Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
18 minutes ago, Park Gothic said:

So you get what we had here last year - which is the way Aggie wants it. Well, he gets it

My avatar approves. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Park Gothic said:

This past athletic year had to be the most demoralizing for them in 15 years. Until they fled to the SEC, they had to be reminded every year that we were better than them. Maybe they would get up in one sport for a little while, but never for very long and never in all three. But when they moved to the SEC they never had to have the lie laid bare. They could keep telling themselves, year in and year out, "We're better than the sips. They play in the BDF. Even though we're meh in the SEC, we'd be dominating them and that conference." Even when our move to the SEC was announced, they could tell themselves how great it would be to watch us get pantsed in their superior conference. The younger part of their fanbase that doesn't remember them in the Big 12 probably even believed it, too. 

So you get what we had here last year - which is the way Aggie wants it. Well, he gets it.

So now you understand why they fired Jimbo. 
 

They were so scared Jimbo wouldn’t beat us, that they hired a new coach. If Sark had been on a 8-5 trajectory again in 2023 I have 0 doubts they would have stayed Jimbo. As usual they panicked. 
1. New coach beats evil sips, great move.

2. New coach gets beat by evil sips, needs time to clear crap roster provided by old coach. 
 

Win, win for ags . Just like most American companies, only today’s stock market means any thing.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Yep. The new coach will root out all the drug users and trash the old guy left. We all heard the stories. Coach New Guy will get the most out of what we have and bring in his guys. We'll see a big difference next year!

Well, it's just the first year for Coach New Guy. Coach Ebil Toxic Longhorn had a worse record his first year at toxic university. I think I guys played harder for Coach New Guy. It takes three years to install your program and get your guys. Can't wai for next season.

Injuries, refs, t.u. turning everybody against us. I still back Coach Sorta New Guy. Grow a pair and get behind the team.

Fucking Coach Old Guy destroyed this program. Three years and same underperformance. Fire him! He shows no emotion. Halftime adjustments!  hurd derr!

Well, Coach New guy seems to have that swagger about him. Reveille licked his hand. He'll root out all the bad apples....

You forgot one.

Coach New Guy always gets A&M.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted (edited)

My cycle was general not specific.

ETA: I was around when they replaced Gene Stallings with Emory Bellard. All of my Aggie friends were were talking about Bellard cleaning up the awful mess of drug use and laziness on the team. There was no Information Highway yet, so you couldn't follow the rest very closely. Over the years (gulp, decades. Yikes!) the rest has been observable with their coaching changes. TexAgs has only made it more evident.

Tradition.

Edited by RomaVicta
Posted

I'm not sure they even would have taken the risk on Sark.      The BMA and AD dept aka texags would have had to be on the same page, maybe the would have been.    Now they act like hiring Sark was an obvious no brainer.    

Pros:   He was at Alabama so gets SEC.    Good offensive mind

Cons:   7 win steve, personal issue/USC flame out.   Most success has been as coordinator.

Posted
25 minutes ago, Mr. Drummond said:

I'm not sure they even would have taken the risk on Sark.      The BMA and AD dept aka texags would have had to be on the same page, maybe the would have been.    Now they act like hiring Sark was an obvious no brainer.    

Pros:   He was at Alabama so gets SEC.    Good offensive mind

Cons:   7 win steve, personal issue/USC flame out.   Most success has been as coordinator.

I'm still honestly surprised we went and got Sark

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted
5 minutes ago, HuttNuts said:

I'm still honestly surprised we went and got Sark

Same.  I don't think the message boards were particularly happy about it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, Mr. Drummond said:

I'm not sure they even would have taken the risk on Sark.      The BMA and AD dept aka texags would have had to be on the same page, maybe the would have been.    Now they act like hiring Sark was an obvious no brainer.    

Pros:   He was at Alabama so gets SEC.    Good offensive mind

Cons:   7 win steve, personal issue/USC flame out.   Most success has been as coordinator.

Sark would have been back on the sauce in six months, tops, if he'd been hired by aggy. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Mr. Drummond said:

For sure, but luckily our AD isn't run by the monkeys in the zoo.    Theirs is.   

The literal monkey resides with UT's special teams coach.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, HuttNuts said:

I'm still honestly surprised we went and got Sark

Sark was recommended by Saban, that was the surprise.

Saban was everyone's first choice, and we did what the wise do: having approached the Best and been turned down, we asked him who's the Next Best, and he told us to get Steve... and we did. 

So far, so good.

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
22 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Yep. The new coach will root out all the drug users and trash the old guy left. We all heard the stories. Coach New Guy will get the most out of what we have and bring in his guys. We'll see a big difference next year!

Well, it's just the first year for Coach New Guy. Coach Ebil Toxic Longhorn had a worse record his first year at toxic university. I think I guys played harder for Coach New Guy. It takes three years to install your program and get your guys. Can't wai for next season.

Injuries, refs, t.u. turning everybody against us. I still back Coach Sorta New Guy. Grow a pair and get behind the team.

Fucking Coach Old Guy destroyed this program. Three years and same underperformance. Fire him! He shows no emotion. Halftime adjustments!  hurd derr!

Well, Coach New guy seems to have that swagger about him. Reveille licked his hand. He'll root out all the bad apples....

New coach gets us. We claimed old coach gets us, until we decided he didn't get us.  

Now we know old coach NEVER got us. Ever! 

Posted
17 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

New coach gets us. We claimed old coach gets us, until we decided he didn't get us.  

Now we know old coach NEVER got us. Ever! 

Old coach got them. Got them for over $100 million.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Getafix said:

 

Lulz ... after Tech and Baylor 😂  😂  😂.

 

image.thumb.png.a2a81f8babe049e659f7677bea5abe9b.png

image.thumb.png.a1e7adc725d2013eaa7b3eea8a643f42.png

image.thumb.png.38c417e2d18301fadcf4fc765fc3f22d.png

image.thumb.png.4119a9d778103770c0544b15a6bd2127.png

 

 

Graham will be along soon to set them straight. In his rankings, which have miraculously reappeared after disappearing following the aggy game last year, he as Texas 7th in the conference. Aggy is 3.  

Posted
23 hours ago, WBT said:

Same.  I don't think the message boards were particularly happy about it.

People were pissed and tired of losing.  We wanted Urban Meyer because we were tired of watching Texas get its teeth kicked in for 1.5 decades.  Lucky for us, Steve, NIL and Quinn all aligned perfectly at the right time to allow us to build a perpetual fuckstomping machine.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
14 hours ago, Getafix said:

 

Lulz ... after Tech and Baylor 😂  😂  😂.

 

image.thumb.png.a2a81f8babe049e659f7677bea5abe9b.png

image.thumb.png.a1e7adc725d2013eaa7b3eea8a643f42.png

image.thumb.png.38c417e2d18301fadcf4fc765fc3f22d.png

image.thumb.png.4119a9d778103770c0544b15a6bd2127.png

 

 

I would bet money that SMU would beat aggy on a neutral field this season. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
On 5/6/2025 at 4:26 PM, Park Gothic said:

This past athletic year had to be the most demoralizing for them in 15 years. Until they fled to the SEC, they had to be reminded every year that we were better than them. Maybe they would get up in one sport for a little while, but never for very long and never in all three.

I get that the big 3 are the sports that drive most engagement, but it is so frustrating (as a more than occasional  track fan) to watch them completely ignore their track and field team members who have been Olympians and/or future world champions. They have a handful of dedicated fans on their message board but as someone who has attended meets on their campus, most of the aggies are oblivious. It's a sport in which they've had a fairly decent level of success both individually and team-wise (besides meat judging) and while it will always be a challenge to face traditional powerhouse teams such as Oregon, Arkansas, Georgia, and USC; with only a little more $$ and attention they could actually have something of which to be proud and stop chasing the futility of the rest of it. But as I said at the beginning, I get it. It's football, baseball, and basketball, and thus every year the first in line for the roller coaster are the maroon clad ever hopeful aggie fans.

 

*The latest national rankings for DI Outdoor T&F:

Men: 1)USC 2) A&M 3) Tennesee 4) Nebraska 5) Georgia.......17) Texas

Women: 1) Georgia 2) A&M  3) USC  4) Arkansas 5) BYU.......13) Texas

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I get that the big 3 are the sports that drive most engagement, but it is so frustrating (as a more than occasional  track fan) to watch them completely ignore their track and field team members who have been Olympians and/or future world champions. They have a handful of dedicated fans on their message board but as someone who has attended meets on their campus, most of the aggies are oblivious. It's a sport in which they've had a fairly decent level of success both individually and team-wise (besides meat judging) and while it will always be a challenge to face traditional powerhouse teams such as Oregon, Arkansas, Georgia, and USC; with only a little more $$ and attention they could actually have something of which to be proud and stop chasing the futility of the rest of it. But as I said at the beginning, I get it. It's football, baseball, and basketball, and thus every year the first in line for the roller coaster are the maroon clad ever hopeful aggie fans.

 

*The latest national rankings for DI Outdoor T&F:

Men: 1)USC 2) A&M 3) Tennesee 4) Nebraska 5) Georgia.......17) Texas

Women: 1) Georgia 2) A&M  3) USC  4) Arkansas 5) BYU.......13) Texas

 

How do we improve our track program? 

Posted
38 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

How do we improve our track program? 

I don't have enough specialized knowledge of this program to specifically answer that. They did have some solid athletes graduate with both teams and the women also had the fortune of having some good younger athletes that are still around to keep the team in contention while the men lost reliable point winner Leo Neugebauer. The women did, after all, finish 3rd outdoors last season, while A&M was number 10. I'd say that is pretty good and coming off of that they will need to rebuild a little.

Don't follow recruiting as much as I used to and talent jamming is a thing (Oregon and Georgia in distance and sprints respectively) are pretty good at that as are some of the other top schools (USC repeatedly capitalizes on being the most populous state with a pretty damn good track reputation). Repeated success (similar to football) often has students wanting to attend the number one school, but failing that an athlete will try and get on at a school in the same conference. Most of the recruiting standards (ii.e. event times/distance etc) for the SEC schools are similar so I sometimes wonder if it's just a case of not enough face time to go after the unpolished gems. It's great to land the athlete who's already appeared at a national or state meet whether in-state or out, or to look around elsewhere in the world but it's a tough balancing act and it takes up a lot of time. I'm not going to go into coaching staffs at the various schools; that runs into too much heresay.

The scholarship changes that have been proposed for Texas unis may become problematic as well for typical non revenue sports, and they were already having issues. NIL would go a long way I suspect. Some schools' collectives give more to their track & field/xc and I don't keep track (!) of that other than noticing those collectives make a point of putting it in their profile.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

How do we improve our track program? 

Investing $300,000 in NIL would buy 12 - 15 point producing athletes if you avoid the sprinters.  It wouldn’t take much to compete at the Championship level.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
22 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

New coach gets us. We claimed old coach gets us, until we decided he didn't get us.  

Now we know old coach NEVER got us. Ever! 

He got’em alright….to the tune of $100,000,000.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 hours ago, Armybrat said:

He got’em alright….to the tune of $100,000,000.

I make it $123,000,000.

$45,000,000 to coach.

$78,000,000 to stop coaching.

Apparently the replacement is paid less to do the coaching than Jimbo is paid to not do any coaching. 

Advantage, aggy.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
33 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

I make it $123,000,000.

$45,000,000 to coach.

$78,000,000 to stop coaching.

Apparently the replacement is paid less to do the coaching than Jimbo is paid to not do any coaching. 

Advantage, aggy.

 

Those dumbasses paid Jimbo $20.5 million a year for every year he coached. Just stunning. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Deej said:

Those dumbasses paid Jimbo $20.5 million a year for every year he coached. Just stunning. 

SITTING. National Championship. Coach.

  • Haha 2
Posted

Bless you, @JesusSweatDuck. Just the perfect little excercise to separate the week from the weekend!

  image.png.f5fcd7e1af5c58425ada0f0eb068706a.png

image.png.d2e18cafc60c40d16f9bb60a47dbff7b.png

 

image.png.32411bb91e386e271ff18ebbfe944966.png

 

Brevity, my friend, and lay off the useless, inaccurate qualifiers. And, for God's Sake, active voice!!!

image.thumb.png.d9c692c6dd31682aaf9cd2d0bc113448.png

 

image.thumb.png.5961d33b326ff8ef364fdde095d8d9b3.png

1 It never gets more bare-knuckeled, no-holds-barred, and dirty than someone inviting one to join something and saying yes. Cover the children's eyes?

2 I get the feeling that constant state of astonishment is another Aggie tradition. "You see that? He just started a car by pushing it!!"

3 Compliments on your realization about the void of said attachments.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

 

Bless you, @JesusSweatDuck. Just the perfect little excercise to separate the week from the weekend!

  image.png.f5fcd7e1af5c58425ada0f0eb068706a.png

image.png.d2e18cafc60c40d16f9bb60a47dbff7b.png

 

image.png.32411bb91e386e271ff18ebbfe944966.png

 

Brevity, my friend, and lay off the useless, inaccurate qualifiers. And, for God's Sake, active voice!!!

image.thumb.png.d9c692c6dd31682aaf9cd2d0bc113448.png

 

image.thumb.png.5961d33b326ff8ef364fdde095d8d9b3.png

1 It never gets more bare-knuckeled, no-holds-barred, and dirty than someone inviting one to join something and saying yes. Cover the children's eyes?

2 I get the feeling that constant state of astonishment is another Aggie tradition. "You see that? He just started a car by pushing it!!"

3 Compliments on your realization about the void of said attachments.

Good stuff, but in fairness, the voice was active. I think you may have meant for the writer to cut back on unnecessary and inappropriate use of the progressive.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Magus Ossis said:

Good stuff, but in fairness, the voice was active. I think you may have meant for the writer to cut back on unnecessary and inappropriate use of the progressive.

I'm not a great grammarian. I think the change makes it better, but I may surely be mistaken about how I label things.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

 

Well, crappy day for our baseball and softball teams ... so here's some salve - 

- Aggies were playing Mizzou.  That's 0 - 24 (in conference) Mizzou.

- Top of the 9th, Mizzou trails 6-3.

- Mizzou scores 6, Aggies go el zippo, Mizzou wins 9-3.

Whoop!

 

image.thumb.png.34610e5e2bef61249d9d321e5e6aaea7.png

 

image.thumb.png.f4cd177903a61f3dc93b9eed621c6af5.png

 

image.thumb.png.30525792347bfa4b2af80f9112e212c7.png

Lulz.

image.thumb.png.7a99fb49470eaaf8c028e7ad3a8d5975.png

 

image.thumb.png.b431971a63a389e4b018386e6e3eaa6c.png

 

image.thumb.png.51f26f6b6c02fece677e99a1d120df37.png

 

The Zen Master said "We'll see ..."

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...