Yahoo! Contributor Network
This article was created on the Yahoo! Contributor Network, where users like you are published on Yahoo! every day. Learn more »Yahoo! Contributor Network
A&M moving to SEC would benefit Aggie football: Alum’s view
As a former Aggie, I've been keeping an eye on the potential move of my alma mater, Texas A&M, to the Southeastern Conference (SEC). Some think it would be a good move for the Aggies, while others feel it would lead to their demise.
I've come to the conclusion that moving to the SEC will benefit Aggie football greatly.
I'm not referring to anything involving finances. I recognize that the financial part of a possible move is an important component, but to be honest, it bores me. There are smart people in place at A&M and with the SEC to make those decisions, and I'm not even remotely qualified to judge the monetary effects on the university's or conference's coffers one way or the other.
I'm taking the perspective of a sports fan who loves competition.
In a self-serving July article by Trey Scott in the Daily Texan—the student newspaper of A&M's arch-rival, the Texas Longhorns—Scott outlines all the reasons why the Aggies—as well as Texas' other rival, Oklahoma—will crash and burn in the SEC. For A&M, it's because they'll lose a lot. For the Sooners, it's because Norman, Okla., is somehow an inferior city to Oxford, Miss., and Athens, Ga., so recruiting will apparently suffer.
I don't need Scott to remind me that since their 1996 move to the Big 12 Conference, the Aggies have been completely hapless against SEC talent, going 0-6, including 0-4 in bowl games. They haven't won a game against an SEC opponent in 16 years.
Scott takes further joy in pointing out that the Aggies haven't had a 10-win season since 1998, haven't won a bowl game in a decade, and have a 10-28 record against ranked teams since 2001. Their one and only national championship in football was in 1939.
This is a very common theme of articles opposing A&M's move to the SEC: the Aggies won't fare well against SEC teams. Sure, the money will be better in the SEC, the argument goes, but A&M will go from being a medium fish in a small pond to being a small fish in the ocean. And who in their right mind would want to give up pounding their chests after bullying weak competition year after year?
Texas sure doesn't.
This is exactly why A&M needs to move. To be the best, the Aggies have to start beating the best. In football, a switch to SEC competition will prepare them to do just that.
Since this BCS nonsense darkened the skies of college football in 1998, eight of the 12 national championships in football—including the last five in a row—have gone to SEC teams. Two have gone to Big 12 teams.
The Big 12 offers Oklahoma and Texas.
The Sooners are apparently at least mildly interested in moving on to bigger and better competition, too, which would leave Texas and their brand-spankin' new TV station to broadcast the Longhorns pounding the bejesus out of creampuffs like Baylor, Iowa State, and Kansas year in and year out in the Little 8.
It's a perfect match. The SEC would be hard-pressed to find a suitor with a larger and more devoted fan base than A&M. Rivalries already exist between the Aggies and both Arkansas and LSU, so the SEC would instantly have two games worthy of national attention, should A&M make the move.
Imagine the boost in prestige and recruiting ability that will come to A&M as a result of being in the SEC as opposed to hanging on with a dying Big 12 Conference.
And sure, there will be some growing pains, but the Aggies will get to face real competition almost every week of the season, and after a few years of adjusting to how to win in the new conference, they'll join in the SEC tradition of dominating the college football world.
Should Oklahoma join A&M in the SEC, the Longhorns get to rule their own little sandbox with no real threats to their eternal domination. Everyone's happy.
(Even better, the potential move appears to irritate ESPN, too, which makes it even more enticing to those like me who aren't fans of the worldwide "leader.")
I can't imagine a reason why this deal shouldn't go through.
Note: This article was written by a Yahoo! contributor. Sign up here to start publishing your own sports content.