I'm confused...

If I am wrong, tell me, but I keep reading about how the A&M defense was the worst in the SEC last year as we prepare for tomorrow's game against Arkansas.

How in the wide wide world of sports is that at all relevant when we have the game against South Carolina to show us that this defense can be effective against a team that has a good offensive line and wants to run the ball?

Now, is Arkansas better than Carolina at running? Absolutely. But football like most sports is a dynamic game. Rarely is one aspect of a game so strong that it obliterates the relevance of other areas.

In this case, are people really thinking that a passing offense that has not been super efficient against lesser opponents (other than Auburn) is going to all of a sudden come to life? In my (albeit somewhat cursory) review of their games against Tech and NIU, I did not see things that made me think they can pull off consistent, penetrating play action against the TAMU defense even if Matthews or Raven or Watts is moved forward to help contain the run. Now, if I am wrong about that, it could be quite a game. But from what I have read and seen, I am relatively confident that won't be the case.

But even if that is true, it would take the Aggie offense sputtering for this not to turn into an oddball shootout where we are passing and they are running. Is it possible? Yes. But I haven't seen anything from the Arkansas defense to make me think they have the personnel to get a pass rush against our offensive line, or have the personnel to keep up with our vast array of receiver options. Frankly, this is where I think A&M has an advantage over almost every school in the FBS - wide receiver depth that is eight, nine, ten players deep. As one ESPN pundit said, "Every time I turn around, another new Aggie reviever has caught a pass for a touchdown." I mean, Niederhofer? NIEDERHOFER?

Honestly, I love the guy and what he represents. Loved the story on him earlier this week, too. But it makes a point that Sumlin and Co. can take a walk on and get him that productive. He has made some plays. Can he do it against a top 30 team like Arkansas? We will see, but he looked better than most of the SMU receivers who are scholarshipped.

I do think this part of what people are saying is accurate - the most efficient offense will win. I just look at match-ups and don't see how their average defense will stop our high octane offense more than our average (in places - in other places, not so much) defense will stop their powerful offense. Just penalties alone make me think that the Arkansas offense will hiccup enough for the Aggies to win.

That being said, this brings us back to the concern I had a few days ago. We are dangerous as long as we are running well. Was the composure we saw against Carolina just getting up for one big game, or is it something we can replicate? As we have seen with other programs just this season, consistency at a high level is rare and difficult to maintain, so I can see where we have a few of our own hiccups. Like RSJ's dropped pass, or the penalties, in the first quarter against SMU. We can afford that against the Ponies. Against the Hogs, that could change the complexion of the game.

But therein lies the advantage we have. An off game from Hill is unlikely - apparently his dad has really helped him have professional level composure. An off game from the OL is also unlikely. Depth will ensure that if one player is having a tough day, someone else will step up. Same for the running backs and receivers. We are four deep at running back. That is sick. We are now ten deep at wide receiver. That is absurd. A competitive performance atmosphere will ensure that the players on the field are focused, organized and effective. It really is magnificent.

On defense, we also have depth across the defensive line and good enough players at the next two levels that unless we have a complete Auburn 2013 meltdown, Snyder will find the right moment to stall enough of their drives to give A&M the victory.

Again, I have read as much as I can, and watched Arkansas' games. Where am I off here? Are the Hogs' wide receivers as good as Carolina's? (For what it is worth, I do think Allen is better than Thompson.) Or is Arkansas's defense better than I am giving them credit?

The more I look at it, though, the more I think I have it dialed in. Too many people have images of last year's defense in their head and don't recognize that Snyder not only has better players, he has depth, especially along the defensive line. Even after this defense made Carolina look below average (a Gamecocks team that went on to beat a pretty good East Carolina team and some team from Georgia...) on offense. I mean, the line last week on the SMU game was 32. It took us a HALF to get that margin. No, I don't think that Vegas has a handle on this club yet.

But like I said at the start, if I'm wrong, tell me.

Aggies v. Arkansas - specific matchups

I was able to watch the Arkansas-Northern Illinois game and had previously watched the Ark-TT and Ark-Auburn matches, so here are some quick hits on the various match-ups.

Razorback running game v. Aggie defense will be a challenge. No doubt there. This is the thing everyone is focusing on as it was such a huge challenge for the guys last year and will be a big challenge this year. But let's bear in mind that Carolina was supposed to have a great running game, even without Davis. How exactly did that work out again? Again, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth and the Aggie version of that is our offense. Any separation will force Arkansas to pass, which leads us to...

Razorback passing game v. Aggie defense will be at worst a draw.  Why? Their WRs are not good - certainly not as good as Carolina's. And while the Arkansas OL will probably do better than Carolina's, the overall advantage will still point to the TAMU sideline. Yes, Allen is a good quarterback, but if the WRs aren't running good routes (and they haven't) or making catches (they have at times, others not so much), you could have Peyton Manning back there and it wouldn't matter. If the Aggies can open up the game and get into their style of match, that is really going to hurt Arkansas' chances.

Arkansas return game v. Aggie kickoff and punt units. There is certainly danger here. Arkansas started the game v NIU with a return for a TD. TAMU has been good at coverage and their kickers have put the ball in the right spots, but they will need to continue to do so, otherwise they could open themselves up to a real problem.

Aggie return game v. Arkansas kickoff and punt units. Without Noil, the Aggies are good but not any more dangerous than Arkansas. These two areas are probably going to be a push.

Both teams are also good in kicking extra points and field goals.

Aggie passing game v. Razorback pass defense. There are some real absurdly bad numbers out there, especially on 3rd and short, for the Arkansas defense. It plays right into the strength of the Aggie offense. Unless there are some statistical anomalies here - which is possible - this is where TAMU is going to really hurt Arkansas' ability to get them off the field. Remember how the Aggies moved the ball methodically rather than vertically against Carolina? Like that, although I do expect Arkansas' defense to be possibly more effective than Carolina's was, although the TAMU passing game has only improved, including the addition of some vertical success.

Aggie running game v. Razorback defense. It is here, though, that the Aggies are the most under-appreciated. Between the play calling of Spavital and the effectiveness when they go to it, the TAMU running attack is lethal. I, for one, love seeing the team pass, pass, pass, ohh a run, pass, pass, pass, maybe another run, pass pass and the next thing you know, we are inside the 5 and we bring in the power running game or the option running game and a gassed defense has nothing left to really put into defending it, and it is church. I saw nothing from Arkansas in their games to indicate they can prevent this from happening.

I do think that when the Aggie play elite teams like Alabama and Auburn, and possibly LSU (at the end of the year, they will have worked out some things and could get back to elite level), Mississippi State (although I am not sure just yet) and Ole Miss (at least their defense is surely elite), this dynamic will change. But against good to lesser teams, they won't be able to handle the pressure that the offense puts them under. Like Coach Boone said, "Like Novocaine, give it time, it always works." And while Arkansas is clearly a good team, they are not an elite team.

Granted, the Arkansas running game is absolutely a punch in the mouth, one that we will need to see how the Aggies react to. But unless they lose their composure, TAMU will find a way to have their success on the offensive side of the ball and the defense needs to just make a handful of stops. Here is where I trust Mark Snyder. He has time and again - especially at Alabama in 2012, and a handful of times last year (including against Arkansas) found a way to win the chess match at a key point. I loved how we won the Duke game with defense there at the end, for example. And I have loved seeing what Snyder can do with a real set of players on defense this year, and am giddy about the idea of adding to that for next year and beyond.

So looking beyond this game, I do see where the Aggies might be challenged by a better defense (Ole Miss, Alabama, maybe Mississippi State, LSU, Missouri) or an equally good offense (have you seen what Alabama is doing?, Auburn, Missouri) and that will determine how far our team can go. But for this game, no matter how hard Arkansas hits the Aggies in the mouth with the running game, it is only one area, and in the other areas, the Razorbacks are just too deficient. I have the Aggies winning 45-31 after it being close in the first quarter and a half.

Let's talk Arkansas

So the next opponent for our Fightin' Texas Aggies are the Arkansas Razorbacks, a team that for a good portion of recent history was that No. 3 team in the West that challenged two of the top three that usually was Alabama, Auburn and LSU, and sometimes challenged for the conference as a whole.

In other words, what A&M has been since joining the SEC.

In a lot of ways, 2012 was the perfect storm for Aggie success. Auburn was in an epic collapse. Flat out epic. And Arkansas had their own degeneration to deal with. Two established and quality programs were at an all time low in terms of their ability to play football.

Auburn fixed its problems quickly. The right coach took what remained of some really high levels of talent and put them right back in the mix, winning the SEC and coming 13 seconds away from winning the sixth straight national championship for the state of Alabama.

Arkansas, not so much. When Petrino spit the bit on that back road on his motorcycle and his girlfriend, he threw the entire Razorback organization into the gutter, and while they made a quality move, it was a significant move in a new direction that was going to take some time to gain traction.

Well, you are seeing that Arkansas team showing some of that traction now. Granted, it probably isn't enough yet to challenge for the division or the conference, but from what we have seen so far, they are going to make all of the top four teams (currently, Alabama, Auburn, our Aggies and Mississippi State) earn their wins, and the other two better watch out otherwise they will end up losing to the revitalized Arkies. Obviously, Auburn has already shown they can beat the Razorbacks, but that game showed the danger that Arkansas brings. A quality running game and a good, but not great, defense.

And I really really wish I hadn't deleted that game so I could go back and watch it in more detail because I think there are a lot of similarities to how the Aggies and the War Eagle Tigers play. I do think that Auburn is slightly better than A&M - mostly in terms of depth of experience and a developed roster after bringing back much of last year's team - but the Aggies are close enough both in terms of style and talent that it is a good analog. 

On the other hand, I think Arkansas has really improved since their opening match against Auburn. The have figured out how to maximize their runnning game and have developed their passing game more.

So add it all up and it seems like we have a pretty competitive game coming up. One that the Aggies should win, but it will be close enough that we need to bring the same focus we brought to the Carolina match, and we need to execute. Turnovers and penalties will the path to letting the Razorbacks into the game, hence my concerns that I wrote about yesterday.

And I have one other big concern, that is in some ways a larger umbrella version of what I wrote yesterday. Is this team as composed as it was against Carolina in all big games, and the games v. Lamar, Rice and SMU were just difficult to bring the same focus because the opponents were just not that challenging? Or did we play our best game of the year, and now we will have to work to get back to that level of play?

I think it is a fair question, but I think if you look at the actual results under Sumlin, you have rarely seen the team out of sorts, other than the two games at the end of last season that I think we can chalk a lot up to Manziel's injury and the fact that we went all in on "we have the best player in the game, let's give him room to succeed." But in so many other big games, we were never really out coached or out prepared. We were sharp and eager to play, rarely making the mistakes that cost you matches.

So the information we have in front of us - for this game and beyond - points to a consistent level of focus that will give us the best chance to win all of those games. The small sample size, and the fact that every team is new, especially in terms of senior leadership, and this team is so young. SO young.... That I will have some butterflies for pretty much every remaining game this season (other than ULM).

But this is what we wanted, right? When we signed up for this move to the SEC - we wanted to play the best to be the best? Okay then. Let's get after it then! Would not have it any other way. 

In Sumlin we Trust!

The University of Texas (at Austin) and their delusional mentality

"Texas QB Tyrone Swoopes said he, "expects to be in the College Football Playoff." This year, he said. "We have the talent to do it." With two losses? He said yes." - @kbohls (Kirk Bohls, senior writer for the Austin American Statesman)

Let me start with this - I have a lot of friends who went to and/or are fans of the Texas Longhorns. For them, to a large degree, I say this with some sadness. And actually, as I will explain below, for Aggies as well. There are so many people who are good people, good fans of the sport, who should not be colored by the mentality that is dragging down their football program. And as a citizen of Texas, I want to see all Texas football teams do well - yes, including TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, etc. I love what is happening at UTSA. I was happy to see Rice win CUSA last year.

But there are enough that are not like that, that it just has to be said - the delusional perception that "We're Texas, we should get the best players because of who we are, and we should win national championships because of who we are" is just . . . frankly, pathetic. It is a large reason that many don't like or even hate the Longhorns.

This may sound odd coming from an Aggie, but I actually don't hate the Longhorns. I cheered for Ricky Williams and Vince Young. I want them to be as good as they can be. Why? Well, one, hate just isn't a good thing. But two, the better UT-Austin is, the better football in the state of Texas is, and ultimately, the better football in the state of Texas is, the better the Aggies are going to be. I would love to see UT-Austin get back to being great and to have the Aggies play them on Thanksgiving. It would be phenomenal. For the same reason that I loved the Aggies going to the SEC, playing Alabama and LSU, etc. Play the best to be the best. Learn from conflict, grow. I am not surprised by the level of success the Aggies have had in recruiting since going to the SEC.

So I don't hate them, although I do get frustrated by Longhorns, especially when you look at all they have at their disposal, add in the arrogance that seems institutional and reflected in many of the university's actions, and you have quite a mix.

In the same way that Cowboys' fans are frustrated with Jerry Jones, you have an organization that has more resources than any other team out there, yet you squander that advantage by being self-centered and assured of your own greatness. In terms of the Cowboys - you are in a league with a hard salary cap. So why aren't you spending all of that extra money on the best coaching, scouting and facilities out there? Why are you basically operating without a general manager or a real coach? The two most important leadership positions in an NFL team and you have emasculated them both. By the way, this is nothing new. One of the issues Jimmy Johnson had with Jerry Jones was the lack of resources being put to the scouting efforts....

So here sits UT-Austin, with the most revenue of any team out there, a 100,000 seat stadium in a city that they own. Their ratings potential is always fantastic. Yet they let Mack Brown run out of quality assistant coaches and the institutional rot that follows is epic. The fact that Oklahoma has almost double the amount of national championships as UT-Austin ought to be reason alone to get Longhorns of their collective butts to make things happen. Granted, Oklahoma is very very good, but if you compare assets, it isn't even close.

Now in comes Charlie Strong. He is trying to do the right things and get them back to being a football team. As I said above, I personally hope he has success in turning the program around. I would love for it to be enough that they would be willing to play the Aggies on Thanksgiving again, and for that to be the penultimate college football game, overshadowing the Iron Bowl, etc. Yes, I will admit, in large part, I think that A&M is so far ahead of UT-Austin that no matter how much catching up they do, they won't surpass us. Even with the resources, revenue, etc., the Big XII is no comparison to the SEC. Again, play the best to be the best, and sorry charlie, but no one is going to get excited about your NFL prospects watching you play Iowa State.

The nice thing is this. It doesn't matter. The Fightin' Texas A&M Aggies are going to be fine, one way or the other. We have found a home where our unique passion for the game is not mocked, but embraced. And our team has risen to a level where we have never been before, and things are only going to get better. (I have visions of the games against Oregon in '18 and '19...)

But it does hurt my heart a little that challenging ourselves against a good team in the Longhorns just is not possible right now.

Quick footnote - as you may have surmised, there certainly things that some Longhorns have done in the past that I do hate. The arrogant dismissiveness towards other schools, obviously including A&M, is one. Efforts to have the school turned into a mental institution, for example. But the way the Longhorns generally responded - especially the Longhorn band - to the Bonfire Tragedy, really made it clear to me that there are a lot of really good people who are Longhorns, and they and their school deserve some respect. So Charlie, Dustin, Eric, Nissa, and many others, for you and those like you, I really do wish the Longhorns would do well.

As we start SEC play again, some concerns

As I wrote in my Game Grades, I have a very big concern that came from the game on Saturday. I also have some others in general for this team. I doubt I am bringing up anything the team isn't working on, and I have faith that they will address them, but let me share.

Saturday - that start to the game was unsettling. Over-hyped to play SMU? We have to be more professional than that. In fact, a lot of people were giving us a lot of credit for the South Carolina win because we weren't too hyped up - we were focused, prepared and locked in. On Saturday, we were anything but. Color me not a fan.

On top of the penalties, we just didn't start well, and that is something this team cannot afford. That first drive touchdown is something that really sets a tone for the teams, and is a huge part of Sumlin's success over the years. We *HAVE* to maintain that, and we weren't able to against SMU? Now I will give SMU some credit - it appeared they came out well prepared and were firing at full speed, but do you really think Arkansas is not going to do that, with better athletes?

As far as conference play, I do think that any team we can get ahead of, we should be able to beat. And the defenses that I see being able to really match us hat for hat is Alabama and Ole Miss. Auburn is the lone exception because their offense is the one unit that I think can go toe to toe with us. ASSUMING WE PLAY OUR BEST. Again, a start like SMU and we are in a deep hole against a few other teams. After Saturday's game in Death Valley, I have to put State in the conversation as well. My sense is that LSU made some mistakes that gave them belief, and they aren't what they have been over the past few years (too many exits for the NFL over too many years has, I think, finally caught up with them), so I am not sure that Mississippi State just beat THAT LSU squad, but they certainly showed they have a competitive defense and a good offense. And we don't know a lot about Arkansas' defense other than they got blown out by Auburn in the first week and they have been good against average to below average teams since.

I am worried about teams that can really run the ball, including Arkansas. In the traditional race of offensive styles, the ability to run the ball has been one to counteract a high powered passing game, and if anyone can do it in the SEC, right now it is Arkansas (and Alabama). Again, why scoring first is so important as it will force them to pass the ball. For what it is worth, I felt that the LSU game last year really drove home for me that the way we play offense is as much about defense as it is about our own offense. Scoring like crazy allows a less skilled defense to simplify the playbook and get after certain areas. It is why when we couldn't move the ball against LSU last year, we were in big trouble. I can see that happening against Arkansas, Ole Miss, State, Alabama, Auburn and possibly LSU and even Mizzou if they get their young guys coached up enough.

That is pretty much all of our remaining games. Fun!

But that is the thing, now we are in a challenge every week, and this team relishes a challenge, and I think Sumlin and the staff has worked hard to get them ready for that gauntlet. It is one of the things that I really respect from this team - the old adage about the team never quitting has never been more true than with this club. You don't go 12-2 on the road in the SEC without the ability to consistently bring your A game - and as we saw the last two weeks, that is a very difficult thing to do in college football (looking at you, Southern Cal, and Mizzou, and Virginia Tech and Georgia).

So yes, I am very excited about the rest of this season. Lots of talent - although not as much as we will have next year, or the year after - and the confidence that they have the tools to be the better team in every game they play. Frankly, I think the schedule works out really well for us - we are getting the three middle teams right now, where we can show that we can out-talent them. Those games can prepare us for our two toughest games against Alabama and Auburn on the road. Then we finish with teams that, if we make it through these next five, should be games we can win. Oh yes, it is all in front of us now.

I leave you with this - the next two games will determine whether this team really is in the top third of the SEC. Arkansas will be a great test, and Mississippi State on the road will tell us if we still area ahead of the middle of the pack teams. Beat State on the road, and we should be able to beat Ole Miss at home. Should be fun!

Game grades - Aggies at SMU

This is going to be short because, frankly, SMU is just awful and that was a glorified scrimmage. In some ways, I think Lamar was more competitive, at least in terms of effort and system.

Because I think it will set a tone, let's start here:

Overall - B. This was an ok effort by a team that had one last chance to really rev up before playing in the toughest division college football has ever seen (not hyperbole, folks. Check it out. This is not a good thing. Google is your friend). We will see details below, but there were some things from this that did not sit well with me. Not something that I am ringing alarm bells over, mind you, but things that raise an eyebrown and gets a hard "let's not do that again, we should be better than that" look.

QB - B. Hill threw his first interception, but ran for an almost touchdown when a play broke down. I did really like that he threw the deep ball well near the end of the first half for a touchdown. Allen was good but not great. Possibly unfairly, but I am putting some of the early mistakes on Hill here. Especially with his position and his own clear ability to handle the moment, he is one of the tone setters and overall leaders on the team, and the early penalties and mistakes are a concern.

RB - B. Brandon - seriously? Not the way to start the game. Overall, very good again, and efficient for so much of the game.

WR - B. RSJ - same thing as Brandon. That was not good. Overall, though, good effort.

OL - A. Once again, we could run at will and Hill had all the time in the world to pass. Love this unit.

DL - A. Eight sacks is really good. Wish Myles would have found a way to beat a double-team, but that is part of the growing process - now he has to adjust.

LB - B. I cannot put into words how happy I was to see Jordan Mastrogiovanni and Shaan Waashington back. This is a unit that is going to be severely tested over seven of the next eight games and we need every capable player back.

DBs - B. A few breakdowns again. I know they are going to happen, but against this team, we should be able to mask them more than we did. It was good to see De'Vante Harris back. That depth will be important.

Coaching/scheme - B. The use of returning players and keeping players fresh was well handled. Giving Allen time with the first OL was good. I put the early game jitters and mistakes, though, on everyone who committed them or should have had a hand in leadership, so this is on them a bit. We have one game left where we *might* be able to get away with a start like that (ULM) and hopefully the staff can use this to make that point, but it was not good to see.

I thought about going into the start of the game a bit more here, but with such a big game coming up, I think I am going to put it in its own piece so look for that later. Suffice to say, though, this team has a defense that needs the breathing room of a lead. Surely it is better, but not good enough to survive the SEC West. This team cannot afford a start like Saturday's in any of their conference games.

Aggies v. SMU - What to expect, what to hope for

Similar to the Rice game, today your Fightin' Texas Aggies are taking on an overmatched foe - possibly the most unbalanced matchup in the FBS this season.

But there are things that I defintiely hope to see today because this is the last game we have to work out the kinks before we dive into the meat of our schedule - and there is a LOT of meat to it. Obviously, Alabama, Auburn and LSU are big challenges, but I get the sense that Mizzou is going to be a lot closer to the team that won the SEC East last year than people expect, and the Mississippi schools are better in a lot of ways this season. But we start the run next week against Arkansas, and if you saw what they did to Texas Tech, you know that they have some heavy artillery to bring to the fight.

So the more we can fix and figure out against the Ponies the better.

Clearly, there are things that are running at peak efficiency right now: both lines, the wide receivers, the running backs, special teams. I hope to see that continue and hopefully we can develop depth for those units that will be necessary as we wade through the gauntlett that is the SEC West.

At quarterback, I think there is so much right here that it is pretty easy to note what needs to be improved - the vertical game. You have to give Hill a TON of credit to this point (along with the coaching staff). He has been miles ahead of what even the most optimistic thought coming into the season. But that deep ball - the timing and execution just isn't there. So let's work on that as much as possible before the score gets too out of hand. I also want to see Kyle Allen really get some reps and settle in as a quality backup. After the Rice game, I have some concerns...

The rest of the defense also needs work. The linebackers and secondary need to find their regular starters and their regular starters need to settle into their assignments and tackle better, fast, because Arkansas is going to be that punch in the mouth that Mike Tyson always talked about, and then it gets harder.  How is that for perspective?

I love Watts, Everett, Garrett, Hall and so much of the DL. And we aren't talking about an awful defense (in large part to those players). But the better we can get now, the better we will be when we don't have time to improve.

Injuries - this is a touchy one. If someone is probable, to the extent that we can get them some reps without risking their health, I say do it to the amount that would help their timing, then get them out of there. If there is any chance that players like Mastrogivanni or Clear could re-injure something and we really don't need to see them today, hold them back. Obviously, only the coaching staff knows what that looks like, but those are the principles I hope they are using.

Overall, what I really hope to see is an improvement in focus. Last week, some of the focus wasn't there. Hopefully this week we have a bit better level there.

College Realignment - The Next Evolution?

I saw a discussion about who would be a better candidate as an expansion target, assuming that there is another round - Baylor or Texas Tech. It is an interesting question, although one that appears to be academic because of a few variables, not the least of which is the inability of the Pac-12 to put a good network product together. 

As a quick aside on that, I get wanting to keep all revenue, and I get trying the current "all or nothing" model, but in the wake of the success of the SEC Network, trying to charge the same for people in Florida as California seems rather nose/face, no?

But it did spark a thought that I figured I would drop on this blog real quick. But let me establish a premise or two first. To start with, this is an idea I am kicking around.  PLEASE comment below if you have insights, corrections, thoughts, clarifications, etc. on any of this. I am sure there are so many moving parts that there is information I do not have, or don't have accurately enough, that you dear reader can help us with. Additionally, please review the "assumptions" section below as some of them may help you understand where this is going.

The Overview

So there will most likely be another round of conference realignment, in large part due to the new haves/have-somes/have-nots dynamics since the SEC Network's successful launch. Now you have the SEC as the king of the hill, the B1G a step behind, then a gap, then the ACC and Big XII, and then a larger gap, and then the rest. 

What makes things interesting is that now you have enough revenue in the SEC to have an ACC or Big XII school jump ship to the SEC and make the same or better money in the SEC *while paying the Grant of Rights penalty* for exiting their current conference. (It appears that the ACC and Big XII teams are currently making +/-$20M currently, and in the SEC or B1G, they would make close to or more than $40M.)

If true, that would mean that if the SEC or B1G wanted to expand their footprint a little more, they can do it without significant obstruction.

So that leads us to a few basic assumptions before we dive into the details.

Assumptions and Background

First, it is all about the benjamins. And in this context, that means millions of dollars at a pop, and how to get them. This is NOT about maintaining historical rivalries, although I do think that some sort of reality check on travel might play into the discussions a bit. I mean, West Virginia in the Big XII has to be costing all of those programs way too much money, time and quality. But this is about eyeballs in stadiums for revenue sports that generate revenue for in-stadium and television events.

Second, ESPN and Fox are going to try to keep their properties as much as possible. ESPN with the ACC and the LHN, and Fox with the Big XII. This may be a huge sticking point we may have to revisit, especially considering that the LHN is ESPN and Fox is the main partner for the Big XII overall. That is very much a huge conflict.

Third, the gulf between the SEC/B1G and the Big XII/ACC is not something that UT, OU, Notre Dame, Florida State or others are willing to stomach long term. This is a point I could very well be wrong about, and you could only see the defection of a few schools from the ACC to fill out the ACC and we are done.

Fourth, the past efforts of the B1G and SEC to play footsie with UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina State, etc.

And yes, this ignores the Pac-12 as I think they have painted themselves into a corner that they can't get out of. Also, in part, because the LHN was successful at one thing - keeping UTx out of the hands of Fox and in the ESPN family.

The Theory

Find a way to create a conference or arrangement that raises as many boats as possible. Can it be done? I am not sure, but this is my best guess for now. It does involve moving a few teams around, involving five different conferences.

I - The Heavies Who Stay

Let's start with the key players. These are the teams that are going to push for this because they won't make enough money to keep up with the SEC otherwise: OU, Notre Dame, Florida State, Clemson. They will be for this because simply, they have no choice. There is no other way to raise their revenue to keep up with the facilities, coaching investments, etc. that Arkansas, Ole Miss, etc., are able to pour money into with the SEC Network revenues. Getting out financed by Alabama or LSU is one thing. But Kentucky? Mississippi State? No way those collegiate blue bloods will put up with that.

Note that I did not put UT in that mix as they have all the revenue they need. Their key here is to go along with anything that doesn't impact their considerable income. I almost put ND in this group too but their once ground-breaking deal with NBC isn't the behemoth it once was.

Ultimately, I think Notre Dame will have to go this route as a natural progression of their path to date. Surely they want to keep their independence, but the brand simply isn't as strong as it once was, although it clearly is still strong. In fact, ND and UT are the two crown jewels that will make this super-conference worth the effort.

II - The  Heavies Who Leave

This group is more hypothetical as not all of these schools are guaranteed to move, but they are the ones most likely to.

First, the two most likely to go to the SEC: Virginia Tech and North Carolina State. As much as the SEC might love to get UNC instead, it seems unlikely that the SEC would absorb UNC and Duke and either add 2 more teams or not add Virginia Tech. Why? Because the states of Virginia and North Carolina are the targets for more television revenue. Adding more than the minimum necessary makes no sense. In fact, you can make an argument that the revenue difference in adding those two schools just to add those two states is somewhat marginal, but that would make this whole exercise moot and that is no fun, now is it? I have looked at a few different options on this, and I just can't see UNC joining the SEC - not with Duke and two other schools, and certainly not without Duke.

Second, the ones most likely to go to the B1G. This is in large part due to who the SEC doesn't want or can't make work: Georgia Tech, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia.  All four have been heavily rumored to be targeted by the B1G up until the whole ACC GOR deal was finalized.

Is it possible that Georgia Tech is something the Super-Conference fights over? Possibly, but based on past rumors, I don't get the sense that they will fight that hard. Georgia is a huge state in terms of eyeballs, but I don't see how the program itself is worth fighting over.

III - Others Who Might Leave

In this group, I have Kansas and Kansas State possibly going to the B1G. Personally, I think it unlikely, but if the new super conference doesn't want to go to 20 teams, this would be the solution. My sense is that it wouldn't bring enough value to the B1G for them to be interested, but I throw it out there as a possibility.

IV - The Remainderment

These are the schools that for one reason or another are along for the ride. They can't push their way forward, but if it means a larger network for ESPN, and more money for them, then they will sign off on it:

OSU, Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU, West Virginia, Iowa State, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Miami, Wake Forest, Boston College.

V - The Last Peice

This would put the new super-conference at either 17 or 19 teams, with no one in the NY/RI/CT area. Here is where I think you will see UConn added to round things out and put a relatively Power 5 sized program back in the Power 5.

What It Looks Like

SEC: Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, North Carolina State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech

B1G: Duke, Georgia Tech, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio State, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, UNC, Virginia, Wisconsin (and possibly Kansas and Kansas State)

Big XII/ACC Super-Conference: Baylor, Boston College, Clemson, Florida State, Iowa State, Louisville, Miami, Notre Dame, OU, OSU, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, TCU, Texas Tech, UConn, UT, Wake Forest, West Virginia (and probably Kansas and Kansas State)

Bottom Line

If you were ESPN, would you pay B1G/SEC money for that new conference? Could it generate the eyeballs and advertizing dollars to at least get close? That is a larger footprint than either the B1G or SEC and would probably have more eyeballs and ratings...

I say ESPN because while Fox is a competitor and would love to fund a competitor to the SEC in the South, the LHN problem raises its ugly head again, as does the current contract with ESPN for the ACC.

Again, I am sure there are flaws in this. Where are they? What am I missing? What needs to be corrected?

Game Grades for Aggies v. Lamar

First off, sorry, Lamar - you don't rate grades. Certainly you kept trying, but there really isn't enough to really evaluate.

Overall, I was VERY impressed with the composure this team showed - a young, talented squad after winning such a big game in Carolina, against a very weak opponent. It just screamed to me "letdown." And then throw in a two hour rain delay?  Yet we saw a level of cool professionalism that was outstanding. Perfect? No. But very very solid. Impressive. It certainly validates what I have been thinking and hoping was true about this coaching staff - that they have the pulse of the team locked in and know how to manage it.

I do want to take a moment to do a quick set of follow-on hits from my in-game post.

Kyle Allen - well done. Fantastic recovery from what could easily have been a derailing interception. Obviously, the opponent wasn't a huge challenge, but they were good enough to make you pay for a mistake (and that just changed my mind about something, btw) and Allen overcame that mistake to be very very good.

Very glad to read that the injuries to Clear and Carson are not long-term injuries and were ones that they would have played with had their services been needed. Still very worried about Jordan's injury, though. And want to know more about the knock Matthews took...

Ok, let's get to the grades.

Lamar - I have changed my mind. I am going to give an overall grade of "C" for them. Why? Because while they didn't have any special athletes that cause the Aggies any problems, they played the game with effort and as well as they could, and on top of that, when the Aggies did make a mistake (Allen, Noil, etc.), they exposed it. (I can't really say they "made them pay," because that didn't really materialize, but they convert the interception off Allen's bad decision, etc.) No one quit, no one got mentally sloppy, no one started doing stupid things that might injure themselves or opponents. They did what they were supposed to do.

Your Fightin' Texas Aggies

Defensive line - A. The roughing penalty on Garrett was the only big gaffe that sticks out to me. Holding a team like Lamar to 3 points is what really good defenses do.  Anyone really think that last year's squad would have done nearly as well? Me neither. And it all started with pressure from the front four. Goodness gracious, Garrett looks Von-Miller-legit.

Linebackers - A. Even with the loss of Mastrogiovanni, this group made the plays that needed to be made.

Defensive backs - A. Good game from all, although you have to wonder if Lamar had the talent to really challenge this group. But Deshazor Everett with the INT and great tackle on Lamar's quarterback is great to see.

Overall Defense - A. The Rice game should give this group more of a test, but to the extent that they could, it looked like they worked on and improved on the things that were apparent problems from the South Carolina match.

Offensive line - A+. What a group of road graders. Not a huge test, so not a whole lot we can say, but they didn't make mistakes.

WRs - A-. The minus is for the fumble from RSJ. Other than that, they did all the great things they do: well run routes, blocked when it was the right time, made most of the catches they were supposed to make. I really like the depth this group is developing, as well. Add in the recruiting class coming in next year and this is going to be quite the arsenal for any QB.

RBs - A. The absence of Carson is a bit worrisome, but it sounds like it was just precautionary. And hello there, James White. A lot of really good production from a redshirt freshman. Looks like the RB position is as set as the WR position.

QB - B+. This might be a bit harsh, but Hill needs to continue to work on the vertical passing game and the grade reflects Allens INT.

Special Teams - A. Missed being an A+ by four yards, which I bet Noil will make sure to get the next time he is that close to goal.

Coaching - A+. across the board, continually this team is well prepared physically, mentally and schematically. Very impressive.

Quick Hits from Aggies v. Lamar - live

Halfway through the third quarter...

Mastrogiovanni out - bad bad bad. We have lots of talent on the defense, but linebacker has now lost two starters in two games.

Kyle Allen - you have skills, sir. Zero doubt. But let's not rush into things.

Armani Watts - another very good game.

RSJ - can't let someone strip you. Can't. I am sure he will learn from that.

Special teams once again top of the line. So important, so underrated.

Way to go, fans - setting the record for a college football game in the state of Texas. Not an unimportant stat.

Looking ahead a bit - SMU has had a terrible start to the year, now has a week off and will then have to host these Aggies. Probably need to bring extra ambulances and hide the children and any women who might be squeamish....

What did South Carolina victory really mean and Lamar

Well, one thing that became increasingly clear - albeit on the down low in a lot of instances - was that last week's drubbing of the South Carolina Gamecocks was definitely a lot of the Texas A&M Aggies showing their quality and only somewhat of the home team coming up short. This is important because in the immediate aftermath, many were not sure how much of the victory was Aggie success or South Carolina failure.

But after both sides had gotten a chance to review the film, it became clear, especially from Spurrier's press comments to the media, that it was a lot of Aggie talent, execution and composure. Thursday night, the Head Ball Coach had made disparaging remarks about his defense. By mid week of this week, he had changed his tune.  The lack of success of the Gamecock defense had much more to do with the fact that the Aggies had weapon after weapon after weapon to throw at an admittedly young and inexperienced defense. But what Spurrier noted was that it was not so much his young and inexperienced defense executing poorly, but rather excellent execution by the Aggie offense.

That should definitely be reason for confidence out of College Station.

I do still think there were a few things the Gamecocks had within their own control that they didn't handle well. First and foremost, they were not physically prepared. Flat out not prepared, with no reason not to. Second, what exactly did they expect? There is enough tape on Hill to know what you were going to get - at least to a large degree. I know a number of poeple who watched him at Southlake that shrugged when I asked them about him. This was no different than back then. Cool, calculated execution. And as for the weapons Hill had to play with - and play with is the right phrase, because he was flat out toying with them for the vast majority of the game - only Noil was one you didn't really have any tape on. The OL, running backs, Jucos, RSL, Clear had all played before and there was at least some tape. Especially the running backs and OL. (MAN, did that offensive line look good....)

And the overall Sumlin offense - it has been around for YEARS, yet Carolina seemed to react as if they had no idea what was going to happen. Those of us who followed the team the last two years knew exactly what was going to happen - Aggies score first, and if the defense can get a stop, second, and before you know it, it is all over but the crying.

But credit to the coaching staff and players. The coaches had them prepared and the players executed it flawlessly. The only question I have now about the offense is do we have the ability to attack vertically? That and the usual "how do we react when things don't go well." I am sure we will find out. By the time we play the Mississippi schools and the Alabama schools, they will have enough tape to throw some real challenges our way.

And I just have to say, I LOVE LOVE LOVE the way we ran the ball, especially with the big packages near the goal line. How scary is that, to see a jumbo package run out there for a team that is HUNH, and have it execute that well.

But offense? A+, especially considering the environment, the situation, etc.

The defense - after watching the game again, so impressed with Armani Watts. A little concerned about what happens when he doesn't time the tackle the right way, but he did it more than once - certainly didn't seem to be an accident. And that front seven. Now THAT was an SEC front seven! The linebacker play can probably improve, but the DL was outstanding against a really good offensive line. Maybe that is another place where the Carolina preparation was a little lacking - where they seemed to expect the same crap we put out there last year, when obviously that was not the case. If nothing else, I would have been looking at tape from 2012 because the talent level HAD to rise after 2013, didn't it? And at least 2012 would give you a feel for how Snyder wanted to call plays, right?

On second viewing, it looked to me like the PIs were legit. Maybe a little ticky tack, and there was the one where the WR pushed first (but on that one, the DB never turned around, so it was a bit academic), but overall, they were legit. The ones on the freshmen I am not so worried about. The one on Deshazor, though. Come on, vet. You can do better than that. Right?

But with Everett likely getting back to his old self, and Watts out there, you have two legitimate quality DBs. Considering the pressure that the front seven should be able to put on most teams, that should be good enough. The nice thing is this - we now have three games (four if you count Arkansas) of gradual escalation in talent or home/road challenge to work and make improvements. I actually really like the game against Lamar as they have a good, high energy offense that will require good fundimentals from the guys. Solve the PIs and the breakdowns, and then you have a solid defense - one that when paired with this offense will be too much to handle for all but a handful of teams.

I do want to touch again the special teams. Ooooh they were solid, with the potential to break something big. Kickoffs didn't give away big returns. Same for punts. KRs and PRs were good to great most of the time. And Lambo was automatic.

But what I want to finish with is this - what it takes to go 11-2 on the road in the SEC and the Aggie schedule is something special, and we really need to let it sink in that this team is not going to be out-prepared, out-coached or intimidated by much if anything. Not only is that a welcome change, it is something that I think only Alabama rivals in terms of institutional success.

Let that really sink in guys and gals. We got ourselves a football coach who loves where he is and is so fantastic.... These are once in a generation, people, if that often. I for one am so glad to see the University take his relationship so seriously and make sure that all is well with him and his staff.

Alright, Lamar, give us your best shot. Let's see how we have improved.