jake2011 said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

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.

---

Ou vs Texas has been a better rivalry over the years because OU has consistently been much better than us. If we continue to win consistently that would change.

---

Many rivalries are better due to mutual respect and time. Your reply implies that time and wins/competition is a factor in making a rivalry good, or even great. Texas does not want competition. They want an easy path to a championship.

Fans on both sides keep using the above rivalries, and even other rivalries as positive examples of why to continue in-state rivalries... Do you see any fans using the A&M/tu rivalry as a positive example to continue rivalries?

Many college football fans even confuse which team is which in Texas... because they are not interested enough in the competition between the two schools, especially when one school that denies the rivalry.

If 115 years is enough for tu to decide that we are not a respectable rival, and if 115 years is not enough time to create a national interest win or lose, then it is insanity to expect anything different for another 115 years.

I voted 3 times just to negate your bad votes.
They do not inspire confidence in your education.
And I was in school for that win streak. (89-93)
And bled building bonfar using my HATRED for Austin.

Never again give them the satisfaction thinking that WE give a damn if they had enough air to breath.

Tuck Fexas!

Dam right! Because in your case, you're scared.
(In our case, its intelligent.)

No

I see tu added to the schedule ONLY IF/WHEN A&M experiences a significant drop in ticket sales.

This could happen with an extended period of POOR performance and string of head coaching changes that would put us in tu's current situation with the need to inject some energy back into the schedule.

Don't want it to happen, but it could.

No.

Staff please delete this thread.
It has no support from paying members nor the poors.

For the love of God, stop it!!!

Quote:

---

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.

---

Yep. There's not much standing in the way between them and the playoff the second they actually become decent. Especially when their one "big time" OOC game a year is against teams that aren't consistently good these days (USC, ND, Arkansas). I like the idea of having a direct influence on their playoff chances every year, instead of just helplessly watching it happen against a weak schedule. Just look at this past season. They were 5-7, but lost 5 of those games by a combined total of three touchdowns and one 2 point conversion. And that's when they're the worst they've been in years.

Why play cheaters when you know they will cheat!

HELL NO!!!!!!!

LightningDammitt said:

---

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.

---

Nicely put...on a personal note, I do not know a single Ag who, come Thanksgiving, waxes nostalgic...has not happened even once...I don't know sips nor do I associate with any but I suspect they don't give a **** either! Everything about the SEC move has been amazing...even if we're just mediocre in football...that will turn around one of these years...maybe by then we'll play those aholes in a bowl or playoff...

West Point Aggie said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

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.

---

Nicely put...on a personal note, I do not know a single Ag who, come Thanksgiving, waxes nostalgic...has not happened even once...I don't know sips nor do I associate with any but I suspect they don't give a **** either! Everything about the SEC move has been amazing...even if we're just mediocre in football...that will turn around one of these years...maybe by then we'll play those aholes in a bowl or playoff...

---

You must not know many Aggies then. Most Aggies and Longhorns I know want the game back. Thanksgiving isn't as fun without the game

West Point Aggie said:

---

LightningDammitt said:

---

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.

---

Nicely put...on a personal note, I do not know a single Ag who, come Thanksgiving, waxes nostalgic...has not happened even once...I don't know sips nor do I associate with any but I suspect they don't give a **** either! Everything about the SEC move has been amazing...even if we're just mediocre in football...that will turn around one of these years...maybe by then we'll play those aholes in a bowl or playoff...

---

Well, I know a bunch who do miss the game. My anecdotal evidence is as good as yours.

^
|
Fair enough! The fact that none of the Ags I know and associate with care whether it comes back or not still holds!

It really was a regional rivalry that, let's face it, meant more to Aggies...sips absolutely cared about it, but more out of their arrogant sense of self importance.

All this being said, f*** tu...may it be a permanent divorce!

If the students of both universities want to bring the game back, don't let a bunch of crotchety old alumni stop you.

Not afraid to win or lose. We win, reaction is so what, tu is terrible.

We lose, never hear the end of it.

NOTHING TO GAIN HERE!

Let the sips play with themselves and put it on LHN.

Aggie_Journalist said:

---

If the students of both universities want to bring the game back, don't let a bunch of crotchety old alumni stop you.

---

Sorry to break the news to you, but the inmates don't run the asylum just yet. Above their pay-grade.

Look, I would like to see the game played again, but I understand the opinions of those who don't. I'm as happy as anybody about the move to the SEC and the visibility it has given us.

I'm not going to try to change any minds, but I'll tell you what I miss most about the game. Sometime 8 or 10 years ago we won when we were not favored. My wife and I went out for dinner and drinks, and it's possible that I had one or two too many. Possible. I had a great time sitting there calling all my teasip buddies to make sure they had seen the game and offering to bring them up to speed if they hadn't. It was fun, and I would have gotten the same call if the shoe was on the other foot.

I don't have one good friend from Bama, LSU, etc. that I can do that with. That's what I miss.

Duckhook said:

---

Look, I would like to see the game played again, but I understand the opinions of those who don't. I'm as happy as anybody about the move to the SEC and the visibility it has given us.

I'm not going to try to change any minds, but I'll tell you what I miss most about the game. Sometime 8 or 10 years ago we won when we were not favored. My wife and I went out for dinner and drinks, and it's possible that I had one or two too many. Possible. I had a great time sitting there calling all my teasip buddies to make sure they had seen the game and offering to bring them up to speed if they hadn't. It was fun, and I would have gotten the same call if the shoe was on the other foot.

I don't have one good friend from Bama, LSU, etc. that I can do that with. That's what I miss.

---

Being a jerk?

NO NO NO

aggiehawg said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

Look, I would like to see the game played again, but I understand the opinions of those who don't. I'm as happy as anybody about the move to the SEC and the visibility it has given us.

I'm not going to try to change any minds, but I'll tell you what I miss most about the game. Sometime 8 or 10 years ago we won when we were not favored. My wife and I went out for dinner and drinks, and it's possible that I had one or two too many. Possible. I had a great time sitting there calling all my teasip buddies to make sure they had seen the game and offering to bring them up to speed if they hadn't. It was fun, and I would have gotten the same call if the shoe was on the other foot.

I don't have one good friend from Bama, LSU, etc. that I can do that with. That's what I miss.

---

Being a jerk?

---

Nah. Sorry if all of your friends are so thin-skinned that they can't have fun about a football game. It goes both ways.

Count me as one that hopes we never play them again unless in a bowl game. Move on, there is no benefit for us to play them. Concentrate on winning games in the SEC.

Play'em in a bowl game, great! Otherwise there is no upside to playing them yearly. We already have enough on our plate. So long to the orange & white.

Close to ten pages...

Massive blowout (AGAIN)....TexAgs posters say "no", "no, thanks", and "Hell No" in overwhelming numbers.
Some dude who calls himself "Champ" and is the vast minority DID achieve more keystrokes than all the "no" voters combined....so he's got that. Just basically no support.

Of course, most of the "no" reaction was just a swear word plus "no", "no" or POTD votes, so....who needs a bunch of keystrokes?

"No"....along with the TexAgs multitudes.

Yet again.

88jrt06 said:

---

Close to ten pages...

Massive blowout (AGAIN)....TexAgs posters say "no", "no, thanks", and "Hell No" in overwhelming numbers.
Some dude who calls himself "Champ" and is the vast minority DID achieve more keystrokes than all the "no" voters combined....so he's got that. Just basically no support.

Of course, most of the "no" reaction was just a swear word plus "no", "no" or POTD votes, so....who needs a bunch of keystrokes?

"No"....along with the TexAgs multitudes.

Yet again.

---

Meh. Popular vote means nothing. Ask our President.

But if the game did somehow get started up again at a neutral site, Aggies would fill our side for sure, as would teasips. There would be enough fan and TV interest to make it work.

Duckhook said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

Close to ten pages...

Massive blowout (AGAIN)....TexAgs posters say "no", "no, thanks", and "Hell No" in overwhelming numbers.
Some dude who calls himself "Champ" and is the vast minority DID achieve more keystrokes than all the "no" voters combined....so he's got that. Just basically no support.

Of course, most of the "no" reaction was just a swear word plus "no", "no" or POTD votes, so....who needs a bunch of keystrokes?

"No"....along with the TexAgs multitudes.

Yet again.

---

Meh. Popular vote means nothing. Ask our President.

---

Did you mean the President that legitimately won the Electoral College by a wide margin?

Duckhook said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

Close to ten pages...

Massive blowout (AGAIN)....TexAgs posters say "no", "no, thanks", and "Hell No" in overwhelming numbers.
Some dude who calls himself "Champ" and is the vast minority DID achieve more keystrokes than all the "no" voters combined....so he's got that. Just basically no support.

Of course, most of the "no" reaction was just a swear word plus "no", "no" or POTD votes, so....who needs a bunch of keystrokes?

"No"....along with the TexAgs multitudes.

Yet again.

---

Meh. Popular vote means nothing. Ask our President.

---

Well.... TexAgs is more of a democracy... Presidential elections are more of a republic part of our government.

Would someone please divide us up by state, elect some electors, and do the vote by electoral college?

yeah.... that would settle it!

ArbAg said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

Close to ten pages...

Massive blowout (AGAIN)....TexAgs posters say "no", "no, thanks", and "Hell No" in overwhelming numbers.
Some dude who calls himself "Champ" and is the vast minority DID achieve more keystrokes than all the "no" voters combined....so he's got that. Just basically no support.

Of course, most of the "no" reaction was just a swear word plus "no", "no" or POTD votes, so....who needs a bunch of keystrokes?

"No"....along with the TexAgs multitudes.

Yet again.

---

Meh. Popular vote means nothing. Ask our President.

---

Did you mean the President that legitimately won the Electoral College by a wide margin?

---

Yes, that one. Both of our statements are factual.

Rod Tidwell said:

---

You can vote no on this petition just so people know

---

Voted no.

No reason to ever play them again. Unless it's the playoff or the MNC.

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

I will make a deal... we can play the Longhorns again, after the Big12 is dissolved and the either go independent or are absorbed by another non-SEC conference.

Until then, F'em.

If we play them while they are still part of a viable Big 12, we are just enabling their behavior as a conference bully who always gets its way.

---

I'll go one further and say I'll get on board when Bonfire comes back to campus with full university support.

Duckhook said:

---

ArbAg said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

Close to ten pages...

Massive blowout (AGAIN)....TexAgs posters say "no", "no, thanks", and "Hell No" in overwhelming numbers.
Some dude who calls himself "Champ" and is the vast minority DID achieve more keystrokes than all the "no" voters combined....so he's got that. Just basically no support.

Of course, most of the "no" reaction was just a swear word plus "no", "no" or POTD votes, so....who needs a bunch of keystrokes?

"No"....along with the TexAgs multitudes.

Yet again.

---

Meh. Popular vote means nothing. Ask our President.

---

Did you mean the President that legitimately won the Electoral College by a wide margin?

---

Yes, that one. Both of our statements are factual.

---

Yes...but "Trumped" by my initial factual statement.
(Y'know....the statement that is on point...?)

88jrt06 said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

ArbAg said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

Close to ten pages...

Massive blowout (AGAIN)....TexAgs posters say "no", "no, thanks", and "Hell No" in overwhelming numbers.
Some dude who calls himself "Champ" and is the vast minority DID achieve more keystrokes than all the "no" voters combined....so he's got that. Just basically no support.

Of course, most of the "no" reaction was just a swear word plus "no", "no" or POTD votes, so....who needs a bunch of keystrokes?

"No"....along with the TexAgs multitudes.

Yet again.

---

Meh. Popular vote means nothing. Ask our President.

---

Did you mean the President that legitimately won the Electoral College by a wide margin?

---

Yes, that one. Both of our statements are factual.

---

Yes...but "Trumped" by my initial factual statement.
(Y'know....the statement that is on point...?)

---

I just pointed out that popular sentiment (or votes) is not always the deciding factor.

There really is no need for a petition for or against the game being brought back. There isn't one for when they schedule out of conference games with crappy schools or P5 schools. Why would this be any different? It's about money and when there is enough of it, it will be scheduled. That will be the deciding factor, how much money can we make?

They will schedule it and everyone will show up, even those who will hate it will watch it in some way shape or form. Many on here are against it but not enough to not watch it.