FFS.

This is about playing or not playing the assclowns from Austin, not whether we should play any of our SEC opponents. But you go right ahead pulling crap I never said out of your ass.

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

FFS.

This is about playing or not playing the assclowns from Austin, not whether we should play any of our SEC opponents. But you go right ahead pulling crap I never said out of your ass.

---

No no no. You misunderstand me, our goals are completely aligned. Together we will make sure we never play another game against a team that has had an unfair or bad ruling by the refs to teach the other team a lesson and show them what a superior football program we are. Alabama is going to be financially hurting after we refuse to play them, just like the longhorns are now. It's certainly not like they will make any money off TV revenue deals, advertisement, or donors. No sir, they depend on us for their money and it's time that we flex our muscles just like we did with the longhorns. Beating them on the field is child's play and won't teach them anything, we have to hit them where it really hurts and refuse to play them. Beating them on the field does nothing to decrease Alabama's reputation, but refusing to play them would turn them into the laughing stock of college football.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/college-football-25-most-valuable-182024139.html

Just look at this, Alabama would be in finical hell without being associated with our brand. No one around the country even knows who Alabama is without them being associated with us. They'll be in the same situation longhorns are when we left them to rot.

Aggie_Swag18 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

FFS.

This is about playing or not playing the assclowns from Austin, not whether we should play any of our SEC opponents. But you go right ahead pulling crap I never said out of your ass.

---

No no no. You misunderstand me, our goals are completely aligned. Together we will make sure we never play another game against a team that has had an unfair or bad ruling by the refs to teach the other team a lesson and show them what a superior football program we are. Alabama is going to be financially hurting after we refuse to play them, just like the longhorns are now. It's certainly not like they will make any money off TV revenue deals, advertisement, or donors. No sir, they depend on us for their money and it's time that we flex our muscles just like we did with the longhorns. Beating them on the field is child's play and won't teach them anything, we have to hit them where it really hurts and refuse to play them. Beating them on the field does nothing to decrease Alabama's reputation, but refusing to play them would turn them into the laughing stock of college football.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/college-football-25-most-valuable-182024139.html

Just look at this, Alabama would be in finical hell without being associated with our brand. No one around the country even knows who Alabama is without them being associated with us. They'll be in the same situation longhorns are when we left them to rot.

---

tu =\= Alabama

Hope that helps!

Swag is here to do dirty work for DelConte.

Swag sounds like the kinda guy #Mke bro hugs at the gym

Reno Hightower said:

---

Swag is here to do dirty work for DelConte.

---

Swag is here because you old people lost yours. Don't worry though, I'll help you get it back so all of you aren't jumping through hoops trying to justify why we can't play a football game. Do you really think Clemson is worried about South Carolina beating them or the fact that it could help boost South Carolina's revenues and attendance?If our goal is actually is to win a national championship we shouldn't be running around scared that increasing the attendance of one game for a team or having a negligible impact on their revenue will hurt us. Teams that have their sights set on a national championship aren't worried about how some other school could benefit (but most likely not) from playing them.

HarveyBirdman said:

---

Swag sounds like the kinda guy #Mke bro hugs at the gym

---

Why are you paying so much attention to #Mke at the gym? Before now I didn't even know #Mke went to the gym.

Aggie_Swag18 said:

---

HarveyBirdman said:

---

Swag sounds like the kinda guy #Mke bro hugs at the gym

---

Why are you paying so much attention to #Mke at the gym? Before now I didn't even know #Mke went to the gym.

---

He only goes on upper body days after they've windex'd the mirrors

That gives me a very disturbing image of a guy with huge arms and chicken legs that barely support his body with you hiding in the background watching his reflection in the mirror.

Aggie_Swag18 said:

---

Reno Hightower said:

---

Swag is here to do dirty work for DelConte.

---

Swag is here because you old people lost yours. Don't worry though, I'll help you get it back so all of you aren't jumping through hoops trying to justify why we can't play a football game. Do you really think Clemson is worried about South Carolina beating them or the fact that it could help boost South Carolina's revenues and attendance?If our goal is actually is to win a national championship we shouldn't be running around scared that increasing the attendance of one game for a team or having a negligible impact on their revenue will hurt us. Teams that have their sights set on a national championship aren't worried about how some other school could benefit (but most likely not) from playing them.

---

Keep doing your thing on DelConte's behalf, Swag.

up-n-aTm said:

---

DOG XO 84 said:

---

If For the folks who favor resuming....Historically, (last 30 or 40 or 50 years), we lose every other game we play the sips. Is it worth it to have one more loss every other year (on average), just to play the sips? Say we have the horses, have a great year (maybe 1 conf loss).

We beat Bama, have a shot at CFP, but we scheduled tu and they were really good that year. Now with 2 losses we are out and tu is in. They beat OU and the rest of a weak B12, then beat SEC Aggies, they go... we stay home. If my math and history are correct, we probably lose an opportunity for CFP every other season, just by scheduling the sips.

Why sign up for that?

---

This hook is too shiny. tu troll.

---

I'm a tu troll? Maybe my logic is faulty, if so please explain why? Make you a deal, if you think I'm a tu troll, I'll meet you basically anywhere in Texas. I'll be wearing my ring, I'll throw my diploma in back seat. I'll bring $1k. You do the same. If I'm not an Ag,you keep my money...if I am, I keep yours. Deal?

Btw... my daughter '21 is currently applying to med schools, graduates in dec. I'm obviously '84. Dad was '55 his uncle '32. 80% of folks on this board who graduated prior to say, 2005 bought at least one textbook from my great uncle. I was on 3rd stack the night Jackie came out to bonfire. I was skinny enough as a freshman to squeeze under the gate of the "graffiti room" in the steam tunnels. Save your money buddy!

I want it back, but on Labor Day weekend. Start as home and home for 4 years first as a trial. No SEC or Big 12 refs, 1st game at Kyle.

We are playing with them.
We're playing keep-away as long as we want.
After we win the SEC, I suggest a 2 game set, maybe.

I side with Bjork. And no I don't think anyone is scared to play them. The said they would never play us again. Their fans also said that. Now that they want to play the game again F them. We will play them one day and I'm all for that and love that we aren't just saying Ok now that they are ready to play after they said never play them again.

They are the ones who threw the first hissy fit and unscheduled us in every sport then made the rest of the Big 12-2-2+2 not schedule us as well for a time.

They always want to control the terms. I think we come to the table with terms:


1) We choose the refs, every year. No more phantom holding calls and phantom PIs from sip fans in zebra costumes. No Big 12 refs who handcuff our defense from playing SEC football. SEC refs every year, especially in Austin.

2) The game has to be played on Thanksgiving or T+1 in the evening. No 11 am kickoff. No Sept meaningless game.

3) Not allowed to show the game on the longhorn network live and for at least 10 years after they are played.

How's that for starters?

DOG XO 84 said:

---

up-n-aTm said:

---

DOG XO 84 said:

---

If For the folks who favor resuming....Historically, (last 30 or 40 or 50 years), we lose every other game we play the sips. Is it worth it to have one more loss every other year (on average), just to play the sips? Say we have the horses, have a great year (maybe 1 conf loss).

We beat Bama, have a shot at CFP, but we scheduled tu and they were really good that year. Now with 2 losses we are out and tu is in. They beat OU and the rest of a weak B12, then beat SEC Aggies, they go... we stay home. If my math and history are correct, we probably lose an opportunity for CFP every other season, just by scheduling the sips.

Why sign up for that?

---

This hook is too shiny. tu troll.

---

I'm a tu troll? Maybe my logic is faulty, if so please explain why? Make you a deal, if you think I'm a tu troll, I'll meet you basically anywhere in Texas. I'll be wearing my ring, I'll throw my diploma in back seat. I'll bring $1k. You do the same. If I'm not an Ag,you keep my money...if I am, I keep yours. Deal?

Btw... my daughter '21 is currently applying to med schools, graduates in dec. I'm obviously '84. Dad was '55 his uncle '32. 80% of folks on this board who graduated prior to say, 2005 bought at least one textbook from my great uncle. I was on 3rd stack the night Jackie came out to bonfire. I was skinny enough as a freshman to squeeze under the gate of the "graffiti room" in the steam tunnels. Save your money buddy!

---

I don't think you are a sip troll but you do realize your argument is a loser mentality? Why did we play Clemson? That was 0-2, even worse than a loss every other year to sips. We went 1-1 against a crappy UCLA program no one cares about. Based on your logic we should schedule 4 patty cakes OOC. Hell we should drop out of the SEC and play in the AAC so we can go 12-0 every year.

Putting all that aside, I will just give my perspective. Too many people in here talk about natties as the ultimate goal. That's fine but if it's your only goal then you must be miserable human beings. I simplify my life. While I'd love a natty, I also love the joy of a single victory against a good ranked opponent. It feels great. Doing so against a ranked opponent and most hated rival? Sounds pretty tasty to me.

Aggie_Swag18 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

FFS.

This is about playing or not playing the assclowns from Austin, not whether we should play any of our SEC opponents. But you go right ahead pulling crap I never said out of your ass.

---

No no no. You misunderstand me, our goals are completely aligned. Together we will make sure we never play another game against a team that has had an unfair or bad ruling by the refs to teach the other team a lesson and show them what a superior football program we are. Alabama is going to be financially hurting after we refuse to play them, just like the longhorns are now. It's certainly not like they will make any money off TV revenue deals, advertisement, or donors. No sir, they depend on us for their money and it's time that we flex our muscles just like we did with the longhorns. Beating them on the field is child's play and won't teach them anything, we have to hit them where it really hurts and refuse to play them. Beating them on the field does nothing to decrease Alabama's reputation, but refusing to play them would turn them into the laughing stock of college football.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/college-football-25-most-valuable-182024139.html

Just look at this, Alabama would be in finical hell without being associated with our brand. No one around the country even knows who Alabama is without them being associated with us. They'll be in the same situation longhorns are when we left them to rot.

---

Well with all of that non-sense you wasted your time typing and I wasted my time reading, it is quite clear that your goals, whatever they are, are not even on the same planet as mine. Actually, since I have no input into the football program and who they schedule, I have no goals.

None of what you say makes a dang bit of sense. I've stated that in a perfect world, a world where sippy behaved like any other program, I'd be okay with scheduling them. But since that is a fantasy world, a world you seem quite familiar with, I'm not okay with that. They are a cancer to whatever organization they belong to. Have you ever heard of the SWC? Do you recall the formation of the Big 12 including schools like Nebraska (in their national championship winning heyday), Colorado, Missouri, and yeah, Texas A&M? The sips do not like a level playing field where everyone has the same opportunities to win because they know they will not win as much as they think they are entitled to win. They do everything they can to tilt that field in their favor. Having said that, A&M is more talented than they are, has a far superior coaching staff, and I believe would blow their sorry asses out of the water.

Something else I'll ask if you recall - Texas A&M offered to continue that series when we left for the SEC, and they cried like the little girls that they are, claiming their schedule was full (right before signing some other program, if I recall right). They took their ball and went home. Now that they see how crappy their schedule is, they suddenly want to play again? Screw that noise. They had their chance. Ship sailed. Why should we give them a life line?

And again, no where have I suggested we not play Alabama because the SEC refs always favor them, or Auburn because of a horse collar in a game played 7 years ago, or LSU because of scary Cajun Cookie Monster yapping at someone. You continuing to make that statement just makes you look like a bonehead.

"Now that they see how crappy their schedule is, they suddenly want to play again? Screw that noise. They had their chance. Ship sailed. Why should we give them a life line?"

I know Im a YUGE sip troll for pointing out facts contrary to the never-again narrative/ loser mentality, but Id be curious to know the difference in TV viewership of the sips vs the Ags last season. I saw some stat that their LSU game had two million more sets of eyeballs than ours. Plus they played in the conference championship. My point being that, while their home schedule is laughable, I dont think a "life line" in terms of viewership and what a renewal would do for their numbers is the best argument against playing them again.

But you know what would, inarguably, be a devastating blow to their program? Jimbo wiping the field with them.

Also no one has mentioned the impact that beating the sips would have on recruiting. Every offseason we go head to head on many recruits and we lose some win some. You cant tell me that a 52-12 sip beatdown wouldnt be a boon to our recruiting.

Play the game.
Its football.
Just win, baby.

levypantsEOY said:

---

"Now that they see how crappy their schedule is, they suddenly want to play again? Screw that noise. They had their chance. Ship sailed. Why should we give them a life line?"

I know Im a YUGE sip troll for pointing out facts contrary to the never-again narrative/ loser mentality, but Id be curious to know the difference in TV viewership of the sips vs the Ags last season. I saw some stat that their LSU game had two million more sets of eyeballs than ours. Plus they played in the conference championship. My point being that, while their home schedule is laughable, I dont think a "life line" in terms of viewership and what a renewal would do for their numbers is the best argument against playing them again.

But you know what would, inarguably, be a devastating blow to their program? Jimbo wiping the field with them.

Also no one has mentioned the impact that beating the sips would have on recruiting. Every offseason we go head to head on many recruits and we lose some win some. You cant tell me that a 52-12 sip beatdown wouldnt be a boon to our recruiting.

Play the game.
Its football.
Just win, baby.

---

Uh no, they did not play in their conference championship.

Recruiting boon?

Beat the teams on our schedule and win the SECW and you have your recruiting boon. If after that we meet up with those sorry steers in a bowl let's kick the ever living, ever loving, compound, complex fighting Texas Aggie hell out of their orange ***es!

We already have a schedule, that if we are successful navigating, insures recruiting boons without having to fiddle with the distraction from Austin.

Haha forgot they were leapt by Baylor, that titan of college football.

We can accomplish everything that we want to as a program without getting back into bed with tu. We did it for 120 years and got out for a reason....several reasons actually. No need to do it again unless its on our terms or in a big time bowl game.

Stinky T said:

---

A future home/home series in 2030 something? Maybe.. Agree to play them every year? That would be a colossal misstep for A&M leadership in my opinion. For lots of reasons.

---

The rivalry, and all it meant, is dead if the game isn't played by 2033. There won't be anyone under 40 who experienced the game as an undergrad at that point. In less than 5 more years there won't be any incoming players old enough to remember it. Heck there are no present players that can remember Bonfire.

Cullen doesn't get the big picture and is very naive. Doesn't realize what is best for A&M.

longeryak said:

---

Stinky T said:

---

A future home/home series in 2030 something? Maybe.. Agree to play them every year? That would be a colossal misstep for A&M leadership in my opinion. For lots of reasons.

---

The rivalry, and all it meant, is dead if the game isn't played by 2033. There won't be anyone under 40 who experienced the game as an undergrad at that point. In less than 5 more years there won't be any incoming players old enough to remember it. Heck there are no present players that can remember Bonfire.

---

12 people died due to Bonfire. It currently is like it originally was: not affiliated with the University. Like most other college bonfires. As far as I am aware it continued after a few years and after much needed changes were established to protect the safety of all involved. So referencing it is a troll.

The rivalry died when Texas chose not to renew it. We offered to continued playing. And there is little doubt Loftin's challenge was sincere.

I won't be surprised if we play a single home and home by your magic 2033 date. But I also won't be surprised if we don't. We chose to leave the conference and they chose to end the rivalry because of that. It pretty much is that simple.

Cullen has a right to his opinion, Bjorks job is to what's best for A&M athletics.

**** em, just don't care and don't them. We offered the olive branch they turned their backs and are begging (and using the media) to try and help themselves out. It's what's best for them not us.

We can acknowledge animosity, because of how things used to be, and pay tribute to it (via our yells, ect). But the game is over.

Move on

Quote:

---

Also no one has mentioned the impact that beating the sips would have on recruiting.

---

The best stretch in our history against those assclowns happened from 1984 - 1994. We did very well in recruiting against them, true, but still they got good players as well. And for everything that Jackie did, and then what RC did, it was all for nought, as the sips brought in a guy who finally figured it out, and we got to sit there and watch them "win" a NC (knee was down, but I digress). So what was the true recruiting impact of beating the sips all those years (9-1)?

levypantsEOY said:

---

I know Im a YUGE sip troll for pointing out facts contrary to the never-again narrative/ loser mentality, but Id be curious to know the difference in TV viewership of the sips vs the Ags last season. I saw some stat that their LSU game had two million more sets of eyeballs than ours. Plus they played in the conference championship. My point being that, while their home schedule is laughable, I dont think a "life line" in terms of viewership and what a renewal would do for their numbers is the best argument against playing them again.

---

Why are you comparing one game for them to one game for us? It's not meaningful at all. Compare the whole season or compare their 5th best game to our 5th best game. They have one OOC game and the ou game every year that are significant draws.

Having a third marquee game every year and at least one good home game every year would be huge for them. It would sell thousands of additional season tickets every year. It would add one additional sellout to our schedule each year. The marginal difference for us would be substantially less.

#Mke said:

---

Looks like y'all have some opposition from the most legendary 12th Man of all-time!

---

With all due respect for Cullen, that's E. King Gill.

Leave the psycho ex wife alone. Don't go back to that drama. We are above all that. We have enough big games on our schedule and they have a sad pathetic schedule.

They envy us. They want to be us.

MaxPower said:

---

DOG XO 84 said:

---

up-n-aTm said:

---

DOG XO 84 said:

---

I,If For the folks who favor resuming....Historically, (last 30 or 40 or 50 years), we lose every other game we play the sips. Is it worth it to have one more loss every other year (on average), just to play the sips? Say we have the horses, have a great year (maybe 1 conf loss).

We beat Bama, have a shot at CFP, but we scheduled tu and they were really good that year. Now with 2 losses we are out and tu is in. They beat OU and the rest of a weak B12, then beat SEC Aggies, they go... we stay home. If my math and history are correct, we probably lose an opportunity for CFP every other season, just by scheduling the sips.

Why sign up for that?

---

This hook is too shiny. tu troll.

---

I'm a tu troll? Maybe my logic is faulty, if so please explain why? Make you a deal, if you think I'm a tu troll, I'll meet you basically anywhere in Texas. I'll be wearing my ring, I'll throw my diploma in back seat. I'll bring $1k. You do the same. If I'm not an Ag,you keep my money...if I am, I keep yours. Deal?

Btw... my daughter '21 is currently applying to med schools, graduates in dec. I'm obviously '84. Dad was '55 his uncle '32. 80% of folks on this board who graduated prior to say, 2005 bought at least one textbook from my great uncle. I was on 3rd stack the night Jackie came out to bonfire. I was skinny enough as a freshman to squeeze under the gate of the "graffiti room" in the steam tunnels. Save your money buddy!

---

I don't think you are a sip troll but you do realize your argument is a loser mentality? Why did we play Clemson? That was 0-2, even worse than a loss every other year to sips. We went 1-1 against a crappy UCLA program no one cares about. Based on your logic we should schedule 4 patty cakes OOC. Hell we should drop out of the SEC and play in the AAC so we can go 12-0 every year.

Putting all that aside, I will just give my perspective. Too many people in here talk about natties as the ultimate goal. That's fine but if it's your only goal then you must be miserable human beings. I simplify my life. While I'd love a natty, I also love the joy of a single victory against a good ranked opponent. It feels great. Doing so against a ranked opponent and most hated rival? Sounds pretty tasty to me.

---

I think you mis-understand my position. I want 1 good, national power program every year. I don't want to play 2 ranked non conference opponents every year plus the toughest divisional schedule in the nation. By scheduling tu every year, we are destined to never have a chance for a CFP role.

Honestly, I really don't care if we ever win a CFP championship. Yes it would be nice, I just want to compete for one. Scheduling the sips every year cuts the odds of that ever happening unless we decide playing the sips is more important than scheduling Norte dame, FSU , UCLA , etc. I'd rather have a varied schedule playing different programs than playing the sips every year. You can't do both, practically speaking.

VatoLocoAggie said:

---

Leave the psycho ex wife alone. Don't go back to that drama. We are above all that. We have enough big games on our schedule and they have a sad pathetic schedule.

They envy us. They want to be us.

---

Best comment I've read on this board in a while.

Love Gilley! But! We pay the AD to do what is best for A&M. Not to make an emotionally driven decision that is not in our best interest. Gilley was a great 12th Man! Love what he meant for the team and program! But that does not mean that just like the rest of us he cannot be wrong about something. I believe his emotions and competitiveness are ruling his opinion on this. But facts and the past have shown what the sips are. If they want something it is because they think it is best for them. And them alone. This crap about what is good for the State is a smokescreen? If we go back, they will be the same cheating, arrogant, smug, whining babies they have been forever. And when we beat them several years in a row their media and big money guys will go looking for stuff to bring us down. So sorry Gilley but NO!!!

levypantsEOY said:

---

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

To each their own, but the vast majority of Aggies not only do not want to play them again, they don't even care.

---

This has been proven unequivocally wrong based on numerous polls and, ironically, your lengthy missive about how much you just dont care.

---

No, it hasn't. Both our former and current AD have stated multiple times the odds are decidedly against.

I routinely visit with a recently former 12th Man Foundation Trustee in my office building, and at least according to him it is at least 80% against.

I don't really care about youth opinion or polls coming out of Travis county.