Reply With Quote
Doesn't really matter. Texas is the much bigger name and A&M continuing their rivalry would only help them get national exposure while UT will remain UT regardless of who they play. That's why they don't care about the rivalry like TAMU does
its not Fpoonsie's fault hes halfway decent and actually worth having a legit discussion with, and you/sisk are dumbasses that deserve nothing other than stupid replies full of nonsense and bull , no different than 98% of both of your posts.
Doesn't really matter. Texas is the much bigger name and A&M continuing their rivalry would only help them get national exposure while UT will remain UT regardless of who they play. That's why they don't care about the rivalry like TAMU does
Certainly those who like A&M and those who don't are going to ahve a pretty big void between their expectations of how A&M will compete in the SEC, with bias playing a pretty big role on both sides of that arguement.
No doubt A&M's "sporadic" success in the history of the big 12 combined with an awful bowl record gives A&M's detractors plenty of reasons to doubt A&M's ability to compete in the SEC. My take is that A&M has all the tools to compete in the SEC (facilities, fan base, academics, geography) they've just made a bunch of ty personnel decisions. For example, I certainly don't think the Dennis Franchione era is indicative of A&M's football potential. A&M's got the resources to compete, they just need the right people making decisions. I trust Loftin and Byrne, and while I wasn't in favor of Sherman I think you've got to admit he's done a pretty good job rebuilding the mess that Fran left.
So if they've got the resources to compete in the SEC, I think they're better off trying their luck in that conference as opposed to the Big 12 where Texas is always going to be looking to stack the deck against everyone else.
At least that's my $0.02.
_xe _urderer
Solid points. I agree.
Texas knows that they don't need to play a tough non-conference schedule to be highly ranked so there's little incentive for them to take on a bunch of non-conference risks.
Post from raiderpower:
Just got of the phone with my dad and his legislative buddy and kind of got the scoop. For those that don't already know, this is a life long friend of my dad's, Tech alum, very plugged in, and former state legislator (a very well respected one...). We did a conference call, so I got to ask questions directly. I'll try and be brief, but it will take a bit...
A&M - They aren't coming back unless really does freeze over...
The SEC - Slive is taking the gloves off b/c of Baylor and UT trying to meddle. The SEC is very much after Mizz, and would like to add Tech and KU as well... They would really, really like to add Tech b/c Tech would expand them clear across Texas and would cut UT off to an extent. We also would be a regional partner for A&M. KU is much the same as Tech in this situation, they'd compliment KU very well. WVU was spurned b/c they think they can get Tech, Mizz and KU. If that fails, they might re-visit the WVU idea. *I'll get to Tech's stance on this further down...
The ACC - Not a realistic option... His words...
The Big 10 - They don't want us, we don't want them, mutually beneficial hate...
The Big East - Adding schools from here isn't an option yet b/c it's likely they'll get further plundered....
The Big 12(redux).... Some of the administration is hoping for this, b/c they're scared to see us go out on our own... Most of the administration think this idea is horrible. I was told that the conference would end up being a travel nightmare, completely watered down and filled with teams that truly hate each other.
The Pac12 - Right now they're putting the screws to UT, and they really, really don't care if UT comes or not... Rice is NOT an option. He said he hadn't heard that at all, and he's talked to Scott personally.. The rumor that OU doesn't have the votes is ********. OU, OSU and Tech have the votes... Arizona, AZ State, Cal, Colorado and Stanford are objecting to OU and OSU, but it's mainly posturing... The only one really objecting to Tech is Colorado... That needs no explanation..
Now on to Tech's position on all this... There's a sentiment that's growing that the PAC may not be of much benefit to Tech other than an upgrade in a TV contract... The thought is that we (Tech) are wanting to expand the Jones to accommodate 72,000 in the future. We want to sell that 72k out... The thought is that ticket sales will be an issue... Obviously OU, UT, USC and Oregon would sell out the Jones every year, but we won't have all four of those at home any year... So we'll likely have 1-2 guaranteed sell outs per year, the rest would be up in the air... People will show up for the first year, but the newness will wear off, and our fans just don't identify with the PAC schools...
Conversely, the thought is, if we go with the SEC, we'll sell out a lot of games (even at 72k). SEC fans will also travel, west coast fans will not (proven fact)... The Jones would sell out for LSU, Georgia, Bama, Florida, Tennessee, A&M, Auburn, you get the idea... The only teams that aren't a big draw for the Tech fan base are Vandy, Ole Miss and Miss St.. Word is, if the 4 Big 12 teams the SEC wants join, the TV contracts would top 50 mil for sure and likely come close to 60 mil (insane, I know)...
He wasn't willing to say that the SEC was favored right now, but don't be surprised if, all of a sudden, we are #15 or 16... He did say that the more time that goes by, the worse the chances are of the PAC being our home b/c we're very concerned about the things mentioned...
He told me that many of our big money donors are balking at the PAC idea, but are fully on board with the SEC idea. Nobody likes the Big 12 idea unless A&M stays... He also said that Guy Bailey has some serious SEC connections and is getting a lot done here and Tuberville has been of great help here as well... Just know that our president and HC seem to prefer the SEC...
He said that OU was brilliant by going on the offensive and giving the list of demands. They all seem reasonable to reasonable people, but UT will not be reasonable.. This will make OU, OSU and A&M that have put UT out there as the bad guy. They basically are beat UT at their own game, and UT is ******....
I was also told that our administration had felt betrayed by UT earlier this year, but when UT let it float out there that they were going to start a dirty PR campaign against Tech, well, that was the end of that marriage... Now, does that mean we don't stick with them, no, but our "partnership" with them is done.
So, ultimately, we're "exploring all options". He said at this point nothing would surprise him b/c it all changes hourly.. There is no real time table, but the SEC would like to get enough Big 12 members to force OU and OSU west and just dissolve the conference and wipe out the lawsuit etc... He wouldn't make a prediction on where we end up, but he said if he and the donors had any say in it, it wouldn't be the Big 12...
interesting
at that post
SEC wants Tech and KU
lol
Somebody might want to clue this guy in that conference realignment doesn't work like some WW2 board game. Adding Tech does not mean that the SEC gets to build a Maginot Line between College Station and Lubbock, effectively cutting off Metroplex longhorn fans from their supply lines to Austin, thus forcing them into surrender and declaring alligience to the SEC.They would really, really like to add Tech b/c Tech would expand them clear across Texas and would cut UT off to an extent.
Aggie(on A&M joining the SEC): Good recruits will want to come play in the SEC but be able to stay in Texas! Huge advantage!
Aggie(on Tech joining the SEC): It's not a board game!
fwiw I know SEC won't happen, nor do I really want it to. Just a post with some info that I thought might be relevant to the thread.
Would be a nice fit culturally though, as Tech is a very "good ole boy" school, and the SEC is a very "good ole boy" conference.
Uh, okay. Whatever this is supposed to mean............
It's supposed to mean that all the arguments that you used in favor of Aggy joining the SEC, you will now ignore and contradict because you don't want Tech to join the SEC.
Petty, and very "T.U."-ish.
did you see what I did there??????????????
Bro, it's not about you having no advantages by Joining the SEC.
It's the thought that you actually think the SEC would want/invite Tech.
Not that far fetched. They only wanted aggies for recruiting.Bro, it's not about you having no advantages by Joining the SEC.
It's the thought that you actually think the SEC would want/invite Tech.
Not true at all.
You would think that after everyone literally laughed in Aggy's face when they suggested wanting to join the SEC, Aggy fan would gain a greater appreciation for how things work and learn to show a little humility.Bro, it's not about you having no advantages by Joining the SEC.
It's the thought that you actually think the SEC would want/invite Tech.
Nope!
In the last 15 years Tech is 10-5 vs A&M! That must mean we own the rivalry right????????
History of not winning bowl games says otherwise.
An explaination as to how exactly Texas is getting "cut off" from something by having the SEC add Tech would be helpful here. If it's just the lucrative Lubbock TV market, I'm pretty sure the longhorns are going to be okay.It's supposed to mean that all the arguments that you used in favor of Aggy joining the SEC, you will now ignore and contradict because you don't want Tech to join the SEC.
Petty, and very "T.U."-ish.
You would think that after everyone literally laughed in Aggy's face when they suggested wanting to join the SEC,
How do things work?Aggy fan would gain a greater appreciation for how things work and learn to show a little humility.
You have definitely outperformed us on the field the last 15 years..... What Aggie is saying otherwise?
Only reason A&M might bring up the last 15-35 years on the Horns is because they act like they have continued some sort of dominance over us when actually, in their lifetime, have a losing record against us.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions