It's amusing to read a lot of the stuff that's out there either on boards or even opinion (re: puff) pieces from, well ridiculous dudes (none of the idiots who post stupid stuff are women except for Heather Dinnich).
It always made sense for the SEC to take aTm into the conference due to simple economics: you add millions of eyes in one of the largest states in the US, enabling you to get more money from the TV networks et al your next negotiation (among many other economic positives). Missouri has two large markets as well so even that move made some economic sense for the conference.
But I'm hearing the same nonsensical comments elsewhere (esp here in state) that I heard over a decade ago: somehow, these two schools moving to the SEC is going to GIVE THEM A HUGE EDGE IN RECRUITING IN TEXAS and MAKE THEM POWERHOUSES. In fact, they're dogging on aTm by noting - correctly imho - that aTm tried to scuttle the whole deal when they leaked it.
There is - apparently among some really clueless fans mind you - this narrative of "players want to play in the SEC." Well, yeah, but I doubt a single recruit ever sat at home and said to himself, "yeah, I know Oklahoma is offering me a full ride but I'm going to Kentucky BECAUSE I WANNA PLAY IN THE SEC!" I seriously doubt it has ever happened in the history of the world. Now...I can at least buy the argument on a more minor scale...that maybe someone was being recruited by Texas, OU, and LSU and opted for LSU, but I would be willing to bet that had more to do with "fewer starters in front of me" or "better chance to make the NFL" or something other than "I wanna play in the SEC."
THE DATA IN HARD NUMBERS
aTm has been in the SEC now for 11 football seasons. Their overall record in that time is 90-47 (.656), and their SEC record is 48-41 (.539), meaning they're 42-6 out of conference (e.g. the Houston Nutt effect, where you run up massive win totals against the cupcakes that make your overall numbers look more impressive than they really are).Take that 9-1 Covid year away from them and they have a losing record in the SEC since coming here despite having a Heisman winner and a national championship winning head coach. And this is being the only SEC school from Texas, which was supposed to be a big advantage for the Ags.
Any of y'all bother to look at their numbers from their last 11 years in the B12?
Overall record: 71-63
Big 12 conference record: 41-48
I'm sure some superficial analysts and Tim Brando (pardon the redundancy) would look at those numbers and say, "See, they've been better in the SEC because they got talent they wouldn't have gotten." No, their SEC numbers are better for two reasons:
1) Baylor was awful prior to 2011 and the Ags went 9-2 in those years
2) Arkansas crashed (literally on a motorcycle) and is 1-10 against the Ags since they joined.
Make either of those schools a historic norm an aTm will be LUCKY to finish 8-4.
How does this affect Texas and Oklahoma?
The UNSPOKEN ASSUMPTION in all this has been "aTm got a lot of good players because SEC," but as I said, I think that's a joke in an era where every team is on TV every week. (It also runs contrary to the Ago-centric belief that people wanna come there "because of who we are," Aggie code, Roger Brooklyn Dodger). In other words, I don't think it's REALLY going to hurt the Aggies THAT much - they aren't anything but an annual 8-4 team with a 4-4 conference record. They'll be hurt by losing games to Oklahoma and sometimes Texas, but some of those losses will be exchanged for games they would have lost to Alabama or LSU anyway.
Texas is not going to dramatically improve overnight or even over the next decade on the basis of joining the SEC. They may not improve at all. Texas has been "back" for 30 of the last 40 seasons, a team with more annual "moral victories" than a Mike Shula-coached Alabama team.
Oklahoma, on the other hand, is a wild card in the deck - and they're joining at precisely the wrong time unless Venables turns it around this year. Had they come pre-Covid, I would have made them close to even money to win a division* or lose it closely due mostly to the track meet style they played under Riley, which would have overwhelmed the conference riff-raff and been a new experience for the upper echelon teams to learn. I don't think they would have won out because they accumulated tolls of hard hits would have sidelined some key players, but they would have had - and will have - a better chance than Texas will to actually win.
But I keep reading how them coming to the SEC is going to make them better because they're somehow going to get players they couldn't get before moving conferences - and I just don't think that particularly part of narrative is even close to being true.
