Jump to content
The Smoakhouse Forums

Did SEC move cost A&M a football national title?


Recommended Posts

I'm honestly not stirring the pot here. I read an article on this topic recently. Can't remember where it was. Could've been Ian Boyd, could've been on The Athletic. I honestly don't remember. But I thought it was a well written article that brought up some good points that maybe we could have a civil discussion about.

 

So the premise of the article and the discussion is this...would the team that A&M fielded in 2012 won the national title if they had still been playing in the Big 12.

2012 Big 12 Football Standings

1 Kansas State 11-2 (8-1)

2 Oklahoma 10-3 (8-1)

3 Texas 9-4 (5-4)

4 Oklahoma State 8-5 (5-4)

5 Baylor 8-5 (4-5)

6 Texas Tech 8-5 (4-5)

7 TCU 7-6 (4-5)

8 West Virginia 7-6 (4-5)

9 Iowa State 6-7 (3-6)

10 Kansas 1-11 (0-9)

*Missouri 5-7

A&M offensively was just a different animal than we've seen in a long time. Obviously Manziel at QB was studly once they got rolling. They were incredibly talented up front, and had a bevy of skill position talent built up as well. Even if the defense struggled against the Big 12 spread offenses...that A&M offense would've torched the 2012 Big 12 defenses on a weekly basis. 

We obviously don't know 100% what the Big 12 would've looked like had A&M stayed put. More than likely Missouri doesn't leave and TCU and West Virginia don't join. Either way...none of those 3 beat the Aggies.

A&M pretty easily steam rolls Kansas and Iowa State.

TCU, Tech and Baylor were not going to beat the Aggies either and they most likely get thumped in the process.

Texas...well as a Longhorn...lets just be glad that A&M was in the SEC at this point. I shudder to think of that Manny Diaz led defense trying to stop the Aggies.

Which leads us to the 2 biggest teams that could've challenged the Aggies. Oklahoma we already saw the end result. Kansas State's best chance would've been to keep Manziel off the field...and even that would've boiled down to whether or not Klein was fully healthy when they played. Either way...don't think K-State knocks them off either. 

As the author of the article pointed out...no one in the Big 12 was going to consistently defend the Aggies. 

So A&M most likely runs the table and wins the Big 12. And considering their non-conference slate that year was SMU, South Carolina State, Louisiana Tech and Sam Houston State I think that is a safe assumption. If that had happened...we still would've gotten A&M vs Alabama, it just would've been for all the marbles. I really think A&M would've won that game again. 1) it would've been neutral site instead of in Tuscaloosa 2) Saban would not have had the luxury of seeing Florida and LSU slow down A&M on tape. 3) The extra time to prepare argument would fall flat...Saban had an entire offseason to gameplan for A&M and proceeded to give up even more yards and points the next year. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think A&M possibly wins a national title if they just get la tech in week 1 instead of a reschedule due to a hurricane... They would have beat Florida in week 2 if it wasn’t their first game. Beating Florida gives them the outright sec west title even with the loss to Lsu, and then the probably win the sec title game essentially putting them in a legitimate discussion for the championship game. 
 

now that being said, what if’s are just one of those things. If A&M didn’t go to the sec, they probably keep Sherman one more year. Sherman didn’t want the sec move and his reluctance to embrace it was a big part of why he was fired. If they stay in the big 12 and Sherman is the coach, Johnny probably doesn’t start. Sherman would have never let him do what makes him who he is. KK wouldn’t have been the OC allowing it... 
 

so to answer your question, I think A&Ms chances at a national title, when considering all factors, were higher with the move than staying in the big 12 another season. At least imo. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time there were two teams . A&M brand was and is not big enough to take place of an undefeated Irish and undefeated Alabama. The Aggies definitely Would have been the four team playoff. A month to prepare  and Alabama definitely beats the Aggies. I don’t remember the other team that was in play. However, A&M definitely could have beaten the Irish. 

  • Like 1
  • Stinks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, WETSU said:

I think A&M possibly wins a national title if they just get la tech in week 1 instead of a reschedule due to a hurricane... They would have beat Florida in week 2 if it wasn’t their first game. Beating Florida gives them the outright sec west title even with the loss to Lsu, and then the probably win the sec title game essentially putting them in a legitimate discussion for the championship game. 
 

now that being said, what if’s are just one of those things. If A&M didn’t go to the sec, they probably keep Sherman one more year. Sherman didn’t want the sec move and his reluctance to embrace it was a big part of why he was fired. If they stay in the big 12 and Sherman is the coach, Johnny probably doesn’t start. Sherman would have never let him do what makes him who he is. KK wouldn’t have been the OC allowing it... 
 

so to answer your question, I think A&Ms chances at a national title, when considering all factors, were higher with the move than staying in the big 12 another season. At least imo. 

(Edit)  I was just corrected.  Manzel played the whole game against LaTech?  I thought he was suspended the first half of that game for some reason.

 

If they were in the Big12 they would’ve had the opportunity to play for the national championship.  That has already been proven by the fact that Kansas State was ranked above notre dame before ksu lost.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TxFight said:

I'm honestly not stirring the pot here. I read an article on this topic recently. Can't remember where it was. Could've been Ian Boyd, could've been on The Athletic. I honestly don't remember. But I thought it was a well written article that brought up some good points that maybe we could have a civil discussion about.

 

So the premise of the article and the discussion is this...would the team that A&M fielded in 2012 won the national title if they had still been playing in the Big 12.

2012 Big 12 Football Standings

1 Kansas State 11-2 (8-1)

2 Oklahoma 10-3 (8-1)

3 Texas 9-4 (5-4)

4 Oklahoma State 8-5 (5-4)

5 Baylor 8-5 (4-5)

6 Texas Tech 8-5 (4-5)

7 TCU 7-6 (4-5)

8 West Virginia 7-6 (4-5)

9 Iowa State 6-7 (3-6)

10 Kansas 1-11 (0-9)

*Missouri 5-7

A&M offensively was just a different animal than we've seen in a long time. Obviously Manziel at QB was studly once they got rolling. They were incredibly talented up front, and had a bevy of skill position talent built up as well. Even if the defense struggled against the Big 12 spread offenses...that A&M offense would've torched the 2012 Big 12 defenses on a weekly basis. 

We obviously don't know 100% what the Big 12 would've looked like had A&M stayed put. More than likely Missouri doesn't leave and TCU and West Virginia don't join. Either way...none of those 3 beat the Aggies.

A&M pretty easily steam rolls Kansas and Iowa State.

TCU, Tech and Baylor were not going to beat the Aggies either and they most likely get thumped in the process.

Texas...well as a Longhorn...lets just be glad that A&M was in the SEC at this point. I shudder to think of that Manny Diaz led defense trying to stop the Aggies.

Which leads us to the 2 biggest teams that could've challenged the Aggies. Oklahoma we already saw the end result. Kansas State's best chance would've been to keep Manziel off the field...and even that would've boiled down to whether or not Klein was fully healthy when they played. Either way...don't think K-State knocks them off either. 

As the author of the article pointed out...no one in the Big 12 was going to consistently defend the Aggies. 

So A&M most likely runs the table and wins the Big 12. And considering their non-conference slate that year was SMU, South Carolina State, Louisiana Tech and Sam Houston State I think that is a safe assumption. If that had happened...we still would've gotten A&M vs Alabama, it just would've been for all the marbles. I really think A&M would've won that game again. 1) it would've been neutral site instead of in Tuscaloosa 2) Saban would not have had the luxury of seeing Florida and LSU slow down A&M on tape. 3) The extra time to prepare argument would fall flat...Saban had an entire offseason to gameplan for A&M and proceeded to give up even more yards and points the next year. 

 

 

They would not have won the national title.  There were some clear weaknesses in that team or they wouldn’t have had 2 SEC losses.  However, would they have gone 12-0 in the Bog XII that year?  Possibly.  While K St was strong, their only real challenge would have been OU and then you have the UT rivalry hurdle.  Other than that, it would have been A&M’s year.  

that team was reaaallllyyy good on offense.  Had some issues on D, but would have been top 2-3 in the B12.

they would have still been beat by Bama etc in the playoffs/ NCG.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DB2point0 said:

(Edit)  I was just corrected.  Manzel played the whole game against LaTech?  I thought he was suspended the first half of that game for some reason.

 

If they were in the Big12 they would’ve had the opportunity to play for the national championship.  That has already been proven by the fact that Kansas State was ranked above notre dame before ksu lost.  

Did manziel get in trouble his first year starting? I thought it was the next year that the 💩 hit the fan

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MavGrad99 said:

Did manziel get in trouble his first year starting? I thought it was the next year that the 💩 hit the fan

That is still one of the funniest “Coachisms” to me. 
 

He was suspended for the 1st game(maybe 1st half?) which was supposed to be La Tech. Then that game is postponed so Florida is the first game and all of a sudden those guys were suspended for the “LA Tech Game” specifically instead of the first game. 
 

That might have been the first SEC type decision that A&M made lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MavGrad99 said:

Did manziel get in trouble his first year starting? I thought it was the next year that the 💩 hit the fan

First year he was suspended from all team activities in the summer for a baR fight and providing false identification.  Sumlin begged the university to not kick him out, he was reinstated and named the starter that week.  He played every game I believe.  It was 2013 he had to sit a half game.  I was trying to go from memory at first, but was wrong hence the edit and correction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Valhalla said:

That is still one of the funniest “Coachisms” to me. 
 

He was suspended for the 1st game(maybe 1st half?) which was supposed to be La Tech. Then that game is postponed so Florida is the first game and all of a sudden those guys were suspended for the “LA Tech Game” specifically instead of the first game. 
 

That might have been the first SEC type decision that A&M made lol.

Haha Johnny Manziel taught A&M they ways of Meyer and Saban...  Miles probably did it too, but not in the news as much

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Valhalla said:

That is still one of the funniest “Coachisms” to me. 
 

He was suspended for the 1st game(maybe 1st half?) which was supposed to be La Tech. Then that game is postponed so Florida is the first game and all of a sudden those guys were suspended for the “LA Tech Game” specifically instead of the first game. 
 

That might have been the first SEC type decision that A&M made lol.

That never happened. Manziel was only ever suspended against Rice, and only half a game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer the OP, I can't see pollsters putting A&M over Notre Dame or undefeated Bama. Remember, it was the BCS at the time. 

If we assume one of those teams would've lost elsewhere then we're introducing all sorts of what if scenarios that may or may not have played out, including A&M going undefeated in the Big XII. When A&M smacked the Big XII Champions  OU, they were firing on all cylinders in a way they weren't early in the season. Who knows if the teams had played early in the season what might've happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Valhalla said:

That is still one of the funniest “Coachisms” to me. 
 

He was suspended for the 1st game(maybe 1st half?) which was supposed to be La Tech. Then that game is postponed so Florida is the first game and all of a sudden those guys were suspended for the “LA Tech Game” specifically instead of the first game. 
 

That might have been the first SEC type decision that A&M made lol.

Wrong year and wrong player. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WETSU said:

True. 

I guess you could say he was suspended during the summer... But when it came out he was arrested for trying to break up a fight and something minor like not showing an ID (which I thought was a constitutional right), he was reinstated. 

Did Mayfield even miss game time for his intoxication?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

You are right that was not Manzel. 
 

It was two other guys. The rest was true though lol.

https://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/8/30/3279162/texas-am-suspended-players-florida-postponed-game

 

The year and player(s) were wrong. Only thing you got right was that it happened. Maybe it is an SEC thing. Florida did it before. Saban had suspended a player for the ULM game but lifted that during the game when they looked like they were going to lose.

We should all model punishments after what happened with Mayfield who missed all of 0 games for fleeing cops and driving drunk.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, JohnnyFootball said:

The year and player(s) were wrong. Only thing you got right was that it happened. Maybe it is an SEC thing. Florida did it before. Saban had suspended a player for the ULM game but lifted that during the game when they looked like they were going to lose.

We should all model punishments after what happened with Mayfield who missed all of 0 games for fleeing cops and driving drunk.

1. I got the player wrong. I never even stated a year. It was A&M’s first SEC season. 
 

2. My opinion on things as such has pretty much involved into “Treat it like Saban would” over the last 10 years. 

If the SEC would not suspend a player for it then Riley should not be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Johnny suspension was dumb anyways... the first half suspension was given despite him being officially cleared of any wrongdoing. 

Did he get paid for autographs? Maybe/probably. Was there any evidence that would hold up? No. Therefore how can the suspension be justified? its literally like you getting a speeding ticket because a cop thinks you might have sped on your way to work yesterday even though he didnt see it or catch you doing it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the players suspended for la tech then moved when the game moved.... I agree it was a stretch. But EVERY program stretches things. Not just sec schools. I can find several examples of ou, Texas, and any other program you want where they handled a punishment differently than most outside fan bases would consider inappropriate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

1. I got the player wrong. I never even stated a year. It was A&M’s first SEC season. 
 

2. My opinion on things as such has pretty much involved into “Treat it like Saban would” over the last 10 years. 

If the SEC would not suspend a player for it then Riley should not be.

Hey that's fair!  If some coaches are going to have complete disregard, you're going to struggle if you don't do the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JohnnyFootball said:

Hey that's fair!  If some coaches are going to have complete disregard, you're going to struggle if you don't do the same.

Oklahoma already has some built in disadvantages when compared to the other top football programs such as geography or even an over the top compliance department. There is no point to handcuff yourself further by pretending that college football is about anything more than winning football games. 
 

Riley isn’t getting paid 6 million a year to “build character”.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

Oklahoma already has some built in disadvantages when compared to the other top football programs such as geography or even an over the top compliance department. There is no point to handcuff yourself further by pretending that college football is about anything more than winning football games. 
 

Riley isn’t getting paid 6 million a year to “build character”.

I wholeheartedly agree with that last sentence. I can’t stand when someone acts like these college football coaches are “builders of character” more that football coaches... Nobody gives a damn if a coach makes good men but loses games. There are many other influences in a players life that can be a good influence. For millions a year and dealing with 18-23 year old men, I ONLY care about your record. The rest of it is all just stuff losers talk about to make themselves feel better about a 7-5 record. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, WETSU said:

I think A&M possibly wins a national title if they just get la tech in week 1 instead of a reschedule due to a hurricane... They would have beat Florida in week 2 if it wasn’t their first game. Beating Florida gives them the outright sec west title even with the loss to Lsu, and then the probably win the sec title game essentially putting them in a legitimate discussion for the championship game. 
 

now that being said, what if’s are just one of those things. If A&M didn’t go to the sec, they probably keep Sherman one more year. Sherman didn’t want the sec move and his reluctance to embrace it was a big part of why he was fired. If they stay in the big 12 and Sherman is the coach, Johnny probably doesn’t start. Sherman would have never let him do what makes him who he is. KK wouldn’t have been the OC allowing it... 
 

so to answer your question, I think A&Ms chances at a national title, when considering all factors, were higher with the move than staying in the big 12 another season. At least imo. 

I’m going off of what the team was that season...not wanting to dig into what if scenarios of who would’ve been fired/hired or played etc. that’s how the article I recall being written so that’s what I was basing it on. Take that years A&M team and put them back in the Big 12 instead of the SEC.

 

For the sake of looking, let’s put A&M in place of TCUs conference schedule (thanksgiving vs Texas). 
Sept 15 @ Kansas

Oct 6 vs Iowa State

Oct 13 @ Baylor

Oct 20 vs Texas Tech

Oct 27 @ Oklahoma State

Nov 3 @ West Virginia

Nov 10 vs Kansas State

Nov 22 @ Texas

Dec 1 vs Oklahoma

 

that particular schedule would’ve set up really well for A&M. 1st team with a pulse wasn’t until mid-October. By that point in actuality A&M had dropped atleast 48 pts in 3 of the last 4 so the offense was doing just fine. And we all know how good the group played the last 5-6 games which sets up perfect with that schedule above. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TxFight said:

I’m going off of what the team was that season...not wanting to dig into what if scenarios of who would’ve been fired/hired or played etc. that’s how the article I recall being written so that’s what I was basing it on. Take that years A&M team and put them back in the Big 12 instead of the SEC.

 

For the sake of looking, let’s put A&M in place of TCUs conference schedule (thanksgiving vs Texas). 
Sept 15 @ Kansas

Oct 6 vs Iowa State

Oct 13 @ Baylor

Oct 20 vs Texas Tech

Oct 27 @ Oklahoma State

Nov 3 @ West Virginia

Nov 10 vs Kansas State

Nov 22 @ Texas

Dec 1 vs Oklahoma

 

that particular schedule would’ve set up really well for A&M. 1st team with a pulse wasn’t until mid-October. By that point in actuality A&M had dropped atleast 48 pts in 3 of the last 4 so the offense was doing just fine. And we all know how good the group played the last 5-6 games which sets up perfect with that schedule above. 

 

 

So let's say A&M goes 12-0, which isn't all that of a wild idea.

With Notre Dame at 12-0 and A&M not there to beat Bama (meaning they're 13-0), the BCS wouldn't have put A&M in the title game over those teams. Both would've started higher than A&M, would've played tougher schedules than A&M, and have more tradition. The BCS and pollsters wouldn't have put A&M in the BCS title game. 

So A&M would've been looking at a 13-0 or 12-1 season, depending on who they played in a bowl game, but not a national title. 

That argument is revisionist and regret mongering, since fear mongering didn't work before A&M left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...