Texas A&M Joins SEC, Claims Two More National Titles, Two More Conference Titles

Email this to a friend

Nice Move

File this one under “Why do you guys keep forcing me to write this shit about you?” But really, why do you guys keep forcing me to write this shit about you?

The above photo is the AFTER. And this one is the before:

Notice the two extra natties and two extra conference championships added during the most recent stadium facade facelift? The photo at the top was taken very recently, as members of the Southeastern Conference. The “before” photo was taken when the Ags were just going through the motions in the Big 12 – you know, just the World War II era, one-natty also-ran that regularly found itself at the business end of many jokes.

It’s just that these jokes are writing themselves now. Do you want an example of just how ridiculous this is? Click here to watch a recap of the 1997 Big 12 Championship game, a game where Nebraska stomped the Aggies out 54 to 15. Texas A&M is now claiming the 1997 conference title. I mean c’mon, man.

It was even added to their official website.

***


Email this to a friend

Nice Move

Comments

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or create an account.

  1. fratanomics

    I’m a bit confused here. Why exactly are they claiming the 1997 conference title? Is it because Nebraska left the conference?

    Feel free to mock me if this is a stupid question.

    ^ ThisTake a lapReply • 2 years ago
    1
  2. cleavage

    They’re like that legacy pledge who talks shit and thinks they’re one of the guys until they realized they are fucked like the rest of them.

    ^ ThisTake a lapReply • 2 years ago
    0
  3. GotEm

    They didn’t even play in the 2010 Big 12 championship? How do you even…? What the…? I don’t know how to respond. A&M Got Me

    ^ ThisTake a lapReply • 2 years ago
    0
  4. Will Fratchamp

    They filed winning the Big 12 South Division in 97′ and tying for first in that same division in 10′ under “Conference Champions”. They added themselves as National Champions in 1919 and 1927 even though they shared that distinction with 4 other schools (yay, we’re 1/5ths National Champions guys!) This what happens when you haven’t been legit since the start of WWII

    Welcome to the SEC, pledges. Initiation starts this Saturday at 3:30 ET

    ^ ThisTake a lapReply • 2 years ago
    0
  5. texas_bro

    I could be totally wrong but I thought those national titles were claimed because we went unscored upon those years. I think that deserves it.
    As far as the conference titles, it sounds like BS they tried to justify by using conference records? I don’t so much agree with that

    ^ ThisTake a lapReply • 2 years ago
    0
  6. BROld Spice

    Where do they get off claiming 1939? Tennessee didn’t allow a point en route to a national championship that year.
    You read that correctly.
    Tennessee was unscored-upon en route to being crowned the national champions.

    ^ ThisTake a lapReply • 2 years ago
    0
    • BROld Spice

      In the earlier part of the century the bowl game wasn’t the focal point of the season. The championship was awarded before the bowl game and teams rarely took the entire squad to the bowls anyway. Such was the case in 1939. Tennessee played against USC with less than the entire team and didn’t care too much about winning an exhibition game.

      ^ ThisTake a lapReply • 2 years ago
      0

Load More

1 2