Randolph Duke

The t-shirt was nothing. Let's not forget the school put it up on an official website and out on Twitter. The "NIT National Championship," "texsa sports"... At least we avoided what the "LBJ School of Public Affairs" did. ahhh, good times.

aggy has made a major addition to their "Hall of Champions" trophy case. And to think these people get mocked and ridiculed.

If you have had enough of aggy, just wait until you get to know them better. They get far more unbearable over time. If you haven't yet, head over to aggypedia.com People have trouble understand why so many in the state of Texas have completely given up on the thought of aggy ever being anything but an embarrassment of the people of Texas because most people don't believe us when we tell them about those idiot rednecks. Evidently you are beginning to understand we don't make it up. They truly are as bizarre as we say.

How many times does “the consensus” have get it wrong before you get the hint that using “the consensus” gets you nowhere? What we need is a new approach. We’re not getting “it.” (I apologize for not keeping this below 140 characters, for those who live in that world.) Red got it right on Charlie and got roasted. Let’s not forget that. As soon as Herman hired Casey Horny, alarm bells went off for some of us. The ones who insisted on Urban fucking Meyer are a cancer on the program. Lets start by identifying those who wanted Urban and giving them the same treatment Red got for questioning the hire of Charlie. Can we agree on that? Allowing the same people to continue to use the same "consensus" to hire wrong coach after wrong coach isn't a prescription for success. Identify those who were involved in past mistakes, remove them, upgrade. Or not. Because, you know, the same people who haven't gotten anything right for years and who insist only they can be allowed to make decisions will eventually get it right. Or not.

Stoops was shitcanned because of his extensive history of vile and despicable statements made against UT Austin. That, and his extremely mediocre track record as a position coach and a head coach. In the coaching ranks, there is a strong tendency for head coaches to give positions to fallen colleagues. This, with the understanding at some time in every coach's career, he will need to rebuild his career and/ or his reputation. Saban had done this extensively. Herman did it with Casey Horny. They subordinate the interests of the program to their own personal interests, specifically their relationship with colleagues in the profession. I don't think Sarkisian had any knowledge just how vile some of the statements Stoops has made. Some of us spoke up against the Casey Horny hiring. Thank God that finally those of us who believe coaches should never subordinate the interests of the programs for personal interests know they do it at their own risk. And to think there were people who demanded Urban Meyer be hired and given complete control over UT athletics, unaccountable to anyone on a daily basis. Sark gave a career lifeline to Stoops because that is the coaching culture. It had nothing to do with looking the other way at deeply unethical practices. Had Stoops wanted to join any staff other than Texas', he would have been hired. We knew Stoops better than Sark knew Stoops. The incident should be a cautionary tale, not a reason to question Sark's ethics or judgement.

This one was easy. The people who go through life addressing problems by sacrificing their ethical purposes on w whim need to be stood up to and told to go to Hell. We're Texas. We are supposed to be able to find solutions to difficult problems without having to wallow in the mud that defines programs such as Oklahoma, aggy, Ohio State, etc. What galls me is that the people who insisted on hiring Charlie Strong got it wrong. The people who insisted on hiring Tom Herman got it wrong. The people who insisted on hiring Urban Meyer got it wrong. Those people get to hide in the shadows and continue to try to do long-term damage to the UT athletics programs. They need to be publicly identified and eliminated from further discussions on the subject. They are idiots who care nothing about UT, UT athletics, or our collective long term interests. They are self-serving vermin. Student athletes come to Texas to win championships and be around other athletes who win championships. We need to quit indulging those UT alumni who believe turning any UT student into a scumbag is the right thing to do. If an student athlete wants to become a scumbag and win championships, let them go to OU. If they want to become scumbags and win nothing, let them become aggys.

Urban Meyer is a human piece of shit. The people who were demanding he be brought on the the UT Austin campus have zero consideration for anyone or anything other than their own mental weaknesses and emotional emptiness. Fuck you, Urban. And fuck all your worthless apologists. How people with no principles get influence on college athletics programs escapes me. It is a sickness that is very prevalent in too many programs, including ours.

Still hasn't produced a drop of anything since it was built. One of the most egregious wastes of money in decades. And no one will ever be held accountable. The federal government announced it has already contracted enough supply to vaccinate every American. If this facility ever produces anything significant related to the Covid pandemic, it won't be for the benefit of any Texan or any American. And few people are surprised in the least. Evidently, the facility in College Station uses cell-based technology which differs greatly from mRNA technology. The bottleneck in producing the mRNA vaccines purchased by the federal government is the lack of availability of raw materials. Manufacturing capacity isn't an issue. (Background reading for those interested: https://www.biospace.com/article/harnessing-nature-for-faster-mrna-vaccine-manufacturing/) So, in short, the reason the College Station site has been useless seems to be the facility couldn't support advancements in science and technology. Before it was constructed, it was already outdated by advancements developed at other universities. Who would have ever thought something like that could happen at Texas A&M? Bottom line - It is a complete waste of taxpayer dollars to send money to Texas A&M for innovation or technological advancement. Their culture lacks the intellectual capital necessary to deliver positive outcomes in futuristic or technologically advanced disciplines.

Modern players (such as DeChambeau) impart far more force on the solid-core balls used on tour today. In past eras, there were probably plenty of golfers who could have prospered with the same approach, but the reason players such as DeChambeau can use that technique and the earlier players couldn't is that a high-impact mis-hit with a modern solid-core ball imparts no penalty whereas a high-impact mis-hit on a balata could easily damage the ball, causing the ball to fly errantly. Thus, strength was less of an advantage. Lower the clubhead speed/ lower the launch speed, raise the spin rate (balatas spun faster than modern balls), and a different set of skills prevails. Tiger probably would have done ok with older equipment. Tiger has shown an ability to completely reinvent his swing over time. He is one of the few golfers who has done this repeatedly and maintained an ability to compete at a high level. Tiger is far more of a technician than DeChambeau. Give Bobby Jones the ability to just rip at every drive, not having to protect from a high-impact mis-hit, and his skill set and ability to craft shots from all distances would have allowed him to dominate today's game. To go back to my boxing discussion, Jack Johnson could have easily switched to 12 round fights and 10 oz gloves and been a champion. I'm not sure Floyd Mayweather could have switched to no gloves and 25 round fights and still be as successful. Asserting Mayweather is a "greater" boxer than Johnson or Ali is difficult to accept. At the end of the day, today's athletes are stronger, faster and more massive in size. Where sheer strength is concerned give me any of today's athletes over his counterpart of the past. For the skill positions and skill sports as auto racing or golf, competitors in years past were probably better than most of today's. Take golf. If the challenge is banging a 5-iron close to the pin with an absolutely brutal hangover, I'll take Dow Finsterwald every time. If we are just going tee-to-green for 72 holes with today's equipment, I'll take Bryson DeChambeau and watch it all in the clubhouse, banging out cocktails with Finsterwald.

The OP is doing the exact opposite of what you are saying. He isn't looking at the athletes in their era, he is saying the modern era is producing an amazing number of the greatest athletes of all time in their sport. Comparing Bryson DeChambeau with Bobby Jones isn't valid, regardless of the competition at the time. Modern golfers bomb the ball off the tee, not caring where it goes, and they recover playing iron shots. That is fundamentally a different game than someone like Jones who had to play with far more technique. In world where strength off the tee means little, DeChambeau is cleaning golf clubs for a living, not winning tournaments. Forced to play with balatas, DeChambeau probably wouldn't be a pro golfer. DeChambeau's skills (and swing style) match the demands of the game at this time. Under the rules and equipment of Bobby Jones' time, his skills would not have translated. Jones, on the other hand, Jones' skills and his swing style would have fit the modern game and modern technology quite well. I would have loved to see Bobby Jones play with graphite shafts and a solid core ball. There would be no question who the greatest golfer of all time was. Here is another example of how modern technology matters. The OP asserted jimmy Johnson is one of the two greatest NASCAR drivers of all time. Ken Miles was probably a far better driver than Johnson. Had Miles been able to benefit from modern safety equipment, he may well have gone on to prove that. Likewise, if Johnson had to drive with Miles' technology, Johnson probably dies at Watkins Glen in 2000. Another good comparison would be what if Michael Jordan played in the era when the dunk was not allowed? Would he still be looked at as one of the greatest of all time? Probably not.

Let's be honest, what Jack Nicklaus did with steel shafts dwarfs what Tiger has done with modern technology. What Tiger did was transform the fitness level of the sport. He introduced the era of golf athletes instead of golf technicians. Phelps is extremely impressive, but Bikila won the Olympic marathon barefoot and, just for fun, came back the next time and won it again wearing shoes. Both times setting world records. Does sport get any more elemental than a barefoot Olympic marathon runner? Ted Williams didn't have his career interrupted by war just once, but twice. And (as far as we know) wasn't on steroids. Do you think Bonds could have gotten off the juice, gone out to be not only a combat pilot but a fighter ace, and resumed his career without missing a beat? Put Aaron or Williams on steroids and Barry Bonds is just Bobby Bonds' son. Mike Trout greater than Ted Williams or even Rodgers Hornsby? Are you kidding? What would Satchel Paige have done if racism hadn't held him back? Not even giving Ali a nod as a decent boxer deserves a laugh. Ditto for Jack Johnson. Johnson would have killed Mayweather, especially with bare knuckles and with no limit on the number of rounds fought. What would Teófilo Stevenson have done if that piece of shit Castro hadn't been his way? Mayweather fought 50 times in his pro career and 92 times an an amateur. Tyson fought 58 times as a pro and about 40 times as an amateur. Jack Johnson fought when prizefightng was illegal, so we don't know exactly how many fights he fought, but roughly 95 have been verified, some going well over 20 rounds, never with 10oz gloves. Stephenson fought over 300 times. Ignoring Richard Petty as a NASCAR driver speaks for itself. What we have witnessed as of late have been athletes who managed to excel under the rules of the sport at the time and with the benefit of advanced sports equipment and advanced sports medicine. The rules of their sports have mostly been modified to inflate statistics to make the games more appealing to television audiences. Play a round of golf with steel shaft irons, persimmon drivers and balatas. Give most modern golfers that technology and they would be listed in the record books right next to Dow Finsterwald. Give Bobby Jones graphite shafts and the money in modern golf and his career would have dwarfed Jack's.

They had to change the rules to keep Kareem from being able to score and Kareem still considered Manigault to be a greater player than himself. That says a lot. Imagine watching a 6' player jump high enough to touch the top of the backboard. The list of players so much better than the entire rest of the sport that they had to change the rules to keep the sport from being completely dominated is very short. At the moment, I think the list is: Kareem.

When they changed the rules of the game to give an added advantage to receivers to create higher scoring games, the numbers mean less. Just look at the second quarter PI calls in the most recent Super Bowl. The NFL circa 2021 is far different than the NFL circa 1965. Kyle Korver is in the top 5 all-time in shooting 3s. Larry Bird barely breaks the top 250. Flashy numbers don't mean everything. Put Jerry Rice on a grass field, in the elements, wearing steel cleats, and then let Jack Tatum cover him under the same rules as when he put the hit on Darrell Stingley (that hit didn't even draw a penalty flag). Take away the sports science advancements, the sponsorship dollars that allowed him to train continuously (when he wasn't high as a kite) and Michael Phelps would be just another kid down the street. Add modern knee surgery techniques to the careers of an endless number of older-era athletes and their careers would have been transformed. Take modern sports medicine out of the equation and Tom Brady's career would have ended in 2008. Take racism out of the equation and ask yourself if anyone would have ever matched Satchel Paige. Take out the war years and Ted Williams would have had a decent pro baseball career. What would Hank Aaron's numbers have been if he had also been on steroids?

The list of people you are completely ignoring is, to say the least, massive. Recency bias is clouding your view. Football: Jim Brown, Gale Sayres, Johnny Unitas, Dick Butkus, etc, etc, etc Basketball: Kareem (they literally had to change the rules of the game to stop him), Earl Manigault (THE "OG" - "original goat") Tennis: the list is too long Golf: Ever heard of Jack Nicklaus? NHL - Gordie Howe? Olympics - Couldn't even begin to scratch the surface, but ever heard of Abebe Bikila? Jesse Owens? Shun Fujimoto? Nascar: Petty? Fireball Roberts? Cale Yarborough? Boxing: Ali? Louis? Jack Johnson? Soccer- Pele?

Most people don't know tomorrow will mark 163 years since "the cherished design of the Republic and the State of Texas" was realized and The University of Texas, Texas A&M's parent institution, was established by the Texas Legislature. This will also mark 163 years since the establishment of the Permanent University Fund, the endowment fund overseen by the University of Texas Board of Regents for the benefit of The University and its branch institutions. The PUF was initially funded with $100,000 of the money given to Texas via the Compromise of 1850. During the Civil War, the Legislature raided the PUF leaving just $0.58 in cash and a handful of state warrants (IOUs) of dubious value as the fund's assets. The Fourteenth Amendment stated "neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States." There was extensive discussion whether the warrants held in the PUF were worthless pursuant to this clause. It was left to the Legislature to determine how The University established in 1858 would be funded. This would be worked out and, in 1883, the first institution of higher education in Texas created "Of the people of Texas, by the people of Texas, and for the people of Texas" opened its doors. "One star, one state, one University." What started in 1858 "Changed the World." (Well, not all the world. College Station is essentially still perpetually doomed to remain mired in the 19th century)

Checking in on Texas A&M during Black History Month always provides insight into aggy culture. Today we have a rather well written Op-Ed that offers counterpoint to John Sharp's moment of channeling his inner George Wallace and essentially declaring "Sul Ross today...Sul Ross tomorrow...Sul Ross forever." http://www.thebatt.com/opinion/a-m-is-still-missing-the-point/article_7ae23c9a-6a7e-11eb-b37a-6754caaf1e0e.html The money quote from Op-Ed: "Keeping the statue of a white supremacist at the heart of campus while also increasing funding to promote diversity has an uncomfortable feeling of bribery to it. It is as if A&M is paying marginalized students to ignore the ties to white supremacy now that they have thrown money at the problem." The people of Texas deserve better than Texas A&M.

Over there, it's "copulating," not "breeding." Biology dictates the need for sperm and an egg to breed. In general, just a shitload of sperm is considered "copulating." In College Station, "just sperm" is usually called "tradition."

Let's just jump to the numbers and find out just how much "aggy research" contributes to the Texas economy. In all fairness, I will use the 2019 numbers, since 2020 was unquestionably negatively affected by the "China flu" (as I believe the rednecks call it). In FY 2019, the entire TAMU System (both state agency and academic institutions) generated $855.5 million in research activity, so the Texas A&M System contribution to that combined $2B total is well under 50%. But wait, there's more! Posted also is the breakdown of research dollars for the academic side of the TAMU System and for the far larger State Agency side of the TAMU System that has absolutely nothing to do with academia. Here we see that of that $855.5 million in research for the state agency side and academic side combined, only about $332.7 million of research can be attributed to the academic side of the entire TAMU System. Again, the $332.7 million number isn't the total research expenditures of Texas A&M College Station, it is the actual total of academic research dollars for the entire TAMU System. So, while I'm not sure of the actual breakdown of the overall numbers, we do know: 1) As of the end of FY2019, the entire TAMU System contributed $332.7 million to the Texas economy through academic research activity. 2) Not all of that total can be attributed to Texas A&M College Station. (I know the actual breakdown, I'm not posting it here because I don't wamt it to seem as if I'm piling on.) 3) The combined total of all research dollars pumped into the Texas economy by both Texas A&M College Station and The University of Texas at Austin was in excess of $2 Billion. How much of that "over $2 Billion" can be attributed to Texas A&M College Station, "the state's other flagship university™"? 16%? lol. The people of Texas deserve better than Texas A&M.

Also, the ags are crowing about a tweet sent out today about the combined research dollars of UT Austin and TAMU College Station and the impact of those research dollars on the Texas economy. $2 Billion. That's a damned impressive number. Hats off to Texas A&M for their contributions to this effort. Anyone care to guess what A&M's contribution to that $2 Billion number was?

I am going through the latest NCAA Membership Financial Reporting System reports, collecting my thoughts for a longform piece I will eventually get written. This report contains a lot of interesting data. One reporting category is "Institutional Endowment." Having aggy's 2020 NCAA financial report allows me to update the aggypedia.com page as to A&M's true endowment, both alumni and publicly funded. Remember, aggys is a school that publicly boats of being "The Wealthiest Public University in the Nation™." The NCAA report is subject to auditor review, so the numbers posted have some rather close relationship to the actual numbers. The procedures regarding how the reports are promulgated can be found here: https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/finance/2020NCAAFIN_AgreedUponProcedures.pdf Among the list of schools whose reports I have is also Texas Tech. After I looked up Texas A&M College Station's institutional endowment, I looked up Texas Tech University's institutional endowment. In each report, the figure is "Data Category 55." Remember, these numbers are reported by the schools themselves, subject to their auditor's review, and are expected to be a close approximation, if not the actual total as of the reporting date. Attached are the endowment figures, represented by each institution as being true and correct. Any of you aggys care to try to explain? (Don't bother, I already know the truth). If we accept their $13 billion figure as their total endowment (both "former student"-funded and PUF funded), the "former student"-funded portion of the A&M endowment is barely 3% of the total endowment they claim. Texas A&M wouldn't exist today if they hadn't insisted on being created as a branch of The University of Texas. Which is why the aggys will never risk terminating their constitutional status as a branch of The University of Texas. The truth is the "former student"-funded endowment of Texas A&M is one the smallest of any major university in the nation, despite A&M having one of the largest "former student" contingents of any university in the nation. aggys simply don't donate to fund their school's endowment. And they never have. Since 1876, they have overwhelmingly depended on their status as a branch of The University of Texas to fund their school's growth and to maintain their status as the state's de facto trade school. Yet they mock institutions such as Texas Tech. The people of Texas deserve better than Texas A&M.

Get your popcorn ready. It’s in the works. Based on the first draft, it looks like yet another year John Sharp isn’t going to be sending me a Christmas card.

On Dallas sports radio (105.3) Eric Dickerson was being interviewed. One of the guys brought up Dickerson’s having been recruited by aggy. They asked him why he didn’t commit to aggy. He said two reasons- he hated the horribly ugly aggy uniforms and he wanted nothing to do with a school that had guys as cheerleaders. So there you have it. Dickerson may well have been an aggy if not for aggy turditions. It was a funny segment. Laughing at how stupid the milkmen are.

People do not understand the realities of aggy culture. The first person chosen to be their school president was Jefferson Davis. In the Sul Ross era, professors on campus openly lectured the students about “the abomination of African citizenship.” In the E King Gill era they openly promoted upcoming local Klan rallies over the public address system during home football games. In the immediate aftermath of the Supreme Court verdict in Brown v Board, the aggy students held a campus wide referendum that overwhelmingly asserted they would not respect the Court’s decision. To this day they still refuse to admit Black students in reasonable numbers. Go to aggypedia and read my piece on Sul Ross. He was a complete piece of shit as a human being and virulent white supremacist who murdered Blacks just because (by his own daughter’s words) he wanted to establish the supremacy of the white man. He died from eating a biscuit made with flour laced with rat poison. I like to think the cook was a Black man who poisoned Ross intentionally. This is the elemental foundation of aggy culture. It is who they are. One cannot be an aggy and not be a racist because all of what I have just said, and much more, has to be repudiated and one cannot be an aggy and repudiate massive amounts of their school’s history and culture. There is no room in aggy culture for those who are not avowed bigots. The people of Texas deserve better than Texas A&M.

I don't know, but if we don't find out by March 10, my friend might find out. Not sure what happened, don't care enough to find out. I've got too much on my plate right now.

Not for me, but I care about this person. Traffic stop. There may be some evading, or not. This is a person I want to help.