The Curse of Pretty Good

Let’s start with the obvious question. What’s the point of this piece?

First, it’s the offseason. And second… since our move to the SEC, larger and larger pieces of our fanbase have adopted a perverse, alternative, almost unsporting view of how Texas A&M Athletics should be graded. Phrases like “market reach”, “brand exposure”, and “revenue stream” are used to argue superiority, when these arguments are best served by one metric and one metric only: winning.

That’s the goal of this article - to build a case for Texas A&M’s Big Three men’s programs, relative to the rest of the Power Five, strictly in the context of these questions:

• How many Big Three titles have you won in the modern era?
• If you haven’t won a title in the modern era, how close have you come?
• How many times did you make it to that stage?

Yes, we’re tracking proximity to a national title above all else. In our basketball metrics, for example, a program with one magical Final Four appearance (sup, South Carolina) outranks a program with multiple Elite Eights that has not made the Final Four (sorry, Virginia). We’re not celebrating strings of above average seasons, and we’re not applauding the majesty of “a program with a high floor.” We are simply tracking how often (and effectively) each major program cycles up.

Warning: This is going to sting.

Football (by whoopy)

Modern era definition: Scholarships limited to 85 per team (1994 - present)

Graded criteria: Champion, Runner-up, Playoff/Top 5 finish (AP Final Poll), Top 10 finish (AP Final Poll),

Texas A&M Power Five Rank: 34th (of 65)

Texas A&M SEC Rank: 9th (of 14)

Comparing College Football with College Basketball and College Baseball is similar to comparing apples and oranges since football does not have the same type of end of year tournament. The four team playoff is a nice start. We had to be somewhat creative to measure championship success for football programs.

The expectations surrounding the Texas A&M football program have been, and continue to be, set very high. However, these expectations do not match up with the level of success in a championship context.

There are 17 different teams in this data range that have played in what counted as a National Championship Game. (The Pre-BCS era was a weird time). Of those 17 teams, 14 have played in multiple National Title games, while Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, and Georgia have appeared only once in this time frame (all lost). Texas A&M joins a list of 48 total Power 5 schools that have not participated in a National Title game in the last 24 years.

In 2012, Johnny Manziel gave A&M its closest chance at championship; however, the early-season Florida loss set Alabama up to play in the Championship game against Notre Dame (after winning the SEC Championship). Prior to the AP Top 5 finish in 2012, the last top 10 finish for A&M came in 1994. Compare that to non-Power 5 team Boise State that has had four top 10 finishes, two of which were top 5 finishes; or UCF that has had two top 10 finishes since 2013.

Texas A&M Football is one of six teams that has two or fewer top 10 finishes, one top 5 finish, and is without a playoff or National Championship game appearance in this span. These teams include: Oklahoma State, Arizona State, Oregon State, Arizona, and Arkansas.

Basketball (by gigthem08)

Modern era definition: NCAA Tournament Field expands to 64 teams (1985 - present)

Graded criteria: Champion, Runner-up, Final Four, Elite Eight, Sweet Sixteen

Texas A&M Power Five Rank: T-50th (of 65)

Texas A&M SEC Rank: 12th (of 14)

As you might expect, it was not very difficult to leverage a massive tournament with mountains of historical data. As you might also expect, Texas A&M Basketball does not hold up very well to a deep dive centered around championship contention. Let’s hit the carnage.

The list of schools that haven’t made an Elite Eight in the modern era are not exactly great company. We get a small bump for our multiple Sweet Sixteen appearances, but our inability to join the list of forty seven P5 schools with an Elite Eight appearance is a tough pill to swallow.

We ultimately found a home among the likes of Clemson, Miami, California, Washington, and Vanderbilt. All schools with multiple Sweet Sixteen appearances, and all riding a 30+ year drought without an Elite Eight appearance.

Let’s talk about something else.

Baseball (by gigthem08)

Modern era definition: Field expands to 64 (1988 - present)

Graded criteria: Champion, Runner-up, Omaha Appearance

Texas A&M Power Five Rank: T-25th (of 65)

Texas A&M SEC Rank: 9th (of 14)

The nation does not love college baseball like we do… a lesson that was hammered home while attempting to research this section. The result is an imperfect rating system that is based on criteria that were easily found and categorized: Titles, Runner-Up finishes, and trips to Omaha.

This section is as good as it gets, and it’s still not that great.

Let’s start with the obvious - the lack of reliable information paints Texas A&M in a pretty positive light. By skipping straight from “CWS appearance” to “Runner Up,” we’re able to blur the lines between TCU (eight CWS wins between 2014-2017 without an appearance in the final series) and Texas A&M (famously without a CWS win across three sporadic appearances).

And y’all, college baseball ain’t exactly a priority across the Power Five. Almost half of the PAC 12 and the ACC haven’t sniffed Omaha during our timetable, and the Big Ten (if you can believe this) is looking at a 30 year stretch where only two universities have modern trips to the College World Series. One of those two schools? Nebraska… during their Big XII days. This deck is about as stacked as we could hope to find across this time period, and we’re still winless in Omaha.

Overall, 14 universities have grabbed a title during this stretch, with another eight grabbing a runner-up appearance. The Aggies land among Cal, Texas Tech, Louisville, and Tennessee in a pile of teams that have made Omaha trips with little noise.

Again, this is unequivocally our most successful program.

Multi-Sport (by gigthem08)

Now, we arrive at the hammer. The multi-sport comparison. The purpose of the entire exercise. A comprehensive look at championship caliber seasons across the Big Three sports for every University in the Power Five.

First, a quick primer

• Championships and runner-up appearances count the same across all sports
• Final Fours, CFP Playoff appearances, and “Top 5” final poll appearances (pre-CFP) count as “Tier Two” seasons
• Elite Eights, CWS appearances, and “Top 10” final poll appearances count as “Tier Three” seasons
• Sweet Sixteens and Conference Titles (football only) count as “Tier Four” seasons

Beyond that, the table is pretty straightforward. We’re sorting strictly in the context of “what is your best season,” and breaking ties by checking how many times each school made it to their ceiling.

Abandon all hope, ye who proceed beyond this point

A few quick hitters:

• 19 (of 65) Power Five Universities have won multiple Big Three national titles in the modern era
• 32 Power Five Universities have won at least one Big Three national title in the modern era
• An additional 10 Universities have not won a national title, but have made an appearance in a national title game
• Beyond those 42 schools, an additional six have had multiple “tier two” seasons
• And finally… finally we arrive at Texas A&M. Tied for 49th among 65 Power Five schools with only one “tier two” season (2012 Football). Our friends in 49th place? The Minnesota Golden Gophers, proud owners of a Final Four appearance in 1997.
• Beneath A&M and Minnesota… the dregs of the world. The 15 schools that haven’t had a Top Five pre-CFP finish in football, a playoff appearance in football, a Final Four appearance, or an appearance in the CWS Championship Series. I’m not going to lie - it wouldn’t be too difficult to develop slightly different criteria that placed a few of these schools above us… but it’s nice to know that things could technically be worse.
• Adding salt to the wound - a list of schools from outside the Power Five that would rank equal to or higher than Texas A&M in this exercise: Loyola Chicago, Wichita State, VCU, Memphis, Georgetown, George Mason, Marquette, UMass, UNLV, Xavier, Butler, UConn, Gonzaga, Boise State, Coastal Carolina, Villanova and Seton Hall.

So Let’s Recap (by whoopy)

Freaking Minnesota. Prior to this experiment, we certainly did not consider Minnesota to be anywhere near the same level as Texas A&M’s big three sports. For starters, Texas A&M Athletic Department revenue for 2017 was $211,960,034; while Minnesota’s revenue was $116,376,862. The expectations, and money, we as Aggies have is up there with programs that have won championships in one, two, or all three of these sports. The results do not match up to expectations.

History is not on Texas A&M’s side, but history does not mean the future can’t change. Teams have risen from obscurity to win it all. Most notably, Clemson, who compares similarly with Texas A&M in basketball, baseball, and pre-2015 football as Clemson historically has not been a contender. Now, Clemson has played their way into the national conversation by making the CFP each of the last three seasons and winning it all in 2016. Clemson football is now elite, and coming to College Station this fall.

Of Texas A&M’s big 3, it looks like Baseball is the closest to getting over the hump, but the lack of appearances or wins in Omaha is a big hump to overcome. Football made the biggest commitment by hiring Jimbo Fisher, a coach that has a national championship and has A&M recruiting at a very high level. Basketball had a large number of key players leave for the draft...wait...let’s not talk about basketball right now…

How do these results match up with your outlook and expectations of these sports teams? Let us know in the comments.