- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Difference between Aggies and TU
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:52 pm
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:52 pm
I’m the fourth in a row in my family to have my name. The first one, a native of a small town in Central Texas, was a Longhorn. His son, my grandfather, was a military man and an Aggie. My father was also a military man, also an Aggie. I skipped the military and went to Texas, following a family tradition of sorts.
So I was raised in an Aggie household. Both of my godfathers are Aggies. I went to 20+ Aggie games as a kid, including the Cotton Bowl against Notre Dame. I watched Kevin Murray, Greg Hill, Leeland McElroy, and Quentin Coryatt. I never could buy into the martial atmosphere, but Kyle Field is a hell of a place to watch a football game.
It was never really explained to me why, but my Dad and Grandfather both hated UT with a passion. I use the word “hated” here, but that’s not entirely accurate. Both fairly reasonable men, they acknowledged UT’s superiority in the humanities and softer sciences, while claiming A&M’s superiority in engineering and the hard sciences. Their feelings were never explained to me, but over time I figured them out. Their hatred was based really on two things: (1) football; and (2) Vietnam.
This is the Old A&M
The first of those bases is the easiest one to detail. When my Dad and Grandfather went to A&M it was an all-male military school. You were in the Corp. Then you went into the military. This culture was not conducive to attracting high-level football recruits. As the result, A&M was almost uniformly terrible in the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s. In fact, from 1945 through 1984, 39 years, A&M won only three Southwest Conference Titles. That’s right, 3 for 39, meaning there was a 1 out of 13 chance that A&M would win the conference each year. And this conference included Rice, Baylor, and UH. Their best record over that period was 10-2 in 1975. They were regularly trounced by Texas. This is the A&M my father attended, the one that my Grandfather watched play football on TV.
This is Why I’m Hot
Over this same 1945 – 1984 period, UT won 17 Southwest Conference titles. That means that UT won over 43% of the SWC titles over that period against A&M’s 7.6%. From a football standpoint, the Aggies – like my Dad and Grandfather — hated UT with a passion. It’s easy to see why. UT had the big money from the PUF, the pretty girls, the better football teams, and the rich urban alumni. A&M had the military kids from small towns across the state, and not too much else other than pride
So I was raised in an Aggie household. Both of my godfathers are Aggies. I went to 20+ Aggie games as a kid, including the Cotton Bowl against Notre Dame. I watched Kevin Murray, Greg Hill, Leeland McElroy, and Quentin Coryatt. I never could buy into the martial atmosphere, but Kyle Field is a hell of a place to watch a football game.
It was never really explained to me why, but my Dad and Grandfather both hated UT with a passion. I use the word “hated” here, but that’s not entirely accurate. Both fairly reasonable men, they acknowledged UT’s superiority in the humanities and softer sciences, while claiming A&M’s superiority in engineering and the hard sciences. Their feelings were never explained to me, but over time I figured them out. Their hatred was based really on two things: (1) football; and (2) Vietnam.
This is the Old A&M
The first of those bases is the easiest one to detail. When my Dad and Grandfather went to A&M it was an all-male military school. You were in the Corp. Then you went into the military. This culture was not conducive to attracting high-level football recruits. As the result, A&M was almost uniformly terrible in the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s. In fact, from 1945 through 1984, 39 years, A&M won only three Southwest Conference Titles. That’s right, 3 for 39, meaning there was a 1 out of 13 chance that A&M would win the conference each year. And this conference included Rice, Baylor, and UH. Their best record over that period was 10-2 in 1975. They were regularly trounced by Texas. This is the A&M my father attended, the one that my Grandfather watched play football on TV.
This is Why I’m Hot
Over this same 1945 – 1984 period, UT won 17 Southwest Conference titles. That means that UT won over 43% of the SWC titles over that period against A&M’s 7.6%. From a football standpoint, the Aggies – like my Dad and Grandfather — hated UT with a passion. It’s easy to see why. UT had the big money from the PUF, the pretty girls, the better football teams, and the rich urban alumni. A&M had the military kids from small towns across the state, and not too much else other than pride
8
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:53 pm to fwatts003
Didn't read. Stop calling UT tu. Jesus. It sounds so childish and makes you look petty.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:53 pm to fwatts003
Part 2
The second driver of the UT hatred was cultural — Vietnam, essentially. My Dad was at A&M in the late 60’s, when it was far more Muskogee than it was San Francisco. To him, the A&M/UT divide was the difference between hippies and military men, big town liberal sensibilities and small town patriotism, the idle class and the working class, urban and rural. For someone coming from small-town Texas, with no draft deferment on the horizon, Austin and its counter-culture were a terrifying other. There are plenty of exceptions to these generalizations and I mean no offense, but I think it’s important to understand how other folks perceive things. For my Dad and Grandfather, A&M was old, hard-working America and UT was hedonistic, good-timing, draft-dodging new America.
Jackie Sherrill and the Boys
For my Dad and Grandfather, the Jackie Sherrill-era Aggies changed everything. Finally, for the first time since the beginning of WWII, A&M had a football program with a national profile. Those teams, the vaunted “Wrecking Crews,” punched people in the mouth and ran down their throats. Meanwhile, UT was adrift in the wilderness, cycling through coaches and still paying some of the tab it ran up as one of the last major programs to embrace African-American athletes. To quote a wonderful line from “Sleep Enough to Dream, an old True Believers song, from the Aggies’ perspective, “the books were balanced, for a little awhile.”
“Sleep Enough to Dream” by the True Believers, featuring Jon Dee Graham and the Escovedo brothers
But of course Sherrill was cheating. And of course, he got caught. And UT finally got back on track, hiring a coach who completely resurrected the program and its image. A guy who figured out how to communicate with recruits and their parents. Mack Brown. A&M returned to the bottom of the conference.
When I decided to go to UT no one in my family was all that surprised. After all, I was a long-haired kid who played soccer and wrote for fun. But I started my first year in Austin with the serious belief, ingrained in me since birth, that UT and A&M were death-enemies, polar opposites, defined by their opposition to one another. What I found surprised me – from a UT perspective, the OU game was HUGE, while the A&M game was slightly less interesting than the Tech game, albeit with more history. Older Longhorn fans understood the roots of the rivalry, but people my age, in their mid-30s, really didn’t.
The thing is, A&M has always defined itself as “not UT.” This made sense to the guys from my Dad’s and Grandfather’s eras. UT had long ago stopped defining itself as anything other than what it is: UT. The difference in these self-definitions persists to today, when A&M is a major research university with students from all over the state, similar in many ways to what UT always was. That’s the thing that no current Aggie or Longhorn seems to be able to understand. They are not what they were. And we really do not care as much. Our historical differences have shrunk dramatically, but the Aggies are still defining themselves as not being fast-talking, hip and cool, congenitally rich, city-slickers from Austin. Younger UT fans do not understand the real, old historical difference, or the pride that the Aggies feel in being opposed to what they perceive UT standing for. Aggies do not understand that the most visceral hatred always belongs to the outsiders; UT is not now, and never has been, an outsider. It’s a culture war, played by proxies.
These are the things out of which historical rivalries are built! Real Madrid is for the Francoists, Barcelona for the Catalan separatists. Celtic is a Catholic squad, Rangers is Protestant. Man United is the posh club, Man City is the working man’s club. Boca Jrs. is the working class immigrant team, River Plate is nicknamed the “Millionarios.” These things matter. They make sports matter
The second driver of the UT hatred was cultural — Vietnam, essentially. My Dad was at A&M in the late 60’s, when it was far more Muskogee than it was San Francisco. To him, the A&M/UT divide was the difference between hippies and military men, big town liberal sensibilities and small town patriotism, the idle class and the working class, urban and rural. For someone coming from small-town Texas, with no draft deferment on the horizon, Austin and its counter-culture were a terrifying other. There are plenty of exceptions to these generalizations and I mean no offense, but I think it’s important to understand how other folks perceive things. For my Dad and Grandfather, A&M was old, hard-working America and UT was hedonistic, good-timing, draft-dodging new America.
Jackie Sherrill and the Boys
For my Dad and Grandfather, the Jackie Sherrill-era Aggies changed everything. Finally, for the first time since the beginning of WWII, A&M had a football program with a national profile. Those teams, the vaunted “Wrecking Crews,” punched people in the mouth and ran down their throats. Meanwhile, UT was adrift in the wilderness, cycling through coaches and still paying some of the tab it ran up as one of the last major programs to embrace African-American athletes. To quote a wonderful line from “Sleep Enough to Dream, an old True Believers song, from the Aggies’ perspective, “the books were balanced, for a little awhile.”
“Sleep Enough to Dream” by the True Believers, featuring Jon Dee Graham and the Escovedo brothers
But of course Sherrill was cheating. And of course, he got caught. And UT finally got back on track, hiring a coach who completely resurrected the program and its image. A guy who figured out how to communicate with recruits and their parents. Mack Brown. A&M returned to the bottom of the conference.
When I decided to go to UT no one in my family was all that surprised. After all, I was a long-haired kid who played soccer and wrote for fun. But I started my first year in Austin with the serious belief, ingrained in me since birth, that UT and A&M were death-enemies, polar opposites, defined by their opposition to one another. What I found surprised me – from a UT perspective, the OU game was HUGE, while the A&M game was slightly less interesting than the Tech game, albeit with more history. Older Longhorn fans understood the roots of the rivalry, but people my age, in their mid-30s, really didn’t.
The thing is, A&M has always defined itself as “not UT.” This made sense to the guys from my Dad’s and Grandfather’s eras. UT had long ago stopped defining itself as anything other than what it is: UT. The difference in these self-definitions persists to today, when A&M is a major research university with students from all over the state, similar in many ways to what UT always was. That’s the thing that no current Aggie or Longhorn seems to be able to understand. They are not what they were. And we really do not care as much. Our historical differences have shrunk dramatically, but the Aggies are still defining themselves as not being fast-talking, hip and cool, congenitally rich, city-slickers from Austin. Younger UT fans do not understand the real, old historical difference, or the pride that the Aggies feel in being opposed to what they perceive UT standing for. Aggies do not understand that the most visceral hatred always belongs to the outsiders; UT is not now, and never has been, an outsider. It’s a culture war, played by proxies.
These are the things out of which historical rivalries are built! Real Madrid is for the Francoists, Barcelona for the Catalan separatists. Celtic is a Catholic squad, Rangers is Protestant. Man United is the posh club, Man City is the working man’s club. Boca Jrs. is the working class immigrant team, River Plate is nicknamed the “Millionarios.” These things matter. They make sports matter
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:54 pm to fwatts003
No one is reading all that shite.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:55 pm to fwatts003
I don't get it big Dan?
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:03 pm to fwatts003
Reminds me a lot of the AU/UA rivalry. Back in the day, UA was where the "phony rich folk" went to college to become doctors and lawyers and such, and Auburn was there the "poor farm folk" went to study agriculture or engineering. Even though we've both moved far beyond our respective roots, a lot of people can't see that we're really not all that different anymore.
That being said, War Eagle and Go to Hell Alabama.
That being said, War Eagle and Go to Hell Alabama.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:09 pm to TheSandman
It is interesting the dichotomy present in many states with their schools.
Arkansas, although a Land Grant School, quickly de-emphasised the AG part of the school.
We always had a law school and fine arts school.
I think it was just a coincidence of being located in the least agricultural region of the state that agriculture rapidly got pushed aside.
We were once called Arkansas Industrial University, but its always been a mix of all of the programs found at any major university.
We admitted women from the start and African Americans in the 1940s. We never had the military thing going on real strong here, either.
Arkansas, although a Land Grant School, quickly de-emphasised the AG part of the school.
We always had a law school and fine arts school.
I think it was just a coincidence of being located in the least agricultural region of the state that agriculture rapidly got pushed aside.
We were once called Arkansas Industrial University, but its always been a mix of all of the programs found at any major university.
We admitted women from the start and African Americans in the 1940s. We never had the military thing going on real strong here, either.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:20 pm to wmr
Your post rings truer since Texas passed the 10% legislation, where anyone in the top 10% of their class is guaranteed admission to A&M or UT.
Before that time, A&M attracted more East Texas, West Texas, and rural applicants. Now, there's more Dallas / Houston / San Antonio kids at A&M than ever before, because they can get a guaranteed in and scholarship $$$ to boot.
But spare us a little on the indifference. Texas coaches can lose to OU for years and keep their job--lose too many in a row to A&M and they get fired. Look it up.
Texas likes to beat OU more but hates to lose to A&M more.
Before that time, A&M attracted more East Texas, West Texas, and rural applicants. Now, there's more Dallas / Houston / San Antonio kids at A&M than ever before, because they can get a guaranteed in and scholarship $$$ to boot.
But spare us a little on the indifference. Texas coaches can lose to OU for years and keep their job--lose too many in a row to A&M and they get fired. Look it up.
Texas likes to beat OU more but hates to lose to A&M more.
This post was edited on 9/28/11 at 9:24 pm
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:56 pm to Smoke Ring
Keep it on Texags
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:01 pm to Rickie
quote:
Difference between Aggies and TU
Another difference is that 'horns can get to the frickin point in less than 100 words.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:02 pm to fwatts003
Nobody on this board or any board will read something that long.
Damn you aggies suck.
Damn you aggies suck.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:15 pm to Scruffy
They have to convince themselves they are relevant and UT somehow isn't better than them
It takes many many words
It takes many many words
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:44 pm to Smoke Ring
quote:
But spare us a little on the indifference. Texas coaches can lose to OU for years and keep their job--lose too many in a row to A&M and they get fired. Look it up.
Texas likes to beat OU more but hates to lose to A&M more.
Again, aggy sees a correlation, but lacks the ability to understand causation.
UT can lose to a topflight football school like OU, and the coach can keep his job. Losing to an inferior football school will get you fired.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:49 pm to iHorn
Posted on 9/28/11 at 11:31 pm to busey
Hello, iHorn.
Why are you batting 50% against an "inferior" football school during my 37 year-old existence?
Just more t-sip spastic bullshite. You are a 50/50 school against your Maroon and White daddies, and now we will be playing real teams in the SEC.
No wonder y'all shite your bed and pissed your pants and your AD talks about a 2-bit LHN that no one can see, but refuses to play TEXAS A&M.
You have a vagina and you are scared. If you are not scared, then play us.
Whooooops! Still scared 
Why are you batting 50% against an "inferior" football school during my 37 year-old existence?
Just more t-sip spastic bullshite. You are a 50/50 school against your Maroon and White daddies, and now we will be playing real teams in the SEC.
No wonder y'all shite your bed and pissed your pants and your AD talks about a 2-bit LHN that no one can see, but refuses to play TEXAS A&M.
You have a vagina and you are scared. If you are not scared, then play us.
Whooooops! Still scared
Posted on 9/29/11 at 1:00 am to Smoke Ring
quote:
Why are you batting 50% against an "inferior" football school during my 37 year-old existence?
Because the Aggies cheated their arse off in the 1980's with Jackie Sherrill. Read the OP, he validates this. R.C. Slocum was his bag-man (the man who oversaw the money transactions). Supposedly happened a few times in the underground garage at Northpark Mall in Dallas.
Jackie Sherrill coincided with Texas' worst stretch of football since the middle 1950's. And what did the Aggies get out of it? Two major probations with severe lack of institutional control and a string of championships in a dying, decaying conference. That's it.
Read this link about their cheating ways
SMU and the Aggies took cheating to a whole 'nother level. Fred Akers, a decent coach for Texas, paid the price (so to speak).
A&M won 10 of 11 contests during that cheating stretch. That severely skews that "record even during my lifetime" baloney.
Jackie Sherrill is a crook. He left a mess wherever he went. Just ask Mississippi State.
To sum up, the only time A&M held an upper hand was when they had cheating bastards running the show, namely, Bear Bryant and Jackie Sherrill.
This post was edited on 9/29/11 at 1:02 am
Posted on 9/29/11 at 1:35 am to texashorn
quote:
To sum up, the only time A&M held an upper hand was when they had cheating bastards running the show, namely, Bear Bryant and Jackie Sherrill.
I think you are about to feel the wrath of Bama Nation!
Posted on 9/29/11 at 7:29 am to CPT Tiger
quote:
Because the Aggies cheated their arse off in the 1980's
Posted on 9/29/11 at 9:24 am to Gunner
hopefully we will leave the saw'em off bs behind when we join the SEC next year
Posted on 9/29/11 at 9:33 am to leoj
quote:
Texas likes to beat OU more but hates to lose to A&M more.
Did this guy just take a shot at his own school?
Ou is an all time great program. ADs can live with losing to an all time great program but they have less patience when their coaches lose to inferior programs.
I don't think the A&M guy even realizes the point he made.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News