I completely disagree on one thing. I think that both Texas and A&M can both be successful at the same time. I know history suggests I am wrong, but now that neither team is playing the other, I think the separation will make it possible.

Yes Texas will always be the top completion for Texas high school recruits and vise versa, but there is more than enough talent for both to field a top level team.

As for the Texas recruiting class, I highly doubt Coburn flips to anyone, his recent comments suggests that he is pretty solid to Texas right now. Things can always change but as of right now he is solid. With Poona Ford graduating, he stands a solid chance at early playing time.

As for people thinking the Texas D isn't legit, think again, it's by far a much better defense than many ranked ahead of them. They have faced a perfect storm of top college QBs and shown very well against all of them. About the only QBs they didn't face were UCLA and Wyoming.

If you are just looking at Stats you will miss the big picture with this defense, they are amazingly good and will only get better next year.

As for the Texas QBs.

Sam Ehlinger was responsible for 3 losses, or should I say that he was responsible for turnovers in three games that resulted in losses. I think experience will help him next year that he won't be so bone headed. win those three games and you are looking at a 10 win season. (assuming Texas wins a higher tier bowl game).

Texas will get a lot of their line back for next year and if they can keep the injuries down they will get at least average line play which will help the offense out a lot.

Expectations are much higher next year with favorable schedule I think Texas will win at least 9 games maybe 10.

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

1. Stop saying "their". You've already been outed as a sip. Give up the ruse.

2. One of those OL commits (the highest rated one) is going on a 2 year mission and won't be on campus until 2020.

3. Keondre Coburn DT is going to flip to A&M.

---

Speaking of resorting to future predictions. One guy is going on a mission that only you know that future event is certain and one DT is flipping that only you know that future event is certain. Okay.

---

He told your recruiting services he was going on the mission

They will benefit from Mayfield, Rudolph, hill, etc. Being gone.

The horn defense was very good at turning poor decisions into points. They had 8 non offensive touchdowns. Many of those were pick 6 or fumble 6.

Those points are the reason why horn won as many games as they did and made several other games closer than they should have.

The offense is a serious mess.

The fact that it did not look better with a month off, two healthy QBs and all that practice time should be very concerning for horn fan. Especially since offense is supposed to be Herman's thing.

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

.

You've stated many times all season that the big 12 is then worst conference in football despite statistics and conference rankings by unbiased outlets disagreeing. You point to 1 or 2 years worth of nfl drafts but ignore coaching (not to mention on field results). Do you really believe the B12 is the worst conference? If so, are there any other Ags that share your sentiment?

You can use the NCAA statistics website and run a report of the toughest schedules thru the 28th. The big xii as a composite is pretty bad. To me that says weak conference.

http://stats.ncaa.org/rankings?sport_code=MFB&division=11

huisachel said:

---

Missouri was disgraceful. You should get them kicked out of the SEC, the greatest conference in the world ever.

The very thought of losing to a team from the BDF 12-2. That should not happen to anybody.

That is like losing a bowl game to Kansas State or somebody. Disgraceful. Kick them out.

---

Exactly. A big part of the reason why Summy is gone. You nailed it

Your Friend said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

.

You've stated many times all season that the big 12 is then worst conference in football despite statistics and conference rankings by unbiased outlets disagreeing. You point to 1 or 2 years worth of nfl drafts but ignore coaching (not to mention on field results). Do you really believe the B12 is the worst conference? If so, are there any other Ags that share your sentiment?

---

I think it's a push between the Pac 12 and the Big 12 as to who is the worst of the five. The gap is not as big as people act like it is, but it's still a weak conference.

I'm hoping Georgia supports this assessment with their play in the OU game. If OU competes, or even wins, it will be a much harder argument to make for this particular year.

Long term, though, I only see OU, Texas, and maybe (maybe) OSU as serious contenders for any kind of sustained success on a national stage. (I just can't put WVU or TCU in that category, current success notwithstanding).

Compare that to the SEC with 4 (yes, I'm counting A&M) in the Western division alone, combined with Georgia, Florida, and Tennessee (who will be back, at some point), and it's hard to imagine the Big 12 measuring up well (again, long term).

The Big 10 (or whatever we call it now) can point to OSU, Mich, Wis, Penn State, and Nebraska. The ACC has Clemson, FSU, Miami, GT, and VT, all good programs.

The Big 12 will still have some good years, but, top to bottom, year-in/year-out, I think it's the weakest. The Baylor implosion has hurt. Is it the weakest this particular year? I'm going to say yes, but OU can ding that argument pretty seriously in a few days...

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Ian Neff said:

---

I am going to politely ask that all of you do your best to recognize how bad Mizzou is.

---

They suck. How good is Wake Forest?

---

what does wake forest have to do with anything? The aggie team that will play tomorrow is with a lame duck staff not the supposed future. Try and keep up champ.

---

Hasn't that been the story since the UCLA game?

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Tamu_mgm said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

Give me an objective measure to justify saying that the B12 is the worst conference in college football. They have a rep in the CFP and the Pac12 and B1G do not, but it's the worst conference. When OU beats Geo, will it still be the worst conference?

---

Look at the talent level for starters.

---

And the wins or lack therof against other power 5 conferences. And the records of the teams, and the quality of football played on Saturdays equates to pattycake.

Having 2 good teams doesn't mean **** for a conference. There's no depth in the bdf

---

They have 4 of 10 in the top 20. Who are just the two good teams? Is OSU not one of the two? They have worse talent than the American Atlantic and Conference USA? The statement is that the Big 12 is the worst conference in football. A team barely above 500 just beat an SEC team with the same record. OU is about to beat Georgia. OSU has VT and TCU has Stanford. I guess we will see if they win.

---

When you resort to predictions about future games as evidence your argument sucks.

And it's odd you compare talent to the AAC sand C-USA

2017 NFL Draft picks by conference

SEC 53
ACC 43
PAC 36
BIG 35
AAC 15
Big12 14
C-USA 9.

Talent level for the Big 12 is closer to the AAC and C-USA and those numbers show it isn't even up for debate.

---

I guess now it's a better argument since it's just about the play on the field. In the last 2 days the worst conference in college football has teams beat teams from the SEC, ACC and PAC12. I guess good coaching makes up for the lack of talent on the field?

Tamu_mgm said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

Give me an objective measure to justify saying that the B12 is the worst conference in college football. They have a rep in the CFP and the Pac12 and B1G do not, but it's the worst conference. When OU beats Geo, will it still be the worst conference?

---

Look at the talent level for starters.

---

And the wins or lack therof against other power 5 conferences. And the records of the teams, and the quality of football played on Saturdays equates to pattycake.

Having 2 good teams doesn't mean **** for a conference. There's no depth in the bdf

---

Are you referring to the SEC having 2 good teams?

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Tamu_mgm said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

Give me an objective measure to justify saying that the B12 is the worst conference in college football. They have a rep in the CFP and the Pac12 and B1G do not, but it's the worst conference. When OU beats Geo, will it still be the worst conference?

---

Look at the talent level for starters.

---

And the wins or lack therof against other power 5 conferences. And the records of the teams, and the quality of football played on Saturdays equates to pattycake.

Having 2 good teams doesn't mean **** for a conference. There's no depth in the bdf

---

They have 4 of 10 in the top 20. Who are just the two good teams? Is OSU not one of the two? They have worse talent than the American Atlantic and Conference USA? The statement is that the Big 12 is the worst conference in football. A team barely above 500 just beat an SEC team with the same record. OU is about to beat Georgia. OSU has VT and TCU has Stanford. I guess we will see if they win.

---

When you resort to predictions about future games as evidence your argument sucks.

And it's odd you compare talent to the AAC sand C-USA

2017 NFL Draft picks by conference

SEC 53
ACC 43
PAC 36
BIG 35
AAC 15
Big12 14
C-USA 9.

Talent level for the Big 12 is closer to the AAC and C-USA and those numbers show it isn't even up for debate.

---

I guess now it's a better argument since it's just about the play on the field. In the last 2 days the worst conference in college football has teams beat teams from the SEC, ACC and PAC12. I guess good coaching makes up for the lack of talent on the field?

---

You think beating the number 9 team in the SEC was an accomplishment and proof of Bug 12 strength?

Pretty sure the Big 12 will be well represented in this coming NFL draft.

Ragoo said:

---

Their defense looked no better or worse than it did all season, a season in which they lost 6 games.

The worst part is that even with a month off their offense was as bad as it was all season. There was zero improvement over the course of the bowl practices.

They won sure, but lipstick on a pig if your are really objective.

---

Their 4 best defenders, who were also the best player at each level of their defense, skipped the game. DL Nelson, LB Malik, DB Hill, S Elliott.

Seemed like Mizz assumed a bad Texas team missing 4 starters on each side of the ball was going to be a cakewalk.

Threadbare said:

---

Your Friend said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

.

You've stated many times all season that the big 12 is then worst conference in football despite statistics and conference rankings by unbiased outlets disagreeing. You point to 1 or 2 years worth of nfl drafts but ignore coaching (not to mention on field results). Do you really believe the B12 is the worst conference? If so, are there any other Ags that share your sentiment?

---

I think it's a push between the Pac 12 and the Big 12 as to who is the worst of the five. The gap is not as big as people act like it is, but it's still a weak conference.

I'm hoping Georgia supports this assessment with their play in the OU game. If OU competes, or even wins, it will be a much harder argument to make for this particular year.

Long term, though, I only see OU, Texas, and maybe (maybe) OSU as serious contenders for any kind of sustained success on a national stage. (I just can't put WVU or TCU in that category, current success notwithstanding).

Compare that to the SEC with 4 (yes, I'm counting A&M) in the Western division alone, combined with Georgia, Florida, and Tennessee (who will be back, at some point), and it's hard to imagine the Big 12 measuring up well (again, long term).

The Big 10 (or whatever we call it now) can point to OSU, Mich, Wis, Penn State, and Nebraska. The ACC has Clemson, FSU, Miami, GT, and VT, all good programs.

The Big 12 will still have some good years, but, top to bottom, year-in/year-out, I think it's the weakest. The Baylor implosion has hurt. Is it the weakest this particular year? I'm going to say yes, but OU can ding that argument pretty seriously in a few days...

---

You wrote 'I just can't put WVU or TCU in that category, current success notwithstanding).', but you are OK putting A&M, Nebraska, Tennessee, GT, VT, Miami and FSU (given current on field performance) on it? Sure, no bias here.

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

Mizzou also has no OC or OL coach as they both jetted before the bowl game

BigRed12 said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

Mizzou also has no OC or OL coach as they both jetted before the bowl game

---

sips had neither all year.

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Tamu_mgm said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

Give me an objective measure to justify saying that the B12 is the worst conference in college football. They have a rep in the CFP and the Pac12 and B1G do not, but it's the worst conference. When OU beats Geo, will it still be the worst conference?

---

Look at the talent level for starters.

---

And the wins or lack therof against other power 5 conferences. And the records of the teams, and the quality of football played on Saturdays equates to pattycake.

Having 2 good teams doesn't mean **** for a conference. There's no depth in the bdf

---

They have 4 of 10 in the top 20. Who are just the two good teams? Is OSU not one of the two? They have worse talent than the American Atlantic and Conference USA? The statement is that the Big 12 is the worst conference in football. A team barely above 500 just beat an SEC team with the same record. OU is about to beat Georgia. OSU has VT and TCU has Stanford. I guess we will see if they win.

---

When you resort to predictions about future games as evidence your argument sucks.

And it's odd you compare talent to the AAC sand C-USA

2017 NFL Draft picks by conference

SEC 53
ACC 43
PAC 36
BIG 35
AAC 15
Big12 14
C-USA 9.

Talent level for the Big 12 is closer to the AAC and C-USA and those numbers show it isn't even up for debate.

---

I guess now it's a better argument since it's just about the play on the field. In the last 2 days the worst conference in college football has teams beat teams from the SEC, ACC and PAC12. I guess good coaching makes up for the lack of talent on the field?

---

You think beating the number 9 team in the SEC was an accomplishment and proof of Bug 12 strength?

---

They finished 4-4 and tied for 6th in the standings, right? So they are 6/16 and Texas is 4/10...hmmmmm. Besides that, is a fact a fact: did a team from B12 beat the team that the SEC conference put up against them in a bowl game? Do you really believe Kentucky or Miss St was beating Texas in the bowl? What places are they ranked in the SEC?

Yes Kentucky and MSU would easily beat your ****ty sips

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Yes Kentucky and MSU would easily beat your ****ty sips

---

Kentucky and MSU are lucky they are not playing Wake.

So are your sips

Horns would destroy this team. Good thing we didn't have to play them.

jb6092 said:

---

Threadbare said:

---

Your Friend said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

TheBro said:

---

ironmanag said:

---

Yes. Let's tap the breaks. Give t.u. credit. They played well.

They played well against a team that started the year 1-5 and then didn't beat another team with a winning record the rest of the way.

They finished 7-6 in the BDF. We will see if they better or if they just beat a poor team.

---

You are right, but 4 of those losses were to #2, 8, 15 and 19 in the CFP.

---

and, who were the other 2 against? Would you argue the Aggies are "good" because we also lost to (4) teams in the top 25? I wouldn't.

---

The sips are puffing their chests out for a coach that went 6-6 in the worst conference in college football whie we fired one for going 7-5 in the SEC. The two programs have a different set of standards.

---

.

You've stated many times all season that the big 12 is then worst conference in football despite statistics and conference rankings by unbiased outlets disagreeing. You point to 1 or 2 years worth of nfl drafts but ignore coaching (not to mention on field results). Do you really believe the B12 is the worst conference? If so, are there any other Ags that share your sentiment?

---

I think it's a push between the Pac 12 and the Big 12 as to who is the worst of the five. The gap is not as big as people act like it is, but it's still a weak conference.

I'm hoping Georgia supports this assessment with their play in the OU game. If OU competes, or even wins, it will be a much harder argument to make for this particular year.

Long term, though, I only see OU, Texas, and maybe (maybe) OSU as serious contenders for any kind of sustained success on a national stage. (I just can't put WVU or TCU in that category, current success notwithstanding).

Compare that to the SEC with 4 (yes, I'm counting A&M) in the Western division alone, combined with Georgia, Florida, and Tennessee (who will be back, at some point), and it's hard to imagine the Big 12 measuring up well (again, long term).

The Big 10 (or whatever we call it now) can point to OSU, Mich, Wis, Penn State, and Nebraska. The ACC has Clemson, FSU, Miami, GT, and VT, all good programs.

The Big 12 will still have some good years, but, top to bottom, year-in/year-out, I think it's the weakest. The Baylor implosion has hurt. Is it the weakest this particular year? I'm going to say yes, but OU can ding that argument pretty seriously in a few days...

---

You wrote 'I just can't put WVU or TCU in that category, current success notwithstanding).', but you are OK putting A&M, Nebraska, Tennessee, GT, VT, Miami and FSU (given current on field performance) on it? Sure, no bias here.

---

All those schools that you take exception with being on the list have either a history of relevance, massive resources, or both.

If TCU is anything 10 years from now, I will be very surprised. I don't know that much about WVU, but they've always seemed like an afterthought to me.

So, I guess you think the Big12 should rank higher on the list?

And, if by bias, you mean I have an opinion, and factor in things that I think are important other than just the circumstances of the particular moment, well, then, yeah, I have bias...

mugwurt said:

---

Horns would destroy this team. Good thing we didn't have to play them.

---

This is how you troll folks

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

mugwurt said:

---

Horns would destroy this team. Good thing we didn't have to play them.

---

This is how you troll folks

---

No this is how you face reality

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

So are your sips

---

SEC is the toughest conference, yet you say Mizzou is worse than Wake. Wake who finished 4-4 in the ACC. Which does bring up another good point. Top to bottom the SEC is such a strong conference, yet the knock in this thread is how MIzzou won its last 6 games against teams with losing records.

TheBro said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

So are your sips

---

SEC is the toughest conference, yet you say Mizzou is worse than Wake. Wake who finished 4-4 in the ACC. Which does bring up another good point. Top to bottom the SEC is such a strong conference, yet the knock in this thread is how MIzzou won its last 6 games against teams with losing records.

---

Talent wise the ACC is pretty close to the SEC and the draft shows that. There's not a huge gap between the ACC and SEC. There's a chasm between the ACC/SEC and the Big12. Just look at the recent drafts.

Wake Forest went 7-5 against the 18th hardest schedule. Missouri went 7-5 against the 82nd hardest schedule.

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Wake Forest went 7-5 against the 18th hardest schedule. Missouri went 7-5 against the 82nd hardest schedule.

---

Missouri played 12 teams this year and 8 of those were in the SEC conference. Maybe there is chasm between the ACC and the SEC. How does a team in the toughest conference have the 82nd ranked schedule?

Every conference has some dogs. Like Texas in the Big12 recently

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Every conference has some dogs. Like Texas in the Big12 recently

---

I agree. How many dogs makes one's schedule as low as 82nd?

Why do you follow my questions with more questions? Why does your *****ty conference have left draft pics than the AAC?