etexorange said:

---

Quote:

---

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners.

---

So we desired some Aggie and Cornhusker booty, huh? We did cornhole Nebraska more than a few times...

---

Haha I meant larcenous. Thank you.

etexorange said:

---

Quote:

---

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners.

---

So we desired some Aggie and Cornhusker booty, huh? We did cornhole Nebraska more than a few times...

---

I think he means you like to screw your peers over and never want to play on a level playing field. Your delusional arrogance is insufferable. Unless your lot could possibly evolve and accept the fact that the logical reaction to your whole "because we are texas" mentality is "so what?", nobody in their right mind wants to be associated with your lot. Yeah I know it was.

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

---

Because we aren't changing the entire future of our program by playing one game with them. They have no influence over our TV deals (except for that one game I guess, but how would they be able to screw us over on one game a year?), deals that weaken or strengthen our conference, general politics, etc.

Easy to access. Easy to vote. Very easy to vote NO

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

---

Because we aren't changing the entire future of our program by playing one game with them. They have no influence over our TV deals (except for that one game I guess, but how would they be able to screw us over on one game a year?), deals that weaken or strengthen our conference, general politics, etc.

---

We don't need them! Let it go...

ArbAg said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

---

Because we aren't changing the entire future of our program by playing one game with them. They have no influence over our TV deals (except for that one game I guess, but how would they be able to screw us over on one game a year?), deals that weaken or strengthen our conference, general politics, etc.

---

We don't need them! Let it go...

---

I never said we did, and no.

Oh, ok. I guess there is something we CAN agree on... I don't want to ever play football (or any sport) against Texas A&M, ever again.

Vote "NO" on this poll, please.

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

---

Because we aren't changing the entire future of our program by playing one game with them. They have no influence over our TV deals (except for that one game I guess, but how would they be able to screw us over on one game a year?), deals that weaken or strengthen our conference, general politics, etc.

---

I think you underestimate the level they would stoop to. They are petty enough to try anything in their power to screw us over in any way they can. That's how they are. We don't need that high school girl drama, it's pathetic. They do nothing but disrespect and slander us. If they are so desperate to play us, they can reach out to us and play on our terms. And I mean our terms. They would have no room for conniving or manipulation of any kind. Anything less is enabling the behavior we said we wouldn't tolerate any more. Even then.. idk. But they won't.. their egos just can't take it. They are mentally incapable of treating us as true equals and I pity them for that. You really want to beat them? A&M has to wake the sleeping giant and become the thing they are absolutely terrified of: an elite program that suffocates them into irrelevancy by winning. They know what we're capable of now that we've joined the SEC and aren't under their thumb, and it scares them ****less. They got a little taste of it after 2012 but we squandered that opportunity. Don't bail them out by playing their games, and let their asses rot in that dying ****hole they created.

etexorange said:

---

Oh, ok. I guess there is something we CAN agree on... I don't want to ever play football (or any sport) against Texas A&M, ever again.

Vote "NO" on this poll, please.

---

It really is for the best. You have a lot to learn, as do we.

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

---

Because we aren't changing the entire future of our program by playing one game with them. They have no influence over our TV deals (except for that one game I guess, but how would they be able to screw us over on one game a year?), deals that weaken or strengthen our conference, general politics, etc.

---

Playing one game with tu is much like answering one reply with you on this subject. You will continue after you get your way. You will not change your way of thinking, much like they won't change their way of thinking (including the irrational way they treat A&M, and any other entity). Any benefits are outweighed by their behavior. 115 years of behavior.

LightningDammitt said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

---

Because we aren't changing the entire future of our program by playing one game with them. They have no influence over our TV deals (except for that one game I guess, but how would they be able to screw us over on one game a year?), deals that weaken or strengthen our conference, general politics, etc.

---

Playing one game with tu is much like answering one reply with you on this subject. You will continue after you get your way. You will not change your way of thinking, much like they won't change their way of thinking (including the irrational way they treat A&M, and any other entity). Any benefits are outweighed by their behavior. 115 years of behavior.

---

Another poster that can't refute the arguments, so he has to get personal.

Champ Bailey said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion. At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

They still are. They are toxic. What makes you think that has changed and still wouldn't be the case if we played them now?

---

Because we wouldn't be conference partners with them. We would just be playing them once a year.

---

Seriously though, what makes you think that changes anything? A snake is still a snake, tiger, stripes etc. In their mind they want revenge for us having the gall to stand up to them, and the audacity to not accept that they are texas and will always be superior to you mentality. F em. Let them rot. Don't play their game.

---

Because we aren't changing the entire future of our program by playing one game with them. They have no influence over our TV deals (except for that one game I guess, but how would they be able to screw us over on one game a year?), deals that weaken or strengthen our conference, general politics, etc.

---

Playing one game with tu is much like answering one reply with you on this subject. You will continue after you get your way. You will not change your way of thinking, much like they won't change their way of thinking (including the irrational way they treat A&M, and any other entity). Any benefits are outweighed by their behavior. 115 years of behavior.

---

Another poster that can't refute the arguments, so he has to get personal.

---

I did offer a rebuttal.

The bolded portion all pertains to tu, not you.

Wow.... Did you find that my interpretation of your steadfastness, comparable to mine, as in insult? Just wow.

Ok... I'll just leave it alone. No benefit in continuing debate.

Well to be fair you have been stubbornly & shamelessly manipulating and twisting your words to fit your narrative in the face of logical refutes. No need to get all defensive about it.

etexorange said:

---

Oh, ok. I guess there is something we CAN agree on... I don't want to ever play football (or any sport) against Texas A&M, ever again.

Vote "NO" on this poll, please.

---

How cute, sippy thinks we give half a **** what they think or want

GoodOldAgs said:

---

Well to be fair you have been stubbornly & shamelessly manipulating and twisting your words to fit your narrative in the face of logical refutes. No need to get all defensive about it.

---

Who's getting defensive? I'm just pointing out who can't stay on topic.

F no

I filled out your petition with a big NOPE.

You're welcome.

Don't need them!

No.

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

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.

---

I say that becasue we have 115 years of history as a program that completely suggest otherwise. We still have a large contingent of former students that, to this day, put one upping tu in some form or fashion as the highest achievement possible. That has been our anchor and we thankfully cut the chain a few years back. It will still take a few more years for our system as a whole to metabolize out the stupid mentality that tu needs to somehow be such an important part of our life. To go back to that is just stupid.

You keep talking about the fans as if they are the driving factor. Simply put, they aren't. TV contracts and exposure is the driving factor. Fans are going to be there whether we play tu or not, and we'll get a lot more fans being a contender than we ever would playing tu. Not sure why this is such a hard concept, other than you simply think bragging rights over them is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

Again you are misrepresenting my argument. No one is saying that we should start playing tu and stop trying to be good at football. You are setting up ridiculous either/or fallacies.

As far as exposure goes, it's one of the best rivalries in college football. Rivalry games gain you national exposure. So it would benefit us in the tv markets as well.

---

You keep changing your argument. First it was for the fans. Then it was for the revenue. Now it is for the exposure.

We have all of those, even without playing tu. You have your head buried in the sand when faced with the reality of what playing tu has historically meant. We get it, you have ***** envy and want to crow to your friends when we win. Problem is that when you look at the overall picture and weigh the pros versus the cons of playing, there really aren't any pros that carry weight and a whole lot of cons. Well, to a rational person anyway.

They are like playing with a scorpion.7 At some point you are going to get stung, and when you do the fact of the matter is that you can't get mad at them for doing what their very nature dictates they should do.

---

I love how people always get personal when their arguments get refuted. I won't take part in it though.


I haven't changed my argument at all. My original point still stands. We should play Texas every year, because it's the most fun game that we can play. However, people keep listing all these additional reasons we shouldn't play them. So I'm just addressing why they are wrong on that. You are actually the person who brought up revenue and then exposure. Don't get mad at me when I address those and prove your reasoning wrong.

And yes, I fully admit, the sips were conniving, backstabbing, lecherous conference partners. That's why I don't want them in our conference when the Big 12 inevitably fails. I do still want to play them every year, because it's the most fun matchup out of anyone in the nation.

---

Notbing personal at all in the thread.

All you have done,is stick your fingers in your ears and yell "la la la la la la" whenever the multiple different people have presented logic. Then turn around and say "wrong!" and then project your personal views as if they are somehow fact.

You love playing a weighted game against ths sips, mostly because you get to brag about our .333 winning,pwrcwntage. Kudos, I guess.

No.

Not just no but H3LL No. No way do we want anything to do with that toxic corrupt left wing "school".

Rod Tidwell said:

---

You can vote no on this petition just so people know

---

Thanks!

Hey Champ.... the thing is, all of any reasoning you can come up with is based on two things. Your selfishness and pride. You want to be able to prance around your sip friends and crow. Nothing more nothing less. If you really and truly cared bout the athletic department. you would step back and see there is not one iota of benefit from playing them.

Do you know how much the state media would drag A&M through the mud leading up to that game. And God forbid we lose. You want to give them a leg up on the narrative that they are the best in the state. I dont say that in fear, because I dont believe for one minute they could beat A&M at tiddly winks. But if they did. the state media would run it in the ground. They would pay big, and I mean big money to win that game. In the years you have been watching that game with the rest of us, you havent learned one thing. You dont seem to be teachable. Because if tu has taught anyone anything, it's that they cant play on a level playing field. EVA.

Why would anyone with any semblance of intelligence want to get involved with that. Rational people dont run into a burning building to have a picnic.

I don't care about the rationale for playing or not playing tu again. We are rid of them and I never want to play them again. There's no reason to link ourselves to them ever again. We're in the SEC now. We play among the nation's best. Mic drop.

There are some paranoid people on this thread.

Paranoid: unreasonably or obsessively anxious, suspicious, or mistrustful

At some point, after 100 years of results, can one predict the outcome; win or lose?

Insanity is often described as doing the same thing over and over again:; expecting a different outcome.

Some are getting something out of it... Self flaguation maybe?

jake2011 said:

---

You people who think Texas will stay down forever are cute. Man up and play them. In state non conference rivalry games are very common in SEC.

FSU vs FU
SC vs Clemson
GA vs GT
ATM vs Texas, profit?

---

All of those listed other than A&M/tu are productive rivalries. There is mutual respect among the rivals. They are healthy rivalries. They draw national attention.

A&M/tu, in tu's own words, is not a rivalry. They outright refused all requests to continue the rivalry when we left for the SEC. They denied it as a rivalry before we even thought about leaving for the SEC. We were only another controlled opponent, to be manipulated in every way for the good of the conference. They specifically wanted those opponents in that conference to have an easy path to national championships for themselves.
they do not want equal partnerships for the good of both. They want easy access to national exposure.

I see no national remorse for the loss of this rivalry. The A&M/tu game, while in some fans minds is a rivalry, does not compare to the others. The other rivalries generate more national attention and money. They respect each other, and acknowledge the rivalry.

What makes you think tu sees us as their rival? How many times do they have to tell you that OU is their rival? The OU/tu rivalry generates much more national interest and money than A&M/tu. The OU/tu rivalry is a productive rivalry by default, and that is why it continues.

Yes, schools can have multiple rivalries, but in the A&M/tu case, tu does not want it, and does not recognize it.

It is wise to recognize that the relationship is over. There is no profit.