Thoughts on A&M telling Texas "no thanks" on resuming the series?

[Coach34]

For you tough schedule lovers out there- why would A&M say no to an old Rivalry series?

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/aggies/2013/11/no-thanks-aggies-say-facing-longhorns-in-regular-season-no-longer-an-option/



A&M also said no to playing Louisville this year in an opening game for ESPN. Why would they play Rice, Sam Houston, SMU, and UTEP??? Dont they know that fans wont come to games when you play 4 patsies? Playing 4 patsies doesnt mean anything?

[bluelightstar]

we can continue to struggle past 4 patsies in a half-empty expansion

[gravedigger]

I think, if there is nothing more than 'hard feelings' then it's pretty dumb that they don't play. The game is a money maker.

But, if the aggies are not playing because of something else behind the scenes, like some past slight on money that Texas isn't backing off of or simply there is not a 50/50 split on the money for the future games in every way, then I applaud A&M for thumbing their nose.

In the long run, A&M is in the driver seat. They need the game less.

[gravedigger]

Come on coach. Exaggerating the opponents argument isn't relevant to the UT-A&M game.

I presume you mean by 'tough schedulers' anyone who doesn't agree to play 4 swac teams every single year? (see how I did that?)

I'd say the majority of the 'tough schedulers' just want to play 1-2 of those patsies as the bottom half of another major conference.

I don't know of anyone who has said that we need to look for a national powerhouse to play as one of the games. A&M should play Texas if it benefits Texas A&M just like Florida should play FSU, USC should play Clemson, UK and Louisville, Georgia and Georgia Tech. BUT NOT IF IT DOESNT. It is not some obligation like the Mississippi legislators tried to make the MSU-USM games.

Where it relates to the scheduling is a separate issue. It would certainly add to an already tough schedule. So there would have to be some other monetary benefit that offset it.

[Will James]

1. Are there any people openly pushing for a tough schedule?

No. That's called a strawman fallacy.

2. Are there people saying "Don't let our shit schedule blind you to the fact that we are regressing against our competition and just (BARELY) beating the dunces and a couple of down year opponents to remain at the top of the mediocre list isn't a worthy goal"?

Yes.

[Coach34]

1. Are there any people openly pushing for a tough schedule?

No. That's called a strawman fallacy.

Yes- Chewgumm repeatedly talks about how we should play a tougher schedule every year

[Will James]

Yes- Chewgumm repeatedly talks about how we should play a tougher schedule every year

So address your sweeping points at him then.

My post still stands.

[Coach34]

My post still stands.

It really doesnt. We have people wanting us to play a tougher OOC on here. That cant even be argued

[smootness]

1. Are there any people openly pushing for a tough schedule?

No. That's called a strawman fallacy.

Thank you. Why does this keep being brought up as if it's a huge issue. Most people agree we should play as weak a schedule as possible right now. Some want a few slightly tougher games here and there. That's pretty much the extent of the disagreement.

It is minor, so why do we keep talking about it?

[Tbonewannabe]

It really doesnt. We have people wanting us to play a tougher OOC on here. That cant even be argued

Playing a tougher schedule is stupid. We can almost sleep walk to a shitty bowl. That is better than playing Boston College. Bowl games give another month of practice. This is really for younger players to get a jump start on spring practice.

I think we should be at least remotely competitive with teams in the SEC before we decide to get our ass kicked by a decent team out of the SEC.

[SignalToNoise]

No need to play a tough schedule. We struggle to beat the crap teams we play already.

[Political Hack]

they're smart enough to know that winning with their sec schedule will get them a #1 ranking. we're too damn dumb to realize that we can get all the notoriety, votes, press, exposure, and momentum we need by winning in the sec.

[dawgs]

Playing a tougher schedule is stupid. We can almost sleep walk to a shitty bowl. That is better than playing Boston College. Bowl games give another month of practice. This is really for younger players to get a jump start on spring practice.

I think we should be at least remotely competitive with teams in the SEC before we decide to get our ass kicked by a decent team out of the SEC.

I think the bonus practices excuse for rigging the schedule to reach any bowl is bullshit. 2009 we didn't go bowling and we had our best season under Mullen in 2010. Since 2010 we've been regressing despite extra bowl practices so important in the development of young players. It sounds good, but empirical data seems to point at it having a minimal effect on player development and subsequent performance.

[dawgs]

No need to play a tough schedule. We struggle to beat the crap teams we play already.

At least it exposes mullen's flaws instead of letting him relatively hide them in close Ws over the like of uab, Troy, la tech, and bowling green.

[Political Hack]

I think the bonus practices excuse for rigging the schedule to reach any bowl is bullshit. 2009 we didn't go bowling and we had our best season under Mullen in 2010. Since 2010 we've been regressing despite extra bowl practices so important in the development of young players. It sounds good, but empirical data seems to point at it having a minimal effect on player development and subsequent performance.

Are you suggesting that an extra spring is stupid?

[HunterDawg]

At least it exposes mullen's flaws instead of letting him relatively hide them in close Ws over the like of uab, Troy, la tech, and bowling green.

I refuse to accept that we couldn't beat teams from the bottom half of the ACC or teams from out west or teams like that. Heck, if we can't we are screwed anyway. I just think it would do us a lot of good to beat some teams people have heard of. Pounding SWAC teams brings us nothing but snickers. We have wins that people totally disregard and losses to highly ranked SEC teams, and nothing in between.

If we want to seriously recruit major out of state talent, we have to have some higher profile wins to impress them and to invite them to attend when we are on prime time national TV. Intersectional games will do that. They would show us playing Boston College or Virginia or teams like that. We would likely get a win we could brag about. Don't think many of us are bragging about any of our wins this year.

18 year old out of state recruits couldn't begin to tell you where Alcorn St is. We may have players and coaches (and posters here) who couldn't find it on a map. HINT: it isn't in Alcorn Co.

[Maroonthirteen]

If we had a win over 4 Swacs, UK and Ark, the reality would be we are still not any better than a 5-7 record with this schedule.

An extra month of practice....I know a kid that plays college football. Even without a bowl game, they would be lifting and running and 7on7 on their own.

The OK St game, although a loss, was interesting. Even as bad as USM is, it will be an interesting opener. JSU not so much.

It is ashame that ATM doesn't play Texas too. You know the Aggies want a piece of their ass too. But noooo. Also the day UF, USC and UGA stop playing their interstate rivals for an easy road to a bowl.....will be a day college football becomes less interesting. I don't give a damn if it does add to their win total.

[cheewgumm]

Do they base their coach staying on 6 wins?

If they do then if I were a fan and they just won 6 or 7 beating patsies and won't ever fire the coach, I'd be pissed.


For you tough schedule lovers out there- why would A&M say no to an old Rivalry series?

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/aggies/2013/11/no-thanks-aggies-say-facing-longhorns-in-regular-season-no-longer-an-option/



A&M also said no to playing Louisville this year in an opening game for ESPN. Why would they play Rice, Sam Houston, SMU, and UTEP??? Dont they know that fans wont come to games when you play 4 patsies? Playing 4 patsies doesnt mean anything?

[cheewgumm]

If their coach wins 6 they fire him . If our coach wins 6 we have to argue with you and coach that we need to make a change because we aren't beating anybody.

Schedule 4 patsies if you want, but don't then beat 4 swac teams and Kentucky and say we are " building" and all is well.

[cheewgumm]

As long as we have to keep a coach that wins 6 games and call it " progress" I advocate a tougher schedule.

[Coach34]

If their coach wins 6 they fire him . If our coach wins 6 we have to argue with you and coach that we need to make a change because we aren't beating anybody.

Schedule 4 patsies if you want, but don't then beat 4 swac teams and Kentucky and say we are " building" and all is well.

A&M has been to twice as many bowl games than we have had winning seasons in the last 25 years. Our expectations arent the same

[HunterDawg]

A&M has been to twice as many bowl games than we have had winning seasons in the last 25 years. Our expectations arent the same

Some of us are actually saying that we have to play SWAC teams because we can't beat anybody else. That says a whole lot about our expectations.

[Coach34]

Some of us are actually saying that we have to play SWAC teams because we can't beat anybody else. That says a whole lot about our expectations.

Mullen is 15-1 in the OOC since 2010- only 4 of those games are vs the SWAC. So its obvious what you are saying is bullshit

[cheewgumm]

Right, then that isn't beef primarily. Our fans super low expectations, and their willingness to guarantee we stay mediocre by trying to schedule. 6 wins then saying we can never fire the coach because we are " poor ole miss state" and shouldn't expect more than 6 wins. You are smart and have to be ale to see this.


So we get 3 yrs down the road and our still arguing whyweare14 th in recruiting and 6 th in the west.



A&M has been to twice as many bowl games than we have had winning seasons in the last 2 years. Our expectations arent the same

[Coach34]

You would think that a school that has only had 8 winning seasons in the last 25 years before Mullen would enjoy not being shitty for a change. I welcome mediocrity- because we have rarely been that high

8 winning seasons in the 25 years before Mullen....Eight