Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Tex Pete said:

I’m sure they’re denying our 1970 championship since it was a UPI championship (the coaches’ poll). But it was awarded at the time we won it. And the POTUS handed Coach Royal the trophy.

Unlike their fake championships “awarded” 7 decades after the fact. 

Nixon handed DKR the 1969 trophy but your point is valid.  1970 title is way more valid than those aggy computer ones from a century ago that were "awarded" decades after the season.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Replies 87.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Deej

    2287

  • Longboard Horn

    2285

  • Randolph Duke

    2146

  • markstanco

    1763

Posted
Just now, Not a cat said:

Nixon handed DKR the 1969 trophy but your point is valid.  1970 title is way more valid than those aggy computer ones from a century ago that were "awarded" decades after the season.

You don't even need this qualifier.

Texas' 1970 Coaches' Poll title is valid.  That's all that needs to be said.

The Coaches' Poll and the AP Poll titles are valid, and have always been valid, regardless of their timing. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
2 minutes ago, utee94 said:

You don't even need this qualifier.

Texas' 1970 Coaches' Poll title is valid.  That's all that needs to be said.

The Coaches' Poll and the AP Poll titles are valid, and have always been valid, regardless of their timing. 

Can’t we claim 3-4 more if we wanted to be pathetic losers like aggy? 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Can’t we claim 3-4 more if we wanted to be pathetic losers like aggy? 

Even more than that, I think.  But I've never looked into it closely, because we're not pathetic losers. :)

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
35 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Can’t we claim 3-4 more if we wanted to be pathetic losers like aggy? 

Actually just looked it up- if we wanted to be like aggy and add any title awarded by anyone, including retroactively, we could add 1914, 41, 68, 77 and 81.  

Source - https://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160521052546/http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2015/fbs.pdf

Starts at page 107. 

It's funny because a couple of those "titles" are from the billingsley margin of victory calculation and the sagarin ELO chess formulas which awarded the 2 that aggy touts in addition to the legit 1939 title. 

Ok that's enough channeling of Randolph Duke for me today.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Not a cat said:

Actually just looked it up- if we wanted to be like aggy and add any title awarded by anyone, including retroactively, we could add 1914, 41, 68, 77 and 81.  

Source - https://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160521052546/http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2015/fbs.pdf

Starts at page 107. 

It's funny because a couple of those "titles" are from the billingsley margin of victory calculation and the sagarin ELO chess formulas which awarded the 2 that aggy touts in addition to the legit 1939 title. 

Ok that's enough channeling of Randolph Duke for me today.

OK so I was right, although it is only "slightly more" than the 3-4 mentioned by Js1.   I'm just glad I didn't know the actual answer.

And I'm sort of sad that now, I do. ;)

 

Posted
4 minutes ago, utee94 said:

OK so I was right, although it is only "slightly more" than the 3-4 mentioned by Js1.   I'm just glad I didn't know the actual answer.

And I'm sort of sad that now, I do. ;)

 

It'll come in handy if you're ever in an alternate timeline where we are insecure little bitches and want everyone to know about our 9 titles.

  • Like 4
Posted
5 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Elko knows his audience and plays to it. He knows he's being dishonest and even ironic saying "fans" in Austin (he won't say our name like a true Aggie) were moved to hysteria by a nothing interview conducted by nobodies. He knows the TexAggies turned up the shrill. It's clear he reads that site. They will love him thus job security and a cushy life when he drops out of the anus of the sleeping giant.

He is their hero. This guy:

image.png.aed43ad7a9e7203741cfeb513e4e42c3.png

I mean no offense to the intellectually disabled, but this guy looks like he won the shotput at the Special Olympics with a 28-foot lob of an 8-pounder. As a prize, he chose the option of being A&M's honorary football coach for a day. He loves the Aggies.

His loving mother remembers that her father was a heavy set guy. She's saved one of his suits, kind of a garish plaid. Mikey loved Pawpaw. It's a poor fit, but it's only for a day. Mikey is thrilled. He gets hysterical when she tightens the tie, so she has to leave it loose. Mikey picks the shirt himself.

It's the greatest day of his life. They even let him stand on the press podium with all the insignia behind him. They gave him a picture!

Mikey wonders what tu is. They talk about it all the time. It's funny when they yell whoop while standing on one leg and pointing at clouds.

They frightened him when he stepped on some grass, but all the Aggies say howdy and make him feel very special indeed.

Fat boy sure sang a different tune at the podium last November after his first taste of the Horns. About 3:50 for the highlight line

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, utee94 said:

You don't even need this qualifier.

Texas' 1970 Coaches' Poll title is valid.  That's all that needs to be said.

The Coaches' Poll and the AP Poll titles are valid, and have always been valid, regardless of their timing. 

I lived it and I must say that 1970 season sure didn’t fell like a national championship when we lost to Norte Dame in the last game.

Posted
2 hours ago, Not a cat said:

Nixon handed DKR the 1969 trophy but your point is valid.  1970 title is way more valid than those aggy computer ones from a century ago that were "awarded" decades after the season.

Is it really a championship if the players who "won" it never even knew they were champions because they were long dead and buried by the time it was given out?

Their peers and the football establishment at the time didn't recognize them, but their AD will do it a 100 years later so that their Napoleon complex fans will have something to jerk it to.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Crazy... 3 straight home SEC games then 3 straight SEC road games

We play 3 road + 1 neutral site SEC game before we have our first conference game at home.  We have a total of 3 home and 4 road conference games.

Posted
41 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

We play 3 road + 1 neutral site SEC game before we have our first conference game at home.  We have a total of 3 home and 4 road conference games.

Snakey making sure we whorns get a cake walk again. Good thing we paid him so much cash to fix our schedule.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

Crazy... 3 straight home SEC games then 3 straight SEC road games

IMG_20250723_170413.thumb.jpg.6f3c60e24309ae15a9f92a8c0be4caab.jpg

 

Do they play Georgia this century?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Posted

0fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe40fc72b6b2085ba95628075928588d9314d95bbe4

image.png.52c2b6ee8af632a843f0981060712975.png

Quote

After the hubbub of SEC Media Days last week, the Big 10 is trying to have their say with a week full of media availability for their coaches and players up north. There's been a pretty united front from Big 10 coaches, against the backdrop of playoff expansion, leading to a couple of particular talking points.

We've heard from multiple coaches in that conference that the SEC's scheduling is not up to par with other leagues, given the disparity between the SEC's 8-game conference schedule and the Big 10's 9-game conference schedule. Teams are shouting that such a result simply isn't fair: that the SEC needs to play along with everyone else.

GwfxM23bwAAS19K?format=png&name=small

The problem is pretty simple, though: the SEC isn't like everyone else. The top-to-bottom depth in this conference is unlike anything else in the sport, and so you can't compare like for like when there's that kind of disparity— and this is seen pretty well in the Aggies' case.

Sad Big 10 scheduling argument falls on its face against Texas A&M's slate
Like I said, there are some pretty clear talking points being trotted out right now, and that has reached beyond Media Days. Random accounts have begun popping up to assail the SEC's scheduling, such as this tweet that has drawn a lot of attention recently:

GwgJoFqWMAAdSmh?format=jpg&name=small

The problem is obvious: the account left out each team's top non-conference foe. When fans would respond, mentioning this fact, the response was the same each time: "congrats on a 9th P4 game."

Here's the issue: not all P4 teams are created equal, especially not in the Big 10.

That's right: one of the Aggies' "weak" non-conference games outstrips the quality of the bottom four teams of the Big 10— which we are apparently meant to just take as of a given level of quality since they belong to a Power 4 league.

It's also worth mentioning that the Aggies' total schedule against FBS teams has a higher average SP+ rating than Ohio State's conference schedule alone— in other words, even though Ohio State's slate is made up of 9 grueling P4 games, it's still not of the same average quality of A&M's 11 games against FBS competition that includes lowly UTSA and Utah State.

This is simply just such a tired argument at this point. It's not 2013 anymore, guys: it's okay to admit that the SEC is on a different playing field. The last decade and a half has done nothing but prove that fact. Outstanding teams can still come from the Big 10, the ACC, or wherever, but the depth of the Southeastern Conference remains unchallenged.

 

Posted
Quote

This is simply just such a tired argument at this point. It's not 2013 anymore, guys: it's okay to admit that the SEC is on a different playing field. The last decade and a half has done nothing but prove that fact.

I wonder if the last two national champions might suggest otherwise.

  • Haha 3
Posted
18 minutes ago, jTower said:

aggy marching band from the year they last won a “natty” and their school was still an agricultural and mechanical college

IMG_4565.thumb.jpeg.6547208abdf02fa6da4a499695a65235.jpeg

And it’s been downhill for them ever since.

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, jTower said:

aggy marching band from the year they last won a “natty” and their school was still an agricultural and mechanical college

IMG_4565.thumb.jpeg.6547208abdf02fa6da4a499695a65235.jpeg

I’d be shocked if anyone in that photo is still alive.

Edited by Armybrat
Posted
1 hour ago, Beau Vine said:

That's right: one of the Aggies' "weak" non-conference games outstrips the quality of the bottom four teams of the Big 10— which we are apparently meant to just take as of a given level of quality since they belong to a Power 4 league.

 

Nicely done here by Graham. Not only is he addressing the weak scheduling accusations, but he’s also laying the groundwork for how their ugly close victory next month is actually super impressive and justifies their #2 ranking in this SEC Power Poll. 

  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

Nicely done here by Graham. Not only is he addressing the weak scheduling accusations, but he’s also laying the groundwork for how their ugly close victory next month is actually super impressive and justifies their #2 ranking in this SEC Power Poll. 

Yeah, it's art work. It's even better how he opens admitting weak SEC OOC and 8 conference games only to double down with a Corsoesque "Not so fast my friends". Art and a narrative directly designed to press the gas pedal on the roller-coaster climb while building in "I told you so" for later in the season. In the words of the immortal DOC, no one can do it better. 

Edited by BurntEyes
Posted
1 hour ago, jTower said:

aggy marching band from the year they last won a “natty” and their school was still an agricultural and mechanical college

IMG_4565.thumb.jpeg.6547208abdf02fa6da4a499695a65235.jpeg

Instead of finding Bert, where's that stupid dog?  

Posted
17 minutes ago, markstanco said:

Instead of finding Bert, where's that stupid dog?  

Behind the stands taking a halftime shit.
Incidentally, this is Reveille 1 (1931-1944):

 

 

IMG_6035.jpeg

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...