jamesda3
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2011
- Messages
- 11,852
- Reaction score
- 281
Texas regret
In some ways it's amazing that a school which has been uncompetitive in the Big 12 for a good while was so anxious to join a much tougher conference where they will likely be little more than a doormat for the better teams in the conference. Of course they did it for the money and prestige of being an SEC member, but I hope they learn to enjoy being a perennial also-ran in that conference.
Texas has been a perennial also-ran through the last decade. They've had one 10 win season and one 9 win season since 2009. Vince Young and Colt McCoy aren't walking through that door. Wake is 34-27 over the previous 5 years. Texas is 37-25.
So if Texas has seasons of 6-6 or 7-4, at best, for the first 5 years of it’s SEC membership, will they look to move somewhere else?
There likely won’t be anywhere else to go. I know it’s too late now, but I’m thinking if Texas had stayed in the B12 and was able to keep it alive, they may have been able become top dog again. It doesn’t matter now. As others have stated, I think Texas is going to have a very tough time in the SEC.
It's generally worked out for A&M though.
Not sure their SEC record agrees with that assessment. In 9 SEC seasons, A&M is 42-31 in the SEC, and, the Aggies have one 2nd place finish, one third place finish, and every other season they have finished 5th or worse (overall conference record). They have never sniffed an SEC Championship game. Of the 14 SEC teams, only A&M, Vandy, Ole Miss and KY have never made a CG appearance. Got to believe that if A&M stayed in the Big 12, they would've won a Big 12 Championship, and maybe even made a CFP appearance. The Aggies look perpetually stuck with at best good, but not remarkable, seasons.
If the bottom line is money (and it usually is), then, yes, the move to the SEC has worked out for A&M.
Their Big XII record doesn't agree with your assessment. In their last 9 Big XII seasons, A&M was 34-39 in the Big XII, and the Aggies did not finish 1st or 2nd in their division.
If the bottom line is winning football games (and it should be), then yes, the move to the SEC has worked out for A&M.
They went from 5 games under .500 in the Big XII to 11 games over .500 in the SEC. That’s not the same shit. It’s not Bama but it’s better.
aTm has done the same shit in the SEC as they did in the Big XII. Mostly middling teams with a few good years. Their recruiting has benefited the most from being there, and that will be neutralized a bit with OU and Texas coming onboard since they compete for many of the same recruits.
Saban won't be at Alabama forever. When Alabama is out of the equation, or at least less of a factor, the SEC will return to what it once was, which was a revolving door of champions. Texas will be a factor if they ever get a coach. I'm not so sure Sark is that guy. His record as a HC is pretty mediocre, even if he was on the sauce.
A&M didn't join the SEC to be the 5th to 8th best program in the conference. They wanted to return to the 1990s when they had 3 top 10s, and finished every season ranked, but one. Averaging a game over .500 each year in the conference is not what a school with the third highest paid coach in college football is shooting for. Moving to the SEC didn't get A&M closer to the college football elites, and agree with ELC's point that with Texas and OK now joining, the Aggies lose the one in-state recruiting edge they may have had.