REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

I am no fan of A&M. They lost 5 games this year which makes them sound pretty ordinary. But when you look at their schedule, they lost to Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Clemson, and Georgia. That is an absolute gauntlet. I hate to say it, but if they had played our schedule, they are no worse than 11-2 and possibly better. They gave good games to Clemson, Auburn, and Georgia. That being said, I would still love to play them again.

---

Get out of here with that bull***** The only decent team A&M beat all season was missing its starting quarterback and best receiver. Playing a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Beating good teams does. And A&M got beat 50-7 by the last good team they played.

A&M was a thoroughly average team in the Big 12 and remains so in the SEC. They just get to claim their conference mates' wins now apparently.

---

How many times did bu finish ahead of the aggies in the b12?
Don't know if bu would beat them today

---

Troll, troll, troll your boat.

Move downstream, ****heel.

bear2be2 said:

---

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

I am no fan of A&M. They lost 5 games this year which makes them sound pretty ordinary. But when you look at their schedule, they lost to Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Clemson, and Georgia. That is an absolute gauntlet. I hate to say it, but if they had played our schedule, they are no worse than 11-2 and possibly better. They gave good games to Clemson, Auburn, and Georgia. That being said, I would still love to play them again.

---

Get out of here with that bull***** The only decent team A&M beat all season was missing its starting quarterback and best receiver. Playing a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Beating good teams does. And A&M got beat 50-7 by the last good team they played.

A&M was a thoroughly average team in the Big 12 and remains so in the SEC. They just get to claim their conference mates' wins now apparently.

---

How many times did bu finish ahead of the aggies in the b12?
Don't know if bu would beat them today

---

Troll, troll, troll your boat.

Move downstream, ****heel.

---

Nice answer

Jorkel said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

I am no fan of A&M. They lost 5 games this year which makes them sound pretty ordinary. But when you look at their schedule, they lost to Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Clemson, and Georgia. That is an absolute gauntlet. I hate to say it, but if they had played our schedule, they are no worse than 11-2 and possibly better. They gave good games to Clemson, Auburn, and Georgia. That being said, I would still love to play them again.

---

Get out of here with that bull***** The only decent team A&M beat all season was missing its starting quarterback and best receiver. Playing a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Beating good teams does. And A&M got beat 50-7 by the last good team they played.

---

That was almost half their schedule. The best team we beat this year was OSU - the rankings would also appear to confirm that. A&M also beat them. Losing to Auburn by 6 and Georgia by 8 when the season was on the line was pretty respectable. I'm not saying they would beat us, but they would have beat everyone on our schedule other than perhaps OU (but I'm not sure about that). They beat Miss St by almost 3 TDs. Miss State lost 6 games, but their worst loss was to K State by only a TD.

---

So beating Oklahoma State by 18 at full strength in a true road game equals squeaking by that same team without Sanders or Wallace in a virtual home game at NRG? OK. And we're about to play Georgia. We probably ought to see how that one goes before declaring A&M our equal.

And Mississippi State didn't beat anyone either. Since when did playing and losing to good teams make you a good team? College football is the only sport in which that's perceived to be true, and it's really freaking stupid.

---

Who did we beat that's any good?

---

When you win 11 games in a power conference, you don't have to justify your strength of record -- particularly when you've played a schedule ranked in the top 40 by every metric. When you win six or seven, you do. I'm amazed that some of you can't see the difference here.

---

If this applies to Baylor then it applies to Oregon, Utah, Georgia. I've seen post after post of people saying neither team has beaten or played anyone.

---

I would agree wholeheartedly with your first sentence. I've consistently said that all of those are good football teams.

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

I am no fan of A&M. They lost 5 games this year which makes them sound pretty ordinary. But when you look at their schedule, they lost to Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Clemson, and Georgia. That is an absolute gauntlet. I hate to say it, but if they had played our schedule, they are no worse than 11-2 and possibly better. They gave good games to Clemson, Auburn, and Georgia. That being said, I would still love to play them again.

---

Get out of here with that bull***** The only decent team A&M beat all season was missing its starting quarterback and best receiver. Playing a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Beating good teams does. And A&M got beat 50-7 by the last good team they played.

A&M was a thoroughly average team in the Big 12 and remains so in the SEC. They just get to claim their conference mates' wins now apparently.

---

How many times did bu finish ahead of the aggies in the b12?
Don't know if bu would beat them today

---

Troll, troll, troll your boat.

Move downstream, ****heel.

---

Nice answer

---

Your inane questions don't deserve answers as they're meant only to provoke.

But A&M's time in the Big 12 coincided with the worst decade-long stretch in the history of Baylor football. To suggest records built during that period have any relevance today makes you either stupid, a troll or both. I'm leaning toward the latter.

bear2be2 said:

---

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

I am no fan of A&M. They lost 5 games this year which makes them sound pretty ordinary. But when you look at their schedule, they lost to Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Clemson, and Georgia. That is an absolute gauntlet. I hate to say it, but if they had played our schedule, they are no worse than 11-2 and possibly better. They gave good games to Clemson, Auburn, and Georgia. That being said, I would still love to play them again.

---

Get out of here with that bull***** The only decent team A&M beat all season was missing its starting quarterback and best receiver. Playing a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Beating good teams does. And A&M got beat 50-7 by the last good team they played.

A&M was a thoroughly average team in the Big 12 and remains so in the SEC. They just get to claim their conference mates' wins now apparently.

---

How many times did bu finish ahead of the aggies in the b12?
Don't know if bu would beat them today

---

Troll, troll, troll your boat.

Move downstream, ****heel.

---

Nice answer

---

Your inane questions don't deserve answers as they're meant only to provoke.

But A&M's time in the Big 12 coincided with the worst decade-long stretch in the history of Baylor football. To suggest records built during that period have any relevance today makes you either stupid, a troll or both. I'm leaning toward the latter.

---

That's pretty much what you suggested but whatever
Thanks

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

REX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

I am no fan of A&M. They lost 5 games this year which makes them sound pretty ordinary. But when you look at their schedule, they lost to Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Clemson, and Georgia. That is an absolute gauntlet. I hate to say it, but if they had played our schedule, they are no worse than 11-2 and possibly better. They gave good games to Clemson, Auburn, and Georgia. That being said, I would still love to play them again.

---

Get out of here with that bull***** The only decent team A&M beat all season was missing its starting quarterback and best receiver. Playing a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Beating good teams does. And A&M got beat 50-7 by the last good team they played.

A&M was a thoroughly average team in the Big 12 and remains so in the SEC. They just get to claim their conference mates' wins now apparently.

---

How many times did bu finish ahead of the aggies in the b12?
Don't know if bu would beat them today

---

Troll, troll, troll your boat.

Move downstream, ****heel.

---

Nice answer

---

Your inane questions don't deserve answers as they're meant only to provoke.

But A&M's time in the Big 12 coincided with the worst decade-long stretch in the history of Baylor football. To suggest records built during that period have any relevance today makes you either stupid, a troll or both. I'm leaning toward the latter.

---

That's pretty much what you suggested but whatever
Thanks

---

Rex, the check writers at Aggy are impressed with Baylor and thought we had a better team at Baylor.

How was the move to Fayetteville?

So when we look at them, we have to take their "historical conference record" into account, but it doesn't apply to us?

I could expect this line of thinking out of Austin or College Station, but we can do better than this...

If A&M pretty much always finished better than us in the old Big 12, wouldn't the same logic say that the Big 12 has gotten weaker?

FeralBear said:

---

So when we look at them, we have to take their "historical conference record" into account, but it doesn't apply to us?

I could expect this line of thinking out of Austin or College Station, but we can do better than this...

If A&M pretty much always finished better than us in the old Big 12, wouldn't the same logic say that the Big 12 has gotten weaker?

---

When you're talking to the squad (X, mili, thee and b whatever) don't use logic
It doesn't work
Thanks

FeralBear said:

---

So when we look at them, we have to take their "historical conference record" into account, but it doesn't apply to us?

I could expect this line of thinking out of Austin or College Station, but we can do better than this...

If A&M pretty much always finished better than us in the old Big 12, wouldn't the same logic say that the Big 12 has gotten weaker?

---

The difference is A&M's performance and commitment levels have remained constant since then. Ours have not. Baylor isn't in the same place commitment-, facility- or performance-wise it was from 1996-2006. To think what happened in those years, when we were paying our head coach like half a mil and playing in a 50-year-old stadium in Beverly Hills, has any relevance to today is just silly.

A&M has been trying its damnedest to get out of big brother's shadow in two different conferences now and has never come close to doing so. We only really started trying to compete at a high level in the last decade.

REX said:

---

FeralBear said:

---

So when we look at them, we have to take their "historical conference record" into account, but it doesn't apply to us?

I could expect this line of thinking out of Austin or College Station, but we can do better than this...

If A&M pretty much always finished better than us in the old Big 12, wouldn't the same logic say that the Big 12 has gotten weaker?

---

When you're talking to the squad (X, mili, thee and b whatever) don't use logic
It doesn't work
Thanks

---

How would you know? You've yet to do so.

REX said:

---

FeralBear said:

---

So when we look at them, we have to take their "historical conference record" into account, but it doesn't apply to us?

I could expect this line of thinking out of Austin or College Station, but we can do better than this...

If A&M pretty much always finished better than us in the old Big 12, wouldn't the same logic say that the Big 12 has gotten weaker?

---

When you're talking to the squad (X, mili, thee and b whatever) don't use logic
It doesn't work
Thanks

---

Rex, you did this last year with Florida State. Front running is the only thing you have won lately. The Aggy check writers think the Bears had a better season.
Your team's check writers are taking pictures on a high school track in East Texas.

College gameday, conference championship game, and the sugar bowl. It's that sort of prime time exposure that pisses the aggies off. Which conference's 5 loss team is better is just a debate for CFB nerds.

REX said:

---

FeralBear said:

---

So when we look at them, we have to take their "historical conference record" into account, but it doesn't apply to us?

I could expect this line of thinking out of Austin or College Station, but we can do better than this...

If A&M pretty much always finished better than us in the old Big 12, wouldn't the same logic say that the Big 12 has gotten weaker?

---

When you're talking to the squad (X, mili, thee and b whatever) don't use logic
It doesn't work
Thanks

---

Except Thee is logical on issues regarding the college football landscape

The jizz jars love being in a conference where they get dominated by the top 5 programs but can stick their bird chests out about beating up on the other short gimps like miss state, Kentucky, and arkansas.

Redbrickbear said:

---

The jizz jars love being in a conference where they get dominated by the top 5 programs but can stick their bird chests out about beating up on the other short gimps like miss state, Kentucky, and arkansas.

---

Mississippi State . . . who has had records of 10-3, 9-5 (3 times), and 8-5 (twice) since 2010 with a final ranking as high as 11 one of those years. Also had bowl wins over Michigan, Louisville, and NC State during that stretch.

Redbrickbear said:

---

The jizz jars love being in a conference where they get dominated by the top 5 programs but can stick their bird chests out about beating up on the other short gimps like miss state, Kentucky, and arkansas.

---

Kentucky . . . who just last year finished 10-3 with a bowl win over Penn State and a final ranking of 12.

Sure...Best 5 loss team in the country. That and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee.

At the end of the day, being nationally relevant and playing for conference championships is what matters.

tallman1 said:

---

Good point. We have played nowhere near the schedule of Texas A&M and if we did, we would probably have the same record. A&M would be the 3rd. best team in our conference right now, competing for the top spot. The Sooners got beat by LSU just as bad as the Aggies. The SEC is just that much better than the Big12.

---

GTFOH. The Aggies barely beat Ok State on essentially a AM home field. chances are they finish at about the same position as OK state

ImwithBU said:

---

tallman1 said:

---

Good point. We have played nowhere near the schedule of Texas A&M and if we did, we would probably have the same record. A&M would be the 3rd. best team in our conference right now, competing for the top spot. The Sooners got beat by LSU just as bad as the Aggies. The SEC is just that much better than the Big12.

---

GTFOH. The Aggies barely beat Ok State on essentially a AM home field. chances are they finish at about the same position as OK state

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

The jizz jars love being in a conference where they get dominated by the top 5 programs but can stick their bird chests out about beating up on the other short gimps like miss state, Kentucky, and arkansas.

---

Mississippi State . . . who has had records of 10-3, 9-5 (3 times), and 8-5 (twice) since 2010 with a final ranking as high as 11 one of those years. Also had bowl wins over Michigan, Louisville, and NC State during that stretch.

---

Miss state had a once in a program hire Dan Mullen.

They have since crashed back to earth....their program has only won one conference title in their history and that was in 1941.

They have a losing record all time.

The fact that aggys feel the need to artificially prop up the reputations of historically horrible programs like miss state tells you all you need to know about the aggy mentality lol.

Which is 3rd in the big 12? Oklahoma State finished 3rd and A&M is better than Oklahoma State. They would be competing with us and OU for the top spot.

I'm a Baylor fan first and foremost, but I have ties to A&M, so I'm going to be objective. I understand and respect the fact that some just can't be objective for whatever reason. I can tell by some of the comments. It's OK, we don't have to be disrespectful.

Also, you can't always say "we" beat a mutual opponent by more than them. Heck, we beat Rice by 8 and UTSA beat Rice by 4. Does that mean UTSA can play with Baylor? We all know the answer to that. Texas beat Rice by 35 and blew out TTech. Does that mean Texas is better than Baylor? We all know the answer to that. Texas played LSU tougher than OU did. Does that mean Texas is better than OU?

You have to take into account the style of play, the SEC having superior size, strength, and speed than the big 12, more guys that are going to the NFL. It's more of a physical toll playing in the SEC and you need more depth at each position. They land the higher rated recruits, even their 2nd tier teams (now Rhule has proven it's about evaluation and development). I believe that some of the mid level SEC teams (especially A&M) could complete with Baylor and OU.

The very top of the SEC is as strong / stronger by far than the Big 12

Alabama LSU Auburn Georgia Florida would all be comparable to OU and yes I include Baylor this year

The bottom of the SEC Vanderbilt Miss Arkansas probably are where Kansas is

The middle SEC schools would be equal to the Iowa State OSU Texas of the Big 12

At Baylor we are at a huge advantage over the Aggies as we have 1 Blue blood program to beat ( and maybe UT one day ) while the Aggies have 4 minimum to win the SEC

The Aggies this year would have been 10-2 or 9-3 with our schedule but they chose a different route

To see us almost make the CFP is infuriating to them and most of it is jealousy because we can be in the discussion 3 of 5 years and they will be in it 1 of 10 years

Redbrickbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

The jizz jars love being in a conference where they get dominated by the top 5 programs but can stick their bird chests out about beating up on the other short gimps like miss state, Kentucky, and arkansas.

---

Mississippi State . . . who has had records of 10-3, 9-5 (3 times), and 8-5 (twice) since 2010 with a final ranking as high as 11 one of those years. Also had bowl wins over Michigan, Louisville, and NC State during that stretch.

---

Miss state had a once in a program hire Dan Mullen.

They have since crashed back to earth....their program has only won one conference title in their history and that was in 1941.

They have a losing record all time.

The fact that aggys feel the need to artificially prop up the reputations of historically horrible programs like miss state tells you all you need to know about the aggy mentality lol.

---

Regardless of ancient history, Miss St has had a good program while A&M has been in the SEC. Beating them over the last 9-10 years is noteworthy.

guys, I don't want to go to the SEC. I started the thread to troll aggy and it worked better than I could imagine:

https://texags.com/forums/6/topics/3086136/1

Chuckroast said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

The jizz jars love being in a conference where they get dominated by the top 5 programs but can stick their bird chests out about beating up on the other short gimps like miss state, Kentucky, and arkansas.

---

Mississippi State . . . who has had records of 10-3, 9-5 (3 times), and 8-5 (twice) since 2010 with a final ranking as high as 11 one of those years. Also had bowl wins over Michigan, Louisville, and NC State during that stretch.

---

Miss state had a once in a program hire Dan Mullen.

They have since crashed back to earth....their program has only won one conference title in their history and that was in 1941.

They have a losing record all time.

The fact that aggys feel the need to artificially prop up the reputations of historically horrible programs like miss state tells you all you need to know about the aggy mentality lol.

---

Regardless of ancient history, Miss St has had a good program while A&M has been in the SEC. Beating them over the last 9-10 years is noteworthy.

---

It was noteworthy when Mullen was there. It's not anymore.

tallman1 said:

---

Which is 3rd in the big 12? Oklahoma State finished 3rd and A&M is better than Oklahoma State. They would be competing with us and OU for the top spot.

I'm a Baylor fan first and foremost, but I have ties to A&M, so I'm going to be objective. I understand and respect the fact that some just can't be objective for whatever reason. I can tell by some of the comments. It's OK, we don't have to be disrespectful.

Also, you can't always say "we" beat a mutual opponent by more than them. Heck, we beat Rice by 8 and UTSA beat Rice by 4. Does that mean UTSA can play with Baylor? We all know the answer to that. Texas beat Rice by 35 and blew out TTech. Does that mean Texas is better than Baylor? We all know the answer to that. Texas played LSU tougher than OU did. Does that mean Texas is better than OU?

You have to take into account the style of play, the SEC having superior size, strength, and speed than the big 12, more guys that are going to the NFL. It's more of a physical toll playing in the SEC and you need more depth at each position. They land the higher rated recruits, even their 2nd tier teams (now Rhule has proven it's about evaluation and development). I believe that some of the mid level SEC teams (especially A&M) could complete with Baylor and OU.

---

A&M beat a shorthanded Oklahoma State team by three in a virtual home game. That hardly suggests that the Aggies are definitively better. A&M would be comparable in the Big 12 to Oklahoma State, Texas, Kansas State and Iowa State, and all of those games would be virtual toss-ups. They'd finish 8-4 or 9-3 in the Big 12.

People are overestimating the strength of the Big12. Although we may disagree on this topic, which there's no way to prove any of our opinions unless they play. I'm sure we can agree that we want Baylor to beat Georgia! #Sicem

tallman1 said:

---

People are overestimating the strength of the Big12. Although we may disagree on this topic, which there's no way to prove any of our opinions unless they play. I'm sure we can agree that we want Baylor to beat Georgia! #Sicem

---

I don't think we're overestimating the Big 12 so much as you're overestimating A&M. That's just not a great football team by any measure. They'd have a better record in the Big 12 than they do now, but they'd lose three games at a minimum.

Ditto

gobears20 said:

---

Didn't Texas turn the SEC down due to their academic standards?

I would want ACC

---

Texas couldn't afford the pay cut

Only team I see them losing to is us and OU and it'd be close. As we can see by OU's performance against LSU, they are not be a very good team, just won an inferior conference. If Baylor played A&M's schedule, I'm curious to hear what you think our record would be. I hope we take care of business against Georgia. Big12 is 0-3 in bowl games right now and I wouldn't be surprised if KState and Texas lose. Big12 is an inferior conference right now.

tallman1 said:

---

Only team I see them losing to is us and OU and it'll be closE. As we can see by OU's performance against LSU, they are not be a very good team by SEC standards, just won an inferior conference. If Baylor played A&M's schedule, I'm curious to hear what you think our record would be. I hope we take care of business against Georgia. Big12 is 0-3 in bowl games right now and I wouldn't be surprised if KState and Texas lose. Big12 is an inferior conference right now.

---

OU, which was missing several key players in the Peach Bowl, is not a good team by LSU standards, but that's also true of most of the rest of the SEC. By the end of the year, LSU was whipping everybody, including a 50-7 win over A&M that could have been even worse and dominating win over Georgia.

And for about the 12th time, losing to good teams doesn't make A&M good. It just means they played a tough schedule, which in and of itselfis not an accomplishment.