Champ Bailey said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Snap E Tom said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

I am curious if this is an Old Army vs. New Army issue. I guess I'm in the Old Army demographic. Most of my older Ag friends want to play the game. Most of my younger Ag acquaintances do not. What do the rest of you think?

---

No, it's a "living in reality, optimal strategy, acting in rational-self interest" issue. If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

Wrong.

---

OK, so how will playing the game benefit A&M?

---

It's fun for Aggies to watch.

---

And that's supposed to counter EVERY argument against having the game???

---

Yes... and that in itself is a problem. Some do not care at all about negative consequences. Consequences that occur even if we win.

It is a selfless effort on our part to help them, regardless of what negative consequences we suffer. Don't you want to be selfless and noble? Regardless if they abuse the act?

---

How would you be helping people that enjoy watching good football?

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

So how are you being selfless?

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Snap E Tom said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

I am curious if this is an Old Army vs. New Army issue. I guess I'm in the Old Army demographic. Most of my older Ag friends want to play the game. Most of my younger Ag acquaintances do not. What do the rest of you think?

---

No, it's a "living in reality, optimal strategy, acting in rational-self interest" issue. If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

Wrong.

---

OK, so how will playing the game benefit A&M?

---

It's fun for Aggies to watch.

---

And that's supposed to counter EVERY argument against having the game???

---

Yes. It's a game. That wasn't what you originally asked though.

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Then what was your post about?

---

Quote:

---

If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Then what was your post about?

---

The post was about this:

Quote:

---

If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

and the consequences of playing the game, pretty much all of which would NOT be what's best for A&M.

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Then what was your post about?

---

The post was about this:

Quote:

---

If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

and the consequences of playing the game, pretty much all of which would NOT be what's best for A&M.

---

If we wanted to what was best for A&M, we wouldn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a game played by 18-22 year olds. We do that though because it's fun and provides a great opportunity for Aggies to reconnect and have a great time at A&M. The consequences of playing the sips maximize that metric.

---

JMR_2016 said:

---

So what will be the majority opinion when they actually get a competent coach (could be Herman) and run through their conference without much difficulty, seeing as there's only 1 or 2 decent teams in the Big 12 every year. Their road to the playoff is much easier than ours. Then they're making it to the playoff on a somewhat consistent basis. I feel like that's a bigger recruiting draw than the SEC. We wouldn't have even made it to the playoff in Johnny's first (the "special") season.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So what will be the majority opinion when they actually get a competent coach (could be Herman) and run through their conference without much difficulty, seeing as there's only 1 or 2 decent teams in the Big 12 every year. Their road to the playoff is much easier than ours. Then they're making it to the playoff on a somewhat consistent basis. I feel like that's a bigger recruiting draw than the SEC. We wouldn't have even made it to the playoff in Johnny's first (the "special") season.

---

I would have been shocked if we had made it to the playoffs in Johnny's first season. Seeing as how it didn't exist yet.

---

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Then what was your post about?

---

The post was about this:

Quote:

---

If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

and the consequences of playing the game, pretty much all of which would NOT be what's best for A&M.

---

If we wanted to what was best for A&M, we wouldn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a game played by 18-22 year olds. We do that though because it's fun and provides a great opportunity for Aggies to reconnect and have a great time at A&M. The consequences of playing the sips maximize that metric.

---

JMR_2016 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So what will be the majority opinion when they actually get a competent coach (could be Herman) and run through their conference without much difficulty, seeing as there's only 1 or 2 decent teams in the Big 12 every year. Their road to the playoff is much easier than ours. Then they're making it to the playoff on a somewhat consistent basis. I feel like that's a bigger recruiting draw than the SEC. We wouldn't have even made it to the playoff in Johnny's first (the "special") season.

---

I would have been shocked if we had made it to the playoffs in Johnny's first season. Seeing as how it didn't exist yet.

---

---

Right. Pretty sure I worded that correctly. Feel free to respond to the original point though.

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Then what was your post about?

---

The post was about this:

Quote:

---

If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

and the consequences of playing the game, pretty much all of which would NOT be what's best for A&M.

---

If we wanted to what was best for A&M, we wouldn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a game played by 18-22 year olds. We do that though because it's fun and provides a great opportunity for Aggies to reconnect and have a great time at A&M. The consequences of playing the sips maximize that metric.

---

I think there is an implication that the quote "you don't want to do what is best for A&M" is in regards to football.

In other words, "you don't want to do what is best for A&M's football program."

They are another's words, so I may have inferred something that is not there.

The negative consequences of playing that game negatively impacts that metric.

Don't get me wrong... I see the positives, it is just been my experience that the game, and negative consequences (even with winning it) is not worth it.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

+ 2 more quotes (click to expand)

---

Quote:

---

JMR_2016 said:
Right. Pretty sure I worded that correctly. Feel free to respond to the original point though.

---

I'm sure the people who are still scared to play them will still be scared to play them. They will act like they don't care about playing the sips, yet be the first to purchase tickets to play them in baseball and basketball.

As for me, I'm down to play them anytime anywhere.

I do think we should play them at the beginning of the year though. Rivalry weekend is fun, but your season often gets tainted by the last game of the year when looking at coaching decisions. I remember when people wanted to keep Fran because he beat them his last season here.

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

Then what was your post about?

---

The post was about this:

Quote:

---

If you don't want the game, you want to do what's best for A&M. If you do want the game, you don't want what's best for A&M.

---

and the consequences of playing the game, pretty much all of which would NOT be what's best for A&M.

---

If we wanted to what was best for A&M, we wouldn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a game played by 18-22 year olds. We do that though because it's fun and provides a great opportunity for Aggies to reconnect and have a great time at A&M. The consequences of playing the sips maximize that metric.

---

I think there is an implication that the quote "you don't want to do what is best for A&M" is in regards to football.

In other words, "you don't want to do what is best for A&M's football program."

They are another's words, so I may have inferred something that is not there.

The negative consequences of playing that game negatively impacts that metric.

Don't get me wrong... I see the positives, it is just been my experience that the game, and negative consequences (even with winning it) is not worth it.

---

Oh well when you phrase it that way you are right. I shouldn't have to want what is best for A&M's football program. A&M's football program should do what is best for the fans. Playing the sips is best for the fans, because it provides the most entertainment value.

---

JMR_2016 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

+ 2 more quotes (click to expand)

---

Quote:

---

JMR_2016 said:
Right. Pretty sure I worded that correctly. Feel free to respond to the original point though.

---

I'm sure the people who are still scared to play them will still be scared to play them. They will act like they don't care about playing the sips, yet be the first to purchase tickets to play them in baseball and basketball.

As for me, I'm down to play them anytime anywhere.

I do think we should play them at the beginning of the year though. Rivalry weekend is fun, but your season often gets tainted by the last game of the year when looking at coaching decisions. I remember when people wanted to keep Fran because he beat them his last season here.

---

I agree with everything here. I doubt they'd want to play us if it ever gets to that point though. Because then it isn't in their best interest. By that point they're winning games and the recruiting battle. And back and forth we go with no game ever happening.

---

greg.w.h said:

---

Your Friend said:

---

The game must go on

---

The phrase is oddly recoined from this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_show_must_go_on

The concept that there is some minor inconvenience that is preventing the game from being played is downplaying flagrant acts of threats and extortion to get us to stay in the Big 12 including collusion in an effort to prevent us from playing major universities in our own state.

In retrospect their fans missed out on the novelty of playing the only SEC team in Texas and our fans wisely accepted our outcast status with our supporters accepted that status and the majority turned to enjoying the formation of new ties with the potential for the emergence of new rivalries with schools that are more like us and generally have fans that are more like fanatics. All good stuff.

I'm not sure what it means that the game must go on but at first blush it's the sport of college football and at second blush it's actually our team that must go on. Elevating the one annual game to the same status largely exposes the willingness to sacrifice literally everything as long as the one requirement is met.

That's an untenable position going into a negotiation with a weakened opponent who successfully plays any weakness into an advantage. And who took a shared tradition of playing the game on Thanksgiving and turned it into a holiday game for them always in Austin.

We have no shared memories that they haven't shown a willingness to exploit often for naked financial gain. Smart people don't do business with people like that. Southwest Airlines has even been known to book problematic customers with other airlines and convey that rebook to them with an invitation to never book with Southwest again.

That's how we should deal with this though it was politically canny to offer to renew the series "anytime, anywhere" with the implication that there must be a negotiation between peersvto arrange the details. That highlighted the brazen threats and attempt to control the other party that Texas was using. It was disarming.

And the only way to restart the game is as equals. Our former students should demand that and should disdain any fake continuation that doesn't clearly establish that the two sides came to the table as equals and both left satisfied. Anything less is intentionally choosing to be taken advantage of.

There currently is no relationship to "go on" or to support that game going on.

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

Champ Bai said:

---

Oh well when you phrase it that way you are right. I shouldn't have to want what is best for A&M's football program. A&M's football program should do what is best for the fans. Playing the sips is best for the fans, because it provides the most entertainment value.

---

---

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

Champ Bai said:

---

Oh well when you phrase it that way you are right. I shouldn't have to want what is best for A&M's football program. A&M's football program should do what is best for the fans. Playing the sips is best for the fans, because it provides the most entertainment value.

---

---

---

A&M football is a business, what is best for the fans is largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. A&M football needs to do what is best for A&M football.

You are projecting your priorities as the group priorities. My priorities as a fan differ from yours - I'd be much happier, assuming we go with the fallacy that what is best for the fans is a contributing factor, with A&M being competitive for West division and SEC titles on a fairly regular basis versus the occasional win against tu just because nostalgia kicks in.

If we go back to playing tu, we fall right back into the rut of worrying about just being better than tu in some metric. I will be happier as a fan to not have that albatross hanging around our neck and want us to worry about what A&M football (and other sports) can do to become A&M sports and not "we are better than tu in some obscure category" sports.

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

Champ Bai said:

---

Oh well when you phrase it that way you are right. I shouldn't have to want what is best for A&M's football program. A&M's football program should do what is best for the fans. Playing the sips is best for the fans, because it provides the most entertainment value.

---

---

---

A&M football is a business, what is best for the fans is largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. A&M football needs to do what is best for A&M football.

You are projecting your priorities as the group priorities. My priorities as a fan differ from yours - I'd be much happier, assuming we go with the fallacy that what is best for the fans is a contributing factor, with A&M being competitive for West division and SEC titles on a fairly regular basis versus the occasional win against tu just because nostalgia kicks in.

If we go back to playing tu, we fall right back into the rut of worrying about just being better than tu in some metric. I will be happier as a fan to not have that albatross hanging around our neck and want us to worry about what A&M football (and other sports) can do to become A&M sports and not "we are better than tu in some obscure category" sports.

---

Believe it or not, most fanbases are capable of caring about beating more than their rival. Why do you automatically assume that because I want to beat Texas that I don't care about beating LSU or Bama? It's a misrepresentation of the argument.

Nobody is suggesting to invite them to the SEC. We are saying play them just like FUor USCe do.

Also, A&M football's business is providing entertainment to the fans. Your point that they don't care what is best for the fans is wrong. Their entire revenue stream is dependent on the fans. So really, playing against tu is best for the program, as it maxes revenue stream, regardless of how good our team is that year.

---