Texasteasipper said:

---

This forum is obsessed with Texas, so its always going to attract pathetic, needy, masochistic Texas fans for Aggie fans' entertainment purposes.

---

There. fify, ****wad.

Flexbone said:

---

Thucydides1. said:

---

We won a national championship last week, you absolute moron.

---

In what?

---

Male on male crotch watching

Dildo design and manufacture.

Yep saw how it has worked against ISU, Maryland, ITT tech, USC, Kansas, Arkansas, etc. Good thing you have been forced to set the bar so low so you can feel good about it.

Yep, Bama got all the yards they needed. They put their offense in idle and just ran the ball- coasting to a pretty easy win.

I've seen that play dozens of times and still cannot figure out how he hit injured from it. Looks like he and his dad decided it was a lost cause and he should just take a powder and focus on his pro "career".

Flexbone said:

---

Thucydides1. said:

---

We won a national championship last week, you absolute moron.

---

In what?

---

Bunny costumes

The reason Texas didn't have a chance in that NC game is two-fold. Colt didn't want to risk his draft position by playing through his injury, and Mack refused to bench Colt all year and give his backups any meaningful playing time. He even bragged about it, talking about how style points were the only way to get to the NC.

So then your primadonna QB goes out of the game, and you play a true freshman in his second college game ever (the first being one drive against UL Monroe) against Alabama. And you broke him.

Champ Bailey said:

---

The reason Texas didn't have a chance in that NC game is two-fold. Colt didn't want to risk his draft position by playing through his injury, and Mack refused to bench Colt all year and give his backups any meaningful playing time. He even bragged about it, talking about how style points were the only way to get to the NC.

So then your primadonna QB goes out of the game, and you play a true freshman in his second college game ever (the first being one drive against UL Monroe) against Alabama. And you broke him.

---

Nah.

Bama was the better team.

goodAg80 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

The reason Texas didn't have a chance in that NC game is two-fold. Colt didn't want to risk his draft position by playing through his injury, and Mack refused to bench Colt all year and give his backups any meaningful playing time. He even bragged about it, talking about how style points were the only way to get to the NC.

So then your primadonna QB goes out of the game, and you play a true freshman in his second college game ever (the first being one drive against UL Monroe) against Alabama. And you broke him.

---

Nah.

Bama was the better team.

---

Well obviously that too. That's why I said they didn't even have a single chance, not that they would have won.

Champ Bailey said:

---

goodAg80 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

The reason Texas didn't have a chance in that NC game is two-fold. Colt didn't want to risk his draft position by playing through his injury, and Mack refused to bench Colt all year and give his backups any meaningful playing time. He even bragged about it, talking about how style points were the only way to get to the NC.

So then your primadonna QB goes out of the game, and you play a true freshman in his second college game ever (the first being one drive against UL Monroe) against Alabama. And you broke him.

---

Nah.

Bama was the better team.

---

Well obviously that too. That's why I said they didn't even have a single chance, not that they would have won.

---

You said the reason "Texas didn't have a chance" was two fold and cited two reasons, neither of which was "Bama was the better team".

The reason Bama won was Bama was the better team.

To get to my op, I am really going to enjoy watching if the sips play Bama.

I remember being furious at Bama when they went into their "4 corners" type offense. They started "running out the clock" almost immediately. I thought it was stupid, and sure enough, tu got lucky and snagged another KEY moral victory, complete with built-in excuse for eternity, as we all see. In 10 years, sips will go ahead and award themselves a "Cote-Championship" with Bama because...because sips. I know the Tide was trying to protect their own injured QB, which, surprisingly, sips never mention. IMO, the game is a blowout with 2 healthy QBs and should have about a 24 pt. win given the Cote-x factor. Bama always lets me down! Luckily, these days, tu never does...

MSU/SECALUM said:

---

FPI projections show big trouble for Big 12

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/23012587/college-football-playoff-big-12-espn-fpi-projections

---

I want to take this back the article linked by MSU/SECALUM. Here's a quote from the article that talks about we and Clemson:

Quote:

---

Tigers on top
It's a Clemson sweep. In just about every projections category one can think of, the Tigers are the preseason leader.
Most projected wins? Check (11.4).
Best chance to win out through conference championships? Check (19 percent).
Best chance to win their conference? Check (69 percent).
Highest top-four strength-of-record chance? Check (54 percent).

In fact, Clemson's toughest game on the schedule right now is at Texas A&M on Sept. 8, a game the Tigers have a 76 percent chance to win.
This isn't a huge surprise after we revealed in February that the Tigers were No. 1 in our initial preseason FPI rankings (and still are, to be clear). But Clemson holds a substantial edge over the next-best team in many of these categories.

---

I absolutely love the fact we're going to play them in game 2.

The sip narrative when we left for the SEC was that we were wussing out of competition, when our objective was the complete opposite, as this article points out. They were even touting "an easier path to a championship in the Big 12."

Win or lose on Sept. 8 v. Clemson, coaches like Jimbo can use that to make this a better football team for the rest of the season.

Flexbone said:

---

Texan1976 said:

---

MSU/SECALUM said:

---

FPI projections show big trouble for Big 12

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/23012587/college-football-playoff-big-12-espn-fpi-projections

---

One thing is for sure, MSU won't be doing a damn thing. What is it, 78 years since your one conference title?

---

MSU would be beat the absolute **** out of Texas.m and has been better than Texas for a decade.

---

This.

Remember when Miss. played t.u. in 2012 and 2013? t.u. won the first one but lost the second one, in Austin, and sip fired Mack at the end of that year. If sip played State from 2013-17, MSU'd've likely whooped 'em, with the same outcome likely if they were to play in 2018.

88jrt06 said:

---

During A&M's time in the SECW, one team was in the cellar the most: Arkansas. The mutt.
So, tu...let's start with Arkansas. I'll spot you 4...yards.

Ole Miss, MSU, A&M, Auburn, LSU and Bama vary anywhere from easily better programs than tu to "You've got to be kidding me" in comparison. Year after year...very few exceptions.

tu is the kid looking longingly at the cool carnival ride...and the sign that says: "You must be this tall...to ride...".

---

Texas has a winning record against every team in the SECW. They lead the series with Arkansas 56-22.

Which teams in the SECW does A&M have a winning record against?

SEsee said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

During A&M's time in the SECW, one team was in the cellar the most: Arkansas. The mutt.
So, tu...let's start with Arkansas. I'll spot you 4...yards.

Ole Miss, MSU, A&M, Auburn, LSU and Bama vary anywhere from easily better programs than tu to "You've got to be kidding me" in comparison. Year after year...very few exceptions.

tu is the kid looking longingly at the cool carnival ride...and the sign that says: "You must be this tall...to ride...".

---

Texas has a winning record against every team in the SECW. They lead the series with Arkansas 56-22.

Which teams in the SECW does A&M have a winning record against?

---

Texas has a winning record with Alabama predominantly from a time before Texas' football team had desegregated, which says something about how long ago it was. And in the time since scholarship limits prevented them from pretty much locking up anyone with a pulse that could play, they're on even keel with Bama 1-1, the win being in 1982. The loss, well, you know...

Something something about living in the past.

Also, not for nothing, but against MSST, you're tied at 2-2. One win was in 1922. The other in 1999. So, for any semblance of keeping current, you're losing to MSST back in the 90s. When comparing anything newer than the 60s, you're also tied with Ole Miss.

Since scholarship limits, you're also tied at 2-2 with Auburn, however if you even give Texas the 1974 matchup in stats, then you're losing 2-3. The other wins against Auburn were older than the Great Depression.

On the plus side for you, when looking at stats after the 60s, you're 1-0 versus LSU!

The SWC has scholarship limits starting in 1965. The sec didn't. So if anything Texas had the disadvantage.

The Texas oversigned myth still persists though.

It's funny that anyone, specifically tu folks, thinks any record or outcome beyond 10 or so years ago is even remotely relevant. If it didn't occur in the last 4 or so years, then it doesn't matter one bit to me since none of those players are still on the team. That's how I look at it.

nwspmp said:

---

SEsee said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

During A&M's time in the SECW, one team was in the cellar the most: Arkansas. The mutt.
So, tu...let's start with Arkansas. I'll spot you 4...yards.

Ole Miss, MSU, A&M, Auburn, LSU and Bama vary anywhere from easily better programs than tu to "You've got to be kidding me" in comparison. Year after year...very few exceptions.

tu is the kid looking longingly at the cool carnival ride...and the sign that says: "You must be this tall...to ride...".

---

Texas has a winning record against every team in the SECW. They lead the series with Arkansas 56-22.

Which teams in the SECW does A&M have a winning record against?

---

Texas has a winning record with Alabama predominantly from a time before Texas' football team had desegregated, which says something about how long ago it was. And in the time since scholarship limits prevented them from pretty much locking up anyone with a pulse that could play, they're on even keel with Bama 1-1, the win being in 1982. The loss, well, you know...

Something something about living in the past.

Also, not for nothing, but against MSST, you're tied at 2-2. One win was in 1922. The other in 1999. So, for any semblance of keeping current, you're losing to MSST back in the 90s. When comparing anything newer than the 60s, you're also tied with Ole Miss.

Since scholarship limits, you're also tied at 2-2 with Auburn, however if you even give Texas the 1974 matchup in stats, then you're losing 2-3. The other wins against Auburn were older than the Great Depression.

On the plus side for you, when looking at stats after the 60s, you're 1-0 versus LSU!

---

Not involved in this discussion but just wanted to point out that Arkansas is 3-2 against Texas since joining the SEC lol

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

It's funny that anyone, specifically tu folks, thinks any record or outcome beyond 10 or so years ago is even remotely relevant. If it didn't occur in the last 4 or so years, then it doesn't matter one bit to me since none of those players are still on the team. That's how I look at it.

---

So why go back and claim championships from the 1920s?

https://deadspin.com/5941380/texas-am-picked-up-two-national-championships-two-conference-titles-over-the-summer/amp

SEsee said:

---

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

It's funny that anyone, specifically tu folks, thinks any record or outcome beyond 10 or so years ago is even remotely relevant. If it didn't occur in the last 4 or so years, then it doesn't matter one bit to me since none of those players are still on the team. That's how I look at it.

---

So why go back and claim championships from the 1920s?

https://deadspin.com/5941380/texas-am-picked-up-two-national-championships-two-conference-titles-over-the-summer/amp

---

Did we award them to ourselves?

I don't care who won what, when or where. What I know is if Texas played Alabama today the Texas fans would cower in fear when the monsters from Alabama took the field. It would be men versus boys. If you can't compete with Maryland, Tech and patsies like that don't go poking Goliath.

SEsee said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

During A&M's time in the SECW, one team was in the cellar the most: Arkansas. The mutt.
So, tu...let's start with Arkansas. I'll spot you 4...yards.

Ole Miss, MSU, A&M, Auburn, LSU and Bama vary anywhere from easily better programs than tu to "You've got to be kidding me" in comparison. Year after year...very few exceptions.

tu is the kid looking longingly at the cool carnival ride...and the sign that says: "You must be this tall...to ride...".

---

Texas has a winning record against every team in the SECW. They lead the series with Arkansas 56-22.

Which teams in the SECW does A&M have a winning record against?

---

And yet NOBODY who isn't a) a Texas fan; AND b) absolutely insane thinks Texas is on the same level as several of those programs. Texas also has a losing record to Vanderbilt and South Carolina. Head to heads don't really mean all that much. They're a single data point, that's it.

SEsee said:

---

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

It's funny that anyone, specifically tu folks, thinks any record or outcome beyond 10 or so years ago is even remotely relevant. If it didn't occur in the last 4 or so years, then it doesn't matter one bit to me since none of those players are still on the team. That's how I look at it.

---

So why go back and claim championships from the 1920s?

https://deadspin.com/5941380/texas-am-picked-up-two-national-championships-two-conference-titles-over-the-summer/amp

---

I'm not the one that put those numbers up. That's waaaay before my time and therefore pretty much irrelevant to me. Good effort though.

Edit to add: by irrelevant I'm referring to how it would impact the outcome of a game or matchup in today's world. Texas being ahead in the series against Arkansas 50something-20something has no impact on how that game would go. Nor does any sort of matchup history with Bama which is what this thread is about. Just like A&M beating OU like a drum in the Cotton Bowl has no impact on how that game would go today. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

Flexbone said:

---

SEsee said:

---

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

It's funny that anyone, specifically tu folks, thinks any record or outcome beyond 10 or so years ago is even remotely relevant. If it didn't occur in the last 4 or so years, then it doesn't matter one bit to me since none of those players are still on the team. That's how I look at it.

---

So why go back and claim championships from the 1920s?

https://deadspin.com/5941380/texas-am-picked-up-two-national-championships-two-conference-titles-over-the-summer/amp

---

Did we award them to ourselves?

---

You did the 1997 and 2010 conference championships. Nebraska won the 1997 conference championship( and OU won in 2010.

The 1919 and 1927 championships were based off ratings created 60 plus years after the fact.

Embarrassing if you ask me. Apparently deadspin thought so as well.

I don't know anybody who runs around beating their chest about those Aggie titles. Most of the Ags I know are realists and live in the now rather than grouping the past 100 years together.

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

I don't know anybody who runs around beating their chest about those Aggie titles. Most of the Ags I know are realists and live in the now rather than grouping the past 100 years together.

---

And yet you plastered the titles on the side of your stadium decades later.

To quote the deadspin article;

"In other words: enjoy those fake titles, Aggies. Whatever helps you sleep at night."

SEsee said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

During A&M's time in the SECW, one team was in the cellar the most: Arkansas. The mutt.
So, tu...let's start with Arkansas. I'll spot you 4...yards.

Ole Miss, MSU, A&M, Auburn, LSU and Bama vary anywhere from easily better programs than tu to "You've got to be kidding me" in comparison. Year after year...very few exceptions.

tu is the kid looking longingly at the cool carnival ride...and the sign that says: "You must be this tall...to ride...".

---

Texas has a winning record against every team in the SECW. They lead the series with Arkansas 56-22.

Which teams in the SECW does A&M have a winning record against?

---

No, Texas does not have a winning record against every SECW team. Texas is .500, 2-2 against Mississippi State if you count the game that was played in the 20's that they won. Modern time record 1990-present, Texas is 1-2, so Texas does not have a winning record against every SEC west member.

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

I don't know anybody who runs around beating their chest about those Aggie titles. Most of the Ags I know are realists and live in the now rather than grouping the past 100 years together.

---

But that's what sips do best. It helps console them, I guess.

hogfan14 said:

---

nwspmp said:

---

SEsee said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

During A&M's time in the SECW, one team was in the cellar the most: Arkansas. The mutt.
So, tu...let's start with Arkansas. I'll spot you 4...yards.

Ole Miss, MSU, A&M, Auburn, LSU and Bama vary anywhere from easily better programs than tu to "You've got to be kidding me" in comparison. Year after year...very few exceptions.

tu is the kid looking longingly at the cool carnival ride...and the sign that says: "You must be this tall...to ride...".

---

Texas has a winning record against every team in the SECW. They lead the series with Arkansas 56-22.

Which teams in the SECW does A&M have a winning record against?

---

Texas has a winning record with Alabama predominantly from a time before Texas' football team had desegregated, which says something about how long ago it was. And in the time since scholarship limits prevented them from pretty much locking up anyone with a pulse that could play, they're on even keel with Bama 1-1, the win being in 1982. The loss, well, you know...

Something something about living in the past.

Also, not for nothing, but against MSST, you're tied at 2-2. One win was in 1922. The other in 1999. So, for any semblance of keeping current, you're losing to MSST back in the 90s. When comparing anything newer than the 60s, you're also tied with Ole Miss.

Since scholarship limits, you're also tied at 2-2 with Auburn, however if you even give Texas the 1974 matchup in stats, then you're losing 2-3. The other wins against Auburn were older than the Great Depression.

On the plus side for you, when looking at stats after the 60s, you're 1-0 versus LSU!

---

Not involved in this discussion but just wanted to point out that Arkansas is 3-2 against Texas since joining the SEC lol

---

Arkansas hasn't won a conference title since the 1980s and that won't be changing.

You are a person who proudly stated that texas has a winning record against Arkansas when the last time the two teams met it was an absolute bloodbath. To think that the past has any sort of relevance when your team was undressed by the bottom of the barrel in a superior conference and you claim that the overall record is relevant. AND some of your people think it might be a close game against Bama because it might have been a sort of close game if McCoy didn't get hurt in 2010, DESPITE THE FACT that texas has been even more mediocre than A&M over the last 5 years.

And then charge me up because administration put some numbers on a wall a decade later.

I don't know how to nor do I have any more time to argue with that.

MSU/SECALUM said:

---

SEsee said:

---

88jrt06 said:

---

During A&M's time in the SECW, one team was in the cellar the most: Arkansas. The mutt.
So, tu...let's start with Arkansas. I'll spot you 4...yards.

Ole Miss, MSU, A&M, Auburn, LSU and Bama vary anywhere from easily better programs than tu to "You've got to be kidding me" in comparison. Year after year...very few exceptions.

tu is the kid looking longingly at the cool carnival ride...and the sign that says: "You must be this tall...to ride...".

---

Texas has a winning record against every team in the SECW. They lead the series with Arkansas 56-22.

Which teams in the SECW does A&M have a winning record against?

---

No, Texas does not have a winning record against every SECW team. Texas is .500, 2-2 against Mississippi State if you count the game that was played in the 20's that they won. Modern time record 1990-present, Texas is 1-2, so Texas does not have a winning record against every SEC west member.

---

If A&M is retroactively claiming an NC from 1919, I think we should count the games played in the 20s.

Mississippi State should claim some championships. Don't think they have ever sniffed one. Might as welll make one up.