A&M

#1 02-06-2007, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Hi pot, I'm kettle. Live in the past?? You brought up a football game that was played nearly three months ago. But hey, i'm sure Aggie Nation is still basking in the win.....I would be too if I hadn't beaten someone since 1999.

Standard Scoreboard rules dictate that Scoreboard in any sport can be called until the following time the teams compete in said sport. Seeing as how the most recent time the Fighting Texas Aggies and the longhorns competed in football we ended up the winner, calling scoreboard isn't considered living in the past.

So, you can feel free to relish in the Scoreboard you have on us in Women's BB, Swimming and Diving, XC and the like. Go ahead.

Kitso
KS 361 days a year the only thing that matters is 12-7.

macallan25 · #2 02-06-2007, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AggieSigmaNu361

Standard Scoreboard rules dictate that Scoreboard in any sport can be called until the following time the teams compete in said sport. Seeing as how the most recent time the Fighting Texas Aggies and the longhorns competed in football we ended up the winner, calling scoreboard isn't considered living in the past.

........ha, i'm sorry, but I can actually hear a nerdy, dork A&M cult member explaining this to someone.

#3 02-06-2007, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

........ha, i'm sorry, but I can actually hear a nerdy, dork A&M cult member explaining this to someone.

Too bad its something that I got from the intellectual black hole that is HornFans.

Kitso
KS 361 high-fives for those swimming and diving titles though man!

macallan25 · #4 02-06-2007, 08:33 PM

Remind me of when A&M athletics did anything significant? Oh yeah, girls softball won some national championships in the 1980s. Football......try 1939.

Face it......your athletics programs couldn't hold our jocks.

Bob Dole · #5 02-07-2007, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Remind me of when A&M athletics did anything significant? Oh yeah, girls softball won some national championships in the 1980s. Football......try 1939.

Face it......your athletics programs couldn't hold our jocks.

Macallan25, 1
AggieSigmaNu361, 0.

#6 02-07-2007, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Remind me of when A&M athletics did anything significant? Oh yeah, girls softball won some national championships in the 1980s. Football......try 1939.

Face it......your athletics programs couldn't hold our jocks.

Definition of something significant? Doing something that the vaunted Longhorn athletic department hasn't done?

I'd say the last time was Saturday, when we became the first and only team from the Big XII south to win at Phog Allen.

Man, you 'horns are gettin awful riled up over some friendly smack. But oh no, we're not your real rivals. Actually, I think y'all should take 12-7 in stride. I don't think Fran is the guy to get us to where we should be and that win probably will keep him around a couple seasons longer than he should be. Given Byrne's track record hiring coaches, I'd love to see who he'd go after to turn around our football program.

Kitso
KS 361 more hours until I head off to Custer to start student teaching.

macallan25 · #7 02-07-2007, 02:15 PM

FSUZeta · #8 02-07-2007, 05:02 PM

why are they holding their hands in their laps and bending over in that position?

KSig RC · #9 02-07-2007, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AggieSigmaNu361

I don't think Fran is the guy to get us to where we should be and that win probably will keep him around a couple seasons longer than he should be.

Besides the lunacy of this statement given the time frame you've used to make it (not to mention the complete 180 it is from A&M fans' attitudes at his hiring), let's talk about this "get us where we should be" thing . . .

Texas A&M's overall winning percentage as a program is .610 (643-413-49) - they went 9-4 last year (.692). They're under .500 overall in bowl games overall, and while they did get pounded this season by Cal, they were matched against a superior program - no shame there, and again no 'history' to live up to.

What "level" exactly should A&M get to? Let's stop this delusional stuff about every team being a "national powerhouse" - A&M is not a traditional national power, and they are not below "where they should be" in any reasonable sense.

shinerbock · #10 02-07-2007, 05:47 PM

Ksig, I'm not sure I agree with you. A&M is a pretty formidable football program. Considering what people claim are "national powerhouses" of college football, A&M should probably be included in that. Now, there may be an entitlement issue, like there is at Alabama.

Since 1869 Texas A&M is ranked 22 in winning percentage from what I've read.

Some other notables with similar percentages- UGA .64, Miami .638, LSU .637, Auburn .63, UF .622, etc.

I don't think many people would deny those schools as leading powerhouses in college football. A&M, if not among them, is pretty close.

#11 02-07-2007, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Besides the lunacy of this statement given the time frame you've used to make it (not to mention the complete 180 it is from A&M fans' attitudes at his hiring), let's talk about this "get us where we should be" thing . . .

Texas A&M's overall winning percentage as a program is .610 (643-413-49) - they went 9-4 last year (.692). They're under .500 overall in bowl games overall, and while they did get pounded this season by Cal, they were matched against a superior program - no shame there, and again no 'history' to live up to.

What "level" exactly should A&M get to? Let's stop this delusional stuff about every team being a "national powerhouse" - A&M is not a traditional national power, and they are not below "where they should be" in any reasonable sense.

Ok, I had a nice long researched reply that I clicked submit too that was lost to stupid internet issues, so here we go.

A&M is one of the top 5 largest universities in the nation, in arguably the most talent rich state in the country, with top notch facilities and fan support, and more Alumni Donation $$ than the University of Texas.

A&M has a stunted history because for the first 90 years of our existence we were an all-men's military school. When Corps membership became voluntary and the school became CoEd in the 70's, we finally began to take our place as one of the two Flagship institutions in the state of Texas. Since the 70's our record vs. Texas has been pretty much equal, indicating that the dominance of Texas over us in the overall record has more to do with us being a school more complimentary to West Point or the Citadel from the 1940's til the 1970's (coincidentally the last glory years of Texas football prior to Mack Brown). We were the better program from the mid-80's til 2000.

In Fran's four years, the Ags are 25-22 overall with a 15-17 conference record. His tenure has seen our first losing season (03) since 1982, our most losses in a season (8) since 1972, our worst ever loss (OU '03), and our worst ever bowl loss (Cotton '05, Tenn). We have never finished a season under Fran ranked in the top 25. Fran, additionally, is 2-10 vs. Tech, OU and Texas.

His predecessor, RC Slocum was 124-47-2 in 14 seasons, with 11 bowl games, 10 seasons ranked in the final top 25 and 3 rankings in the top 10, a 7-7 record vs. UT (which, in my opinion is where we should be, equal), and a Big XII title.

What do I honestly expect year in and year out? To compete as an equal with Texas and Oklahoma for Big XII south titles annually, winning a Big XII title every 3-5 years, finishing with no worse than 3-4 losses with those losses coming from the likes of Texas, OU, or NU and occasionally one out in Lubbock because that place is a black hole of Aggie Athletics. Why do I expect this? Because of the quality of our facilities, the donations of our Alumni and the talent pool that exists in the state of Texas.

Fran went 5-3 in conference last season, with all 3 losses coming at home. To me that is unacceptable. We outplayed all 3 of those teams, Tech, NU, and OU and I personally believe that those losses are attributible to some questionable game planning and play calling from Franchione.

This is his 5th season and when I say that win in Austin may have bought him some time I mean this. That is the first big road win in his tenure. Prior to that we would go on the road and look completely lost (Norman and Lubbock in '03). I expect us now to be competitive and maybe even steal a couple games on the road, which is where we will be a lot this season, with games in Lincoln, Lubbock, Norman and Miami(Fl.). An 0-fer in those games or bad showings will HOPEFULLY signal the end of the Franchione era.

Kitso
KS 361