Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Featured Replies

4 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Below is the stretch before the modern era. I start with 1955, but I will note that they only scored 12 points against Texas from 1894 to 1907, winning one game and tying two. Those two touchdowns were spread out over 1903 and 1904. In the same period, Texas scored 63 points. I guess the Aggies were off fighting the Boer War, probably for both sides since neither side really won.

Pre-modern Era

image.png

Here is the modern era (erasure begins in 1984) :

image.png

Here is the post modern era or, the Post Erasure Era:

image.png

In the 32 years since being erased, Texas has hardly won any games against the Aggies. Aggies dominated the national scene while Texas wallowed in irrelevance and eventually disbanded their football program.

I'll note that Senor Umlaut, I think, said that there is no longer a starting date leading to the present that Aggies can cherry pick to claim a winning record against the Longhorns. Thus, the pitiful look over their sloping shoulders to a time 30 years ago, in another century, where they beat us a lot, never played for an MNC, and lost most of their bowl games.

giphy.gif

aggy history / logic.

IMG_9325.gif

  • Replies 91.4k
  • Views 9.6m
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

Posted Images

On 1/7/2026 at 10:09 AM, SurlyBDR said:

Screenshot_20260107_100058_Facebook.jpg

Screenshot_20260107_100112_Facebook.jpg

Screenshot_20260107_100122_Facebook.jpg

Just wanted to point out that texas went 17-1-2 against A&M in the first 20 matchups, and outscored a&m including a 334-49 including a 157-0 stretch to kick it off.

On 1/7/2026 at 10:09 AM, SurlyBDR said:

Screenshot_20260107_100058_Facebook.jpg

Screenshot_20260107_100112_Facebook.jpg

Screenshot_20260107_100122_Facebook.jpg

Uh, Lt Dipshit?

Texas has now won 3 in a row, and 2 of those were back to back at Collie Station.

More from Essay Patna:

"The Truth about 78-37-5

When college football debates its greatest rivalries, the conversation usually begins and ends with all-time records. For Texas A&M fans, seeing the headline number against the University of Texas can feel frustrating without context.

But to understand the Texas A&M–Texas rivalry honestly, you have to acknowledge one critical truth:

This rivalry did not start on a level playing field.

The Myth of the “Equal Start”

Many of college football’s most famous rivalries began between institutions that were fundamentally alike.

Take Michigan and Ohio State. Their rivalry began in 1897. From the very beginning, both were large, co-educational, civilian state universities. They recruited from similar populations, offered similar campus life, and built their programs using nearly identical institutional models.

They started the race at the same starting line.

Texas A&M and Texas did not.

Two Very Different Institutions

For roughly the first 80 years of this rivalry, Texas A&M was not a typical college campus. It was a small, all-male military institution where membership in the Corps of Cadets was mandatory. Every student lived under military discipline, with daily formations, strict conduct codes, and limited personal freedom.

Texas, meanwhile, operated as a large, co-educational civilian university in a growing metropolitan area, offering a traditional college experience and drawing from a far broader recruiting base.

Imagine trying to build a modern football powerhouse today where every player is required to live in barracks, wake up before dawn for drill, and follow a strict military code, while your rival across the state offers a conventional “big city” college environment with a student body several times larger.

That was Texas A&M’s reality until the mid-1960s.

When “Going to War” Was Literal

World War II magnified this imbalance to its extreme.

Because Texas A&M was a mandatory military school, its campus served as a direct pipeline for officer training and active duty. When the nation called, Aggie upperclassmen didn’t simply leave for the draft. They were expected to serve.

By 1943, the Aggie football roster had been so depleted that the team consisted largely of 17-year-olds, earning the nickname the “Kiddie Corps.”

Civilian universities like Texas were impacted by the war as well, but in a fundamentally different way. Programs such as the Navy V-12 allowed elite athletes to remain on campus while receiving military training. In the 1943 Texas–A&M game, Texas fielded several players who had actually played for A&M the year before but were reassigned by the military.

That era alone accounts for a significant portion of the lopsided all-time record.

Same rivalry. Same war. Very different conditions.

The Most Skewed Stretch

From 1940 to 1983, Texas posted a dominant 36-7-1 record against A&M.

This period is often cited as proof of superiority, but it reflects more than coaching decisions or talent cycles. It reflects two programs operating under completely different institutional constraints.

Texas was expanding resources, recruiting reach, and national stature. A&M was still balancing athletics with a unique military mission that restricted roster depth, recruiting flexibility, and continuity.

When the Playing Field Finally Leveled

The rivalry did not truly normalize until Texas A&M fundamentally changed.

Women were admitted in 1963. In 1965, membership in the Corps of Cadets became voluntary. Over time, A&M evolved into a large, co-educational university capable of competing for talent under the same basic conditions as Texas.

Once that transformation took hold, the results changed.

From 1975 until the series paused in 2011, the rivalry stood at 19-19.

No dominance. No imbalance. Just two comparable programs trading wins.

Context Over Comparison

The all-time record between Texas and Texas A&M is real, but it is not self-explanatory. It is a historical artifact shaped by decades when one institution accepted constraints that no modern football program would willingly take on.

For Aggies, those early losses are not a source of embarrassment. They are evidence of an institutional mission rooted in service and sacrifice. While other rivalries grew up as equals, this one was forged between two entirely different worlds.

Understanding that context doesn’t erase the record.

It explains it."

00.jpg

Edited by Vic Mackey

The old we were an all male (since there has been like one chick kick a ball in football once) military school so it wasn't fair.

Meanwhile Army running train on nattys back in the day....

"civilian". christ dude, get a fucking grip.

what it explains it are 3 numbers 78-37-5. You are what your record says you are...

22 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

More from Essay Patna:

"The Truth about 78-37-5

When college football debates its greatest rivalries, the conversation usually begins and ends with all-time records. For Texas A&M fans, seeing the headline number against the University of Texas can feel frustrating without context.

But to understand the Texas A&M–Texas rivalry honestly, you have to acknowledge one critical truth:

This rivalry did not start on a level playing field.

The Myth of the “Equal Start”

Many of college football’s most famous rivalries began between institutions that were fundamentally alike.

Take Michigan and Ohio State. Their rivalry began in 1897. From the very beginning, both were large, co-educational, civilian state universities. They recruited from similar populations, offered similar campus life, and built their programs using nearly identical institutional models.

They started the race at the same starting line.

Texas A&M and Texas did not.

Two Very Different Institutions

For roughly the first 80 years of this rivalry, Texas A&M was not a typical college campus. It was a small, all-male military institution where membership in the Corps of Cadets was mandatory. Every student lived under military discipline, with daily formations, strict conduct codes, and limited personal freedom.

Texas, meanwhile, operated as a large, co-educational civilian university in a growing metropolitan area, offering a traditional college experience and drawing from a far broader recruiting base.

Imagine trying to build a modern football powerhouse today where every player is required to live in barracks, wake up before dawn for drill, and follow a strict military code, while your rival across the state offers a conventional “big city” college environment with a student body several times larger.

That was Texas A&M’s reality until the mid-1960s.

When “Going to War” Was Literal

World War II magnified this imbalance to its extreme.

Because Texas A&M was a mandatory military school, its campus served as a direct pipeline for officer training and active duty. When the nation called, Aggie upperclassmen didn’t simply leave for the draft. They were expected to serve.

By 1943, the Aggie football roster had been so depleted that the team consisted largely of 17-year-olds, earning the nickname the “Kiddie Corps.”

Civilian universities like Texas were impacted by the war as well, but in a fundamentally different way. Programs such as the Navy V-12 allowed elite athletes to remain on campus while receiving military training. In the 1943 Texas–A&M game, Texas fielded several players who had actually played for A&M the year before but were reassigned by the military.

That era alone accounts for a significant portion of the lopsided all-time record.

Same rivalry. Same war. Very different conditions.

The Most Skewed Stretch

From 1940 to 1983, Texas posted a dominant 36-7-1 record against A&M.

This period is often cited as proof of superiority, but it reflects more than coaching decisions or talent cycles. It reflects two programs operating under completely different institutional constraints.

Texas was expanding resources, recruiting reach, and national stature. A&M was still balancing athletics with a unique military mission that restricted roster depth, recruiting flexibility, and continuity.

When the Playing Field Finally Leveled

The rivalry did not truly normalize until Texas A&M fundamentally changed.

Women were admitted in 1963. In 1965, membership in the Corps of Cadets became voluntary. Over time, A&M evolved into a large, co-educational university capable of competing for talent under the same basic conditions as Texas.

Once that transformation took hold, the results changed.

From 1975 until the series paused in 2011, the rivalry stood at 19-19.

No dominance. No imbalance. Just two comparable programs trading wins.

Context Over Comparison

The all-time record between Texas and Texas A&M is real, but it is not self-explanatory. It is a historical artifact shaped by decades when one institution accepted constraints that no modern football program would willingly take on.

For Aggies, those early losses are not a source of embarrassment. They are evidence of an institutional mission rooted in service and sacrifice. While other rivalries grew up as equals, this one was forged between two entirely different worlds.

Understanding that context doesn’t erase the record.

It explains it."

00.jpg

I wonder how they explain the 14-5 record over the last 19 games?

1 hour ago, Vic Mackey said:

More from Essay Patna:

"The Truth about 78-37-5

When college football debates its greatest rivalries, the conversation usually begins and ends with all-time records. For Texas A&M fans, seeing the headline number against the University of Texas can feel frustrating without context.

But to understand the Texas A&M–Texas rivalry honestly, you have to acknowledge one critical truth:

This rivalry did not start on a level playing field.

The Myth of the “Equal Start”

Many of college football’s most famous rivalries began between institutions that were fundamentally alike.

Take Michigan and Ohio State. Their rivalry began in 1897. From the very beginning, both were large, co-educational, civilian state universities. They recruited from similar populations, offered similar campus life, and built their programs using nearly identical institutional models.

They started the race at the same starting line.

Texas A&M and Texas did not.

Two Very Different Institutions

For roughly the first 80 years of this rivalry, Texas A&M was not a typical college campus. It was a small, all-male military institution where membership in the Corps of Cadets was mandatory. Every student lived under military discipline, with daily formations, strict conduct codes, and limited personal freedom.

Texas, meanwhile, operated as a large, co-educational civilian university in a growing metropolitan area, offering a traditional college experience and drawing from a far broader recruiting base.

Imagine trying to build a modern football powerhouse today where every player is required to live in barracks, wake up before dawn for drill, and follow a strict military code, while your rival across the state offers a conventional “big city” college environment with a student body several times larger.

That was Texas A&M’s reality until the mid-1960s.

When “Going to War” Was Literal

World War II magnified this imbalance to its extreme.

Because Texas A&M was a mandatory military school, its campus served as a direct pipeline for officer training and active duty. When the nation called, Aggie upperclassmen didn’t simply leave for the draft. They were expected to serve.

By 1943, the Aggie football roster had been so depleted that the team consisted largely of 17-year-olds, earning the nickname the “Kiddie Corps.”

Civilian universities like Texas were impacted by the war as well, but in a fundamentally different way. Programs such as the Navy V-12 allowed elite athletes to remain on campus while receiving military training. In the 1943 Texas–A&M game, Texas fielded several players who had actually played for A&M the year before but were reassigned by the military.

That era alone accounts for a significant portion of the lopsided all-time record.

Same rivalry. Same war. Very different conditions.

The Most Skewed Stretch

From 1940 to 1983, Texas posted a dominant 36-7-1 record against A&M.

This period is often cited as proof of superiority, but it reflects more than coaching decisions or talent cycles. It reflects two programs operating under completely different institutional constraints.

Texas was expanding resources, recruiting reach, and national stature. A&M was still balancing athletics with a unique military mission that restricted roster depth, recruiting flexibility, and continuity.

When the Playing Field Finally Leveled

The rivalry did not truly normalize until Texas A&M fundamentally changed.

Women were admitted in 1963. In 1965, membership in the Corps of Cadets became voluntary. Over time, A&M evolved into a large, co-educational university capable of competing for talent under the same basic conditions as Texas.

Once that transformation took hold, the results changed.

From 1975 until the series paused in 2011, the rivalry stood at 19-19.

No dominance. No imbalance. Just two comparable programs trading wins.

Context Over Comparison

The all-time record between Texas and Texas A&M is real, but it is not self-explanatory. It is a historical artifact shaped by decades when one institution accepted constraints that no modern football program would willingly take on.

For Aggies, those early losses are not a source of embarrassment. They are evidence of an institutional mission rooted in service and sacrifice. While other rivalries grew up as equals, this one was forged between two entirely different worlds.

Understanding that context doesn’t erase the record.

It explains it."

00.jpg

Stolen valor.

West Point and USNA were football powerhouses when this valor-stealer claims TAMU couldn’t compete.

600+ UT students, staff, and faculty made the ultimate sacrifice during WWII. Is their blood less worthy than Aggies? That argument, and the “tea-sippers” always makes me sick. It spits on the graves of heroes.

8 minutes ago, nnm said:

Stolen valor.

West Point and USNA were football powerhouses when this valor-stealer claims TAMU couldn’t compete.

600+ UT students, staff, and faculty made the ultimate sacrifice during WWII. Is their blood less worthy than Aggies? That argument, and the “tea-sippers” always makes me sick. It spits on the graves of heroes.

It’s all such bullshit. Thousands of Longhorns served in WWI and WWII. Just like they did from the rest of America. A lot served in Korea and Vietnam, too.

If they were so small back before I was born, how did they manage to win the MNC in 1939?

And those two prehistoric championships they claimed after they ran away from their Daddy and the Big 12 ?

1 hour ago, Vic Mackey said:

More from Essay Patna:

"The Truth about 78-37-5

When college football debates its greatest rivalries, the conversation usually begins and ends with all-time records. For Texas A&M fans, seeing the headline number against the University of Texas can feel frustrating without context.

But to understand the Texas A&M–Texas rivalry honestly, you have to acknowledge one critical truth:

This rivalry did not start on a level playing field.

The Myth of the “Equal Start”

Many of college football’s most famous rivalries began between institutions that were fundamentally alike.

Take Michigan and Ohio State. Their rivalry began in 1897. From the very beginning, both were large, co-educational, civilian state universities. They recruited from similar populations, offered similar campus life, and built their programs using nearly identical institutional models.

They started the race at the same starting line.

Texas A&M and Texas did not.

Two Very Different Institutions

For roughly the first 80 years of this rivalry, Texas A&M was not a typical college campus. It was a small, all-male military institution where membership in the Corps of Cadets was mandatory. Every student lived under military discipline, with daily formations, strict conduct codes, and limited personal freedom.

Texas, meanwhile, operated as a large, co-educational civilian university in a growing metropolitan area, offering a traditional college experience and drawing from a far broader recruiting base.

Imagine trying to build a modern football powerhouse today where every player is required to live in barracks, wake up before dawn for drill, and follow a strict military code, while your rival across the state offers a conventional “big city” college environment with a student body several times larger.

That was Texas A&M’s reality until the mid-1960s.

When “Going to War” Was Literal

World War II magnified this imbalance to its extreme.

Because Texas A&M was a mandatory military school, its campus served as a direct pipeline for officer training and active duty. When the nation called, Aggie upperclassmen didn’t simply leave for the draft. They were expected to serve.

By 1943, the Aggie football roster had been so depleted that the team consisted largely of 17-year-olds, earning the nickname the “Kiddie Corps.”

Civilian universities like Texas were impacted by the war as well, but in a fundamentally different way. Programs such as the Navy V-12 allowed elite athletes to remain on campus while receiving military training. In the 1943 Texas–A&M game, Texas fielded several players who had actually played for A&M the year before but were reassigned by the military.

That era alone accounts for a significant portion of the lopsided all-time record.

Same rivalry. Same war. Very different conditions.

The Most Skewed Stretch

From 1940 to 1983, Texas posted a dominant 36-7-1 record against A&M.

This period is often cited as proof of superiority, but it reflects more than coaching decisions or talent cycles. It reflects two programs operating under completely different institutional constraints.

Texas was expanding resources, recruiting reach, and national stature. A&M was still balancing athletics with a unique military mission that restricted roster depth, recruiting flexibility, and continuity.

When the Playing Field Finally Leveled

The rivalry did not truly normalize until Texas A&M fundamentally changed.

Women were admitted in 1963. In 1965, membership in the Corps of Cadets became voluntary. Over time, A&M evolved into a large, co-educational university capable of competing for talent under the same basic conditions as Texas.

Once that transformation took hold, the results changed.

From 1975 until the series paused in 2011, the rivalry stood at 19-19.

No dominance. No imbalance. Just two comparable programs trading wins.

Context Over Comparison

The all-time record between Texas and Texas A&M is real, but it is not self-explanatory. It is a historical artifact shaped by decades when one institution accepted constraints that no modern football program would willingly take on.

For Aggies, those early losses are not a source of embarrassment. They are evidence of an institutional mission rooted in service and sacrifice. While other rivalries grew up as equals, this one was forged between two entirely different worlds.

Understanding that context doesn’t erase the record.

It explains it."

00.jpg

Excuses are a lot like assholes...

19 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

If they were so small back before I was born, how did they manage to win the MNC in 1939?

And those two prehistoric championships they claimed after they ran away from their Daddy and the Big 12 ?

The existence of hitler in the world supercharged Aggy and allowed them to play to their peak. Everything has been downhill in A&M's world since the most red-assed of them all, Adolph Hitler, passed away.

7 minutes ago, PhillyD said:

Excuses are a lot like assholes...

You'll find aggy fingers all over them.

Edited by CumStainedJorts

5 minutes ago, SurlyBDR said:

PUT IT ON THE WALL!!!

Screenshot_20260109_081124_Facebook.jpg

IMG_1539.jpeg

30 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

If you have to write a multi page essay to explain…..

Stolen from somebody else:

Slocum's Razor

16 minutes ago, speed817 said:

Teams that have scored more than 3 points against UM this season:

Everybody they played. Except for Bethune-Cookman and TAMU.

Yes, TAMU is a fraud.

IMG_1540.jpeg

image.png

1 A new modern era is born! Such a contorted child.

Well, if you want to include the Big 12 wins, why not add 2011, your last year there when you actually played these teams and lost to both?

2 0-3 versus the school whose name dare not be spoken.

3 1-1 versus another team with a crushing overall record against you.

Who cares about playoff appearances, playoff wins, scoring touchdowns in the playoffs, conference championships, or relevance? That's not what the modern era is all about!

Brauny is soooo dreamy.

I believe he was a cum laude (never missed the jar) graduate of the A&M Alchemy Department where losses are magically transformed into wins.

Spike that ball, Braun man!

image.png

1 Too bad you're not.

2 You're the best 2-game-losing--streak, 0-1 playoff team, and national joke in the country. I'm sure Miami will note your achievement on their NC trophy should they win it. When they look back on the season, Texas A&M will surely be the game they talk about.

Still, take credit for the loss. You deserve it.

Same bullshit argument on all message boards - both can be true - Miami could be good and aggy can be ass at same time. Maybe Miami played like ass that day and still beat aggy. Message board fanatics are either right or wrong no middle ground. That’s what makes it a fun read and frustrating at the same time.

Not sure who is wearing the Canes' uniforms right now, but the Miami team that played last night would prison rape aggy.

1 minute ago, TOR said:

Not sure who is wearing the Canes' uniforms right now, but the Miami team that played last night would prison rape aggy.

Neutral field with no weird swirling wind to disable the better passing game don't mean nuthin.'

16 minutes ago, Hookem10 said:

Same bullshit argument on all message boards - both can be true - Miami could be good and aggy can be ass at same time. Maybe Miami played like ass that day and still beat aggy. Message board fanatics are either right or wrong no middle ground. That’s what makes it a fun read and frustrating at the same time.

Miami's playcalling and approach was terrible for most that game until the last drive when they actually did what they do best, and that's pound the ball on the ground. Ran it straight in for a TD. Their playcalling up until that point fed right into aggy's strength. Miami's defense is also very fast and physical and this caused a lot of issues for aggy offense. It made for a defensive slugfest and some very ugly football all day.

Somewhere on this thread I posted an estimate of male student enrollment at A&M and UT for one particular year "back when". The numbers were pretty close. The "but Sip U was coed" argument mostly works against the Aggies.

8 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

Hang the banner!FB_IMG_1767975125544.jpg

I laughed way way too hard at this. Thank you sir!

22 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Somewhere on this thread I posted an estimate of male student enrollment at A&M and UT for one particular year "back when". The numbers were pretty close. The "but Sip U was coed" argument mostly works against the Aggies.

I think their argument is that before the women folk showed up, they were able to frolic all day in the quad playing tummysticks and thus had no time to practice football. Once the axe wounds showed up and destroyed their nirvana, they had a lot more time on their hands.

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...
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.