🏈 Can Texas A&M and Missouri cut it in the SEC?

[BAMANEWSBOT]

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Missouri wasn't ready when the Big 12 started in 1996. That's the candid assessment of Missouri Athletics Director Mike Alden, who arrived in 1998 and says the school waited too long to invest money into budgets, recruiting and facilities.

Many years of mediocrity followed. During 16 years in the Big 12, Missouri captured two division titles in football and finally won the conference tournaments in men's basketball and baseball during its final season.

So Missouri reassessed its facilities, recruiting and fundraising upon agreeing to join the SEC. The university wants to meet the reality of joining perhaps the nation's most competitive conference.

"I think we'll be competitive," Alden said. "I say that with humility in that I think that our program and our coaches and our kids have done a great job of being very competitive. ... Our kids know, our coaches know, that we have to step up our game."

How newcomers Texas A&M and Missouri fare in the SEC hovers over the upcoming 2012-13 sports season. While the excitement builds among their fans, the final answers won't come immediately.

Read More Here...

 

[aoterrell22]

I have played every sport in the book, but now I am limited to just a "long walk ruined" (golf) and the one thing I have always been aware of is that I play up or down to my competition. The better the competition the better I play.

I think Missouri and Texas A&M will improve as part of the SEC, it may take a few bad seasons, but I fully expect them to be competitive much like South Carolina and Arkansas became once they joined the SEC.

Both Texas A&M and Missouri have won some pretty big games over the years, and I would not be surprised if they don't win some big games against SEC teams in the near future...

South Carolina took almost 20 years to win the east. It was a different time because Florida was so strong.

It took Arkansas four years to win the west. They did it with an average season. Bama, Auburn, and Arkansas finished that year with eight wins I think.

With the east down, don't you think Mizzou will have an easier road than A&M?

 

[rammerjammer]

I agree on both of you guys assessment. I think Mizzou and aTm are similar to what USCjr and Arky were. Obviously Arky was better prepared to join up than USCjr, and more competitive early on. I think Mizzou is better prepared for the transition than USC was and will be able to win sooner, especially with the east being a toss up. UT and UF are still questionable as to how good they are going to be. UGA/USCjr are the ones everyone is expecting to compete for it. As big a cakewalk as UGA has for a schedule I fully expect them to be the team to beat over there.

 

[jdpas29]

i think in a lot of sports other than football, both schools will make an immediate impact and will compete well.

in football, i think tamu will be competitive long before mizzou will on a consistent basis. it will be several years before mizzou will be steadily formidable in football.

eventually i think they will both eventually rise to the level of a uga or so... with tamu having the possibility of being a notch better.

 

[TerryP]

i think in a lot of sports other than football, both schools will make an immediate impact and will compete well.

in football, i think tamu will be competitive long before mizzou will on a consistent basis. it will be several years before mizzou will be steadily formidable in football.

eventually i think they will both eventually rise to the level of a uga or so... with tamu having the possibility of being a notch better.

I don't know jd.

Eight out of the last ten years Mizzou has finished with a better conference record than A&M; one year they were tied.

Mizzou has a system in place and it's been in place for 11 years. A&M is in their first year with Sumlin.

Then we have the SEC east vs the SEC west.

Logic says Mizzou competes more quickly.

 

[planomateo]

Texas A&M is in the same recruiting area they have always been in - hasn't really worked out yet has it. They are still recruiting against the bigger schools in the Big XII and from the SEC. Until they get a coach who can put a solid system in place, they will be middle of the SEC. They will be competing against the strongest teams in the SEC, whereas Missouri gets arguably easier teams (West vs East). IIRC, Texas A&M facility is nice, but it doesn't really compare to the recruiting tools of the other bigger schools in the SEC.

Texas outclassed them years ago with facilities and has been doing it for a very long time - (I'm going back to the Jackie Sherrill days). Texas A&M can sell being in the SEC to recruits, but make no doubt about it, Texas will be selling the same thing to recruits - ie, Texas has an easier path to a championship compared to Texas A&M being in the SEC West.

Texas A&M in my opinion has the most upside or potential, but they have to have the right coaches in place for it to work.

The home of the 12th man and they only seat 83k, seriously come on..n We've had A-day games bigger than their largest crowd ever of 90k.

Texas A&M gives about 30k seats to students - that will change over the next few years - this has been a topic of discussion with me and an Aggie - he says it won't happen, I told him - you moved to the SEC, so that tells me anything is on the table.

Ask yourself, if Texas A&M has so much money...when are they gonna use it - I say this because I get to hear this alot living in Texas

 

[Bo]

In the long run, I see A&M bieng the most successful, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Mizzou compete for the East this coming season.

 

[TerryP]

Texas A&M is in the same recruiting area they have always been in - hasn't really worked out yet has it. They are still recruiting against the bigger schools in the Big XII and from the SEC. Until they get a coach who can put a solid system in place, they will be middle of the SEC. They will be competing against the strongest teams in the SEC, whereas Missouri gets arguably easier teams (West vs East). IIRC, Texas A&M facility is nice, but it doesn't really compare to the recruiting tools of the other bigger schools in the SEC.

Texas outclassed them years ago with facilities and has been doing it for a very long time - (I'm going back to the Jackie Sherrill days). Texas A&M can sell being in the SEC to recruits, but make no doubt about it, Texas will be selling the same thing to recruits - ie, Texas has an easier path to a championship compared to Texas A&M being in the SEC West.

Texas A&M in my opinion has the most upside or potential, but they have to have the right coaches in place for it to work.

The home of the 12th man and they only seat 83k, seriously come on..n We've had A-day games bigger than their largest crowd ever of 90k.

Texas A&M gives about 30k seats to students - that will change over the next few years - this has been a topic of discussion with me and an Aggie - he says it won't happen, I told him - you moved to the SEC, so that tells me anything is on the table.

Ask yourself, if Texas A&M has so much money...when are they gonna use it - I say this because I get to hear this alot living in Texas

Endowments vs donations to the Athletic Department. Is that the difference?

 

[planomateo]

Could be, I want to say most of their endowment is tied up in land and other investments somewhere...could be wrong.

I just get to hear all the time how wealthy and connected TAMU is, which is why I ask the question.

 

[psychojoe]

My Longhorn buddy tells me that the aggies have a little brother complex similar to what the aubs have displayed over the years. Certainly their season last year showed that. High expectations that came down to earth in fourth quarter crashes. Until they show me they have some toughness about them I am going to say Mizzou does better. Mizzou actually found some defense down the stretch last season.

 

[planomateo]

My Longhorn buddy tells me that the aggies have a little brother complex similar to what the aubs have displayed over the years.

yes they do, its probably worse than Auburn...but I haven't lived in Alabama since '93 (holy crap that seems like forever), so maybe Auburn is still bad

 

[rtauburnsucks]

I think Texas A & M can be really good in the SEC. They have a huge state to recruit and tons of money from alumini.

 

[TerryP]

I think Texas A & M can be really good in the SEC. They have a huge state to recruit and tons of money from alumini.

They've had the same in the Big12, but haven't been "really good."

What changes other than the conference they're joining is stronger as a whole than the one they are leaving?

 

[planomateo]

^^^^ you hit the nail on the head - why all the sudden do they get better. They were already in an easier conference - maybe they'll start playing up to competition now?

I'll be interested to see what offense they put in place and how it changes over time.

 

[TerryP]

^^^^ you hit the nail on the head - why all the sudden do they get better. They were already in an easier conference - maybe they'll start playing up to competition now?

I'll be interested to see what offense they put in place and how it changes over time.

I've not heard Sumlin indicate he's changing his approach to their offensive philosophy. The only change I've seen is a class that seems to be focusing on the line of scrimmage. BUT, I have no clue what they had returning this year.

Pinkel has stated he has no intentions of changing their philosophy.

Here's another point to consider.

When Spurrier took over the South Carolina program what did he employ? The "Cock and Fire."

What's his offensive philosophy today?

If you look over the last decade how much of a difference do you find in USC's recruiting classes and those of A&M or Mizzou?

 

[MunchyOs]

I agree that Missouri will adjust to life in the big league a lot faster than Texas A&M will. The only real bright side for A&M right now is the fact that Mike Sherman is no longer at the helm. Needless to say, he wouldn't have lasted long in the SEC. Sumlin is a good coach, but for the foreseeable future, I see them at about a notch above the Mississippi teams. Missouri on the other hand could be a dark horse contender in the East in as little as a year or two.

 

[rtauburnsucks]

They've had the same in the Big12, but haven't been "really good."

What changes other than the conference they're joining is stronger as a whole than the one they are leaving?

I guess nothing really. If A&M gets the right coach though, I think they could be strong eventually.

 

[TerryP]

I guess nothing really. If A&M gets the right coach though, I think they could be strong eventually.

I think Kevin Sumlin might be a good coach. We'll see how he adjusts to the life in a conference that size. He did a great job at Houston, but how much of that is credited to Art Briles? CAB certainly changed the culture at Houston much as he's beginning to do at Baylor.

The thing about A&M is not unlike things we've seen at Bama and a few other SEC schools. You have some BOT members, along with influential alumni, who have forced the hand of the powers that be on campus.

The royally screwed the pooch when they fired Slocum. I'm not talking about their decision to hire Franchione, although that certainly accented their decision. In a nutshell, they fired the best coach they'd ever had in College Station. The Aggies got all pissed because of his post-season record—3-8—while ignoring the fact he had a better winning percentage than any coach in their history.

History, that includes names like Dana Bible, Coach Bryant, Coach Stallings...

It's possible to win and win big in College Station. But, it's a necessity to be able to control those groups I mentioned earlier. I don't know if Sumlin can. I don't think they'll allow him to do so.