Jump to content

πŸ‘πŸ» Texas A&M Aggies 2024 πŸ‘πŸ»


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Lobo97 said:

You're forgetting a few...

Β 

Kenny Hill

Kyle Allen

Kyler Murray

Nick Starkel

Β 

Starting QB's transferring from A&M isn't new, nor was it specific to Jimbo. It's been going on for a while now, and I asked a similar question a week or so ago, but never got much of a response.Β 

Β 

Everyone is so quick to want to change the QB like most people change their socks, but maybe that's the problem. They don't give anyone long enough to develop at the position. Think about it, the only QB since Manziel that A&M has given consecutive years to is Kellen Mond.Β 

The fans hated MondΒ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lobo97 said:

You're forgetting a few...

Β 

Kenny Hill

Kyle Allen

Kyler Murray

Nick Starkel

Β 

Starting QB's transferring from A&M isn't new, nor was it specific to Jimbo. It's been going on for a while now, and I asked a similar question a week or so ago, but never got much of a response.Β 

Β 

Everyone is so quick to want to change the QB like most people change their socks, but maybe that's the problem. They don't give anyone long enough to develop at the position. Think about it, the only QB since Manziel that A&M has given consecutive years to is Kellen Mond.Β 

I know there were a few before the ones I listed, but trying to stick around the portal era. To your point though, outside of Kellen Mond, I have yet to see a Texas A&M QB start back to back consecutive years in the last decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lobo97 said:

You're forgetting a few...

Β 

Kenny Hill

Kyle Allen

Kyler Murray

Nick Starkel

Β 

Starting QB's transferring from A&M isn't new, nor was it specific to Jimbo. It's been going on for a while now, and I asked a similar question a week or so ago, but never got much of a response.Β 

Β 

Everyone is so quick to want to change the QB like most people change their socks, but maybe that's the problem. They don't give anyone long enough to develop at the position. Think about it, the only QB since Manziel that A&M has given consecutive years to is Kellen Mond.Β 

The problem since fisher took over has been injuries. Weigman has not suited up for more than 5 straight games since high school and even then missed time in both junior and senior seasons. He’s made of glass and unfortunately every time he starts to get in a rhythm as a player gets hurt and has to rebuild the momentum again. For an upperclassman, he’s relatively still inexperienced to a lot of in game scenarios. If you can protect him he’s a very solid QB, but A&M can’t protect him so it’s a moot point.Β 
Β 

I actually think that most programs are going through this to some degree. If you’re not winning 10+games, the pressure is always on the starting QB regardless of program. Typically good QB play gets you 10 wins in college football regardless of defense or any other factor. So if you’re not at that mark as a program and you recruit well, there is always calls for the backup to see if he’s the guy. This isn’t an Aggie thing, they just have been one of the more high profile schools going through it.Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ETXfan16 said:

I know there were a few before the ones I listed, but trying to stick around the portal era. To your point though, outside of Kellen Mond, I have yet to see a Texas A&M QB start back to back consecutive years in the last decade.

See above post, but honestly injuries have been an issue for everyone since mond. Haynes king would have been a multi year starter for fisher if not for injuries. Weigman as well.Β 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WETSU said:

The problem since fisher took over has been injuries. Weigman has not suited up for more than 5 straight games since high school and even then missed time in both junior and senior seasons. He’s made of glass and unfortunately every time he starts to get in a rhythm as a player gets hurt and has to rebuild the momentum again. For an upperclassman, he’s relatively still inexperienced to a lot of in game scenarios. If you can protect him he’s a very solid QB, but A&M can’t protect him so it’s a moot point.Β 
Β 

I actually think that most programs are going through this to some degree. If you’re not winning 10+games, the pressure is always on the starting QB regardless of program. Typically good QB play gets you 10 wins in college football regardless of defense or any other factor. So if you’re not at that mark as a program and you recruit well, there is always calls for the backup to see if he’s the guy. This isn’t an Aggie thing, they just have been one of the more high profile schools going through it.Β 

But this problem hasn't only existed since Fisher, nor has it always been injuries.Β 

Β 

Look, I'm not trying to troll A&M here. I've actually stated on multiple occasions over the years that I don't understand why A&M has historically not been able to put it together. They're a major program, in a major conference (not just now, but always have been), with the same resources as everyone else, but it's always the same story with them.

Β 

Kenny Hill, Kyle Allen, Kyler Murray, Trevor Knight - ALL prior to Jimbo Fisher. And this issue with any of them was not injuries.Β 

Β 

Kenny Hill - Took over as the starter in '14 after Manzeil left. Started the first 8 games, benched against Bama for Kyle Allen.Β 

Kyle Allen - Started final 5 games of '14 and most of '15.Β 

Trevor Knight - Started all of '16

Meanwhile, Kyler Murray was there in '15 and never given a chance. Transferred to OU and won the Heisman.Β 

Haynes King split time with Calzada in '21, started in '22 until he got hurt, and lost his job during that time to none other than Weigman. He's now having success at GT. He lost his job because the fanbase shouted loud enough in favor of Weigman that King never even had a chance to get his job back. Now, they're doing the same thing to Weigman.Β 

Β 

I truly the reason the problem at A&M continues from year to year is because when someone points out a problem, rather than acknowledging it and fixing it, they make excuses...i.e., the QB situation. As I said a couple of weeks ago, at what point does A&M try something different? Stop changing QB's like we change socks and give someone time to develop.Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lobo97 said:

But this problem hasn't only existed since Fisher, nor has it always been injuries.Β 

Β 

Look, I'm not trying to troll A&M here. I've actually stated on multiple occasions over the years that I don't understand why A&M has historically not been able to put it together. They're a major program, in a major conference (not just now, but always have been), with the same resources as everyone else, but it's always the same story with them.

Β 

Kenny Hill, Kyle Allen, Kyler Murray, Trevor Knight - ALL prior to Jimbo Fisher. And this issue with any of them was not injuries.Β 

Β 

Kenny Hill - Took over as the starter in '14 after Manzeil left. Started the first 8 games, benched against Bama for Kyle Allen.Β 

Kyle Allen - Started final 5 games of '14 and most of '15.Β 

Trevor Knight - Started all of '16

Meanwhile, Kyler Murray was there in '15 and never given a chance. Transferred to OU and won the Heisman.Β 

Haynes King split time with Calzada in '21, started in '22 until he got hurt, and lost his job during that time to none other than Weigman. He's now having success at GT. He lost his job because the fanbase shouted loud enough in favor of Weigman that King never even had a chance to get his job back. Now, they're doing the same thing to Weigman.Β 

Β 

I truly the reason the problem at A&M continues from year to year is because when someone points out a problem, rather than acknowledging it and fixing it, they make excuses...i.e., the QB situation. As I said a couple of weeks ago, at what point does A&M try something different? Stop changing QB's like we change socks and give someone time to develop.Β 

I'll even dig a little deeper. I'm also not trolling and WETSU can tell me I'm wrong because he knows way more about A&M than I ever will, but from an outsider perspective (orange glasses off btw), the whole Texas A&M entity does not have a bar to meet because there's never really been a bar set. And if you don't know where the bar is set, how are you supposed to reach it? That doesn't apply to just the football program, but to the athletic administration as a whole. Example:Β 

After the BG win, many Aggies I know said to me "well Bowling Green played close to Penn State, they are actually a good football team." No. Just no. You are Texas A&M. You are in the SEC with every resource imaginable. You have more talented players across that roster. You should not be justifying a win over a MAC team because they played PSU close. Be better than Penn State. Have expectations that are bigger than squeaking by Bowling Green or losing to a Notre Dame team who threw their first touchdown pass in week 4. Lion can say "any win is a good win" but that's the equivalent to "winning is hard". It's a terrible mindset to have as a fanbase and a program, and believe us when you say you do not want to hear that every Saturday. The QB turnover rate is so high because it's always been the duct tape over the hole of a water tower.

Orange glasses back on - it's why Charlie Strong and Tom Herman were canned after 3 seasons each. Texas got the taste of success in the 2000's. That bar was set and anything under than bar is completely unacceptable. CDC knew that, and Texas has been on an upward trajectory since he was hired. It starts with the AD, then the coaches, then the players.Β 

Β 

Β 

Β 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ETXfan16 said:

I'll even dig a little deeper. I'm also not trolling and WETSU can tell me I'm wrong because he knows way more about A&M than I ever will, but from an outsider perspective (orange glasses off btw), the whole Texas A&M entity does not have a bar to meet because there's never really been a bar set. And if you don't know where the bar is set, how are you supposed to reach it? That doesn't apply to just the football program, but to the athletic administration as a whole. Example:Β 

After the BG win, many Aggies I know said to me "well Bowling Green played close to Penn State, they are actually a good football team." No. Just no. You are Texas A&M. You are in the SEC with every resource imaginable. You have more talented players across that roster. You should not be justifying a win over a MAC team because they played PSU close. Be better than Penn State. Have expectations that are bigger than squeaking by Bowling Green or losing to a Notre Dame team who threw their first touchdown pass in week 4. Lion can say "any win is a good win" but that's the equivalent to "winning is hard". It's a terrible mindset to have as a fanbase and a program, and believe us when you say you do not want to hear that every Saturday. The QB turnover rate is so high because it's always been the duct tape over the hole of a water tower.

Orange glasses back on - it's why Charlie Strong and Tom Herman were canned after 3 seasons each. Texas got the taste of success in the 2000's. That bar was set and anything under than bar is completely unacceptable. CDC knew that, and Texas has been on an upward trajectory since he was hired. It starts with the AD, then the coaches, then the players.Β 

Β 

Β 

Β 

Penn State is not as good as people make them out to be; and that's not me saying that now, I've said it for the last 2 years. They play good, disciplined defense, but they just don't have a lot of offense. They had 9 games last year where the QB threw for less than 210 yards. 6 times where he threw less than 200, and twice where he threw under 100. And only once in any of those games did they have a 100 yard rusher. They lost 2 of those 9 games. It also helps that outside of OSU and MI, they don't play that tough of a schedule, and they don't even play MI this year.Β 

Β 

I also agree on the, 'any win is a good win', argument. No, it's not. Maybe in the NFL, but not in college where style points matter. And for anyone that disagrees with that, I'd love to hear their explanation for why Texas jumped Georgia in the AP poll, even after Georgia had a 'good' win against Kentucky.Β 

Β 

Winning matters and you can be happy when your team escapes with a win, but that is not the same thing as saying, any win is a good win.Β 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ETXfan16 said:

I'll even dig a little deeper. I'm also not trolling and WETSU can tell me I'm wrong because he knows way more about A&M than I ever will, but from an outsider perspective (orange glasses off btw), the whole Texas A&M entity does not have a bar to meet because there's never really been a bar set. And if you don't know where the bar is set, how are you supposed to reach it? That doesn't apply to just the football program, but to the athletic administration as a whole. Example:Β 

After the BG win, many Aggies I know said to me "well Bowling Green played close to Penn State, they are actually a good football team." No. Just no. You are Texas A&M. You are in the SEC with every resource imaginable. You have more talented players across that roster. You should not be justifying a win over a MAC team because they played PSU close. Be better than Penn State. Have expectations that are bigger than squeaking by Bowling Green or losing to a Notre Dame team who threw their first touchdown pass in week 4. Lion can say "any win is a good win" but that's the equivalent to "winning is hard". It's a terrible mindset to have as a fanbase and a program, and believe us when you say you do not want to hear that every Saturday. The QB turnover rate is so high because it's always been the duct tape over the hole of a water tower.

Orange glasses back on - it's why Charlie Strong and Tom Herman were canned after 3 seasons each. Texas got the taste of success in the 2000's. That bar was set and anything under than bar is completely unacceptable. CDC knew that, and Texas has been on an upward trajectory since he was hired. It starts with the AD, then the coaches, then the players.Β 

Β 

Β 

Β 

Once again….McNeese State is NOT a good win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, YeahBuddy said:

Once again….McNeese State is NOT a good win

Games against McNeese State, UTSA, ULM, are never "good wins". They are games to get "good reps". They are glorified scrimmages for guys to get reps and experience. That's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ETXfan16 said:

Games against McNeese State, UTSA, ULM, are never "good wins". They are games to get "good reps". They are glorified scrimmages for guys to get reps and experience. That's it.

No argument there ! Making a good win is a solid performance, however the ones have an issue is just trolling! Just like Louisiana Monroe and utsa were good wins. Not impressive wins.Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lion7000 said:

No argument there ! Making a good win is a solid performance, however the ones have an issue is just trolling! Just like Louisiana Monroe and utsa were good wins. Not impressive wins.Β 

I think this is where we disagree. Beating teams like LA Monroe and UTSA were impressive, but not good. They were impressive because of the way TX dominated both games, from every facet. They were not 'good' wins because of the quality of the opponent. When OU beat TX last year, it was a good win because of who they beat, but it was not impressive (so much so, most people, OU fans included, still felt TX was the better team). When TX beat Alabama it was both a great win, and impressive.Β 

Β 

There is a difference between a good win and an impressive win, and you clearly recognize that. It's simply in how you differentiate the two. I view them opposite of what you are.Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, ETXfan16 said:

I'll even dig a little deeper. I'm also not trolling and WETSU can tell me I'm wrong because he knows way more about A&M than I ever will, but from an outsider perspective (orange glasses off btw), the whole Texas A&M entity does not have a bar to meet because there's never really been a bar set. And if you don't know where the bar is set, how are you supposed to reach it? That doesn't apply to just the football program, but to the athletic administration as a whole. Example:Β 

After the BG win, many Aggies I know said to me "well Bowling Green played close to Penn State, they are actually a good football team." No. Just no. You are Texas A&M. You are in the SEC with every resource imaginable. You have more talented players across that roster. You should not be justifying a win over a MAC team because they played PSU close. Be better than Penn State. Have expectations that are bigger than squeaking by Bowling Green or losing to a Notre Dame team who threw their first touchdown pass in week 4. Lion can say "any win is a good win" but that's the equivalent to "winning is hard". It's a terrible mindset to have as a fanbase and a program, and believe us when you say you do not want to hear that every Saturday. The QB turnover rate is so high because it's always been the duct tape over the hole of a water tower.

Orange glasses back on - it's why Charlie Strong and Tom Herman were canned after 3 seasons each. Texas got the taste of success in the 2000's. That bar was set and anything under than bar is completely unacceptable. CDC knew that, and Texas has been on an upward trajectory since he was hired. It starts with the AD, then the coaches, then the players.Β 

Β 

Β 

Β 

All of this is very spot on. A&Ms problems have always been about vision. They are too stuck in the good ole boy mentality. They care too much about the court of public opinion. The biggest threats in the region, Texas and LSU, are stone cold assassins in how they view athletics. There is zero care about outside perception…there are zero rules that will be left unbent… there is zero care about anything other than wins and championships. Nothing else matters. A&M has never had that killer instinct. There are several times they have appeared close to being there, but they haven’t reached it yet. I think it will happen eventually, but they just aren’t there yet.Β 

Edited by WETSU
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Lobo97 said:

I think this is where we disagree. Beating teams like LA Monroe and UTSA were impressive, but not good. They were impressive because of the way TX dominated both games, from every facet. They were not 'good' wins because of the quality of the opponent. When OU beat TX last year, it was a good win because of who they beat, but it was not impressive (so much so, most people, OU fans included, still felt TX was the better team). When TX beat Alabama it was both a great win, and impressive.Β 

Β 

There is a difference between a good win and an impressive win, and you clearly recognize that. It's simply in how you differentiate the two. I view them opposite of what you are.Β 

A&M needed a win after a subpar performance offensively against the Irish. I wasn’t bragging or saying it was impressive! Those teams you should beat soundly like bowling green. A closer win is a tad concerning especially to a causal fanbase!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, WETSU said:

All of this is very spot on. A&Ms problems have always been about vision. They are too stuck in the good ole boy mentality. They care too much about the court of public opinion. The biggest threats in the region, Texas and LSU, are stone cold assassins in how they view athletics. There is zero care about outside perception…there are zero rules that will be left unbent… there is zero care about anything other than wins and championships. Nothing else matters. A&M has never had that killer instinct. There are several times they have appeared close to being there, but they haven’t reached it yet. I think it will happen eventually, but they just aren’t there yet.Β 

Would you elaborate on them caring about the court of public opinion? Β Are you referring to just Aggie alum or the general public?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lion7000 said:

A&M needed a win after a subpar performance offensively against the Irish. I wasn’t bragging or saying it was impressive! Those teams you should beat soundly like bowling green. A closer win is a tad concerning especially to a causal fanbase!

I never claimed that you were bragging. I'm simply giving my opinion of what I think constitutes a good win. It's always good to get a win, but that's not the same thing as saying it was a 'good' win. Make sense?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, WETSU said:

All of this is very spot on. A&Ms problems have always been about vision. They are too stuck in the good ole boy mentality. They care too much about the court of public opinion. The biggest threats in the region, Texas and LSU, are stone cold assassins in how they view athletics. There is zero care about outside perception…there are zero rules that will be left unbent… there is zero care about anything other than wins and championships. Nothing else matters. A&M has never had that killer instinct. There are several times they have appeared close to being there, but they haven’t reached it yet. I think it will happen eventually, but they just aren’t there yet.Β 

This is a good way to put it. It seems like A&M is scared to play hardball, which is essentially leaving yourself behind the competition.Β 

Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lion7000 said:

A&M needed a win after a subpar performance offensively against the Irish. I wasn’t bragging or saying it was impressive! Those teams you should beat soundly like bowling green. A closer win is a tad concerning especially to a causal fanbase!

I see what you're saying. A good win in terms of boosting team moral. I can understand that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lobo97 said:

I never claimed that you were bragging. I'm simply giving my opinion of what I think constitutes a good win. It's always good to get a win, but that's not the same thing as saying it was a 'good' win. Make sense?

East Tex fan kinda put it into perspective!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lobo97 said:

I never claimed that you were bragging. I'm simply giving my opinion of what I think constitutes a good win. It's always good to get a win, but that's not the same thing as saying it was a 'good' win. Make sense?

Makes sense to most people

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ETXfan16 said:

This is a good way to put it. It seems like A&M is scared to play hardball, which is essentially leaving yourself behind the competition.Β 

Β 

Buying the #1 class isn’t playing hardball? Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, YeahBuddy said:

Buying the #1 class isn’t playing hardball? Β 

You mean the number 1 class that there has still been not a single piece of evidence they were β€œpaid” any more than any other normal NIL class?Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WETSU said:

You mean the number 1 class that there has still been not a single piece of evidence they were β€œpaid” any more than any other normal NIL class?Β 

No, the ones that transferred out saying they never rec’d payments they were promised. Β 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, YeahBuddy said:

Would you elaborate on them caring about the court of public opinion? Β Are you referring to just Aggie alum or the general public?

Both. A&M would have never hired a guy like Sark who had a history of drinking to the point it cost him his job. Texas didn’t care about that ( and I applaud them for that) and hired him anyway. Texas is willing to do whatever it takes to win, A&M is only willing to do certain things.Β 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...