well i've heard the same stuff before in debates why one rivalry is more meaningful or somehow more heated than another. i don't buy it. regional rivalries are all equal in my book; you might find more people who will tell you ohio st/michigan or usc/ucla are bigger rivalries, but i can promise you they are not any bigger, anymore heated or meaningful to the va tech/uva or a&m/texas fans.
for the longest of time (when texas a&m's football program wasn't that good), longhorn fans pretended they weren't rivals with the aggies, or at least shrugged off the rivalry. it only became a bigger issue with texas once a&m started to beat the longhorns, which i suspect is akin to the recent build-up between uva and va tech.
you also have to realize that the university of texas was goliath to the aggies' david for so long given the inherent differences between a full-blown, co-ed school like ut and what was an all male, all military school like a&m prior to the 70s. the irony there is once women started to attend, the football program improved. go figure.
the powerful ut board of regents, and one of their alumni who just happened to be texas governor, actually held up and delayed for years a&m getting permission to build a new basketball arena. so how were the aggies supposed to recruit when their old gym wasn't even up to some high school standards?
