There’s little to justify why this is the ceiling in the article. There are positives that no one’s seemed to capitalize on: the recruiting strength of TX, the renovated and new facilities - including one of the largest stadiums in the nation, the underlying wealth tied to petroleum, and the size of the university. However, there are negatives: there are three high profile teams in its division that have won national titles in recent memory (Alabama, Auburn, LSU), there’s another nearby school that is a media darling and also has a national title in the current century (Texas), the university has a track record of hiring/firing coaches, and while Texas is a strong recruiting base, it’s not a strong recruiting base for certain positions due to the style of play popular in the state. A&M also is still relatively new - it was a small university (similar in size to Baylor and TCU more than current opponents) until the 1970s. Arguments could be made for this being closer to the floor than the ceiling if the right moves are made - not just in hiring/retaining coaches but in recruiting. Unfortunately, this article chose to take the “A&M has never been good so it will never be good” without any real depth or justification to support its premise.
This has to be one of the poorest prepared and written articles on SDS. If we are talking about money, you realize he's making $5 million in Texas, one of the lowest tax states out there. If he went to USC, he'd need about $8 million to equal the lifestyle he has in Texas. He may leave A&M, but it won't be for money. We haven't even started with recruits, where he is in an area (Texas and Louisiana) which is one of the richest recruiting areas in the country. True he can have an easier schedule by going to a weaker conference and playing weaker opponents (like Meyer or in the Pac 12), or he could continue to build A&M into a competitor with upper echelon of the SEC. There is a reason folks like Frieze, Mullen, Bielema, and Sumlin take on this fight every year. Each believes he can position his school at that next level up.
Your premise is off - LSU, 'Bama, and Auburn are not "safe." Bama and Auburn may be, but LSU is certainly not. Arkansas continued to improve through the year and should be very solid next year. A&M restructured their coaching staff to attack their most glaring issue. MSU loses a lot to graduation, but should still field a solid team. That said, if I had to pick last place, I'd go with Ole Miss. But, it could just as easily be A&M, MSU, or LSU given the parity in the division.