Win % since last conference realignments.

[ALA2262]

Only two schools have improved their win % in football. Syracuse and aTm.

 

[DogPatch]

I would not have predicted aTm's win percentage increasing at all, much less that much.

 

[Redwood Forrest]

I think A&M got a Texas size boost in recruiting, being in the SEC. I look for both the newbies to do the same.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Amazing what happens when go from Dennis Francione & Mike Sherman to Kevin Sumlin & Jimbo Fisher. Must be the conference.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

1) Where does that 54-54 come from?
FBS, I assume, in which case we're looking at the Ags from 2003-2011, 9 years (okay)

2) But...it's not as impressive as folks want to pretend.
- they're 9-0 against Arkansas, who is in a historic down pattern for them, next-level awful
- Aggies were 0-3 when the contract started before Petrino wrecked his motorcycle with his cupcake on-board
- that drops you to 59 wins, one overmatched opponent
- ATM didn't get to play Kansas every year in the Big 12, and they lost in 2007
- two more wins are against terrible Tennessee teams
- three more wins are against Vanderbilt, which is better than their performance against KU

Finally, I'd argue that the Ags played bigger name OOC games in the Big 12 because they HAD to because of the money and bowl situation, they don't require that extra oomph in the SEC.

0-2 vs Miami in 2007 and 2008

What I'm saying is that it's a statistic without a significance.


Subtract Arkansas - who used to be around Okie State level at least (4-4 in the time in question).

In other words - just like the alleged success of Rich Rodriguez "taking the wood to the SEC" at WVA, this is hype without reality. Ok, so let's say maybe they're five wins better over nine years, which is 1/2 win per year.

That sounds about right to me. "Ooh, we get the Texas market , SEC!" and improve by 1/2 game per year.

Sounds about like what the state of Texas can actually help you do.

 

[TideEngineer08]

A statistic I heard the other day is when Texas A&M left the Big 12 for the SEC, Texas was signing 32% of the blue chip rated prospects from the state of Texas while A&M was signing 11%. Today those numbers have shifted to Texas signing 20% and A&M signing 18%. Obviously, teams like Alabama have gained ground in that state over the last decade.

The point being, that the SEC logo has indeed benefited A&M in recruiting. Although, until last season's 10-1 run, it's difficult to say it's actually produced on the field results. For Texas, IMO, it is unknown whether or not their fall in recruiting is a result of more SEC presence in their state or their own ineptitude. They've still been rated in the top 10 to 15 in most years over the last decade. So it's not like they've turned into Rice or something.

It will be interesting to observe where things go from here.

 

[CoolBreeze]

A statistic I heard the other day is when Texas A&M left the Big 12 for the SEC, Texas was signing 32% of the blue chip rated prospects from the state of Texas while A&M was signing 11%. Today those numbers have shifted to Texas signing 20% and A&M signing 18%. Obviously, teams like Alabama have gained ground in that state over the last decade.

The point being, that the SEC logo has indeed benefited A&M in recruiting. Although, until last season's 10-1 run, it's difficult to say it's actually produced on the field results. For Texas, IMO, it is unknown whether or not their fall in recruiting is a result of more SEC presence in their state or their own ineptitude. They've still been rated in the top 10 to 15 in most years over the last decade. So it's not like they've turned into Rice or something.

It will be interesting to observe where things go from here.

Good stuff there. I think that the Horns stand to gain the most out of an SEC move. We have seen a shift of blue chippers announcing for SEC schools over the past few years and UT is poised to take advantage of that more than anyone in my view. It would benefit the SEC in general as well. TAMU has already capitalized on this and do not see this affecting them but all the other Texas schools and maybe Oklahoma could suffer a blow though.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

A statistic I heard the other day is when Texas A&M left the Big 12 for the SEC, Texas was signing 32% of the blue chip rated prospects from the state of Texas while A&M was signing 11%. Today those numbers have shifted to Texas signing 20% and A&M signing 18%. Obviously, teams like Alabama have gained ground in that state over the last decade.

The point being, that the SEC logo has indeed benefited A&M in recruiting. Although, until last season's 10-1 run, it's difficult to say it's actually produced on the field results. For Texas, IMO, it is unknown whether or not their fall in recruiting is a result of more SEC presence in their state or their own ineptitude. They've still been rated in the top 10 to 15 in most years over the last decade. So it's not like they've turned into Rice or something.

It will be interesting to observe where things go from here.

I won't dispute the argument that they sign more blue chippers.

What I'm saying is that the assumption being a good football player in Texas is actually meaningful is oh about 20 years out of date.