Texas A&M matchup thoughts

[RebelW]

A perfectly taught tackle and their head to ground contact causes concussions... So yes.. I hope so

[GuvHog]

I'm not making any predictions but I will say this:

If the Aggies are expecting to see the same Razorback defense they saw in Arlington last season, they are in for a RUDE awakening. If they don't believe it they should ask Ole Miss and LSU.

[WorfHog]

I'm not making any predictions but I will say this:

If the Aggies are expecting to see the same Razorback defense they saw in Arlington last season, they are in for a RUDE awakening. If they don't believe it they should ask Ole Miss and LSU.

Wow Guv, I actually agree with something you posted. We're deeper in the trenches on both sides. 

Losing Spaight and Flowers will hurt initially, but who knew that Spaight would have the season he did last year? I think that the "bermuda triangle" could be better this season. Our offense is going to take the same kind of step that the defense took last season. I expect BA to throw for between 2000-3000. AC and JW will each rush for 1000+. KW will get 500-800. RW3 will probably get 200-300 if he doesn't redshirt.

[Hoggish1]

I'm not making any predictions but I will say this:

If the Aggies are expecting to see the same Razorback defense they saw in Arlington last season, they are in for a RUDE awakening. If they don't believe it they should ask Ole Miss and LSU.

Texass would be a good one to ask, too...

[ChitownHawg]

Texass would be a good one to ask, too...

That was fun watching Shorthorns get stomped, but all honesty - they stunk.

[The_Hog_Father]

That was fun watching Shorthorns get stomped, but all honesty - they stunk.

That's true... But it still felt like this!!



Wooo Pig!! :razorback:

[Demaghog]

I'll be closely watching the TTech game to see how much of a pass rush we can generate with our line. I expect to win that game no matter what, but if the tech QB has lots of time to throw down field, we'll have a hard time beating aTm or the vols. It's the biggest unknown this team has.

[Lake City Hog]

Typical Aggie-- Let them win a couple in a row and all-of-a-sudden they "own" us and we will be lucky to hang with them in the future. I'm 60 years old and have been hearing this same load for MANY years.
The REAL fact is pretty simple, FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS ARKANSAS HAS "OWNED" ATM! Sure Aggie went thru a couple of winning streaks, putting together a 2 or 3 game run. But, it always seems to swing back to our BIG advantage.

Total meetings   71
Series record   Arkansas leads, 41–27–3
First meeting   October 31, 1903
Last meeting   September 27, 2014
Next meeting   September 26, 2015
Largest win   Texas A&M, 58–10 (2012)
Longest win streak   Arkansas, 9 (1958–66)
Current win streak   Texas A&M, 3 (2012–present)

[Chief Mac]

That's true... But it still felt like this!!



Wooo Pig!! :razorback:

LMAO!!  I like that!  I think the beat down of Texas Tech was similar.  Hogs SMASH!!!

[Jek Tono Porkins]

I agree with the general vibe that HUNH, quick score offenses hurt the D to an extent.  If you have a good D, though, it will still do enough to stop the other team enough so that your high-powered, fast-paced offense will outscore the other team.  This premise is totally predicated on how effective that offense is.  It's kind of like when CBP was here.  When we were throwing up 45-50 pts., it didn't really matter that our D gave up 35.  However, when Bama was holding our ridiculous offense to 14-17 points, suddenly the effectiveness of the D became really important.  The really question will be whether guys like Chavis or Boom can live with their D's being effective and still middle of the pack.  These two are extremely successful, competitive guys that want recognition and accolades.  They can provide significant upgrade over their predecessors and still not have top 10 D's with the way those offenses function.  I suppose it all depends on what the W-L columns look like.

The notion that the DC doesn't have to be as good to win a game is valid only if you're assuming that Chavis will have to call just as many defensive possessions at A&M that he did at LSU. If Chavis gave up a certain number of points per defensive possession at LSU, he'll have more defensive possessions to deal with at A&M, which means more points. I also don't see how that could possibly improve with what will probably be less practice time for the defense.

Additionally, I think the days of A&M "outscoring" people are over. Their offense will never be as good as it was with Manziel and Sumlin knows it. I think the Chavis hire is more about an overall shift in philosophy. A&M is going to focus more on defense. It remains to be seen whether or not that works out.

[Jek Tono Porkins]

Wow Guv, I actually agree with something you posted. We're deeper in the trenches on both sides. 

Losing Spaight and Flowers will hurt initially, but who knew that Spaight would have the season he did last year? I think that the "bermuda triangle" could be better this season. Our offense is going to take the same kind of step that the defense took last season. I expect BA to throw for between 2000-3000. AC and JW will each rush for 1000+. KW will get 500-800. RW3 will probably get 200-300 if he doesn't redshirt.

That's why I'm not worried at all about the defense. From practice reports, we all knew that Spaight could hit, but I don't think anyone predicted that he would be a 1st team All-SEC linebacker. I don't think we've had one of those since Olajubutu. Robb Smith has something up his sleeve and I'm excited to find out what it will be.

[mizzouman]

Typical Aggie-- Let them win a couple in a row and all-of-a-sudden they "own" us and we will be lucky to hang with them in the future. I'm 60 years old and have been hearing this same load for MANY years.
The REAL fact is pretty simple, FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS ARKANSAS HAS "OWNED" ATM! Sure Aggie went thru a couple of winning streaks, putting together a 2 or 3 game run. But, it always seems to swing back to our BIG advantage.

Total meetings   71
Series record   Arkansas leads, 41–27–3
First meeting   October 31, 1903
Last meeting   September 27, 2014
Next meeting   September 26, 2015
Largest win   Texas A&M, 58–10 (2012)
Longest win streak   Arkansas, 9 (1958–66)
Current win streak   Texas A&M, 3 (2012–present)

To be honest, as far as current football goes, only the last 5 years or so matter, if you are looking at whose program is in better shape. 

[ZERO]

To be honest, as far as current football goes, only the last 5 years or so matter, if you are looking at whose program is in better shape.

I say this all the time. Football programs don't have genetics and aren't predisposed to constant conditions. A smart hire can change things in a hurry, and I think they're on an upswing right now. I personally believe we were lucky to have missed out on the bulk of the years when A&M had R.C. Slocum. We were 1-2 against that guy, and he led them on a mean streak of 9 and 10 win seasons, and his teams ended ranked 10 of 14 years.

Sumlin has my respect as a coach. I think he has player discipline issues, and I don't necessarily believe he's all that loyal (two things our coach seems to not struggle with), but he knows what he's doing. I'm afraid it's going to be a fight against them with Sumlin at the helm.

[AugustaHog]

The notion that the DC doesn't have to be as good to win a game is valid only if you're assuming that Chavis will have to call just as many defensive possessions at A&M that he did at LSU. If Chavis gave up a certain number of points per defensive possession at LSU, he'll have more defensive possessions to deal with at A&M, which means more points. I also don't see how that could possibly improve with what will probably be less practice time for the defense.

Additionally, I think the days of A&M "outscoring" people are over. Their offense will never be as good as it was with Manziel and Sumlin knows it. I think the Chavis hire is more about an overall shift in philosophy. A&M is going to focus more on defense. It remains to be seen whether or not that works out.

I think you and I are in agreement here for the most part.  I think the quality of TAMU's D will be somewhat improved this year.  Chavis has always done a good job and made the D's that he has taken over better.  I think the issue is that this won't, at least rankings-wise, look like a Chavis D.  He's used to having gaudy numbers and great statistical teams, which is something he has to be proud of.  You are 100% correct in that the more the other team has the ball, the more they are piling up yds and points.  I think you can count on a 35 pt avg for Sumlin's offenses, if not better.  What this boils down to is can Sumlin outshoot the other team's offense.  I think we saw how that works with CBP and with other places like Oregon.  It can be really successful, but you are going to find yourself in a defensive struggle at some point and these offenses (barring a freak at QB a la Manziel or Newton) eventually miss when it matters.  Chavis may help some but the identity of this team is still the same:  'fast paced offense and D that wins enough for the O to win the game'.  This is all fine and dandy until that O is missing quite a bit and the pressure is cranked up big time on the D.  If you face an elite, well-rounded team you are screwed.  See our battles with Bama under CBP. 

[bphi11ips]

To be honest, as far as current football goes, only the last 5 years or so matter, if you are looking at whose program is in better shape. 

It depends on how you define "shape".  College football programs are not defined by 5 year wndows.  Alabama was not in good shape under the "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately" view in 2007 after a decade of DuBose/Franchionne/Shula interrupted by the Mike Price scandal.  USC has been decimated by NCAA sanctions for the last five years.

College football has been defined for a century by "tradition".  In this context, "tradition" isn't what your family eats at Christmas.  It's a measurement of potential energy.  To look at a program's potential to sustain success, look to it's history.  If your personal frame of reference is a decade or less, you may think Oregon is a traditional power.  It's not.  Oregon has two things going for it - glitter and USC sanctions.  The glitter may or may not continue in today's world of fickle 4 and 5 star high school athletes and press conferences and All Star games featuring the hats of schools making the final cut.  In fact, we may be seeing the beginning of the end of college football as we know it.  There may be a division soon of minor league NFL and college.  Colleges will never openly bid for high school athletes in a draft type setting.  We already have the NFL.  There are many cities that can support a minor league franchise.  See Little Rock.  But I digress.

College football isn't going anywhere.  USC will be back.  Oregon will move over.  Michigan and Texas will be back. So will Tennessee and Arkansas.  And A&M will stay where it's always been - second fiddle to Texas and somewhere behind Arkansas in the grand scheme of things.

[Hog N Bama]

That's true... But it still felt like this!!



Wooo Pig!! :razorback:

I love it! I think Bo Wallace felt like that after coming to Fayetteville.

[OneTuskOverTheLine™]

We whipped aTm up and down the field for the majority of this game.

We couldn't close them out because:
1) Jim Cheney's goofy playcalling in the 4th Quarter. Too many called passes.
2) Cheap penalties that cost Arkansas two TDs. One would have made it 35-14. Game over.
3) Bad FG kicking. Couldnt even come close on a 44 yarder that would have won it.
4) Allen's fumbled snap on the last drive that set us behind the sticks when we were gashing aTm in the run game.

aTm has Chavis and a better QB but I think we take it to them this year regardless. Big time revenge game here.

I'm with this guy...

We have beaten aTm on the field more than they have us. They have always been ranked higher and have had more notoriety. Who gives a crap? We're gonna beat the brakes off of their slimy asses for the next 5 to 7 years... Write it down...

[Arkansas Fan]

To be honest, as far as current football goes, only the last 5 years or so matter, if you are looking at whose program is in better shape.

A Mizzery fan...really?

[gmarv]

That's true... But it still felt like this!!



Wooo Pig!! :razorback:

this is what Denver kirklands gonna do to the first aggie he sees.

[wholehog92]

Auburn, Georgia, and A n M may notice something different about our defense this season once they wake up.  If ever a single unit "flipped a switch" it is the Arkansas defense after the GA game.  We had a new DC last year and it took until the GA game for complete installation and buy in or they were just embarrassed from the GA game.  Watch the games beginning of the season vs end of season.  Night and day.

We'll se GA in the SECCG for doubters BTW.

[Bacon_Bitz]

If ever a single unit "flipped a switch" it is the Arkansas defense after the GA game.  We had a new DC last year and it took until the GA game for complete installation and buy in or they were just embarrassed from the GA game.  Watch the games beginning of the season vs end of season.  Night and day.

This is a very good point.  Our defense would've been the best in the country in the second half of the season, besides two fourth quarter breakdowns (Miss St and Missouri).  Granted, those were huge meltdowns, but the D hung in there in both of those games very tough until things finally fell apart at the end.  That's light years better than having a D like A&M's that breaks the minute it steps on the field.  Chavis will not be able to turn things around there quickly b/c he doesn't have the bodies, particularly in the secondary, to play the style of D he wants.   

[ChiTown27]

I think this game and the Auburn game fully depend upon the performance of our linebackers. If they have great games, we win. Our D-line is going to be so good that TAMU won't have time to allow longer plays to develop. This means our cornerbacks should have good games if they can cover solid for 3.5 seconds each play. The LBs will be tested with quick slants, quick outs, smoke draws, etc. In my humble opinion....

[mizzouman]

It depends on how you define "shape".  College football programs are not defined by 5 year wndows.  Alabama was not in good shape under the "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately" view in 2007 after a decade of DuBose/Franchionne/Shula interrupted by the Mike Price scandal.  USC has been decimated by NCAA sanctions for the last five years.

College football has been defined for a century by "tradition".  In this context, "tradition" isn't what your family eats at Christmas.  It's a measurement of potential energy.  To look at a program's potential to sustain success, look to it's history.  If your personal frame of reference is a decade or less, you may think Oregon is a traditional power.  It's not.  Oregon has two things going for it - glitter and USC sanctions.  The glitter may or may not continue in today's world of fickle 4 and 5 star high school athletes and press conferences and All Star games featuring the hats of schools making the final cut.  In fact, we may be seeing the beginning of the end of college football as we know it.  There may be a division soon of minor league NFL and college.  Colleges will never openly bid for high school athletes in a draft type setting.  We already have the NFL.  There are many cities that can support a minor league franchise.  See Little Rock.  But I digress.

College football isn't going anywhere.  USC will be back.  Oregon will move over.  Michigan and Texas will be back. So will Tennessee and Arkansas.  And A&M will stay where it's always been - second fiddle to Texas and somewhere behind Arkansas in the grand scheme of things.

I've said this before.  There's a big difference between tradition and a program. 

I would disagree that today's college football atmosphere is about tradition.  In fact, we are moving away from tradition every year.  It's all about the last 5 years or so.

If tradition was so big, then Yale football would be playing on ESPN every Saturday.  Not so.

[ChiTown27]

That's true... But it still felt like this!!



Wooo Pig!! :razorback:

The best scene in that whole movie. Also, yes. That's what it felt like!

[OneTuskOverTheLine™]

Typical Aggie-- Let them win a couple in a row and all-of-a-sudden they "own" us and we will be lucky to hang with them in the future. I'm 60 years old and have been hearing this same load for MANY years.
The REAL fact is pretty simple, FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS ARKANSAS HAS "OWNED" ATM! Sure Aggie went thru a couple of winning streaks, putting together a 2 or 3 game run. But, it always seems to swing back to our BIG advantage.

Total meetings   71
Series record   Arkansas leads, 41–27–3
First meeting   October 31, 1903
Last meeting   September 27, 2014
Next meeting   September 26, 2015
Largest win   Texas A&M, 58–10 (2012)
Longest win streak   Arkansas, 9 (1958–66)
Current win streak   Texas A&M, 3 (2012–present)

Y'all listen to the old dog..! I made the same point in another one of these aTm fear mongering B.S. thread..!  +1 Lake City Hog..!

[Mike_e]

I've said this before.  There's a big difference between tradition and a program. 

I would disagree that today's college football atmosphere is about tradition.  In fact, we are moving away from tradition every year.  It's all about the last 5 years or so.

If tradition was so big, then Yale football would be playing on ESPN every Saturday.  Not so.

You forget that tradition is also based on a schools natural strengths and weaknesses.

A program can elevate itself surely but it would need to be good for most of a generation for it to stick.

[mizzouman]

A Mizzery fan...really?

What's a Mizzery fan?

[mizzouman]

You forget that tradition is also based on a schools natural strengths and weaknesses.

A program can elevate itself surely but it would need to be good for most of a generation for it to stick.

Depends on what you mean.  Do you mean, by elevation, how the program is seen by others, like the media, or elevation by winning games?

[Biggus Piggus]

Depends on what you mean.  Do you mean, by elevation, how the program is seen by others, like the media, or elevation by winning games?

Fayetteville is 1,400 feet above sea level. College Station is 338 feet. Arkansas's far, far above Texas A&M.

Columbia, Mo.'s just 758 feet. Amateurs.

[Jek Tono Porkins]

I think you and I are in agreement here for the most part.  I think the quality of TAMU's D will be somewhat improved this year.  Chavis has always done a good job and made the D's that he has taken over better.  I think the issue is that this won't, at least rankings-wise, look like a Chavis D.  He's used to having gaudy numbers and great statistical teams, which is something he has to be proud of.  You are 100% correct in that the more the other team has the ball, the more they are piling up yds and points.  I think you can count on a 35 pt avg for Sumlin's offenses, if not better.  What this boils down to is can Sumlin outshoot the other team's offense.  I think we saw how that works with CBP and with other places like Oregon.  It can be really successful, but you are going to find yourself in a defensive struggle at some point and these offenses (barring a freak at QB a la Manziel or Newton) eventually miss when it matters.  Chavis may help some but the identity of this team is still the same:  'fast paced offense and D that wins enough for the O to win the game'.  This is all fine and dandy until that O is missing quite a bit and the pressure is cranked up big time on the D.  If you face an elite, well-rounded team you are screwed.  See our battles with Bama under CBP.

A&M's 2012 team had a 35ppg average in SEC play. 38 in 2013. But in 2014, without Manziel, it dropped to 27ppg. I don't see it getting much better. Kyle Allen is not Johnny Manziel.

[Lake City Hog]

Mizzou, do you apply that same logic to Michigan, Notre Dame, Southern Cal, Nebraska, Texas and several other "traditionally" strong programs? Or is this just an Arkansas thing?

Sorry dude but history is an indicator. Sure, EVERY program has some time period of downs. But, the overall state of any program cannot be summed up thru a 5 year window.

[BirmingHam]

What's a Mizzery fan?

Someone who pulls for Misswho.  They live in Mizzery.

[Mike_e]

Depends on what you mean.  Do you mean, by elevation, how the program is seen by others, like the media, or elevation by winning games?

If you win the media will come along.

Think Miami, that was a hole in the wall school (football wise anyway) but 15 years or so of winning big and they are still well thought of.  Even though they are down right now just the reputation they gained back then would allow them to bounce back easily.

[ChitownHawg]

That's true... But it still felt like this!!



Wooo Pig!! :razorback:

True. We did what we were suppose to do with a bad team - curb stomp them. The fact that this wasn't a typical Texas team didn't deteriorate my enjoyment of watching that beat down.

[Aggie96]

A&M's 2012 team had a 35ppg average in SEC play. 38 in 2013. But in 2014, without Manziel, it dropped to 27ppg. I don't see it getting much better. Kyle Allen is not Johnny Manziel.

You are correct in saying that KA is no JFF. However, we averaged 30.2 PPG when KA started, sure it is a drop off, but a true freshman QB averaging 30.2 PPG with 4 of his top 5 receivers (including his top one) returning and you don't think that number will get better with another offseason and more time running the offense??? Our offense will be better, if we can get the defense even marginally better, then look out.

I think it is funny that everyone is slobbering all over Auburn too and overlooking us. Let's see we both finished 8-5 (Ags beat them head to head though)
Ags return 15 starters, AU returns 12

AT QB - Ags return a very good starter and as a back up have the best HS QB to ever play in the state of Texas EVER - AU has a new starter that is very unproven, he started the first half of the season opener and never had another meaningful snap
DCs - both upgraded to what most consider two of the top 3 in the game
At DE AU returns a potentially elite player who tore his ACL and didn't play last year, Ags return Myles Garrett.
I just don't see the love for them right now

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

And by the way, I look forward to cheering your team on as they dismantle Texas Tech.  I hope you beat them so thoroughly they wind up in a genuine existential crisis.

Believe it or not, my disdain for that disease-ridden institution in Lubbock greatly exceeds my distaste for the pompous, bloated bovine currently decomposing in Austin.

If Texas Tech is a university, then there's hope for every ape in Africa.

I want you to destroy their team to the last man, then go after their families.

LOL.   I don't get the disdain for Tech, but you made me chuckle.  Your comments are ''fann-ish'' but respectful.

Stick around.

And +1.

[lefty08]

Uhhhhhhhh. Chavis and muschamp considered 2 of the top 3 in football by most?  I want to see a poll

[MuskogeeHogFan]

LOL.   I don't get the disdain for Tech, but you made me chuckle.  Your comments are ''fann-ish'' but respectful.

Stick around.

And +1.

Maybe he still feels the sting of having lost 6 of 7 games to Tech from 2002-2008?

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Mizzou, do you apply that same logic to Michigan, Notre Dame, Southern Cal, Nebraska, Texas and several other "traditionally" strong programs? Or is this just an Arkansas thing?

Sorry dude but history is an indicator. Sure, EVERY program has some time period of downs. But, the overall state of any program cannot be summed up thru a 5 year window.

Thats the way Mizzou would like it.

Outside the last 3 years, they havent been much. Of course there was the one year in 2008 when they beat up an Arkansas team without a coach.
Then in 97 when Nebraska beat them on a pass deflected by a foot.

[IBleedRazorbackRed]

Uhhhhhhhh. Chavis and muschamp considered 2 of the top 3 in football by most?  I want to see a poll

I'll take the better, younger, cheaper Robb Smith over both of them.

[mizzouman]

Mizzou, do you apply that same logic to Michigan, Notre Dame, Southern Cal, Nebraska, Texas and several other "traditionally" strong programs? Or is this just an Arkansas thing?

Sorry dude but history is an indicator. Sure, EVERY program has some time period of downs. But, the overall state of any program cannot be summed up thru a 5 year window.

I apply it to EVERY program.

Don't get me wrong, history and tradition is important, but it's NO indicator on  the health of a program today.

Texas has a long history and tradition, but their program today isn't even close to being a top 25 program.  Notre Dame is as historical and traditional as they come.  Love that in Notre Dame.  But, their program isn't what is used to be, not by a long shot.  If you keep hanging on to the past then Yale would have one of the best programs year in and year out.

Gotta stop living in the past.  When it comes to a programs health today, what happened 15, 20, 30 years ago doesn't matter.

[mizzouman]

Thats the way Mizzou would like it.

Outside the last 3 years, they havent been much. Of course there was the one year in 2008 when they beat up an Arkansas team without a coach.
Then in 97 when Nebraska beat them on a pass deflected by a foot.

Dude, 2008 is long gone.  No one cares about that game.  Has ZERO bearing on where the Mizzou program is today.

You can talk about it from a traditional or historically point of view, but how does it help or hurt any team today?

[Biggus Piggus]

Missouri has a long-established, successful head coach with systems ingrained into the team culture on both sides of the football. These factors place Mizzou in the upper division of the SEC. If/when the school begins investing in better facilities, then recruiting could improve enough to make Missouri a perennial title contender.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

I apply it to EVERY program.

Don't get me wrong, history and tradition is important, but it's NO indicator on  the health of a program today.

Texas has a long history and tradition, but their program today isn't even close to being a top 25 program.  Notre Dame is as historical and traditional as they come.  Love that in Notre Dame.  But, their program isn't what is used to be, not by a long shot.  If you keep hanging on to the past then Yale would have one of the best programs year in and year out.

Gotta stop living in the past.  When it comes to a programs health today, what happened 15, 20, 30 years ago doesn't matter.

I mostly agree with this.

Media bias plays a big role as well.

We were as dominant as any team around in b-ball for almost THREE DECADES.  But even when we were riding high, the media in general didn't pee themselves like over-excited puppies the way they did/do Duke, UNC, Kentucky, etc.

Like Notre Dame, Texas, USC in football, media slobber-kissing programs in either sport keeps them relevant and helps revive them when other programs fade into the pack to stay.

[mizzouman]

I mostly agree with this.

Media bias plays a big role as well.

We were as dominant as any team around in b-ball for almost THREE DECADES.  But even when we were riding high, the media in general didn't pee themselves like over-excited puppies the way they did/do Duke, UNC, Kentucky, etc.

Like Notre Dame, Texas, USC in football, media slobber-kissing programs in either sport keeps them relevant and helps revive them when other programs fade into the pack to stay.

You're correct.  The media plays a HUGE role in this because they are LAZY.  They put way too much into the past and they don't do their homework on what the team has now.

But, I have hijacked this thread.  Sorry.  Enough about that.