So to put things into proper perspective…..

YES, we suck and are under achievers in the last 25 years….

But….during the same timeframe….. tu has won only 2 conference titles since 1997….

How ya like Them apples?!?

schmellba99 said:

---

Aggie_Nuke said:

---

I was at that game as well.

Minor correction: K-State did not enter the game ranked #1, instead they were #2, and UCLA was #1. However, at half time it was announced that UCLA was beaten, which meant that K_State became #1 at the half. Of course after we won, they were no longer #1, so it was a short-lived ranking for K-State.

I agree completely with your assessment of the Aggies as a 50/50 (average) team. As I've said several times, we haven't done anything for the last 84 years, and you can expect more of the same for the next 84 years. Even though I loved seeing the win in St. Louis, neither that game or any other came close to a Natty.

Keep your bowl games, conference championships, and all other games short of a Natty. If we can't win a Natty in 84 years, we never will......

---

K State was #2 in the AP, #1 in the Coaches and #3 in the BCS when we played them.

---

Right, that was back in the pre-BCS playoff world which was a lot more chaotic in terms of ranking.

Whether 1st or 2nd - they were undefeated and heading to the Fiesta bowl to essentially play for a natty...until we beat them.

Bring n WOOD said:

---

So to put things into proper perspective…..

YES, we suck and are under achievers in the last 25 years….

But….during the same timeframe….. tu has won only 2 conference titles since 1997….

How ya like Them apples?!?

---

I noticed how you conveniently left out that they won a national title in 2005...so ummmm...yeah, I prefer those apples way more than ours...

12mn95 said:

---

Bring n WOOD said:

---

So to put things into proper perspective…..

YES, we suck and are under achievers in the last 25 years….

But….during the same timeframe….. tu has won only 2 conference titles since 1997….

How ya like Them apples?!?

---

I noticed how you conveniently left out that they won a national title in 2005...so ummmm...yeah, I prefer those apples way more than ours...

---

Yes, conveniently left that part out! (Wink, wink)

12mn95 said:

---

Bring n WOOD said:

---

So to put things into proper perspective…..

YES, we suck and are under achievers in the last 25 years….

But….during the same timeframe….. tu has won only 2 conference titles since 1997….

How ya like Them apples?!?

---

I noticed how you conveniently left out that they won a national title in 2005...so ummmm...yeah, I prefer those apples way more than ours...

---

And played for another one in 2009. And that Rose Bowl win vs Michigan.

I believe some Aggie out there sold their soul in exchange for us winning the 1998 Big XII Championship and included never winning another championship in their lifetime as an added bonus to the trade....

from '85-'94 we had six 10+ wins in a season. since then TWO 10+ wins in a season.

um-yeah said:

---

from '85-'94 we had six 10+ wins in a season. since then TWO 10+ wins in a season.

---

That's a great stat in a vacuum. But the competition level ramped up incrementally from '96 on. Especially from 2012 on.

But point taken. We should be WAY ahead of where we are now.

Aggie_Nuke said:

---

I was at that game as well.

Minor correction: K-State did not enter the game ranked #1, instead they were #2, and UCLA was #1. However, at half time it was announced that UCLA was beaten, which meant that K_State became #1 at the half. Of course after we won, they were no longer #1, so it was a short-lived ranking for K-State.

I agree completely with your assessment of the Aggies as a 50/50 (average) team. As I've said several times, we haven't done anything for the last 84 years, and you can expect more of the same for the next 84 years. Even though I loved seeing the win in St. Louis, neither that game or any other came close to a Natty.

Keep your bowl games, conference championships, and all other games short of a Natty. If we can't win a Natty in 84 years, we never will......

---

We would be perennial winners of conference USA.

i think we should do EXACTLY what Texas has.
I am already looking forward to the trifecta of coaching carousel that can resemble Charlie Strong/Tom Herman/Steve Sarkisian. After we beat Alabama on the road ONE time we can proclaim - HEY! We are REALLY, really back!

One minor problem -
we will be back to our traditional lower top ten, usually in top 10-20 recruiting classes and explaining to our selves, well, we just can't recruit championship talent.
Right now, we have a top talent team.
I know all the crap of Jimbo's last 2 years. So, let's get rid of him and let the party begin.
Why would we ever want to let him get the only national championship talent squad we have ever had get to their junior year.

97 said:

---

I believe some Aggie out there sold their soul in exchange for us winning the 1998 Big XII Championship and included never winning another championship in their lifetime as an added bonus to the trade....

---

Well then, all we need is for that person to DIE.

hargettnow said:

---

i think we should do EXACTLY what Texas has.
I am already looking forward to the trifecta of coaching carousel that can resemble Charlie Strong/Tom Herman/Steve Sarkisian. After we beat Alabama on the road ONE time we can proclaim - HEY! We are REALLY, really back!

One minor problem -
we will be back to our traditional lower top ten, usually in top 10-20 recruiting classes and explaining to our selves, well, we just can't recruit championship talent.
Right now, we have a top talent team.
I know all the crap of Jimbo's last 2 years. So, let's get rid of him and let the party begin.
Why would we ever want to let him get the only national championship talent squad we have ever had get to their junior year.

---

And there it is....the proverbial "next year" post.

If Jimbo is around next year, we will be a 9-3/8-4 team. That's because that is the ceiling of our capabilities when managed by a staff that is comprised of possibly the worst o-line coach in the country, ad *****zo defensive coordinator, a lack of a defensive secondary and a head coach that is too damned prideful to admit his failures and correct them.

But it's also easy to act like that when you make $8MM a year no matter what you do.

um-yeah said:

---

from '85-'94 we had six 10+ wins in a season. since then TWO 10+ wins in a season.

---

Those were in the long obsolete SWC. Tougher competition has made a difference.

KSU really blew it that game with that late fumble....suck it Bishop

Probably the same Ags that agreed to Jimbo's contract.

I don't put it on the coaches….. I mean did Fran, Sherman, Sumlin or Jimbo reach out to TAM first? I mean looks like TAM went after them.
So I say whoever picks our coaches needs to go sell used cars or something. They are the ones that keep making the same mistakes over and over.
I mean we had a legitimate shot at getting Kirby Smart and just let him pass…..who decided that?

Well it's been worse for saint Louis, they lost their nfl team and that stadium is a **** hole. Maybe we cursed each other.

um-yeah said:

---

from '85-'94 we had six 10+ wins in a season. since then TWO 10+ wins in a season.

---

Plus there were less games per season then as well.

um-yeah said:

---

from '85-'94 we had six 10+ wins in a season. since then TWO 10+ wins in a season.

---

You're right, that's easily the winningest ten-year stretch in A&M history but the reality is even worse than the perception about the schedule.

There were very few ranked opponents as time went on, often 1 during the whole season and then a ranked bowl opponent.

Vs ranked opponents:

1985 4-2
1986 1-3
1987 3-1
1988 0-5
1989 2-2
1990 0-2
1991 1-1
1992 1-1
1993 1-2
1994 1-0

14 wins over Top 25 teams in 10 years is pretty telling. I'm not going to go count it up but I'd bet the generally 7-8 win teams of the last decade have beaten far more than that.

Aggiebyblood said:

---

TX_COWDOC said:

---

Texas A&M All-time record 771-498-48 (.604)

---

I was at the 68 Cotton Bowl as a 12-year-old. Listened to or watched 500 +- games since. Outside of a couple of years to remember, it's always been like this. .604 actually sounds better than my memory. But in the end, just an average team over the years. Always had great players, just nobody with consistant X's and O's.

---

I don't think it's correct to say "it's always been like this." I am one of the few that actually experienced A&M being a dominate team when I became an Aggie in1989. For me, I have memory and an expectation that Texas A&M be a perennial Top 10 team. But I get the point that after the 1998 Big 12 Title, we simply did less with more.

ServeAces said:

---

TXAG 05 said:

---

What are the stats for the same time frame for every team not named Alabama, Ohio St, Clemson and Georgia? Probably pretty similar.

---

Texas is 218-97

---

TCU is 218-93

TexAggie1999 said:

---

ServeAces said:

---

TXAG 05 said:

---

What are the stats for the same time frame for every team not named Alabama, Ohio St, Clemson and Georgia? Probably pretty similar.

---

Texas is 218-97

---

TCU is 218-93

---

LSU is 242-86

That Ohio State Sugar Bowl though.... Oof.

Yep. I was NOLA for that one.

Carmine Scarpacio said:

---

Since Sarkisian became the Texas coach, he has as many SEC road wins as Jimbo does.

---

Lol this makes me wanna die.

People forget that A&M was undefeated 4 seasons prior to 98. In 97, it appeared that A&M was getting back to the dominance they had in the mid 90s. After 98, it appeared that A&M would be competing for the Big 12 title every year, but Stoops, Brown, and Leach would put a stop to the momentum.beginning in 99.