(10-19-2014 08:10 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-19-2014 08:06 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Look I'm not going to argue with you, as you're an extremely negative person who just wants to crap all over everyone else.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about how bleak A&M's future is.

I guess I hurt your feelings.

No not at all, I like CFB but I try not to let my happiness depend on 18 year old kids.

(10-19-2014 08:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  so according to you we can't recruit and won't compete in the West but that DOESN'T imply a bleak future....do YOU need a translator?

I said that?

Do you have a translator? I think we need a translator. English to Aggie. :bang head:

here's another big word for you to go look up: Obtuse :)

(10-19-2014 08:11 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(10-19-2014 08:10 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-19-2014 08:06 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Look I'm not going to argue with you, as you're an extremely negative person who just wants to crap all over everyone else.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about how bleak A&M's future is.

I guess I hurt your feelings.

No not at all, I like CFB but I try not to let my happiness depend on 18 year old kids.

I'm not going to stoop to your level, a little too petty and childish for my tastes.

Well, now that the Aggie is done crying, back to the conversation.

I don't think it is possible for a squad to regret joining the SEC at this point.

(10-19-2014 02:10 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(10-18-2014 11:56 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  Sure they make more money, but now that their once in a century QB is gone, they will sink back to the level they were at in the Big 12, and it's much harder to get out of the cellar in the SEC.

They may end up being the Kentucky of the West, huge fanbase and little to show for it. I just wonder if all of these programs really thought out their expansion moves.

No... Better to be the best Texas school in the SEC than play third fiddle behind UT and OU.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvp37o1jZUo

(10-19-2014 08:13 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  here's another big word for you to go look up: Obtuse :)

An angle greater than 90° yet less than 180°.

(10-19-2014 06:26 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Texas A&M was the biggest winner in conference realignment IMO. Not only are they in the premier conference making more money, but they have huge recruiting and exposure advantages over Texas that have evened the playing field between the two schools. One could even argue A&M has surpassed Texas, but it's going to take several more years to determine if it's the Manziel effect or a long-term trend.

I would disagree strongly. aTm did well, but were already doing well. Rutgers got the golden ticket out of purgatory.

I agree that TAMU was not the biggest winner. Utah and Rutgers are. Utah may be in a similar position to A&M where they traded the opportunity to win for more money. It can suck for the fans but I'm sure the people collecting the money love it.

(10-19-2014 11:28 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  I agree that TAMU was not the biggest winner. Utah and Rutgers are. Utah may be in a similar position to A&M where they traded the opportunity to win for more money. It can suck for the fans but I'm sure the people collecting the money love it.

Utah is currently 5-1 and in good position to win the Pac 12 South...plus their fans I feel probably love the fact they get to play USC, UCLA & Arizona State every year.

(10-20-2014 03:05 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(10-19-2014 11:28 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  I agree that TAMU was not the biggest winner. Utah and Rutgers are. Utah may be in a similar position to A&M where they traded the opportunity to win for more money. It can suck for the fans but I'm sure the people collecting the money love it.

Utah is currently 5-1 and in good position to win the Pac 12 South...plus their fans I feel probably love the fact they get to play USC, UCLA & Arizona State every year.

The Utes may be underdogs in 4 of their final 6 games. They have yet to have a winning conference record since joining the PAC 12. Their fans might enjoy those names but Utah will be hard pressed to match the success they had in the MWC.

(10-20-2014 03:13 AM)CoogNellie Wrote:  

(10-20-2014 03:05 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(10-19-2014 11:28 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  I agree that TAMU was not the biggest winner. Utah and Rutgers are. Utah may be in a similar position to A&M where they traded the opportunity to win for more money. It can suck for the fans but I'm sure the people collecting the money love it.

Utah is currently 5-1 and in good position to win the Pac 12 South...plus their fans I feel probably love the fact they get to play USC, UCLA & Arizona State every year.

The Utes may be underdogs in 4 of their final 6 games. They have yet to have a winning conference record since joining the PAC 12. Their fans might enjoy those names but Utah will be hard pressed to match the success they had in the MWC.

Trust me...as a fan you look forward to the challenge...

(10-19-2014 11:28 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  I agree that TAMU was not the biggest winner. Utah and Rutgers are. Utah may be in a similar position to A&M where they traded the opportunity to win for more money. It can suck for the fans but I'm sure the people collecting the money love it.

I agree. Had TAMU stayed in the Big 12, they'd be okay. Utah and TCU in the MWC, which likely still keeps BYU, plus add Boise St, and Hawaii, they might be okay. Not as good as where they are now, but in decent shape. But Rutgers in the AAC? Compared to the Big Ten?

Why did they wait so long to add Boise? A combo of Boise, TCU, BYU and Utah is solid. Throw in a Fresno and a UH (either one) for TV and recruiting purposes and that had the makings of a major conference.

And I still see no reason for A&M to be in regret just because they're having a tough month of October losing to top 10 teams, albeit badly.

Anybody ever ask themselves where A&M would have been of they had Johnny and were in the Big12? My guess is they would have been playing for a NC instead of ending up 3rd and 4th in the SEC West.

They've been a huge winner in terms of money, support, and exposure but how much of that has to do with the SEC and not Johnny Football? If they had won a NC, or at minimum played for one, where would they have been?

When you compare the two it's pretty obvious that in fact they potentially lost out some. They'd have been better served having been in the Big12 the last two years and the SEC now.

Maybe defenses would have known him better since the Big 12 is full of Texas recruits who played against Juanito Futbol Americana in high school.

(10-20-2014 09:11 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Why did they wait so long to add Boise? A combo of Boise, TCU, BYU and Utah is solid. Throw in a Fresno and a UH (either one) for TV and recruiting purposes and that had the makings of a major conference.

As we've seen before, it's not always all about on the field. Although for the conferences trying to move up in perception, they probably should. But for whatever reason, they seemed to have resistance from those teams.

I just meant, assuming there was no merger of leftover MWC and Big East teams, when you consider the alternatives, Rutgers could easily be where UConn is right now (of AAC teams, they would have been the only other likely team to get invited). Note that Louisville and West Virginia are really in the same boat as Rutgers (if things broke differently either could be still in the AAC), but among the former Big East teams, they probably did the most to improve their position on their own in terms of reinvestment, and on the field production, so they are not generally looked at the same way.

(10-20-2014 09:31 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Maybe defenses would have known him better since the Big 12 is full of Texas recruits who played against Juanito Futbol Americana in high school.

Well the Big 12 defenses are set up for that kind of offense as they face it all the time. SEC defenses were set up to handle a power game. With Missouri, Texas A&M and now Auburn, Coach Saban has been talking about changing his recruiting to deal with those offenses.

There's little doubt the fact that the SEC defenses weren't facing it week in and week out contributed to Manziel's success, not that he wouldn't have been pretty successful anywhere.

A&M said they were making a 100 year decision. While that is hyperbole to an extent the comment was designed to say without question that the move was not for a short term goal. What has it accomplished in 3 years?

1. A&M has generated enough interest to upgrade facilities (especially Kyle Field) at a rate that has truly placed them among the nation's leaders in that regard.

2. They have separated their brand from Texas and blended it with a more successful one the SEC.

3. They have brought heightened exposure to their program which has assisted their recruiting endeavors.

4. They have changed a conference with limited footprint but good saturation for a larger one with the best saturation.

5. They have traded a conference which is dependent essentially upon two brands for one that has much greater breadth with which to maintain national interest and exposure. When Texas and OU lose early it has way too much impact on the Big 12.

6. They managed to change conferences and find one in which their games are still accessible for their fans. This will be an issue for Texas and Oklahoma should they ever desire a change.

7. They now have more marquee games coming into their venue (which also increases their brand and exposure) than they had in their former conference after the losses of Nebraska and Colorado.

IMO all A&M will need to compete regularly for the West title in the SEC is a staunch defense. Had Manziel had one they may well have won the SEC and a national championship in their first, and possibly second year. Sumlin has never coached at a level where enough talent was available to expend it on a defense. He needs to hire a first rate D.C. and bring prowess to both sides of the ball. When he does that the marriage of A&M and the SEC will yield the on field success for which the Aggie faithful yearn.

Had A&M remained in the Big 12 for two more years they would not have attained the things enumerated at the pace with which they have come, nor would their situation have been improved significantly over what they have experienced in the first three years of a new head coach.

(10-20-2014 09:39 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-20-2014 09:31 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Maybe defenses would have known him better since the Big 12 is full of Texas recruits who played against Juanito Futbol Americana in high school.

Well the Big 12 defenses are set up for that kind of offense as they face it all the time. SEC defenses were set up to handle a power game. With Missouri, Texas A&M and now Auburn, Coach Saban has been talking about changing his recruiting to deal with those offenses.

There's little doubt the fact that the SEC defenses weren't facing it week in and week out contributed to Manziel's success, not that he wouldn't have been pretty successful anywhere.

Seems unfair to Coach Saban and Alabama that they should have to change anything. The rest of the NCAA should change the rules to accommodate them.