.
"If you don't want to work, become a reporter. That awful power, the public opinion of the nation, was created by a horde of self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditch digging and shoemaking and fetched up journalism on their way to the poorhouse." - Mark Twain
I've never understood why sophistication is an insult.
Poor Aggies.
by TexasTexasYeehaw on Jul 19, 2011 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions
It's probably 80-100 years old
I can imagine that (mostly) farm boys found sophistication something to belittle.
Oh wow.
That has to be the lamest insult in the history of insults. Do they not realize being sophisticated is a good thing?
“Ur moar sofisiticiated than me an’ my familee! I’m goin’ to make funn at ur expence! Dur hurr!”
"If you don't want to work, become a reporter. That awful power, the public opinion of the nation, was created by a horde of self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditch digging and shoemaking and fetched up journalism on their way to the poorhouse." - Mark Twain
"Swinging" is probably too generous.
Dropping may be more accurate.
by divinebovine on Jul 19, 2011 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow
Oh, the irony of Peter spewing an unending sea of rhetoric about how all Aggies "accept unequivocally a certain set of ideas" or conform to a UT-hating mold completely detached from reality, never stopping to consider whether his characterization of a class of people numbering in the tens of thousands is precisely the sort of bone-headed, one-track, detached-from-reality mindset that he is simultaneously condemning. By what standard did you arrive at your whimsical perception of Aggies? A blogger? Two? A hundred posts on an obscure website (BON) or an even more obscure A&M-related website (12th man)? Stray comments from Aggies in a parking lot? If that is your standard, then one might just as easily conclude that all Longhorns accept unequivocally a certain set of ideas – namely, that A&M plays "second fiddle," that the sole source of Aggies’ identity is UT, and that Aggies are willing to do anything to hurt UT even if it means hurting themselves.
But that, of course, would be completely ridiculous and would ignore real world facts. Your analysis is completely devoid of any accurate description of the vast, vast majority of Aggies. Not only is there a segment of the Aggie population that does not conform to your notion of an Aggie (and indeed does "peddle[] in reality"), it happens to be the overwhelming majority of Aggies. Your caricature of Aggies, assuming it is tethered to reality at all, is based loosely on a vocal minority [*1] presumably found mostly, though not exclusively, on the internet. Perhaps you were attempting (in vain) to try your hand at sarcasm, or perhaps you truly are ignorant of the facts. Either way, you should be ashamed for painting all Aggies with such a broad and demeaning brush. Most Aggies study biology, engineering, or business, and support the football team but do not (ghasp!) have an undying, irrational hatred for UT bordering on an identity crises. In fact, most Aggies actually have a respect for UT, which is often inspired by a connection to the school (brothers, sisters, etc.). In that sense, they are a lot like most Longhorns. Well, like most Longhorns apparently excluding you.
[*1] See generally http://texags.com; see also http://www.iamthe12thman.com.
by SJ27 on Jul 19, 2011 7:55 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I wish your reading comprehension
was on par with how well written your rebuttal was. This following quote is from the 2nd paragraph of PB’s post:
Most vocally (and comically), of course, are the Aggies, who are lighting up boards and blogs with renewed commitment to establishing their persecuted status.
Come on, man. He points out pretty early who he is aiming this post towards. Perhaps you are offended because you fall into that “vocal minority”.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
I wish your reading comprehension
of the whole was on par with your reading comprehension of a single sentence. The entire post was directed to Aggies generally, hence the numerous references to Aggies generally (e.g., “To be an Aggie is to accept unequivocally a certain set of ideas,” “if it were not part and parcel with the broader Aggie mindset, in which their own identity is forever defined by their rival,” “there isn’t at least a minority counterculture that peddles in reality”). He may have intended to be aiming at bloggers, but the net he cast couldn’t have been any more poorly designed for that purpose. And no, I am decidedly not in the vocal minority.
by SJ27 on Jul 19, 2011 9:28 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
He made the point of prefacing
who it was directed towards. It really isn’t that hard to understand.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
Anything referencing Texags for logical thinking
would not get endorsed by Charlie Sheen. Similar to turning in a doctoral dissertation while only referencing wikipedia.
by divinebovine on Jul 19, 2011 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions
oh i beg to differ
ive met Aggies who are good people and i get along with but they all still have a undying hatred for UT. hell most of them wouldnt even capitalize “TU” if i paid them 100,000 dollars. most even refuse to call UT “Texas” they insist on “tu”
formerly "Horns102591"
Re:
Oh, the irony of Peter spewing an unending sea of rhetoric about how all Aggies “accept unequivocally a certain set of ideas” or conform to a UT-hating mold completely detached from reality, never stopping to consider whether his characterization of a class of people numbering in the tens of thousands is precisely the sort of bone-headed, one-track, detached-from-reality mindset that he is simultaneously condemning.
What is ironic here? I think what you are trying to say is that Peter over-generalized about the degree to which Aggie agree with each other, which is something but it’s not ironic. In any case, your point only works, if at all, because you’ve inserted all in bold.
If that is your standard, then one might just as easily conclude that all Longhorns accept unequivocally a certain set of ideas – namely, that A&M plays “second fiddle,” that the sole source of Aggies’ identity is UT, and that Aggies are willing to do anything to hurt UT even if it means hurting themselves.
I do not think it’s productive to tell someone that their “standard” at arriving at a “whimsical perception of Aggies” is wrong based on a sample-size you have imagined. I don’t know what Peter’s data set is, but I suspect its more than “A blogger” or “Two” or even “A hundred posts ona n obscure website” or “Stray comments from Aggies in a parking lot.” I suspect that his experience with Aggies is comparable to your own; a lifetime of engagement with hundreds, maybe thousands, of them in a multitude of social settings. And just like you, he’s made some conclusions about how Aggies behave, and what they think. The difference is he’s posted some places where you can find Aggies behaving badly, as have you, but you’ve not presented any evidence of Aggies behaving well, except your own personal assurance as Speaker for All Aggies Everywhere that “the vast, vast majority of Aggies” are not how Peter describes them, and that for some reason Aggies who “study biology, engineering, or business, and support the football team” do not “have an undying, irrational hatred for UT bordering on an identity crises.”
(As an aside, does this mean Aggie liberal arts majors, or chemistry majors, or art students, do have an undying irrational hatred for UT bordering on an identity crisis? What does studying biology, or engineering, or business have to do with being accurate about opposing fans? That isn’t very intuitive.)
While I agree with you that people tend to over-generalize about opposing fans, that hardly means Peter is unqualified to make some generalizations about Aggies, particularly if he backs that up with links to blogs or forums are littered with precisely the kind of delusion he’s criticizing. And he shouldn’t “be ashamed” for doing so, either, as this is his house, mother fucker.
by Skin Patrol on Jul 20, 2011 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
If you are unable to see the irony of a blatantly narrow-minded and detached-from-reality post about the narrow-mindedness and detached-from-reality nature of others, I do not think I can help you. Also, thank you for pointing out the fundamental flaw in Peter’s post: "The difference is he’s posted some places where you can find Aggies behaving badly" Exactly, he includes two links to sources – sources that I discussed in my original post and actually used to support my argument – and then takes a giant leap to generalizing about all Aggies (And yes, "all" is certainly justified since his phrases are drafted in terms of universal maxims, e.g., "there isn’t even a minority that peddles in reality" or "To be an Aggie is to accept unequivocally . . . ." just to name a few).
To the extent you argue that I provide no sources for Aggies "behaving well," that completely misses the point. I am not the one who has made outrageous and incredibly-insulting claims apparently applicable to all Aggies. In fact, I did just the opposite. I claimed that the Aggie population consists of both reasonable Aggies and a much smaller group that very loosely, if at all, resembles the UT-hating Neanderthals described in the post. Does my status as an Aggie graduate, which undoubtedly gives me more contact and experience with Aggies (in all settings) than that of a Longhorn (say, like Peter), allow me to credibly call out riduculous assertions apparently applicable to all Aggies (assertions that, a priori, cannot be true)? Absolutely. Heck, an eskimo who has never heard of A&M could rebut those insulting assertions. But if you really want sources, I would recommend crawling out of your hole and doing what I did – get some A&M friends and show up at a game day in College Station a day early to hang out and visit the campus.
One final point of advice: never end an otherwise-cogent response with such an incredibly childish remark. It takes away from everything you just wrote.
Re:
If you are unable to see the irony of a blatantly narrow-minded and detached-from-reality post about the narrow-mindedness and detached-from-reality nature of others, I do not think I can help you.
You can’t help me because you aren’t trying. One place to start would be to show me which definition of ironic you think encompasses a “blatantly narrow-minded and detatched-from-reality post about the narrow-mindedness and detatched-from-reality nature of others.” Click here for a link to the definition of irony. Swing away. Peter is criticizing Aggies for precisely the thing (in your opinion at least) that he’s doing by criticizing them. That might make him a hypocrite (probably not). It might effect his credibility (it doesn’t). But it isn’t ironic, and it doesn’t involve irony.
Exactly, he includes two links to sources – sources that I discussed in my original post and actually used to support my argument – and then takes a giant leap to generalizing about all Aggies (And yes, “all” is certainly justified since his phrases are drafted in terms of universal maxims, e.g., “there isn’t even a minority that peddles in reality” or “To be an Aggie is to accept unequivocally . . . .” just to name a few).
So you’ve both provided links to Aggies behaving badly, but you haven’t responded with any evidence of Aggies behaving well. In other words, the only evidence (besides your own subjective experiences) available supports Peter’s position, and not yours. If you’ve got examples of Aggies who have adopted Peter’s position, please post links.
To the extent you argue that I provide no sources for Aggies “behaving well,” that completely misses the point.
You don’t get to tell me what my point is. My point is that you speak only with the authority of your personal experience, and have given no reason why yours is more valuable than Peter’s, as that is also a source for his authority.
I claimed that the Aggie population consists of both reasonable Aggies and a much smaller group that very loosely, if at all, resembles the UT-hating Neanderthals described in the post.
And you could be wrong, and you don’t get to avoid being wrong merely by saying “I know a lot of reasonable Aggies.” You think there is some presumption that Aggies are reasonable, which is fine, but that presumption has been rebutted by the collective experience with Aggies by many non-Aggies. You’ve already posted two very good sources of why the rest of us have concluded that y’all are unreasonable, at least about college athletics.
Does my status as an Aggie graduate, which undoubtedly gives me more contact and experience with Aggies (in all settings) than that of a Longhorn (say, like Peter), allow me to credibly call out riduculous assertions apparently applicable to all Aggies (assertions that, a priori, cannot be true)?
It might. It might also give rise to bias. In any case, one needs not attend Texas A&M to intelligently generalize about its fans.
But if you really want sources, I would recommend crawling out of your hole and doing what I did – get some A&M friends and show up at a game day in College Station a day early to hang out and visit the campus.
Oh, ok, well that settles things. Peter Bean should be ashamed of generalizing about Aggies on his UT website because username “SJ27” knows some reasonable Aggies. What a thoughtful rebuttal, we’re all persuaded. By the way, why would I crawl out of my “hole” so I can crawl right into another one called College Station? I’m pretty good where I am.
One final point of advice: never end an otherwise-cogent response with such an incredibly childish remark. It takes away from everything you just wrote.
Is that Rule #3,721 from Diane Hacker’s Rules of Internet Debate? You’re wrong; a cat walking across the keyboard at the end of my post doesn’t take everything, or anything for that matter, that I just wrote inane. It helps you rationalize why I’m so wrong and you’re so right, and thus makes persuading you less likely, but I wasn’t vagina-fired onto this earth to help you “get stuff” anyways.
by Skin Patrol on Jul 20, 2011 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Well said
Skin Patrol’s done all the hard work here, but just to be clear, SJ27, the point was never that all — or even all — Aggies are myopic and self-deating clowns. While I didn’t bother adding a qualifier to every single mention of Aggies, I made note of my awareness that there is a distinction between kinds of Aggies:
Ultimately, that’s why it’s useless to listen to so many Aggie fans themselves on these topics: whatever extent their vantage point overlaps with reality at any given moment is purely accidental. All too many Aggies continue to evaluate their situation through the prism of the victimized fan, as evidenced by the solutions they offer, which revolve around escaping or bringing harm to UT tu. As much bravado as Aggies convey, it is ironic that so many want to win by taking their ball and going home.
That you missed that is ironic. (Like, ironic for real, as in a proper usage of that word.)
Moreover, if you can’t tell that I’m generalizing — even over-generalizing — and, yes, poking with a stick those very vocal Aggies at whom the post is directed, well, you need to lighten up and read blogs a little more often. And probably avoid using footnotes in your comments. (Optional, but it can be liberating. Try it.)
Finally, I’ve got quite a few Aggie friends, and though they aren’t the caricatures of rationality I describe above, they also — for the most part (I know you’re qualifier-sensitive) — seem to me pretty naive and foolish with regards to how they view A&M athletics and its relationship to UT. Even the relatively normal, rational ones think going to the SEC is a good idea.
As only an Aggie could.
You ain't hurt...
Hmmmm
Peter is criticizing Aggies for precisely the thing (in your opinion at least) that he’s doing by criticizing them. That might make him a hypocrite (probably not). It might effect his credibility (it doesn’t). But it isn’t ironic, and it doesn’t involve irony.
and
That you missed that is ironic. (Like, ironic for real, as in a proper usage of that word.)
"Many of Holmes’ criticisms . . . form an expressly generalized critique of communitarianism. Holmes’ choice of method here is ironic, since he criticizes liberalism’s critics for employing an ahistorical and abstract critique of liberalism." Peter Berkowitz, Liberal Zealotry, 103 Yale L.J. 1363, 1373 (1994)
"It is highly ironic that while the United States regularly criticizes countries such as China, Iran, and Iraq for their civil and human rights violations, it nonetheless joins these nations in supporting capital punishment." Taylor Young Hong, Televised Executions and Restoring Accountibility to the Death Penalty Debate, 29 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 787, 819 (1998).
"Moreover, the European Commission . . . resists the demands of some European academics for community-wide regulation of moral rights, which is ironic given that the Commission routinely criticizes the United States for its lack of commitment to the cause of moral rights in copyright law." Cyrill P. Rigamonti, Deconstructing Moral Rights, 47 Harv. Int’l L. J. 353, 358 (2006).
But I guess the fine folks over at Yale Law Journal, Columbia, and Harvard have no grasp of the English language. Your other points do not warrant a response as they have already been addressed.
ok question
the people at Yale and Harvard ar what you’d call sophisticated so shouldnt they be refered to as “Sips” too?
formerly "Horns102591"
Re:
Yes, the three passages you have quoted all involve misuses of “irony.” The second and third are accusations of hypocritical action. The first one doesn’t even come close, as it doesn’t even identify the necessary “ironic” incongruity between what is said (or happens) and the intended message (or result). That doesn’t mean those journals “have no grasp of the English language”; it just means that the authors were all taught the same wrongful use of a particular word as you. It is similar to how huge swaths of the population, mostly women, think the word “chauvinism” has something to do with gender aggression.
I wouldn’t go to the Yale Law Journal for an explanation of the meaning of chauvinism, or its etymology. I would simply read the definition, which if what I’ve tried to encourage you to do for the word irony, twice now.
by Skin Patrol on Jul 20, 2011 9:37 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
PS
I think people with more-than “no grasp of the English language” sometimes make mistakes. Until very recently, I was of the honest but mistaken belief that the word “fatalistic” carried a negative association. A few weeks ago I was expressing skepticism about one of our legal defenses, and said something along the lines of: “I don’t mean to be fatalistic, but I just don’t think that dog hunts.” One of the partners stopped the meeting to tell me that he thought I didn’t know what fatalistic meant. We opened a dictionary. I have been misusing fatalistic and fatalism my whole life, which is especially embarrassing since I used to be a philosophy major (and should therefore have better understood fatalism) and because I now operate in a profession where careful language usage is critical.
I think this discussion is pretty masturbatory for both us, but if you want to have it, your time would be better spent in a dictionary, rather than on google trying to find examples of smart people misusing language, which are legion.
I literally laughed aloud reading this.
at the degree to which some people wear their [apparently unconquerable] insecurities on their sleeves.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 20, 2011 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Standing and applauding.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
You forgot to say...
“I rest my case,” Mr. Hutz.
by Travis Wimberly on Jul 20, 2011 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah I kind of agree with you.
The vocal minority, unfortunately, represents A&M very poorly on the internets. If you are, in fact, an Aggie, please start posting here more!
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 21, 2011 1:28 AM CDT up reply actions
The Trouble With Longhorns
That trouble – as represented by this post – is assuming that the benefits of being #2 to Texas (or actually #3 to Texas and Oklahoma) are so obvious to everyone. " if we can be a strong No. 2 in the state of Texas, while competing in a diluted Big 12, and while making sufficient money to be a nationally relevant football program, isn’t that just about ideal? I mean, short or being the No. 1 most advantaged program in Texas? " No, that stinks. It is in YOUR interests, because YOU get to stay #1 without even trying. THEY have to scrap, scrape, fight, innovate, etc. to be #2 in Texas and #3 in the conference. (If Missouri ever figures out how to hire someone that can both recruit and coach at the same time, possibly no better than #4.) And if you were #2-#4 in a tough conference, then that is pretty good. Auburn is historically the #4 or #5 program in the SEC, and that got them undefeated seasons in 1992, 2004 and 2010, plus Heisman Trophies in 1985 and 2010. But being #2, #3 or #4 in what you admit yourselves is a watered down conference? Like being #2 in the Pac-10 to USC all those years? Or being #2 in the ACC to FSU or Clemson? Or #2 in the Big East to Miami? Yeah … Texas A&M wants to be N.C. State, Arizona or Syracuse. Go to the Cotton or Holiday Bowl and have a grand ole time. That’s what they’re aspiring for! How could you EVER turn down a deal like that?
Look, you guys have the attitude “Texas A&M has always been second rate, so why not accept it and be happy!” Well the problem with that is THINGS CHANGE. 30 years ago, the state of Florida was a college football wasteland (unless you were talking about Florida A&M’s beating up on Grambling or something like that). But since 1984, Florida, FSU and Miami have combined for 10 national titles. Just 15 years ago, no one would have ever foreseen Virginia Tech as so much as surpassing Virginia, let alone playing in a BCS game every other year. Oregon? More of the same. 20 years ago no one could have foreseen them surpassing Washington State (not Washington, but Washington State) let alone playing for the national title. Another example: LSU. Before Nick Saban, LSU had gone to the Sugar Bowl 7 times since World War II, the last time in 1986. After hiring Saban in 2001, LSU has been to 4 Sugar Bowls, 2 of them national title games. Before Steve Spurrier and Saban, the idea of LSU and Florida ever consistently being better than Auburn, let alone Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama, was ridiculous, yet that is precisely what has happened. And before Bobby Bowden and Howard Schnellenberger, the idea of nationally relevant college football programs in the whole state of Florida was considered a joke, and that state’s biggest contribution to the game was Gatorade.
Add to that the Longhorns’ long period of not being that good or great before hiring Mack Brown (and even there, it took 6 years and Vince Young/Colt McCoy to get Brown to Big 12 title, oh yeah and Oklahoma not being particularly good in 2005 and 2009 helped!) and you see why the Aggies have plenty of reason to be skeptical when being told that being #2 to Texas (and #3 to Texas and Oklahoma) is their ceiling.
we beat OU in 2006 and 2008 too
and in case you dont know Brown has been to the Big 12 Title Game more than just twice. he went in 1999 lost to Nebraska (GASP!) and then in 2001 lost to Colorado. and id hate to state the obvious here but how many times has A&M been to the Title Game? ZERO. how many times have they been to the Big 12 Title Game? two times. How many Championships has A&M won in the last 65 years? NONE. yes you are #2 in this state
formerly "Horns102591"
Small correction
at the moment, TAMU would likely be #3 in this state, as we needn’t insult TCU. Plus, if Tech hadn’t left their brains at home when they fired Mike Leach, A&M might be a pretty distant 4th :-)
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 20, 2011 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions
So foolish
Who said anything about needing to accept being NC State, or just the Holiday Bowl?
The point is that you’re better situated right here, with better chances at BCS Bowls and all the rest, than if you go to the SEC.
By all means, if you want to be an irrelevant football program that goes to the Independence Bowl in a good year, head on over to the SEC. They’ll be glad to take turns whomping y’all. Here, in the Big 12, the path to success is much clearer, and easier.
The point is that Texas is going to be the behemoth athletics program in this state whether you stay or go. Might as well accept that, let us do our thing, and realize that if you beat us on the field — which you’ve done three out of the past five years — you’ll have everything that really matters, anyway.
Or just go to the SEC and be a small fish in a much bigger, more dangerous sea. Up to y’all.
You ain't hurt...
Get over yourself Aggies.
I’m sorry, but A&M is WAY in over there heads. http://themaindisch.blogspot.com/2011/07/stop-whining-texas.html
They are always in over their heads. Always.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
From all of this it sounds like UT is really scared about A&M joining the SEC.
I don’t personally care about football but it would be nice to play Alabama and I don’t care if A&M goes to the SEC or not. But I can say that I am tierd of hearing the UT band play “I’ve Been Working On The Railroad”.
But I didn’t pick A&M over UT because of football. I picked A&M because of the academics… and the guidance counseler at UT tols me A&M had the best opportunity for what I was looking for in my degree. I gave up a scholarship to UT to attend A&M. Now that I am in the real working world, I’m glad I did. Ends up that you do learn something in college and that it might actually effect your ability to earn a living. So who cares about football when it comes to making a living? Unless you are 1 in a million that gets to play pro football or you end up working for UT athletics of course. Winning or lossing the National title doesn’t effect my paycheck. What does is my ability to do the job I am paid for by my clients.
I attended classes at both UT and A&M, and Auburn and Texas State as well. I dislike UT because it was mostly students from Asia and liberals that hit 6th Street to get drunk and party. The classes were easy and not challenging. Later I took classes at ACC and they were about the same level but only $300 a classe versus $1000+. Texans seem to be the minority at UT and most UT fans I know have never attended a class at UT nor set foot on campus. Most of the people I know from UT where not Americans nor Texans and the few Americans were mostly from California. When I was at Texas A&M most of the people I knew were from Texas and lots of them were serving our country in the military. I only ran into a few liberals and never ran into anyone from California that I recall.
After college I went into the military. I met one person from UT and many, many, many dozens from A&M. When I got out of the military I came to Austin to work in IT. The only UT fans I know here, none of them went to UT. They are just fans because they live here. So where do all of the UT grads go?
Now I own my own business in Austin and I hire mostly UT students and grads. So I like UT because it keeps my payroll costs down! That’s just a joke. I like the idea of hiring UT grads for $10 an hour. A&M grads will not work for anything less than about $20 to $25. That is the truth. I’ve been noticing that since 2003 when I started my business. I’m not sure why that is. But I think it’s because most of the UT grads that apply have degrees in things like political science, business admin, etc. Most of the A&M grads have degress in things like engineering. Other than that, I don’t really know why this is. Maybe it’s just the type of job I am hiring for that causes this pattern. But it’s interesting either way.
I do not have a problem with UT until they start stay stupid and moronic things like what was printed in this article. If you want to compare the unversities in regards to what matters, start comparing them academically, scientific research, land/sea/space grants, etc., etc. Football is no way to compare. No on really cares a year later anyway.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Burnt Orange Nation
Related FanShots on Burnt Orange Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
