OldArmy
- 115 comments
- 11 likes given
- 10 likes received
Bio not provided
@MoKelly1 Relax Mo. Your schedule has you with Georgia first. Best time of the year to face the Dawgs. And you goy them at home. Just for fun.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuStsFW4EmQ
@ETXAg05 I'm thinking Red Clay has more problems than just billboard envy...... school color angst, no sense of humor, state envy, mascot envy and alternatives to smoking tobacco envy.
@JB TexasEx @AndrewMartin Ah, now we have the downward spiral into conspiracy theories. Not my job to do your research for dimwit. You can google it as well as anyone. But if you think that having to have everything you know spoon fed to you is a right you can get by demanding it, you're gonna have to find another nurse maid. Already did the 3 year old thing. And unbridled capitalism is not socialism, and only someone who does not understand socialism would have made the comment. Revenue sharing is as old as capitalism itself. Socialism is not corporate entities sharing profits, it is the dictatorship of the proletariat (or other state apparatus) taking from the governed body, with or without their consent, and redistributing as it sees fit. There is no profit in a socialistic model, it is the redistribution of wealth.
The SEC is an alliance of corporations with a profit motive. who have agreed to a contract that increases the value of products and services through consolidation of brands. The model is one of the sum total of the parts is less than the sum total of the alliance. That increase is called the profit margin. So, its not a model of "we split what we all already have (socialism), it is a model where the increase in revenue of the alliance is more than the increase in revenue made by any individual member.
Now I'm beginning to doubt if you ever went to the University of Texas. Surely the basic courses in economics taught there are not so bad as someone who is ignorant enough to think revenue sharing is socialism could ever pass with that mush in their heads. And, you should be able to extrapolate the answer to the "Aggie Network" part of you question from the explanation of revenue sharing (Can you say SEC network would be more profitable?)
Oh, and really liked the Gomer dig. Priceless. A level of sophistication not many college grads would be willing to share in public. And I don't mind it. I was an enlisted marine (get it, Gomer Pyle?) before I went to A&M.
And gotta say, you aren't very good at this.
@AndrewMartin 77. Howdy!
@AndrewMartin What class were you?
@AndrewMartin @JB TexasEx Yep, 14,000 in WWII, more than all three service academies put together. There is a reason the student body is called "Army." And it still commissions more officers than any other non academy. Not bad for a bunch of toy soldiers.
@JB TexasEx @AndrewMartin Members of the Corps of Cadets do not salute each other, and not sure if you would know how to render a proper salute anyway.
@JB TexasEx Well, thanks for the Gump reference, and I already answered your question, and answering a question by the way, does not equate to reading comprehension. Look it up, comprehension has nothing to do with a response. Gump actually served his country. What have you done for us lately? And in your mind is there something wrong with being a private serving his country? Obviously you seem to think so.
Whats the matter, you can't google?
And the new seats for the Aggie Band were assigned in less than a week after the SEC decision was made, and if you want you can go to the resolution passed by the Texas A&M student government that said while A&M was asking for an exemption to the policy, that whatever the decision was, the student body expected the university to comply as quickly as possible.
So, not sure what you think we had a "problem" with. The school followed the rules, asked for an exemption, it was denied, and within a week, new seats had been assigned. For us, keeping things in perspective is not a problem. And moving the band did not rise to that level.
@JB TexasEx Oh, and on the comprehension thing, I said "we appreciate your contribution to advertising Aggie jokes to the SEC," not that we make money directly off of your post on line. Rights to Aggie Jokes are owned by the Texas A&M University press. If you tell one on the radio, or tv, and it is one of the thousands we own, we get a royalty check, just like the two sisters who ensured their rights to the song, "Happy Birthday." Bottom line, the more jokes told in any medium that makes a profit, A&M gets a cut. So, the more commentators in the SEC who know about them, the more opportunities for revenue. And you would be surprised to know how many copies of Aggie Joke books are bought by non-Ags, and all proceeds go to us. In fact, for our SEC brethren, if you want to hear a lot of Aggie Jokes, all you have to do is tell one, and we will join in. We know a bunch of them and WE LIKE THEM. So, again, thanks for advertising to our SEC brothers and sisters Aggie Jokes. We hope they will get on the band wagon.
@JB TexasEx Well, first off Texas A&M does not keep numbers of Corps members joining the military "under wraps," and just about any simpleton can check the number of commissioned grads out of the Corps, so will let you go do it. Like there is a conspiracy at A&M to cover up something about a student organization. Stupid comment. And every Corps member has to take at least two years of ROTC because A&M decided a long time ago to maximize the University's commitment to fulfilling its commitments under the laws for obligations of Land Grant colleges and universities, specifically the commitment to train a large pool of citizens to be prepared to enter military service should the nation need to call on volunteers.
So, while you don't like the Corps, it is performing that mission statement whether or not the Corps member actually enters the military. Its an old concept, and one many with your bent and lack of education on the roles and missions of Land Grant colleges don't respect. We do, and happily we don't much care what slackers think. So, while folks like you like to diss the concept of citizens voluntarily learning more about their country's defense with "toy soldier" comments, those who actually have taken the time to educate themselves on how things actually work, and why they exist have a slightly more informed opinion. But, you're a sip so.......
And, since you seem to get what you want to out of what others write, I said "students in the stands." A&M has the largest student section in its stands in the country. Period. Just Google "largest student section in college football." Not hard. A&M holds the NCAA record for putting the largest number of students in the stands for games, over 31,000. Track back, the comment about students in the stands went to your comments on practicing yells. The by product of that focus on getting students involved in traditions (from before they actually start classes to the day they leave) is the largest percentage of student participation at football games in the country. We know Texas has a wonderful stadium. It has a great fan support base. It sells out all the time. So do a lot of other universities. Ku-dos. It is a great thing to see a sold out stadium. But that was not what I said. So, I know tu has a great academic reputation. Should put that to work and read for comprehension.
Again, happy you are posting on a site you still seem to think is reserved for only SEC members and t-sips.
@JB TexasEx There you go. And from all us former toy soldiers who grew up to be real soldiers because of the Corps, we appreciate your contribution to advertising Aggie jokes to the SEC. A&M owns the rights to them, and we make a lot of money off them. And you get good by practicing things sip, which is why we have yell practices. And most of the visitors to Kyle will tell you we're pretty good at them. And we have noticed you guys are pretty good at singing a knock off to "I've been working on the railroad," and maybe one day you will be able to get as many students in the stands as we do.
And happy you were able to tell us all about tu's fidelity to the Big 12. Mizzou and A&M grads are happy to be reminded of that. I mean it was Texas President Bill Powers who was leading the Big 12 solidarity movement when he went to the PAC 10 to try to get tu into that conference. Confirmed btw by PAC 10 Commissioner Scott, right after Powers refused to give A&M President Loftin assurances tu was not doing just that...... twice. Thanks for the commitment.
Happy to see you here sip. Makes us feel much better about joining the conference.
@JB TexasEx Sorry if references to your alma mater that have been used for about 100 years are insulting. Its college ball, every school out there takes its share of ribbing, and puh-lease cut the "we're holier than thou "we don't do it." You can't possibly think the entire population of Texas Exes is so well mannered, cultured (and devoid of humor) that they don't throw barbs at other schools.
If you don't like it, I will remember you don't take good natured ribbing too well. And thanks for pointing out how much money tu made last year, it confirms what I said, that the school is a (no pun intended) cash cow. And again, good for the school. Its done very well (That's a compliment by the way, just in case that was not clear to you in your hyper sensitive state).
And you're confused. If I'm not supposed to be here because this is not an Aggie Blog, and I shouldn't post here because we are not in the SEC yet, then what the heck are you doing here? Your school became a member of the SEC on what date?
Good grief.
@JB TexasEx Agree with most of that, but I'm not in the blame it on the other school crowd. I've seen posts both ways, with 8 x 10 color glossies and powerpoint presentations to prove this point of view or that. Most are colored by partisan posturing. Bottom line, it was a corporate decision. Like most corporate decisions, it was based on expectations of market share, branding, etc. In the end, it was just the inability to come to terms. Happens all the time in the capitalist system. It was not personal. No one called the former students and exes and asked what they thought, so it isn't "the Aggies did this, and Texas did that." 365,000 living Ags, and maybe 13 got a vote. Same with Texas Exes.
College ball is corporate ball. tu has a program worth what, almost a billion? Big bucks. And I do not think the administration at tu cares one whit for the Big 12, other than it is a good vehicle to market their brand. A healthy Big 12 is a plus. Not a criticism btw, tu is the biggest neutered bull in the pasture, and has been very successful in making sure that has been the case for decades. And Exes are not about to cheer on any admin that loses that standing, even for a short time. Ya'll as a group have expectations. Oklahoma and company have done a good job giving the steer fits every now and then, but your administration would be booted out by the Exes if they made decisions that actually leveled the playing field in the Big 12. Just my opinion, could be wrong, but don't think so.
As for all recruiting being national, I think that goes just so far. Conferences make a difference to a lot of players, and Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, et al are all banking on the draw being strong enough to benefit them. Will it? I think so, but you are right, time will tell. If it does benefit the SEC, as I think it will, tu is not going to fall on hard times, but it will make recruiting slightly more competitive in the state. The AD can't like that burr under his saddle. Do I think he spends time thinking about it? Some, that's why there is this thing called the LHN.
I suspect that in the end, the LHN will be beneficial to Texas with some residuals to the Big 12, but my point was that in the sort term it has not helped the Texas AD in the politics of Texas state recruiting, fund raising, branding, etc. Are the Horns going to be really inconvenienced by all this? Of course not. It would take a monumental set of idiots being hired at tu for a few decades to accomplish that. Don't see that happening. But Dodd has to be irritated at some level by the turmoil the Big 12 experienced by miscalculating two school administrations reactions to the deal, a conference that is dominated by his team. Bad for his business rep if it looks like tu's AD can't control the herd. I think tu as a group of fans are happy right now with the way things have turned out, and dissing A&M plays pretty well in Austin. So, it may have been throwing a reporter off with a flippant comment, but if you go to tu blog sites right now (and I never do), I suspect you will find Dodd's stock has gone up with the comment. Nothing a sip likes much better than some good ol Aggie bashing. Works both ways, so not throwing stones at you or any of the fine folks who decided to wear t-shirts with a dead cow's skull on it.
The school in Austin has a great academic and athletic reputation, well deserved btw. A good number of reflective t-sips are aware of their market share and are determined not to let that slip in a very competitive environment (and who can blame them, you don't get to be the the most valuable college athletic brand by not being aggressive and protective of your turf). The only serious threat to an encroachment on their dominance in the economics of Texas state athletics (read that television rights and competition for the best recruits in the state) has been A&M's move to the SEC. Not sure why Dodds made the comment. I suspect it was just to end discussion with the questioner on the issue of how A&M's move (and the SEC's expanded recruiting opportunities in state) might affect that dominance. Dodds does not get paid to lose ground, and he has two embarrassing failures that he needs to brush under the rug for the moment. 1. The LHN has not only been a serious under performer in developing market share, his poor handling of the internal political struggle the planned network, caused a serious stability crisis in the Big 12 with the departure of two schools (crisis is fixed, but still not a good thing), 2. The Horns underperformed the last couple of seasons, and he is under the gun to get that fixed this year. Dodds does not believe for a second that A&M has a sliver of East Texas, he also knows that every team in the SEC now has an increased footprint in Texas, especially the West. That will, emphasize WILL, make recruiting harder for his athletic department. Bash A&M with silly little disses if you want, but its not just A&M he has to deal with, its the undefined (at this point) SEC footprint in the great state of Texas. What he knows is that undefined footprint will begin to become clearer soon. His job is to mitigate the short term impact of it. He won't be around for the long term impact.
@John at MrSEC Sorry, going to break the commandment of not responding. You actually won on this one. I will do the mia culpa here. You are correct, your figures are solid and I led with my face and hit your knuckles. You are being the gentleman by deferring, but we both know you got me.
Next time I will try to actually think before I respond. Novel concept I know, but will try.
Apologies.
@John at MrSEC And I don't know about never paying to respond to anyone. if you didn't get to smack someone every now and again, why would you do this? Sometimes you just need the target practice. And I do like the research, even if I am in the dog house for being stupid about Missouri recruiting stats.
Okay, I'll take that I need to be a bit more aware of the time zone shift and the work load of someone on the keyboards in the AM while I am still in the PM, but honestly (and not protesting here) the first sentence is actually an agreement with you, phrased incompletely perhaps. "USC is not likely to benefit any more, or any less, than other schools that come to Texas," might have been a better way to start. I AGREE with you that Spurrier is dealing with a little irony. My point (poorly stated) was that Spurrier may know he has an opening in Texas, but the down side for him is that his advantage (In my opinion) is not any greater than other schools that show up in Texas because they are closer to home (and have been there many more times than USC, as you pointed out in your response.
Really was agreeing with you, just trying to put my two cents in that Spurrier has competition in that regard who have a better name brand to start with than USC (Alabama, LSU, Miss, etc.)
Again, apologize for appearing to rain on your post.
@John at MrSEC What? Man you need to read what I wrote, cause you are just manufacturing a disagreement when there was none.
All I said was everybody is going to get a bump up from recruiting in Texas. Now my turn to tell you not to put words in my mouth. I never said I was close to Carolina's coach. I said in my post that going to Texas was a big deal "and Spurrier knows that," WHICH IS EXACTLY THE POINT YOU WERE MAKING. "If you are in the West, you are going to get exposure. Alabama, LSU, and Arkansas are going to benefit more than USC, just because they are closer to home," does not mean USC is not going to benefit, that means I think the teams in the West are going to benefit more..... because they are closer.... and they are going to go to Texas every two years. Now if that sets you off..... wow.
I thought the purpose of posting on a sports blog, was to give an opinion. Go back and see if anything I wrote is a personal attack on you, your work, your sources, intelligence or maturity. There is not one word, phrase or point that does any of that. Not one. Until now, cause your response was borderline stupid.
You seem hell bent on manufacturing insults because I agreed and expanded on much of what you wrote, so if my agreeing with 95% of what you wrote was not enough, or if my using the words "and Spurrier knows that," somehow makes the veins in your brain housing group pop, my turn to tell you that you sound like I put up a brick wall and you are arguing with it. Really. the only thing you can remotely take as a disagreement with your post is that I expanded your initial thought on USC benefiting from A&M being in the SEC to every team in the conference, but mostly the teams in the West. Sorry.
If that is your threshold for coming on like a jerk, I promise to never, ever respond to one of your articles with a line that has the following words in it, "and Spurrier knows that." I also promise never, ever to agree or disagree with a single word you write. What a concept.
Seems to me that is what it will take, unless you want a promise to never, ever to give an opinion on anything that happens concerning football in my native state of Texas, because all those thoughts are the property of John at MrSEC, because you talk to people in that state who are in football programs. Heck, seems to me that the purpose of this blog is not for us to comment on what you write but to accept it without comment. Wow, again, what a concept. Should have picked up on that before this.
Sorry Bub, but you went off the deep end on this one. Not expecting you to even consider that you might have gone off half cocked here, cause tonight you seem to want to be pissed off for no reason. Hope that works for you, but my presence here helps make you money, not the other way around. And no, that does not mean you have to take crap from us, but you might want to think that your dumping unwarranted crap on any of us is part of the bargain either.
Again, am I missing something here? What words, exactly, did I put in your mouth? Not a one. I asked a question about perception. You are the pro here, you get paid for putting this up, and actually your first sentence in response is pretty funny when taken in context with the next paragraph. Good, direct and well delivered defense of solid research (and followed by a right cross. The sign of a well educated pro.
The rest, not so much. Now I'll tell you the same thing you told me, go back and do research. Not one of my posts insult the quality of content on this site, or the authors. I never play "gotcha" with the writers. You want me to try another site, no problem. But if you look up my posts, you might understand why your last sentence is every bit as much gibberish (and unprofessional) as anything I ever directed at you or this site.
Want to keep readers, try behaving toward the reader like you admonish the rest of us to act on this site. Got it, you catch a lot of crap. If I offended you, I apologize, really. Let me know if you find anything in my posts that tracks to the, "try another site." Not waiting on baited breath though.
Did I miss something here? Missouri has had a pretty solid football program for a while. When are we going to stop saying, "Wow, Missouri can actually manage a top quality sports program from the backwaters of the US?" Oklahoma has been doing one heck of a job in a state that defines a limited home grown talent pool. They make up for it by going next door and recruiting their butts off, but you don't hear folks saying, "Gee, what a surprise, they have a lot of talent lined up." While the SEC may give the Tigers a boost, would think that in order to make the statement that Mizzou is a surprise success in recruiting, because they have been in the SEC for 12 seconds, lets get a before and after snapshot.