Is this correct? Comes from Saturday Down South. We're not even 0.500 in Bowl games?


Texas A&M (17-20): The Aggies are going bowling for the eighth consecutive season. Last year they saw their four-game bowl win streak snapped. As a former member in both the Southwest Conference and Big 12 Conference, Texas A&M has appeared in the Cotton Bowl (13), winning five of those, more than any other bowl game. It's also the only bowl in which the Aggies have managed to win more than once.

Doesn't it matter more that our current coach is 3-1?

Did you just start following Aggie football this year? Wow!

Ags have actually been very good in bowls under Sumlin but pretty awful the previous 20 or so years with a lot of close losses in brutal matchups.

Wrangler said:

---

Is this correct?

---

Yes

It's easier to look up the answer than post a new topic. I'm constantly amazed that people have no idea where to look up stats on the internet.

agdaddy04 said:

---

Doesn't it matter more that our current coach is 3-1?

---

Probably alot easier to win bowls now that they let so many more teams in. Heck, even teams with losing records can get a bowl these days.

Most of our bowl match ups before 2000 were against top 20 teams and often top 10 teams. Now we go 8-4 and get fringe top 25 teams. 80 teams make a bowl this year whereas 25 years ago that number was closer to 30.

I've never met a toilet bowl that I haven't won.

In the Big XII we always were upgraded to a better bowl than we should have been in because we were one of the only schools that traveled well in that conference. Now we're where we should be bowls in the SEC.

Wonder if Alabama worries about Ole Miss having a better bowl record? What about Michigan and Ohio State having a bowl record below .500, they must be pissed?
http://www.winsipedia.com/ranking/bowl-record

Claud said:

---

agdaddy04 said:

---

Doesn't it matter more that our current coach is 3-1?

---

Probably alot easier to win bowls now that they let so many more teams in. Heck, even teams with losing records can get a bowl these days.

---

How many of those have we played?

Its made me cringe in the past whenever sumlin brags about winning 4 consecutive bowl games for the first time in school history. This is more proof he is in over his head. And people eat it up too. I've seen that regurgitated numerous times here as if it is some great accomplishment.

Here is a list of each team we lost to in a bowl throughout the 80s and 90s:

#7 ohio state, #4 fsu, #17 pitt, #4 nd, #2 nd, #5 ucla, #2 ohio state, #11 penn st

Mixed in there were some great wins over auburn, nd, byu and michigan, all of which are equivalent to our cotton bowl win over ou. The rest of our tremendous 4 game winning streak was made up of unranked northwestern (6-6), #22 duke (8-4), and unranked west virginia (7-5). I can't imagine the anticipation for the texas bowl if we had a 5 game winning streak on the line. It's too bad unranked louisville was able to snap it.

portuguese breakfast said:

---

Its made me cringe in the past whenever sumlin brags about winning 4 consecutive bowl games for the first time in school history. This is more proof he is in over his head. And people eat it up too. I've seen that regurgitated numerous times here as if it is some great accomplishment.

Here is a list of each team we lost to in a bowl throughout the 80s and 90s:

#7 ohio state, #4 fsu, #17 pitt, #4 nd, #2 nd, #5 ucla, #2 ohio state, #11 penn st

Mixed in there were some great wins over auburn, nd, byu and michigan, all of which are equivalent to our cotton bowl win over ou. The rest of our tremendous 4 game winning streak was made up of unranked northwestern (6-6), #22 duke (8-4), and unranked west virginia (7-5). I can't imagine the anticipation for the texas bowl if we had a 5 game winning streak on the line. It's too bad unranked louisville was able to snap it.

---

20-40 years ago...nobody remembers this except for the olds.

honestly, unless youre in an elite bowl, it doesnt matter.


No one gives a **** we won the meineke car care bowl.

Bone6 said:

---

In the Big XII we always were upgraded to a better bowl than we should have been in because we were one of the only schools that traveled well in that conference. Now we're where we should be bowls in the SEC.

---

this x 1,000.

the 3 worst were:

1997 Cotton Bowl vs. #5 UCLA
1999 Alamo Bowl vs. Penn State --- who had been #1 for the first 2 months of the season
2004 Cotton Bowl vs. Tennessee --- SEC East champion

Most schools have worse bowl records than us.

Agdaddy....without JFF he is 1-3

portuguese breakfast said:

---

Its made me cringe in the past whenever sumlin brags about winning 4 consecutive bowl games for the first time in school history. This is more proof he is in over his head. And people eat it up too. I've seen that regurgitated numerous times here as if it is some great accomplishment.

Here is a list of each team we lost to in a bowl throughout the 80s and 90s:

#7 ohio state, #4 fsu, #17 pitt, #4 nd, #2 nd, #5 ucla, #2 ohio state, #11 penn st

Mixed in there were some great wins over auburn, nd, byu and michigan, all of which are equivalent to our cotton bowl win over ou. The rest of our tremendous 4 game winning streak was made up of unranked northwestern (6-6), #22 duke (8-4), and unranked west virginia (7-5). I can't imagine the anticipation for the texas bowl if we had a 5 game winning streak on the line. It's too bad unranked louisville was able to snap it.

---

This post needs to be brought up everytime a pumper mentions Sumlin's bowl record. Sumlin is playing crappier teams than Slocum played because he is going 8-4 instead of 10-1 during the regular season. The final rankings take everything into account and we were ranked top 15 for 9 times in 11 seasons from 1985-95. We have done it once in 5 seasons under Sumlin and will drop to once in six seasons if we keep him.

You should change your name to txagsdisgruntled2014

Quote:

---

Sumlin is playing crappier teams than Slocum played because he is going 8-4 instead of 10-1 during the regular season

---

that's a very valid point.

hold on now...the Cotton Bowl win over Oklahoma was a significant win. The Sooners were the Big 12 champs.

the Chick-fil-A Bowl win was against the ACC Coastal Division champ. Duke is not a powerhouse but they had a good team that year. Jamison Crowder is a star for the Redskins now.

the Liberty Bowl win over West Virginia was an average win. But in 2000 the Ags lost the Snow Bowl to a very average State team

I don't get why everyone puts so much stock into one game at the end of the season played a month after the season is over. 99% of the bowl games played are consolation prizes anyway. The teams are quite often not even the same ones that were present September-November.

Considering bowl games should be played against evenly matched teams 17-20 sounds about right.

Yes real powerhouses Duke, WVU, Northwestern, and Louisville, pad those states real good.

Man, some people will do anything to be miserable. What a sad existence that must be.

For the most part... Bowl games are 99% meaningless.
Yeah if you win sugar bowl, Rose bowl or such its a big thing.... Others , nobody cares

TXAGBQ76 said:

---

Man, some people will do anything to be miserable. What a sad existence that must be.

---

No kidding.

Of course the alternative is that we don't make a bowl. Then they could be miserable and wallow in the fact that we didn't make a bowl. We could have made a better bowl, but would likely have lost. Then the burning of the Sumlin effigies would have happened because we have a losing bowl record under him.

I would truly hate life if I woke up and spent my day actively looking for something to be miserable about.

Part of the reason we got rid of RC was because he was 3-8 in bowl games.

portuguese breakfast said:

---

Its made me cringe in the past whenever sumlin brags about winning 4 consecutive bowl games for the first time in school history. This is more proof he is in over his head.

---

Texags. Where winning proves you are in over your head.

Bowl record is correct but our overall record is 717-465-48, which is solidly mediocre, though under Sumlin, at a high price per win.

Emilio Fantastico said:

---

Part of the reason we got rid of RC was because he was 3-8 in bowl games.

---

Then people will say he lost because we played better teams in the bowl game. Unbelievable that people say that.

That's exactly why he was fired people. Because there were better teams than his.

8T2 said:

---

portuguese breakfast said:

---

Its made me cringe in the past whenever sumlin brags about winning 4 consecutive bowl games for the first time in school history. This is more proof he is in over his head.

---

Texags. Where winning proves you are in over your head.

---

You must have misread my post. When you act like a 4 game bowl winning streak is some sort of accomplishment, when 3 of the wins were northwestern, duke and west virginia, you're satisfied a little too easily. But being a sumlin guy, maybe you felt a great deal of pride about the streak as well. If so, sorry about the music city bowl. Hopefully you just misread my post.

Up until 15 years ago, all bowls were a big deal. Back in the '50s, '60s, '70s and even '80s, there were only about 18-20 bowl games. It was a huge honor to get to go to a bowl game...any bowl game...back then. There were really only two tiers of bowls. The top tier was the Rose, Sugar, Orange and Cotton. All of the other bowls...Sun, Liberty, Independence, Peach, Citrus, Bluebonnet, Gator and such...were still a pretty big deal.

Winning the Sun or Liberty Bowl today is nothing. Winning it in the '80s was fantastic.

There were lots of 8-3 and even 9-2 teams who stayed at home during the holidays and didn't get to go bowling.

In 1973, the Ags went 8-3 overall and 5-2 in SWC play and didn't get invited to a bowl. We also beat Clemson, Washington and LSU in non-conference games along the way. Great season for the Ags...no reward in December.

doctorz said:

---

Bowl record is correct but our overall record is 717-465-48, which is solidly mediocre, though under Sumlin, at a high price per win.

---

That's a .593 winning percentage. In 100+ years of playing football, that's not mediocre.

I'm not sure when this was last updated or if it's even accurate, but we're 26th all-time in win percentage. Look at our record from 1946 thru 1973. In those 28 years, we had only 6 winning seasons, 3 bowl games (2 wins, 1 loss) and a record of 105 wins, 167 losses and 15 ties (.392 winning percentage). Considering how awful we were for that quarter-century, it's pretty amazing we're even sniffing the top 25 in overall winning percentage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_win-loss_records

And look at some of the teams above us in all-time winning percentage records. They may play D-I football now, but they spent a career playing at a lower level and (for some reason) are getting credit for all of those wins on this list. Looking just at win-loss percentage, here are some ridiculous rankings:

3. Boise State
10. Old Dominion
16. Georgia Southern
17. Appalachian State

So you want to tell me those 4 programs are all better than A&M?

Look, I'm not at all happy with the direction and leadership of this program, but to call us historically mediocre is simply false. Teams like Ole Miss, Texas Tech, Missouri, TCU, Maryland, Louisville, South Carolina, Oklahoma State and Kentucky are historically mediocre.

tk for tu juan said:

---

Wonder if Alabama worries about Ole Miss having a better bowl record? What about Michigan and Ohio State having a bowl record below .500, they must be pissed?
http://www.winsipedia.com/ranking/bowl-record

---

Alabama still has more wins than anyone else.