I remember years ago when that was the UT football team's big problem a couple years back. There were no tough non-conference games there for a while which ended up hurting their ranking. I am not sure how the scheduling works in basketball, it seems to be a year by year basis, unlike football. UT finally started to schedule tougher non-conference games recently in football, which A&M definitely will start to do in basketball given the chance. If you think they are scared of playing tough teams next year then you are crazy. If they have a chance to play some tougher teams they will but it might take another year or so to schedule them. Then they might start getting more national consideration. BTW, all the experts that watched the aggies play at the end of last year knew they were a top 40 team. If they didn't think that then they didn't watch them play. It's that simple.
I have no idea what Billy Gillespie thinks or feels...whether he's scared to play so-and-so or not. I do know that they played a weak schedule. Whatever his reasons for that, my point is that things need to change in order for A&M to become a legit top 10-15 team. Even more specifically to the point, what I said earlier was addressing specific fan perspectives (as voiced on this thread) towards the need to play a tougher schedule. The program will do what they will do regardless of what we say. But I was responding to the idea that playing harder games is not neccessary. Take that for what it's worth. By the way, not ALL the experts agreed that A&M was a top 40 team. I alreday mentioned Seth Davis' opinion expressed during the telecast of the Tournament Selection Show and Seth did watch the A&M play at the end of the year and he is most certainly considered an "expert". Not sure where we go from here.
I never said all of them did agree. The ones that didn't agree only did so because they did not know enough about the team. Seth Davis was thinking just like you, that A&M had such an easy schedule at the beginning so they are not a good team. They were one of the hottest teams in the country and could compete with any team in college basketball. It is very simple where we go from here. Seth Davis was completely wrong and obviously did not watch more than one game at the end of the year. I am sure he will tell you now he was wrong. Experts can be wrong you know, more often than not they go by stat sheets and matchups when they should be watching the games. Watching that many games is not possible so I do not believe Seth cared enough of A&M to watch them which is totally reasonable. Therefore, he went by the stat sheet.
there is a big difference between football and basketball programs. for one thing, a&m has, atleast a history of, an upper tier football program. i highly doubt any football players other than legacies go to a&m for any reason other than their football history. basketball on the other hand has just come around at a&m this year, and even then it has become popular on the basis of a powder puff non conference schedule and a last second win at home against the University of Texas. put it this way, if any of you were a young black man from houston or dallas and you had your choice of going to a school located in metropolis, like Austin or Houston for instance, or going to a smallish town which prides itself on agriculture (not really popin' on the streets) what would your decision be. i apologize for making a blanket statement concerning a&m, but i stand by the fact that there is a lot of racism going on at that school.
First, yes, you did say all who saw A&M did agree. You're assuming (because you don't have any way of knowing) that Seth Davis didn't watch A&M play at the end of year BECAUSE he questioned their invite to the tourney. Doesn't that logic seem a bit circular to you? "You prove that you watched the games if you agree with me, but if you don't, it means you didn't watch the games." In fairness, I can't know for sure that he did or did not watch A&M play in the last few games of the year. I also assume that Davis, being an "expert" on the network that covers college basketball exclusively, would watch film and games, including that of A&M, before making major pronouncements on national TV. That is an assumption, though. Lastly, you might want to read my previous posts more closely because I never said that A&M was not a good team, based on their easy schedule. I watched more than a few A&M games, so I wasn't simply looking at their schedule. I think playing crap schedules like that open you up to questioning (and rightfully so, imo) by media experts and by the selection committee. The tournament bids are not based solely on the quality of team. Bids are handed out for both the quality of the team and the quality of a season's worth of work. That's why there's the RPI, that's why there's an automatic bid for conference champions, etc. You can be the most talented team in the country, but if you don't play anybody, you're not going to be get what you think you deserve. That's a fact.
Austin is hardly a metropolis; it's a college town with a handful of somewhat tall buildings. I've actually read more than a few stories of players who chose a school specifically because they knew that the small town atmosphere would allow them to concentrate on their game and studies. Aside from that, if the desirability of a city carried as much weight as you think it does then every player in the country would be lined up to play at UH right now, considering Houston is the current epicenter of hip hop culture.
