Keep yell leaders and add cheerleaders...its a win win.

quote:

---

I grew up in the Amarillo and many of my HS friends attended tech. They are ALL doing very well for themselves. So don't fool yourself, the work that a student puts in is what determines the relevance of the degree.

---

Plenty of Tech grads do just fine for themselves. But in that vein, please don't fool yourself that a degree from A&M won't open up lots more doors to you pretty much everywhere than a degree from TTU. Likewise, a degree from MIT will open up more doors than your A&M degree. Don't delude yourself that there is no difference at all between schools.

bottomline for me...I think the program is simply blocked until Brown and Stoops retire or move on somewhere else. They have A&M locked out recruiting-wise on the elite defensive players in the state. And it's been that way for 10 years.

However I do think the program should still be able to go no worse than 8-4 each year, but 10-2/11-1 is not within reach until something goes significantly wrong at OU or Texas.

quote:

---

It's nice to see how many people agree with me and my neighbors on the current state of our football program and even more so supportive to see all of the replies such as, "you don't know anything about football."..."

---

Might I suggest that the reason people might think you know nothing about football is because you attempted to "analyze" the problem with our football team and came to the conclusion that the biggest problems include Fish Camp, maroon SUVs, and teaching our kids the War Hymn. Pardon me if I missed your insightful analysis of why our scheme won't work, why our recruiting is going the wrong direction, why our players aren't being developed, why we had mismatch problems-- in short, where I missed anything that had to do with football whatsoever. Maybe the bit about "incestuous" hiring, but that was the only semblance of actual football talk in the whole post.

All you gave us was yet another petulant New Army rant about how you don't like our University and what it is. That's cool, you don't have to. But tell me wtf you are doing at A&M? There are plenty of schools with equal if not better academics. There are plenty of schools with better greek scenes. In short, there are plenty of schools across the nation and state that can give you anything you want in a school, including winning football if that is what is most important to you. If you don't like A&M and what it is, that's fine, but understand that you are 100% full of crap if you think that anything except the quality of coaches, players, recruiting and facilities have any impact on the football team.

You whiners remind me of the people that go to Abilene Christian and immediately start moaning about having to go to chapel, mandatory Bible classes, and not being able to drink. You knew the score when you registered for classses. What are you doing at A&M if our university sucks so much? If you're an former student, you're welcome to encourage your kids to go to a university that does things right, like Texas State or UNT.

[This message has been edited by TheFirebird (edited 10/19/2009 1:19p).]

quote:

---

IMO (after this very long post), as I said before, the mis-management of Groff killed any momentum RC had coming out of the early 90's. He LET Texas and OU back into the picture in that 200 mile circle by letting them out-invest us and forcing us to re-cycle assistants who went on to success after leaving A&M for greener pastures (Tubberville, Sherman, Davies, Sumlin, etc). Some left for HC promotions, but most just left for more cash.

Follow that up with Franchione (by the way, there was NOTHING wrong with his HIRE - he had a great resume, it just turned out to be garbage and a huge mistake) and ta-da, you have the program we have now.

---

+1

We focus and put such a premium on being "different" that we forget to be competitive. We think that by changing a few things we are "conforming" to the rest of the schools in the NCAA. By the way...winning cures all of these arguments...that and getting cheerleaders.

#1 makes me think of that dumb shirt that says "At the end of the day, win or lose, I'm still an Aggie and you're still a T-sip, and that's more important than what happens on the field."

I do agree that being an Aggie is a meaningful thing, but this shirt just proves our 'holier than thou' and envious attitude. It shows that we've accepted our culture of losing and now we're just like "at least i'm not a hippie t-sip, or at least don't go to texas tech high school."

That's all we can do now- talk about how our yells, whooping, and not walking on the grass is better than the other team's effort on the football field.

quote:

---

#1 makes me think of that dumb shirt that says "At the end of the day, win or lose, I'm still an Aggie and you're still a T-sip, and that's more important than what happens on the field."

I do agree that being an Aggie is a meaningful thing, but this shirt just proves our 'holier than thou' and envious attitude. It shows that we've accepted our culture of losing and now we're just like "at least i'm not a hippie t-sip, or at least don't go to texas tech high school."

That's all we can do now- talk about how our yells, whooping, and not walking on the grass is better than the other team's effort on the football field.

---

Guess what ItalianStallion-- our attitude and effort means nothing because we aren't playing the game.

Are you really so delusional as to think that we just aren't upset enough, that's the real problem?

quote:

---

The biggest problem of all is that we don't demand performance of our football program.

---

This kind of nonsense implies that the AD is not trying to win. This, and the OP, are ridiculously delusional in that they honestly feel their anger will change something. It didn't prevent the Obama election, and it won't make us a better football team.

Please, oh wise ones, please just state that you honestly think that BB and AD actually want us to stay mediocre and reveal yourselves for the absolute moran loosers that you are.

Also hilarious: attacking other fans because you realize your ire is both impotent and irrelevant...

There is no question that there is truth to #1. People who didn't attend A&M find it weird how in to the university our alumni are. We go out of our way to cultivate this.

Firebird, I'm not delusional. I'm an Aggie who is sick of all of the same old mumbo jumbo. Most Aggies are real and down to earth, and know that our football team struggles, but there's that select few who make up excuses like the ones I mentioned just to discredit our loss.

[This message has been edited by ItalianStallion74 (edited 10/19/2009 1:31p).]

If we just got angry enough, our recruiters would recruit better...
If we just got angry enough, our coaches would coach better...
If we just got angry enough, our players would practice harder...
If we just got angry enough, we'd win more...

Seriously?

Nobody, even the most delusional fanatics, are happy losing or staying mediocre. That you fools even entertain this idea is comical.

Getting angry will not get their attention but leaving games early when we are down by 5 tds or empty seats will definitely grab someones attention. But, Aggies shouldnt leave games early right? I still think everyone is jumping off the ship too early. There is no excuse for losing a game as bad as we did on Saturday but lets see what we do to rebound...that will be the true test. If we lose another game by 50 some odd points then we may have some issues deeper than just being young. I still think we need to look into getting cheerleaders.

Furious:

Exactly. None of us like to lose. And I think Sherman deserves a little heat on him for this performance. And if he can't turn things around and get things on track, then BB will deserve some heat. No one here is trying to say that all is well.

But what's idiotic is the suggestion that the reason we are losing is because we support our university and the football team through thick and thin and that the answer to all our woes is a smoke machine, some cheerleaders, and maybe even some AC/DC intro music. Scratch that, the answer is to tell our incoming freshmen that they shouldn't be proud of A&M and love the school, and not to teach our kids how to root for the Ags. That's the real problem, we just love the school too much.

Get real. The problem lies in coaching/players and nothing else. Our traditions didn't stop us from winning (or cause us to win) when we were good, they have no bearing on our loss now.

Did you ever stop to think that high school recruits might be into smoke machines, cheerleaders, and AC/DC intro music? I mean, if thats what it takes to get 5 star recruits then we should look into adding some of that. We arent trying to recruit 50 year olds.

As someone who plans to enroll in grad school at this GREAT university and unfortunately never go to experience everything that makes A&M the university and place that it is as I had dreamed about my whole life, I have this to say...

#1 could not be further from the truth. Don't bash this university. Football, X's and O's, coaches, all that is fine. But not the university, c'mon people. This has gotten ridiculous.

The finger pointing is absolutely absurd. You're calling out the traditions of Texas A&M, the very thing that gives the school any sort of national recognition at this point. It's ludicrous and comes across as whining.

Man up, shut up, and go after the things that are failing right now. Quit dragging other things into your pity party.

quote:

---

Did you ever stop to think that high school recruits might be into smoke machines, cheerleaders, and AC/DC intro music? I mean, if thats what it takes to get 5 star recruits then we should look into adding some of that. We arent trying to recruit 50 year olds.

---

Yes, that's it. It's not the chance to play for Pete Carroll or Mack Brown. It's not the great odds of being drafted in the NFL. It's not the chance to play for an NC. It's the smoke machine and intro....

Do you think before you type? RC Slocum recruited NFL talent to this school for years and if anything it was more Red Ass back then.

Recruits don't care about sideline stuff. They care about winning. Everything and anything looks cool when you are winning. Proof: Oklahoma looks cool when they are winning.

Cowboy+1 Good way to end this topic!

quote:

---

Did you ever stop to think that high school recruits might be into smoke machines, cheerleaders, and AC/DC intro music? I mean, if thats what it takes to get 5 star recruits then we should look into adding some of that. We arent trying to recruit 50 year olds.

---

Kids go play at schools because of a couple of reasons...

And I played collegiate athletics and went through the recruiting process so I know.

1. Kids wanna play for a winner
2. Kids wanna play close to home
3. Kids wanna play where mom/dad went to school
4. Kids wanna play where they get school paid for
5. Kids wanna go play because they have nowhere else to go

...that's about it.

If you think all that other stuff translates into W's, then you, sir, are extremely delusional.

Firebird - I agree with you on this topic...

I really want the OP or someone else to come out and say they don't think the AD is trying to win an MNC in football. They know it's not true, so the only tangible thing to attack is the "loyal fanbase."

Regardless, athletic women in skimpy tight clothes are ALWAYS a good idea.

The funny thing is that before the season started, nearly everyone said this year was "throw away" and didn't matter. Our Oline is terrible and we start way too many freshmen. But since we looked great in our first 3 games the season magically became somehow different.

I swear the people on this forum are worse than heroin junkies.

Actually I dont think before I type...im not a real person and you are actually speaking to a computer...and this computer thinks that if you compare A&M to Pete Carroll and USC you are the one not thinking before typing...this computer also believes cheerleaders would be a good idea for A&M.

Short version of my comments, OP is clueless and so are so many Ags that thought he nailed it. It comes down to Coaches, recruiting, and facilities. Get those right you win!

OP, I love the logic that if there are universities that are having more success than us then it has to be because of our differences. Some of our differences are what makes us such a unique and special place to go to school or play football.

Coaches, facilities, and recruiting is actually all it comes down to. We were week on coach, facilities, and recruiting over the past 10 years. Facilities are 95% corrected and recruiting is improving, we'll have to see on the coaching.

Look at the past coaches, facilities, and recruiting: RC was a good, not great coach. All that talent and no offense or serious threat of a national championship. Not a great coach.

Wally Grof was a fair to OK AD. This is where the long term impact is felt. The lack of investment in facilities and coaches doesn't get fixed quickly. Assistant coach turnover and no facilities kills a program. Both of those issues hit you hard ultimately in attracting talented players and coaches.

Fran phony didn't have a clue about football. His reaches on players NEVER panned out and his shotgun approach to recruiting only based on number of stars left enormous gaps in talent all over the field.

While we are fielding a talented group of youngsters, there are still so many weaknesses collectively as a team. Mainly on both lines where we are skeleton thin looking at just numbers, much less play makers. All over on the defense we lack enough studs for them to be able to shine. Collectively we are very weak when what few strengths you have can be nullified and your weaknesses are so easy to exploit. That is why we are so bad as a team.

Sherman is a "grinder" and should have sought more JC players to come in and contribute immediately, but he would have lost some of his sales pitch to recruits and reduced the players to build around for the longer term solution.

That's my .02


[This message has been edited by Z Team (edited 10/19/2009 2:05p).]

Why not A&M?

Firebird is right.

I was a Fish Camp counselor twice and so I don't understand the comment #1 about the 'holier than thou' attitude that is supposedly passed down at Fish Camp. There's no truth to that, at least at the 2 fish camps that I attended. We were there to learn about Aggie traditions, why they are important and how to carry them on. Other schools have their traditions - we have ours. But nobody else has a 12th Man which is consistently ranked as one of the top College football traditions...we should be proud of that, while not disrepecting other schools traditions.

We are down right now in football and it stinks. But our program overall, is still a top 25 program when you consider everything, Heisman, conf championships and 1 National Championship. Yes it happened a long time ago, but there are many other schools who would kill for our history and our resume. (tech for example, great recent success but no heisman, no nat champs, no Big12 or SWC champ) We have been down for 10 years, but it's not time to jettison the traditions that make us unique.

quote:

---

Gunan,

You think it is a good idea to continue to hire and fire every 2-3 years until we find the next Meyer or Saban? You sir just revealed your idiocy. It is a horrible idea to change personel and schemes every 3 years.

Actually, I'm going to stop there. Obviously someone dense enough to equate giving someone time to build a program with "accepting mediocrity" is not worth arguing with. Give me one example of a program that changed coaches every 3 years and was subsequently successful.

---

Oh brother. You can't say something is a "horrible" idea without looking at the evidence. We have been "trying to build a program" for >10 years. The landscape is different than it was in the 90s and a new strategy is required. I think most of us would agree the goal (ultimately) is to win Big 12 Championships and BCS games. Did you read my previous post? Did you see how every coach that has won a BCS championship this decade other than Mack Brown did it within 4 years of joining their program???

Do you want some examples of programs that went through coaches with regularity before finding the ONE? How about Oklahoma...between 1990-98, they went though Gary Gibbs, Howard Schnellenberger, and John Blake. Then Stoops comes along and wins the MNC in his second year and has built a continuous BCS contender....

Other schools got rid of their championship winning coach's predecessor after a few years, also. USC gave Paul Hackett 3 years before getting Carroll, who won a title in his 4th year. Ron Zook got 3 years at Florida before Meyer came along and won his MNC in his 2nd year.

We can keep doing it the way we've been doing it for years and give a coach 5 years to try and "build a program" or we can keep going through coaches until we find the right fit and THEN build a program. Certain coaches have IT, and others don't Again, read my previous post- this is how it's been done by WINNERS this decade.

When you are blind you can never see the light...

TAMU24,

My computer thinks your computer is an idiot.

[This message has been edited by The Cowboy (edited 10/19/2009 2:20p).]

Your computer is entitled to its opinion

quote:

---

RC didn't recruit very many players that were quality Big-12 players.

---

ah, so ***that's*** how he won as many big 12 championships as mack brown did...

quote:

---

We can keep doing it the way we've been doing it for years and give a coach 5 years to try and "build a program" or we can keep going through coaches until we find the right fit...

---

You are right! Sherman's 5th year has been a disaster thus far!!!!11111

One problem is that the powers that be were so concerned about finding a HC that "gets" A&M.

I'd rather be hiring folks that "get" how to win.

quote:

---

You are right! Sherman's 5th year has been a disaster thus far!!!!11111

---

2 and 3, sure. #1 is a load of crap. There's nothing wrong with being proud of your university....even if it's hard to do with the state of the football program.

Is winning and playing in the NFL the #1 priority for most recruits? Definitely. By FAR.

But if you really think a schools image -- which includes cheerleaders, "smoke machines", intros, how they look on national television, ridiculous youtube videos that are seen nationwide, acceptance of minorities, etc, etc... don't play a role in recruiting, then major college athletics has passed you by.

Again, institutions like Army and Navy have FAR more history and "tradition" than Texas A&M... Yet they've got cheerleaders on their sidelines.

Why do you think that is?

op

I really find this post and thread disturbing. In fact I find a lot of what's going on in our country disturbing right now. What ever happened to our core honor that made us all Ags. We honor those that go before us especially those gave their life for our country. I want a great football team as bad as anyone and I don't mind some change but please let there be at least one place in this world where honor exists and we pass it on for generations.. Good luck and keep fightin AGs..