Texas A&M's move to the SEC has impacted the recruiting landscape in Texas
10,109 Views |
75 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by OldBurlyBear86
Joined:
Jul 4, 2017
Posts:
19,753
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
To summarize, Aggie sold out. Got more blue chips but live at 6-6 or 7-5.
I'm not sure this is really showing a cause in fact type of causal connection. I think there are multiple causing factors to the shift from the years in the first graph to the years in the second graph.
Aggy's uptick in blue chips is due to Texas being down more than the SEC. The first period of measurement was at the tail end of one of UT's most successful decades ever, and they'd played for two national titles in a four year span. The later period is after UT has been stuck in mediocrity for quite some time.
Also, the The Athletic has an analyst with excellent pie chart talent.CNC said:
To summarize, Aggie sold out. Got more blue chips but live at 6-6 or 7-5.
But at the same time they went from being behind Oklahoma to destroying them in the state of TX.LTbear said:
Aggy's uptick in blue chips is due to Texas being down more than the SEC. The first period of measurement was at the tail end of one of UT's most successful decades ever, and they'd played for two national titles in a four year span. The later period is after UT has been stuck in mediocrity for quite some time.
Apparently, A&M moving to the SEC caused our recruiting to get better, and Tech's to get worse.
Crap in the woods bear
Joined:
Jan 2, 2020
Posts:
79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is why I came here by the way. Y'all are funny
gobears20 said:
This chart is extremely misleading. By comparing the 4 years prior to A&M leaving to the 6 years after, that unequal comparison will understate the negative impact on the Big 12 since it captures a smaller period before the change, and that results in the Big 12 looking more stable across the change instead of seeing more of a decrease.
Focusing on the size of the slice of the pie can help offset some of the 4 yr vs. 6 yr comparison problems. It appears that A&M has gained at the expense of UT and, to a lesser degree, OU.
boognish_bear said:
As the old saying goes, "you can put lipstick on a pig to make it look better, but a pig is still a pig." Aggie is still Aggie. What a pile of money to see an increase in winning percentage increase 0.004 percentile.
Joined BaylorFans in 1999 under username jumpinjoe. Have always been Jumpinjoe. Proud 4 Year Baylor letterman and 1968 graduate and charter member of Quartermiler U, produced school record in 400 IH.
This is correct. There are too many uncontrolled variables to extrapolate that A&M's moved caused this change. Look at Ole Miss. Was it because of A&M's move to SEC, or was it that Hugh Freeze was paying players. Ole Miss paying players made it better which made it more attractive to players.PartyBear said:
I'm not sure this is really showing a cause in fact type of causal connection. I think there are multiple causing factors to the shift from the years in the first graph to the years in the second graph.
Someone else pointed out UT's struggles as a cause.
It is bad journalism and logic to conclude that this data says A&M caused this shift, but it is Pro-SEC journalism at its finest.
RightRevBear said:This is correct. There are too many uncontrolled variables to extrapolate that A&M's moved caused this change. Look at Ole Miss. Was it because of A&M's move to SEC, or was it that Hugh Freeze was paying players. Ole Miss paying players made it better which made it more attractive to players.PartyBear said:
I'm not sure this is really showing a cause in fact type of causal connection. I think there are multiple causing factors to the shift from the years in the first graph to the years in the second graph.
Someone else pointed out UT's struggles as a cause.
It is bad journalism and logic to conclude that this data says A&M caused this shift, but it is Pro-SEC journalism at its finest.
The last 14 years (since 2006 since that was the beginning year for the charts) have been the golden age for the SEC, and it's not a concoction of the media. They have won 10 of 14 national championships since Texas/the Big 12 last won one in 2005. The ACC has won 3 of 14, and the Big 10 has won one. If there is media bias, it is in favor of the Big 10 because at the beginning of every year we are forcefed how great that conference is until they ultimately lose on the field.
Looking at it from an A&M perspective, the SEC west with only 7 teams has 3 teams that have combined to win 8 out of last 14 national championships. Measuring the strength of their program in the two eras is difficult to gauge because their record in the Big 12 vs their time in the SEC is not an apples to apples comparison.
Similar in some ways.Chuckroast said:
Looking at it from an A&M perspective, the SEC west with only 7 teams has 3 teams that have combined to win 8 out of last 14 national championships. Measuring the strength of their program in the two eras is difficult to gauge because their record in the Big 12 vs their time in the SEC is not an apples to apples comparison.
OU and Texas dominated the Big 12 South football wise...Bama, LSU, and some times Auburn dominate the SEC west.
I think the prestige of the SEC football brand has helped aggy recruit better players. But with the top SEC football teams still whipping aggy it has left them in an almost identical place record wise.
I will say this aggy sure does not seem to mind getting beat by Bama, LSU, Auburn, UGa, and Florida.
Yet, they absolutely hated getting beat by UT, OU, Texas Tech, Okie State, and Kansas St.
You would have to crawl deep into the aggy subconscious to find out why that is...
You would have to crawl deep into the aggy subconscious to find out why that is...
Uh, no thanks.
Uh, no thanks.
SMack said:
Apparently, A&M moving to the SEC caused our recruiting to get better, and Tech's to get worse.
Tech suffered most with TCU's arrival and Baylor's ascent.
Yes, you're probably right.Baylorbears111 said:SMack said:
Apparently, A&M moving to the SEC caused our recruiting to get better, and Tech's to get worse.
Tech suffered most with TCU's arrival and Baylor's ascent.
As many have posted, asserting that A&M's departure is the cause of the recruiting changes is, at best, an oversimplification. At worst, it's an example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy -- if something happened after X, it must have been caused by X.
One thing that has definitely changed that I think is caused by A&M's departure -- a smaller percentage of the best Texas recruits are going out of state. I am not certain, but I think the evidence supports it. According to the data in the chart, 58% of the blue chippers went to Texas schools before, and 53% went after.
I always thought that A&M going to the SEC was good for A&M, but bad for the state of Texas. Apparently, the legislature believed otherwise.
Trying to use math with Aggies is like trying to speak English with a Martian.
As an Aggie client recently told me:
"We went to the SEC to swim in a bigger pond. I'm getting really tired of just treading water."
"We went to the SEC to swim in a bigger pond. I'm getting really tired of just treading water."
Redbrickbear said:Similar in some ways.Chuckroast said:
Looking at it from an A&M perspective, the SEC west with only 7 teams has 3 teams that have combined to win 8 out of last 14 national championships. Measuring the strength of their program in the two eras is difficult to gauge because their record in the Big 12 vs their time in the SEC is not an apples to apples comparison.
OU and Texas dominated the Big 12 South football wise...Bama, LSU, and some times Auburn dominate the SEC west.
I think the prestige of the SEC football brand has helped aggy recruit better players. But with the top SEC football teams still whipping aggy it has left them in an almost identical place record wise.
I will say this aggy sure does not seem to mind getting beat by Bama, LSU, Auburn, UGa, and Florida.
Yet, they absolutely hated getting beat by UT, OU, Texas Tech, Okie State, and Kansas St.
You would have to crawl deep into the aggy subconscious to find out why that is...
It's clear A&M was going nowhere in the Big 12. They were always going to be UT's little brother. My guess is that their primary goal in moving to the SEC was to elevate their program to the level of UT's, and I think they have been successful in that respect as they have for the most part closed that gap since their record and recruiting prowess is right on par with UT now. I think part of UT's lackluster program now is that they are splitting Texas recruits with A&M more than they used to. I'd love to see those schools play each other annually.
I'm not sure this is really showing a cause in fact type of causal connection. I think there are multiple causing factors to the shift from the years in the first graph to the years in the second graph.
Lucky Patcher Kodi nox
Lucky Patcher Kodi nox
osogreen said:
As an Aggie client recently told me:
"We went to the SEC to swim in a bigger pond. I'm getting really tired of just treading water."
I'm getting tired of it as well but have we regretted making the move? Not a chance. We are recruiting at a level to compete with the top end of the SECw. There's no shame in not having beaten Alabama lately - not many have. LSU, loaded with talent year after year, hadn't even done that since we joined up in 2102....they have just been that dominant.
SECe is different. We very well could have beaten UGA, without half their starters sitting out by the way, but you guys personally saw how "aggressive" their DB's were able to play and get away with. One of their receivers got in the act as well.....pretty blatant. The SECw is just a bit steeper hill to climb.
All that said, if I had to choose between being in a more prestigious league, one that we know will still be in existence a decade from now or according to you all continued to languish in the big 12, I'll take the SEC every time.
We're 3-1 against our former big 12 opponents in bowls. We used to be that big 12 team. The thing is, if a team can win the SEC, odds are very good that battle tested team will fare much better than the big 12 champ.
One thing that I will admit is an advantage for the big 12 is that it is an easier path to the playoffs. No doubt. And with 3 to 4 weeks to prepare for round 1 and 2 weeks to prepare for round 2, it's not as if you will ever have to play UGA and LSU in consecutive weeks.
Anyway, does that mean we're satisfied with the last few years? Course not. But I get this is a Baylor Bear fan site and the discussion on this thread is about what I would expect.
Just like Tech killed TCU/SMU when they were mistakenly admitted to the SWC in 1960. The dilution of talent in this state is a killer with five P5 schools.Baylorbears111 said:SMack said:
Apparently, A&M moving to the SEC caused our recruiting to get better, and Tech's to get worse.
Tech suffered most with TCU's arrival and Baylor's ascent.
So arkansas stays steady.....
The SEC has prestige in football thanks to 4 schools...Bama, LSU, Auburn, and Florida.Crap in the woods bear said:osogreen said:
As an Aggie client recently told me:
"We went to the SEC to swim in a bigger pond. I'm getting really tired of just treading water."
All that said, if I had to choose between being in a more prestigious league, one that we know will still be in existence a decade from now or according to you all continued to languish in the big 12, I'll take the SEC every time.
Aggy is not one of them.
No one in the Big 12 cared that aggy left. Most Big 12 schools were tired of your whining and endless voting to keep unequal revenue sharing.
Nebraska was a loss because it was a national brand. And Missouri helped lock down the KC market and had good basketball.
Aggy brought nothing to the table....just another diploma factory state school with mediocre athletics.
The SEC used y'all to gain access to Texas tv markets and stuff more cash in the pockets of the big boys like Bama and LSU....can't blame them for that.
Now y'all are a permanent punching bag for the big boys and are on the farthest west of the SEC with no Real rivals (Arkansas kind of cares/LSU doesn't care at all) and with no influence at the home office in Birmingham.
If that is "living high on the hog" for aggy fans than fine.
Hey, I enjoy kicking A&M right now too, but I'm afraid we are going to see them take the next step in 2020. If you think their "former students" are annoying now, wait until they win the SEC. It might make me move out of Texas again.
It would be interesting if they did take the next step, but anything less than a top 2 finish in the SEC West leaves Texas A&M where they've always been, and, given their schedule includes @Mike Leach's MSU, @Auburn, @Alabama, LSU, and Lane Kiffin's Ole Miss, it seems unlikely that Texas A&M will reach that mark.TeamPlayer said:
Hey, I enjoy kicking A&M right now too, but I'm afraid we are going to see them take the next step in 2020. If you think their "former students" are annoying now, wait until they win the SEC. It might make me move out of Texas again.
Aberzombie1892 said:It would be interesting if they did take the next step, but anything less than a top 2 finish in the SEC West leaves Texas A&M where they've always been, and, given their schedule includes @Mike Leach's MSU, @Auburn, @Alabama, LSU, and Lane Kiffin's Ole Miss, it seems unlikely that Texas A&M will reach that mark.TeamPlayer said:
Hey, I enjoy kicking A&M right now too, but I'm afraid we are going to see them take the next step in 2020. If you think their "former students" are annoying now, wait until they win the SEC. It might make me move out of Texas again.
Tall order for A$M to beat Bama, LSU, AU. The rest of the West of just bad to mediocre at best. New coaches at Ole Miss, Miss, Arkanas won't change that.
A&M virtually always loses more games than it is expected to. It was true before the change to the SEC, it was true under Sumlin, and it's been true so far under Fisher, so there is no real reason to expect otherwise at this point.Wapiti said:Aberzombie1892 said:It would be interesting if they did take the next step, but anything less than a top 2 finish in the SEC West leaves Texas A&M where they've always been, and, given their schedule includes @Mike Leach's MSU, @Auburn, @Alabama, LSU, and Lane Kiffin's Ole Miss, it seems unlikely that Texas A&M will reach that mark.TeamPlayer said:
Hey, I enjoy kicking A&M right now too, but I'm afraid we are going to see them take the next step in 2020. If you think their "former students" are annoying now, wait until they win the SEC. It might make me move out of Texas again.
Tall order for A$M to beat Bama, LSU, AU. The rest of the West of just bad to mediocre at best. New coaches at Ole Miss, Miss, Arkanas won't change that.
They really didn't this past year. Lost all 5 games they had virtually no chance in (LSU/Bama/Clemson/UGA/Auburn). Won their 6 patsies that will still be patsies in 2020 (Ark/SC/Ole Miss/3 pushover noncons). Managed to win both of their only games against evenly matched competition (MissSt/OkSt).Aberzombie1892 said:A&M virtually always loses more games than it is expected to. It was true before the change to the SEC, it was true under Sumlin, and it's been true so far under Fisher, so there is no real reason to expect otherwise at this point.Wapiti said:Aberzombie1892 said:It would be interesting if they did take the next step, but anything less than a top 2 finish in the SEC West leaves Texas A&M where they've always been, and, given their schedule includes @Mike Leach's MSU, @Auburn, @Alabama, LSU, and Lane Kiffin's Ole Miss, it seems unlikely that Texas A&M will reach that mark.TeamPlayer said:
Hey, I enjoy kicking A&M right now too, but I'm afraid we are going to see them take the next step in 2020. If you think their "former students" are annoying now, wait until they win the SEC. It might make me move out of Texas again.
Tall order for A$M to beat Bama, LSU, AU. The rest of the West of just bad to mediocre at best. New coaches at Ole Miss, Miss, Arkanas won't change that.
And they get to replace 14-1 Clemson and 12-2 UGa with 5-7 Colorado and 3-9 Vandy in 2020. Plus outside chances against a retooling LSU and a Bama without a clearcut superstar QB.
The aggy 2020 football schedule almosts guarantees a very highly successful year unfortunately. I think they can easily go 6-0 heading to Auburn. IF they win that game they will most likely go into the Alabama game at home with a 10-0 record.
Their schedule this year follows our pattern of last year.
Their schedule this year follows our pattern of last year.
Featured Stories
See All
Program Reset: Post-Spring Attrition, Transfers & Recruiting
by Colt Barber
Emptying the Notebook: Schobel and Brown Decommit, Whatley is a Bear
by Grayson Grundhoefer
What Ashtyn Hawkins Can Be for Baylor Football in 2024
by Travis Roeder
Pros Update: The Draft, the NFL & the UFL
by Craig Smoak
Colorado Center Aaronette Vonleh Commits to Baylor
by Grayson Grundhoefer
sonuvabear
Emptying the Notebook: Schobel and Brown Decommit, Whatley is a Bear
in SicEm365 Premium Insider
24