As someone who graduated from A&M almost 15 years ago, this has been an interesting read re: the Corps.

I had no idea what went into it. Respect.

Corps '04...I have no issues with making this a better leadership development laboratory.

While there have been some exceptional outfits, some have atrophied in significant ways.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Also the bulls and others who are woke d bags likely don't like the non-integrated (all-male) outfits because the all-male ones continuously, every year, dominate the awards for grades, athletics, etc. This is simply unexplainable to the woke losers, but being very close with my own non-integrated outfit and many of my buddies moving into integrated outfits--there are just unresolvable issues with integrated outfits and both female and male cadets being held to the same standards.

---

I thought they got rid of all-male outfits?

I was in an integrated outfit (around the same time you were), and while we performed well in most of those metrics, I can confirm there are problems when you put both genders together in an environment like that. Probably one of the biggest lessons I learned from the Corps.

I hope they keep all-male outfits. I would not even be opposed to bringing back W-1. A one-gender experience should be available for people who want it.

BQZip01 said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

BQZip01 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

BQZip01 said:

---

Fuzzy Dunlop said:

---

Here's my take:

This is all BS. As many of you have already stated, he's solving a problem that doesn't exist. Retention is one thing but trying to retain everyone is not what is needed. This is a feel good inclusion move. fish life is hard and that is what made my time in the Corps worth it. When my buddies and I get together, most of our stories are about fish year. Yeah, there's a few stories of being pissheads or roaming the steam tunnels when we were Butts and Zips but 97% of the stories are the crap outs, hall parties, 3x5 come-bys, current events at chow, our rivalry with L-1, etc.

He's blaming the sophomores for not being ready to lead but in reality, it's the Trigon's fault for not having then ready. Actually, pissheads aren't ready until the 2nd semester anyway. Some of our worst crap outs were as pissheads.

I think part of the outfit culture problem started when they rotating leadership positions and taking 1st Sgts and COs from one outfit and moving then to another. I understand that was not his initiative but I don't think this change will fix the "problem."

---

"A problem that doesn't exist"
1. Outfit culture IS a problem when cadets actively flaunt the rules saying "our outfit doesn't do that".
2. A system that leads to outfit culture like this needs massive reform: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/education/article/texas-am-hazing-lawsuit-cadets-18550232.php

---

There have always been bad outfits. Fix the problem and have them model after the good outfits. That's how they have done it for 100 years. This solution destroys the good outfits.

---

The problem appears to be Corps-wide and Outfit Culture is the root of it. You cannot force bad outfits to become good without shaking things up. I highly doubt that a unit without fish for 4 weeks will "destroy the good outfits"

---

Where are you getting 4 weeks?

It is 8 weeks with no fish in the outfit, so that is from mid August, all September, 1/2 October. All the fish are together and no outfit training is happening at all cause they are not separated at all.

Then after that (mid Oct - 3rd week Nov) about 4-5 weeks with fish (living separately) and attending outfit training areas in random hallways on certain days. So they have zero outfit contact for 8 full weeks (really 9 when you figure in FOW). Then another 4-5 weeks where they see upperclassmen maybe 2 hours per day, 4 to 5 days per week. Then Thankgiving, come back for finals, and home for Xmas break for a month.

Might as well go to school at a regular ROTC program at UH or the like. That is not a Corps experience.

---

Please read the Commandant's actual plan

1. He has it at "5-6 weeks" including FOW which is about 2 weeks now. That means about 4 academic weeks.
2. "All the fish are together" nope. They are with staff selected from the major units
3. "no outfit training is happening" You're right. CORPS training is happening. That's the point. They don't need to be embedded in an outfit to learn how to be a cadet. The idea that they will not be a good cadet unless they are YOUR cadet is an anathema to good order and discipline, which is lacking.
4. I've seen other ROTC units...this is NOTHING like it.

---

FOW is 1 week and has always been 1 week, we did it last year, it is 1 week.

Fall break was October 9th and 10th, so when I said half of October, you are talking about 3-4 days difference maybe.. So the point is from August 8th - October 10th, they will have zero contact with their outfit.

All the fish will be living in a dorm by themselves by major unit away from their outfits.
This is confirmed when the reason they are waiting till Xmas to put them with the outfits as they say they logistically have to figure out how to move them.

There is Corps training happening all the time now. Cadets have a military science class, a military science lab and a SOMS class in addition to all the other mandatory afternoon training the Trigon requires. There is probably more Corps training time now, than when we were in the Corps. They literally have multiple meetings per week.

We are not other ROTC units. Over 50% of the cadets are D&C. If you want to rid the Corps of the D&C cadets, this is the way to do it.

Quote:

---

I know when and why. It had nothing to do with upperclassmen failing to train. It had to do with some red ass fish that went a little too far.

OK, maybe way too far, but it was fun and the legend lives on.

---

While I agree that one could argue that kidnapping fish are responsible, the mechanism was not new and upperclassmen definitely shared responsibility and one could argue that all responsibility rested on these upperclassmen 'leaders', the military advisers, and ultimately the university.

The fish were expected to mete out some retribution for the past harassment. Maybe the retribution was in keeping with the hazing. I don't know and don't care. It never would have happened without upperclassmen endorsing and doing the same to their leaders. This reverse hazing never should have been allowed an avenue of bad outcomes.

It was clearly a failure in leadership. Untrained upperclassmen making stupid decisions, 'hold my beer' or good bull stupidity, do not set good examples or mold good leaders. The corps leaders and university should do a better job supervising.

Maybe the changes suggested will go to correct the hazing problems. Hoping it eradicates the ritual of hazing 'good bull' and shift the focus on good leadership and stewardship.

I'd hold off making that decision just yet. The dust up from BG Michaelis' covert op is reaching a level I've not seen in my decades of association with Texas A&M. This 148 year old institution is not one to experiment with on a whim.

bobbranco said:

---

Quote:

---

I know when and why. It had nothing to do with upperclassmen failing to train. It had to do with some red ass fish that went a little too far.

OK, maybe way too far, but it was fun and the legend lives on.

---

While I agree that one could argue that kidnapping fish are responsible, the mechanism was not new and upperclassmen definitely shared responsibility and one could argue that all responsibility rested on these upperclassmen 'leaders', the military advisers, and ultimately the university.

The fish were expected to mete out some retribution for the past harassment. Maybe the retribution was in keeping with the hazing. I don't know and don't care. It never would have happened without upperclassmen endorsing and doing the same to their leaders. This reverse hazing never should have been allowed an avenue of bad outcomes.

It was clearly a failure in leadership. Untrained upperclassmen making stupid decisions, 'hold my beer' or good bull stupidity, do not set good examples or mold good leaders. The corps leaders and university should do a better job supervising.

Maybe the changes suggested will go to correct the hazing problems. Hoping it eradicates the ritual of hazing 'good bull' and shift the focus on good leadership and stewardship.

---

Get back to me when hazing stops at the academies and other institutions. People will do stupid things to other people. Good leadership or otherwise.

I get it hazing happens.

But if you don't want oversight you need to lead better and haze better (don't do time consuming, crazy, harmful and dangerous crap).

I have reached out to CCA to see if they can provide something more official than this thread.

I would have hoped they would have been involved to a certain degree since they were helping advertise the mentor positions a few months ago. My guess is they were not in the loop either.

281TexAg said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Also the bulls and others who are woke d bags likely don't like the non-integrated (all-male) outfits because the all-male ones continuously, every year, dominate the awards for grades, athletics, etc. This is simply unexplainable to the woke losers, but being very close with my own non-integrated outfit and many of my buddies moving into integrated outfits--there are just unresolvable issues with integrated outfits and both female and male cadets being held to the same standards.

---

I thought they got rid of all-male outfits?

I was in an integrated outfit (around the same time you were), and while we performed well in most of those metrics, I can confirm there are problems when you put both genders together in an environment like that. Probably one of the biggest lessons I learned from the Corps.

I hope they keep all-male outfits. I would not even be opposed to bringing back W-1. A one-gender experience should be available for people who want it.

---

No there still are a handful of all male outfits.

The unstated Corps goal is to integrate every outfit so that they can even them out.
Fact is the all male outfits dominate almost every category, no matter the category and that is not good for business.

I think this fish training is also part of that plan as well. Detach the fish from the outfit, detach the outfit from the fish.

I think it will first be choose your outfit, then train as a group and move to your outfit, but then eventually, it will be you will be randomly assigned an outfit based on what the Trigon deems necessary.

tamc93 said:

---

I have reached out to CCA to see if they can provide something more official than this thread.

I would have hoped they would have been involved to a certain degree since they were helping advertise the mentor positions a few months ago. My guess is they were not in the loop either.

---

I called the CCA and emailed Bruce Hamilton the CCA CEO as well.

The nice lady on the other end said the CCA doesn't take official positions on any policy decisions by the Corps.

This is plenty official.. Read the thread, the Commandant has already commented on it in his safe space of the Corps Facebook group. I posted a letter from a cadet to a group requesting help. The existing cadets have already started a petition to overturn this and are willing to leave the Corps if this goes through. I checked with my son's CO and he said 'plans are being finalized'.


And he consulted no one.

Not Sharp, Not Welsch, Not the BOR, Not the Corps Advisory Board, Not the CCA, Not the Assoc of Former Students, none of them. Only the Trigon bubble where half the staff is not even Aggies.

BQZip01 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

BQZip01 said:

---

Fuzzy Dunlop said:

---

Here's my take:

This is all BS. As many of you have already stated, he's solving a problem that doesn't exist. Retention is one thing but trying to retain everyone is not what is needed. This is a feel good inclusion move. fish life is hard and that is what made my time in the Corps worth it. When my buddies and I get together, most of our stories are about fish year. Yeah, there's a few stories of being pissheads or roaming the steam tunnels when we were Butts and Zips but 97% of the stories are the crap outs, hall parties, 3x5 come-bys, current events at chow, our rivalry with L-1, etc.

He's blaming the sophomores for not being ready to lead but in reality, it's the Trigon's fault for not having then ready. Actually, pissheads aren't ready until the 2nd semester anyway. Some of our worst crap outs were as pissheads.

I think part of the outfit culture problem started when they rotating leadership positions and taking 1st Sgts and COs from one outfit and moving then to another. I understand that was not his initiative but I don't think this change will fix the "problem."

---

"A problem that doesn't exist"
1. Outfit culture IS a problem when cadets actively flaunt the rules saying "our outfit doesn't do that".
2. A system that leads to outfit culture like this needs massive reform: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/education/article/texas-am-hazing-lawsuit-cadets-18550232.php

---

There have always been bad outfits. Fix the problem and have them model after the good outfits. That's how they have done it for 100 years. This solution destroys the good outfits.

---

Great. How do you propose to "fix the problem"?

Saying it that simplistically ignores the real logistical challenges

---

You fix the problem by setting objective standards you expect outfits to reach and holding them accountable. Then if they don't you make changes in leadership, typically taking leaders from strong outfits that were passed over because those outfits produce more of them and have them bring that culture to the outfit that needs help. If the outfit is too far gone you disband it.

Part of the current problem is the lack of objective standards they are using to evaluate outfits. Grades, physical fitness, athletics, involvement in organizations and student leadership, and have a lack of discipline issues and idiocy. They have been disbanding some of those outfits even though when they show improvement in areas they may lack while rewarding outfits that are weak that aren't respected within the Corps. They really don't like having the few all male outfits that exist even though they are the most desired. People join the Corps for the challenge not for it to be easy and to be coddled.

I have 2 of my Corps buds that had kids that joined the Corps wanting something similar to what their Dads had experienced and instead found a Woke mess and were miserable. One was in a bad outfit. Another was in a good outfit and was loving it and then it was disbanded and their son was forced into an outfit he hated. Had one that had a good experience in a good outfit. It's all about the outfit. You have many outfits that the fish have tremendous power over the upperclassmen because if they complain at all the upperclassmen are severely punished. They seem to be obsessed with not making life stressful or difficult which is the main point of the Corps, it's not supposed to be easy.

I also really question why there are so many females in leadership when they make up a smaller percentage of the Corps and have built in physical limitations. There are definitely exceptional females but I have trouble believing they are disproportionately superior. If leadership isn't being given to the best qualified person that is the most respected among their peers that causes a breakdown in the organization as well. The Corps is designed as a meritocracy. So either A&M has found some magic formula that female Corps members have drastically improved while men have declined in the last 30 years or it has become deeply political and there are very different standards being applied.

My youngest is likely going to Main Campus in another year and he's got no desire really to join the Corps based on what he has seen with our other friends and he can certainly hack it. Would be 3rd Generation and is a very strong student. I stopped donating to the Corps Foundation a few years ago myself.

aggiez03 said:

---

I called the CCA and emailed Bruce Hamilton the CCA CEO as well.

The nice lady on the other end said the CCA doesn't take official positions on any policy decisions by the Corps.

---

Sad that I am running out of organizations to send money to at A&M.

CCA has taken positions before, so I wonder what is different this time?

TIL Corps of Cadet alumni believe their program is superior in preparing US military officers than that used by the United States service academies.

Duly noted.

fc2112 said:

---

TIL Corps of Cadet alumni believe their program is superior in preparing US military officers than that used by the United States service academies.

Duly noted.

---

I think you could make arguments that much of the training is superior but it's different. The Corps also allows anyone to join and half the cadets aren't contract. The Academies are hand selected with everyone having a military obligation. It's very hard to compare the two and it really depends on what you are looking to evaluate.

Small quibble, the academies do not require a service obligation for the first two years.

A cadet is not obligated until they show up for first day of their junior academic year. Somewhat like how all A&M cadets take ROTC the first two years, but are not required to take a contract

Your hazing experience may be the norm. I agree that a horrible experience does bond a group and can create a solid team until it backfires. Training, the physical and mental stress, does not equal the erratic nature of hazing. Ultimately I don't think hazing rituals are necessarily the answer because they can destroy morale beyond repair, solidify distrust, and result in vendettas up and down the chain of command.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Small quibble, the academies do not require a service obligation for the first two years.

A cadet is not obligated until they show up for first day of their junior academic year. Somewhat like how all A&M cadets take ROTC the first two years, but are not required to take a contract

---

The larger point is that the Academies select their students, the Corps does not. Also that while technically you are not obligated until after a period of time at the Academies, 99% of kids going there start with the intention of joining the service. That's not the case at all in the Corps where you have half that take contracts and probably another 20% that considered it seriously but chose not to or had an issue (typically medical) that prevented it. They have fundamentally different missions.

The point of the Corps is the training. The point of the Academies is it is a means to an end. My eldest is in the Corps at Galveston for instance as he is wanting to get his Deck Officer License studying Maritime Transportation. 85%+ of the kids in the Corps there are going for License with about 10% doing NROTC and a very small number of D&C Cadets. The Corps there is completely different than CS because it is a means to an end and those kids are doing it because they have to in order to get the license. All of the training is specific to what they will need to do their job later and they don't have lots of extra leadership training. It's much more professional development and personal responsibility as opposed to team oriented and there isn't the emphasis on class distinctions outside of Freshman but they also aren't treated anything like they are at Main Campus outside of Orientation Week.

In CS it's about the leadership training itself. You not only have half the kids not going in the service but of those who are they could be going in any of the 4 branches. BTW that's another reason the Outfit structure works well because different outfits emphasize different things and students can choose what they want be it a Branch or Band or outfits that emphasize athletics or academics or has a lot of engineers or whatever. In the end the outfits that people most want to join are the all male outfits, the Band, and of course E-2 so they can be with Rev.

I remember when my eldest did Spend the Night as he was considering Main Campus literally half of the kids were with the few all male outfits and the other half were split among the dozens of others. The problem is the leadership in the Corps sees that as a problem for the outfits that people want to join, they don't think "Huh, well maybe we should offer more of what students want". I remember talking to some of them and they were so annoyed that those kids didn't want to go into integrated outfits and felt like the all male outfits had such an advantage. At the same time they seemed to embrace every complaint and were focused on coddling kids and numbers for the sake of numbers. It was enlightening and frustrating.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

News flash: rule followers can and often make terrible leaders in the real world.

---

This is why British Commonwealth people are terrible leaders, especially CEOs.
I'm including Brits, Canadians, Indians, Australians, Kiwis, etc. under this umbrella.

But they are excellent rule followers.
If you're trying to keep a company on the same course it's on, put a Commonwealth person in charge.

At my last employer, once the entire management chain consisted of a Kiwi, an Indian, a Brit, and another Brit, I knew we were toast. But, we were exceptional at being compliant with corporate policies.

bobbranco said:

---

Your hazing experience may be the norm. I agree that a horrible experience does bond a group and can create a solid team until it backfires. Training, the physical and mental stress, does not equal the erratic nature of hazing. Ultimately I don't think hazing rituals are necessarily the answer because they can destroy morale beyond repair, solidify distrust, and result in vendettas up and down the chain of command.

---

No doubt I was fortunate and had great leaders. The key is that the "hazing" has a purpose and guidelines and safety is always first. Most of all it takes strong leadership and you have to weed out the folks that abuse power. You also can't set up a system where the fish know they can complain about virtually anything and get their leaders punished. I know I've heard about fish who all but taunt their upperclassmen now if they get disciplined because they know they can report them and have tremendous power over them. It's pretty far out of whack.

I think the CoC is a great organization and as with anything that involves humans you will have problems. I want the best for the CoC because it is the poster child for Texas A&M.

Hazing incidents have caused outside intervention. A&M, the academies, the armed forces will and continue to haze. It's a given that hazing occurs but leaving it up to a bunch of untrained, immature college kids to devise new tactics or continue failed tactics is a recipe for disaster. If there was some level of supervision or maturity the hazing would not have happened as noted in the report in the Houston Chronicle. Hope it all works out for you guys because without proper leadership you will kill the CoC.

aggie93 said:

---

I know I've heard about fish who all but taunt their upperclassmen now if they get disciplined because they know they can report them and have tremendous power over them. It's pretty far out of whack.

---

I know enlisted report disliked officers for 'bad behavior'.

Can't tell if it's the woke mob or bad leaders. Probably the former more than the latter.

Military doesn't need a woke mob.

I am not suggesting destroying the CoC. Learn from the mistakes and improve.

Hazing is all fun and games, like partying too hard, until you end up in the emergency room

I firmly believe hazing has a place but as you note truly bad actors get dismissed. Obviously, repeated dismissals because of hazing gone wild, proves the problem continues and there is a failure with supervision or leadership.

If the CoC has hazing directives that are not being followed that is a problem.

bobbranco said:

---

I think the CoC is a great organization and as with anything that involves humans you will have problems. I want the best for the CoC because it is the poster child for Texas A&M.

Hazing incidents have caused outside intervention. A&M, the academies, the armed forces will and continue to haze. It's a given that hazing occurs but leaving it up to a bunch of untrained, immature college kids to devise new tactics or continue failed tactics is a recipe for disaster. If there was some level of supervision or maturity the hazing would not have happened as noted in the report in the Houston Chronicle. Hope it all works out for you guys because without proper leadership you will kill the CoC.

---

Hazing has been going on as long as there has been a Corps and they have always dealt with it and addressed it. It has also always been used by people who have agendas to change the Corps as a reason to do things that have nothing to do with hazing. It was that way when I was in school and when my Dad was in school.

Fair enough.

Don't be surprised by the criticism.

this new plan puts the power in even fewer hands, IMO that has more chance of hazing occurring and easier to cover up. So I don't buy this is to address hazing

Quote:

---

at the Academies, 99% of kids going there start with the intention of joining the service.

---

And about a third of them still drop out. The difference being, that at A&M, you can stay in the Corps, even if you change your mind on service.

My exact experience too. '94. Kidnapped and left out of town on the side of a road. We had no idea the crap we were getting ourselves into. Hell Week was like none other. But I'll remember and cherish those memories and bonding moments the rest of my life.

fish are not placed by random right now. To give insight, current cadets recruit high school seniors and juniors into their specific outfit. They recruit ultimately for the corps but these soon to be fish know where they want to go. It is not a random selection, unless the incoming cadet has done no interaction with outfits and is not on any outfits list.

If that is the case. The fish still gets to chose but might not get their first choice