The Move

[h-town12]

No

 

 

So why would they try to "boycott" A&M? Seems childish to me, especially if A&M has said they would still play them.

[bordertown]

It's a mystery of life. I will not speak for Baylor or Tech. I can only give you my perspective on Texas' rationale and tell you I agree with it.

 

What I find interesting are the Aggies point the finger at Dodds. Their blame is misdirected. The blame should be pointed by the Aggies at the Texas Exes like me. If there was a uproar by the Exes such as myself, the game would happen. But the way we see it is the Aggie administration flipped us off. No one likes that experience. The collective response by the Exes has been "have a good life".

[h-town12]

It's a mystery of life. I will not speak for Baylor or Tech. I can only give you my perspective on Texas' rationale and tell you I agree with it.

 

What I find interesting are the Aggies point the finger at Dodds. Their blame is misdirected. The blame should be pointed by the Aggies at the Texas Exes like me. If there was a uproar by the Exes such as myself, the game would happen. But the way we see it is the Aggie administration flipped us off. No one likes that experience. The collective response has been "have a good life".

 

 

So like I said. Bitter. Thank you.

[bordertown]

I am not bitter, just disappointed in the Aggies.

[Immortal13]

Seems aggies are confusing indifference with fear and/or bitterness.

[h-town12]

Seems aggies are confusing indifference with fear and/or bitterness.

 

 

I think you are confused on what indifference means.

[Immortal13]

I think you are confused on what indifference means.

Nope...quite clear. It's you who are confused

[Lobos2004]

I think you are confused on what indifference means.

 

What'd you expect?

[Lobos2004]

I am well aware that was A&M's position. I think it is a true position of A&M's view.

 

Here is the other side. A&M left to get out of Texas' shadow. Texas' brass told A&M the repercussions of the proposed move. A&M left to SEC as it was more important to the school than a rivalry. A&M thought Texas was bluffing. They were wrong. By continuing the rivalry, A&M would continue to be in Texas' shadow.

 

While I will miss the rivalry, but I agree with Texas, Baylor's & Tech's decision.

 

A&M made their decision to wander in an unknown land.

 

So basically you're throwing out hypothetical things to which you have NO idea about and are saying that that is how A&M "destroyed" the rivalry? Because they "left to get out of Texas's shadow"? Yeah, I bet you truly believe that too, don't you? LOL! Forget the fact that there was much more money involved, a better fit culturally (according to the SEC and A&M), a more prestigious conference, and many other things. No, you know exactly what Loftin and the BOR were thinking and their reasoning behind A&M leaving, right?

 

Again, A&M laid down a challenge, Texas backed away. That speaks volumes as to who "destroyed" the rivalry. Much better than you thinking you know the reasoning behind Loftin and the A&M BOR when in actuality, you have no clue whatsoever.

[bordertown]

So basically you're throwing out hypothetical things to which you have NO idea about and are saying that that is how A&M "destroyed" the rivalry? Because they "left to get out of Texas's shadow"? Yeah, I bet you truly believe that too, don't you? LOL! Forget the fact that there was much more money involved, a better fit culturally (according to the SEC and A&M), a more prestigious conference, and many other things. No, you know exactly what Loftin and the BOR were thinking and their reasoning behind A&M leaving, right?

 

Again, A&M laid down a challenge, Texas backed away. That speaks volumes as to who "destroyed" the rivalry. Much better than you thinking you know the reasoning behind Loftin and the A&M BOR when in actuality, you have no clue whatsoever.

 

Has it occured to the Aggies that the rivalry is no longer a cultural fit for Texas. Obviously, you think playing in the SEC is more important. I respect that. Now why can't you respect the fact Texas is ready to move forward and A&M is not in our plans?

[WETSU]

I'm gonna say this.... For those who think the Aggies did this to get out of the Texas shadow, your partially right but partially wrong. I will admit this and so will most Aggies. Most Aggies are obsessed with Texas. They measure their success compared to what Texas does. Therefore, I believe this move was not made to get out from the Texas shadow, because the Aggies were setting their standards around Texas. Now that they are in the SEC, they can no longer do that. That's why I think this move was more about separating itself from texas than stepping from under their shadow.

 

Aggies could look at it as one thing while Texas looks at it from the other view. I see the logic from a Texas fans side of it, but it's stretching it a little to assume they know that this was only about getting out of the Texas shadow. There are many more factors.

 

 

As for the rivalry, it's being killed by Texas for this reason. The Aggies chose to go to the SEC. They didn't choose to "leave the rivalry with Texas." They simply chose a different conference. That has absolutely nothing to do with the Texas/A&M game itself.

[Lobo97]

I'm gonna say this.... For those who think the Aggies did this to get out of the Texas shadow, your partially right but partially wrong. I will admit this and so will most Aggies. Most Aggies are obsessed with Texas. They measure their success compared to what Texas does. Therefore, I believe this move was not made to get out from the Texas shadow, because the Aggies were setting their standards around Texas. Now that they are in the SEC, they can no longer do that. That's why I think this move was more about separating itself from texas than stepping from under their shadow.

 

Aggies could look at it as one thing while Texas looks at it from the other view. I see the logic from a Texas fans side of it, but it's stretching it a little to assume they know that this was only about getting out of the Texas shadow. There are many more factors.

 

 

As for the rivalry, it's being killed by Texas for this reason. The Aggies chose to go to the SEC. They didn't choose to "leave the rivalry with Texas." They simply chose a different conference. That has absolutely nothing to do with the Texas/A&M game itself.

 

 

I was with you until that last part.

 

This is where A&M (and it's fans) need to accept the truth...as well as anyone else who continues to point the finger in "ONE" direction. The Texas-Texas A&M rivalry is done, and listen to this part carefully everyone, because of BOTH sides!!! Texas A&M left the conference because of Texas. Plain and Simple, it's not a secret. Texas threatened that if they left, they wouldn't play them anymore. Then, they followed through with their threat. Unless everyone at A&M is a complete moron, they knew dang well Texas wasn't going to play them anymore. So what did they do, they came out and said, "We will still play you". Why, because they knew Texas wasn't going to anyway which in turn would make Texas look like the bad guy. A&M didn't want to play Texas anymore either. If it wasn't a problem...They wouldn't have left the conference! Seriously, you can't say you're tired of being in someone's shadow, leave, yet still request to be tied to them. That's stupid and pointless.

 

BOTH sides are equally at fault here. For anyone to dispute that (from either side), it's only because you're truly a homer!

[Lobos2004]

I was with you until that last part.

 

This is where A&M (and it's fans) need to accept the truth...as well as anyone else who continues to point the finger in "ONE" direction. The Texas-Texas A&M rivalry is done, and listen to this part carefully everyone, because of BOTH sides!!! Texas A&M left the conference because of Texas. Plain and Simple, it's not a secret. Texas threatened that if they left, they wouldn't play them anymore. Then, they followed through with their threat. Unless everyone at A&M is a complete moron, they knew dang well Texas wasn't going to play them anymore. So what did they do, they came out and said, "We will still play you". Why, because they knew Texas wasn't going to anyway which in turn would make Texas look like the bad guy. A&M didn't want to play Texas anymore either. If it wasn't a problem...They wouldn't have left the conference! Seriously, you can't say you're tired of being in someone's shadow, leave, yet still request to be tied to them. That's stupid and pointless.

 

BOTH sides are equally at fault here. For anyone to dispute that (from either side), it's only because you're truly a homer!

 

Good post. I'll agree that both sides are at fault.

[DB2point0]

I'm gonna say this.... For those who think the Aggies did this to get out of the Texas shadow, your partially right but partially wrong. I will admit this and so will most Aggies. Most Aggies are obsessed with Texas. They measure their success compared to what Texas does. Therefore, I believe this move was not made to get out from the Texas shadow, because the Aggies were setting their standards around Texas. Now that they are in the SEC, they can no longer do that. That's why I think this move was more about separating itself from texas than stepping from under their shadow.

 

Aggies could look at it as one thing while Texas looks at it from the other view. I see the logic from a Texas fans side of it, but it's stretching it a little to assume they know that this was only about getting out of the Texas shadow. There are many more factors.

 

 

As for the rivalry, it's being killed by Texas for this reason. The Aggies chose to go to the SEC. They didn't choose to "leave the rivalry with Texas." They simply chose a different conference. That has absolutely nothing to do with the Texas/A&M game itself.

 

Whatever reason they left it was a dumb move. They didn't just walk away from Texas, they walked away from a division of good rivalries. Texas didn't want to play an out of conference game on Thanksgiving and I don't blame them. Maybe they could talk Tech into playing them since Tech hates them so badly.

[Immortal13]

Texas did not back down from any "challenge". That is patently ridiculous. How many times has Texas won the Lone Star Showdown?....like every time. Texas does not need the game and frankly tying up a NONCONFERENCE slot every year to appease A&M is not a concern for Texas....(ie indifference :) ) Texas may have plans for other bigger name nonconf opponents would be my guess. Saying Texas is "backing down" is just what some ignorant aggies say to make themselves feel better.

 

Whether the move ends up being good or bad for Texas A&M remains to be seen. I really don't care that much. If that's what they wanted to do, then fine. As far as all this "cultural fit" business, I guess someone is going to have to explain that one to me.

[WETSU]

I was with you until that last part.

 

This is where A&M (and it's fans) need to accept the truth...as well as anyone else who continues to point the finger in "ONE" direction. The Texas-Texas A&M rivalry is done, and listen to this part carefully everyone, because of BOTH sides!!! Texas A&M left the conference because of Texas. Plain and Simple, it's not a secret. Texas threatened that if they left, they wouldn't play them anymore. Then, they followed through with their threat. Unless everyone at A&M is a complete moron, they knew dang well Texas wasn't going to play them anymore. So what did they do, they came out and said, "We will still play you". Why, because they knew Texas wasn't going to anyway which in turn would make Texas look like the bad guy. A&M didn't want to play Texas anymore either. If it wasn't a problem...They wouldn't have left the conference! Seriously, you can't say you're tired of being in someone's shadow, leave, yet still request to be tied to them. That's stupid and pointless.

 

BOTH sides are equally at fault here. For anyone to dispute that (from either side), it's only because you're truly a homer!

Both sides are not equally at fault.... There is SOME fault on both sides, but At the end of the day the reason this game is not being played is on Texas. There is a sequence of events that started this...

 

The big 12 was about to die. The PAC 16 was about to be formed. Instead of going, the Aggies decided they would pursue the SEC instead. This was before the LHN and everything. When Texas heard A&M wanted to go to the sec instead, the turned a 180 on the PAC 16 and decided to stay in the big 12. A&M then reacted and said they would stay in the big 12 too. Then the LHN was announced. They discussed content about conference games being played on it and possibly even pushing highlights for high school kids and high school games as a "recruiting tool." The Aggies then decided that getting going to the SEC would be something they would rather do. Partly because of Texas trying to push the envelope with their network and partly because of the previous reasons they wanted the sec over the PAC 16. Then when the Aggies announce they were leaving, they immediately announced they still wanted the rivalry with Texas. Texas than immediately announced they would not longer schedule A&M in any sports.

 

So let's shorten this up.... A&M made a choice to go a separate direction at a opportune time. Texas changed their stance and stayed but then tried to strongarm the conference with their network content. The Aggies then left on "bad terms." They still wanted to play Texas but Texas chose not to.

 

 

 

At the end of the day, it's just like I said above. A&M chose to leave the conference but till wanted the LSS. If Texas decides they want to put out orders like stay in the conference or we won't play you, or if they just refuse to play them because they left its still Texas that's stopping the game.

[WETSU]

Texas did not back down from any "challenge". That is patently ridiculous. How many times has Texas won the Lone Star Showdown?....like every time. Texas does not need the game and frankly tying up a NONCONFERENCE slot every year to appease A&M is not a concern for Texas....(ie indifference :) ) Texas may have plans for other bigger name nonconf opponents would be my guess. Saying Texas is "backing down" is just what some ignorant aggies say to make themselves feel better.

 

That is literally the most arrogant and inaccurate statement I've ever seen on here...

[Immortal13]

That is literally the most arrogant and inaccurate statement I've ever seen on here...

 

It's the truth and you just can't take it. What part was inaccurate? Oh yeah, y'all one the LSS 1 whole time right??

[WETSU]

It's the truth and you just can't take it. What part was inaccurate? Oh yeah, y'all one the LSS 1 whole time right??

Actually, that's not it. You are wrong on that btw which further proves my point.... The part that was inaccurate is that Texas will find a better opponent for that spot.

 

The LSS is among the top 5 played rivalries in college football both in number of games played and in "fan favorite" perspective.

 

Secondly, the overall series standings doesn't tell the whole story with this rivalry. A&M didn't allow receuited football players to play until the 60s when the Corps was no longer a requirement. Lets put that into perspective.... Texas went 52-17-5 against the Aggies while the Aggies WERE NOT EVEN RECRUITING REAL FOOTBALL PLAYERS. Since they dropped corps requirements Texas is 24-19 since the Aggies started recruiting with equal requirements and footing. So the series is much closer than you or most people choose to admit if you think about it from a logical standpoint. Is Texas still better? Yes. But it's competitive. Not lopsided.

 

 

Texas fans are out of their mind if they think that playing tcu is on par with the LSS.

[Lobo97]

Both sides are not equally at fault.... There is SOME fault on both sides, but At the end of the day the reason this game is not being played is on Texas. There is a sequence of events that started this...

 

The big 12 was about to die. The PAC 16 was about to be formed. Instead of going, the Aggies decided they would pursue the SEC instead. This was before the LHN and everything. When Texas heard A&M wanted to go to the sec instead, the turned a 180 on the PAC 16 and decided to stay in the big 12. A&M then reacted and said they would stay in the big 12 too. Then the LHN was announced. They discussed content about conference games being played on it and possibly even pushing highlights for high school kids and high school games as a "recruiting tool." The Aggies then decided that getting going to the SEC would be something they would rather do. Partly because of Texas trying to push the envelope with their network and partly because of the previous reasons they wanted the sec over the PAC 16. Then when the Aggies announce they were leaving, they immediately announced they still wanted the rivalry with Texas. Texas than immediately announced they would not longer schedule A&M in any sports.

 

So let's shorten this up.... A&M made a choice to go a separate direction at a opportune time. Texas changed their stance and stayed but then tried to strongarm the conference with their network content. The Aggies then left on "bad terms." They still wanted to play Texas but Texas chose not to.

 

 

 

At the end of the day, it's just like I said above. A&M chose to leave the conference but till wanted the LSS. If Texas decides they want to put out orders like stay in the conference or we won't play you, or if they just refuse to play them because they left its still Texas that's stopping the game.

 

You can ration it any way you want WET...but at the end of the day, A&M left because of Texas. Why leave because of Texas then come out and say you still want to play Texas???

 

You can look through your maroon glasses all day and continue to point the finger in one direction, but at the end of the day you'll still be wrong.

 

It's like a sibling rivalry where no one wants to take fault, but instead, keep blaming the other. Both sides ARE at fault and both sides ARE at fault equally. I don't care that A&M said they still wanted to play. It doesn't take any of the blame off of them when they only said it because the knew the other side wouldn't agree.

[WETSU]

You can ration it any way you want WET...but at the end of the day, A&M left because of Texas. Why leave because of Texas then come out and say you still want to play Texas???

 

You can look through your maroon glasses all day and continue to point the finger in one direction, but at the end of the day you'll still be wrong.

 

It's like a sibling rivalry where no one wants to take fault, but instead, keep blaming the other. Both sides ARE at fault and both sides ARE at fault equally. I don't care that A&M said they still wanted to play. It doesn't take any of the blame off of them when they only said it because the knew the other side wouldn't agree.

What makes you right and me wrong?

[Lobo97]

Actually, that's not it. You are wrong on that btw which further proves my point.... The part that was inaccurate is that Texas will find a better opponent for that spot.

 

The LSS is among the top 5 played rivalries in college football both in number of games played and in "fan favorite" perspective.

 

Secondly, the overall series standings doesn't tell the whole story with this rivalry. A&M didn't allow receuited football players to play until the 60s when the Corps was no longer a requirement. Lets put that into perspective.... Texas went 52-17-5 against the Aggies while the Aggies WERE NOT EVEN RECRUITING REAL FOOTBALL PLAYERS. Since they dropped corps requirements Texas is 24-19 since the Aggies started recruiting with equal requirements and footing. So the series is much closer than you or most people choose to admit if you think about it from a logical standpoint. Is Texas still better? Yes. But it's competitive. Not lopsided.

 

 

Texas fans are out of their mind if they think that playing tcu is on par with the LSS.

 

 

Being from Texas, I am sad to see the LSS go away. That said, just because two teams play rank in the top 5 for "most games played" and/or "fan favorite" does NOT make the opponents better than anyone else. That's a completely different statement. Heck, Texas has only played Alabama 9 times compared to the 118 they've played A&M. Guess what, Alabama would still be a better opponent than A&M...because they are better!

 

As for the overall series, it's funny to me when Aggies choose to look at most recent history, all time history, or back so many years. You seriously only look for the time periods that make A&M look better. The all time series IS lopsided whether you want to admit it or not. Just like A&M has only won the game 3 times since 2000 (and that's on an even recruiting playing field).

Even the last two years Aggies will talk about how bad Texas has been. Yea, Texas has had their 2 worst seasons in the Mack Brown era the last 2 years. But guess what...They have still won just as many bowl games as A&M in that span, they have still won just as many games as A&M in the rivalry during that time, and they've won the most recent one.

 

As for TCU, do I think they will be a better opponent than A&M moving forward...of course not. Are they a better opponent right now...Absolutely!!! Because lately, they have been better.

[Lobo97]

What makes you right and me wrong?

 

Umm, the answer, LOL!

 

How about the fact that you either can't, or just refuse, to look at the big picture. You're looking at it from one side and refuse to admit your team just might be wrong. I'm looking at it from both sides and can, and have, expressed the stupidity taken from both sides.

[WETSU]

Being from Texas, I am sad to see the LSS go away. That said, just because two teams play rank in the top 5 for "most games played" and/or "fan favorite" does NOT make the opponents better than anyone else. That's a completely different statement. Heck, Texas has only played Alabama 9 times compared to the 118 they've played A&M. Guess what, Alabama would still be a better opponent than A&M...because they are better!

 

As for the overall series, it's funny to me when Aggies choose to look at most recent history, all time history, or back so many years. You seriously only look for the time periods that make A&M look better. The all time series IS lopsided whether you want to admit it or not. Just like A&M has only won the game 3 times since 2000 (and that's on an even recruiting playing field).

Even the last two years Aggies will talk about how bad Texas has been. Yea, Texas has had their 2 worst seasons in the Mack Brown era the last 2 years. But guess what...They have still won just as many bowl games as A&M in that span, they have still won just as many games as A&M in the rivalry during that time, and they've won the most recent one.

 

As for TCU, do I think they will be a better opponent than A&M moving forward...of course not. Are they a better opponent right now...Absolutely!!! Because lately, they have been better.

Are you kidding... I just pointed out a time that still makes Texas look better....

 

My point is, you cant look at wins from the 20s in the same way as the 80s. I don't know what is so hard for Texas fans to understand that A&M was not even recruiting real football players.... They were guys going to a "ROTC" academy. A&M put more officers in WWII than West Point. The Aggies were not recruiting the all American high school kids and getting them. Texas was.

 

When the Aggies started recruiting regular players in te 60s things changed. Texas was no longer dominant in the rivalry. It's been pretty even every since.

 

I'm not trying to make a case for A&M, I'm just pointing out facts. Facts that must be considered when discussing the rivalry. It has been a very competitive series since the 60s. That's a valid argument. Matter of fact, compare it to some of the other rivalries over the last 25 years, it's one of the closest in college football. I'm sorry if you don't agree, but I think the Corps requirements changing in the 60s is a big part of it.

[Lobo97]

Are you kidding... I just pointed out a time that still makes Texas look better....

 

My point is, you cant look at wins from the 20s in the same way as the 80s. I don't know what is so hard for Texas fans to understand that A&M was not even recruiting real football players.... They were guys going to a "ROTC" academy. A&M put more officers in WWII than West Point. The Aggies were not recruiting the all American high school kids and getting them. Texas was.

 

When the Aggies started recruiting regular players in te 60s things changed. Texas was no longer dominant in the rivalry. It's been pretty even every since.

 

I'm not trying to make a case for A&M, I'm just pointing out facts. Facts that must be considered when discussing the rivalry. It has been a very competitive series since the 60s. That's a valid argument. Matter of fact, compare it to some of the other rivalries over the last 25 years, it's one of the closest in college football. I'm sorry if you don't agree, but I think the Corps requirements changing in the 60s is a big part of it.

 

You're right, football in the 20's wasn't the same as in the 80's. But it also isn't the same today as it was in the 90's. That is my point. So many fans (high school, college, or pro) want to exclude particular points in time for that specific reason. Yet they fail to realize, if you're going to omit a period of time when the game changed, well that includes much more than pre-WW2. You can't pick and choose which ones count and which ones don't...because then everyone will have a different reason why one era counts and one doesn't. So you do have to count every game that was played. Because that is one thing that will never change...they were played.