Let me put it to you this way:
In the past 10 years, if AU had nine 10+ win seasons (109-19, also, 2000 was the only year in that range that they didn't have 10 wins; it was a 9 win season), won one NC and appeared in another NC game in that same time frame, and made the money that Texas makes from their program, you would argue anybody that would hint that AU wasn't one hell of a program. Here are a few other statistics on Texas:
Texas ranks as the 2nd most winningest NCAA college football program with an 845-317-33 all-time win/loss record as of 2009.
Texas ranks 2nd in the NCAA post-season bowl game appearances with 48 appearances as of 2008 with a 25-21-2 record.
Texas holds an NCAA record for most winning seasons at 105 out of 116 seasons of football.
Texas is the only football program to post at least 10 wins in every season since 2001.
Texas is the only football program to post at least 9 wins in every season since 1998.
I'm not saying they're the best team EVAR or the end all be all of college football, but damn. I would be pretty fucking happy with my team.
I didn't argue with anybody making the statement. You'd know that if you'd read all of my question. I asked
you to tell me what qualifies them (or any program) as "one hell of a program". Although you instead chose to make a comparison to Auburn, instead of your mighty tahd program that you've never seen play in person, you still didn't really give too many parameters as to what qualifies a "program" as "one hell of a program"...which is pretty subjective anyway I guess. Your answer, while basically dodging the question, tells us all a great deal about your thinking.