But I’m almost wholly indifferent at this point.

The big thing here is leverage. I’d LOVE to see Mizzou use the Big Ten talk as leverage into getting the 9-3 vote they need from the Big 12 to see more revenue. When the argument first started, I was totally against leaving the Big 12 — I love the Big 8 rivalries, and as a Texan with friends scattered all over the Big 12 South, I love having the Texas schools in conference. But at this point, if the Big 12 makes no concessions to keep Missouri in conference and the Big Ten approaches MU, I certainly won’t be mad if the university decides to wave goodbye to the Big 12.

But I think the powers that be UT, OU, aTm, NU all would say so and laugh it off, they have the situation the way they want it and like. Mizzou is one of the original founding members of the original conference. Texas and Okla. are the new comers, so to speak. They were no better than any other school in this conference, but collectively all the schools voted to set up the way things are now. The 9-3 vote to change anything of any importance,the revenue sharing from tv or in the case of the Big 12 the lack of.

The Big 10/11, and SEC both have tv revenue sharing as well as Bowl appearance profits sharing. The Big 12 is just as likely to let Mizzou go so as to let in another smaller school that UT,and OU can pumil year in and year out. They have those dates circled on their calendar with a W so they can pre-count it as a win. Either way if Mizzou is laughed at and told no way you’re leaving, or told sure dont let the door hit ya on the way out, I dont see the votes coming together to change anything. Because there are 4 schools that tend to stick together on votes. It’s in their best interest to keep things the way they are.

The best and only real way to change the way things are, is simple just win. If you win you’re in so they say. I can see the pro’s and con’s of both sides of jumping to the Big ten, you can make an argument either way. But it seems to me that we could be hoping for the chance to get roughed up by tOSU and Mich.

First off, as MM says above, all of this stuff is cyclical. Eventually, either the North teams will increase their competitiveness and bowls will become more interested, PLUS if Mizzou continues to be a solid team, both Bowls and fans will be more likely to buy into our program.

Secondly, while the Big 10 has better Bowls, does anyone not seriously see a drastic change to the Bowl system coming? Maybe not in the next decade, but eventually. Hopefully, it’s a playoff with minor bowls, maybe it’s an NCAA-mandated selection process, who knows? Then, how stupid will we look for using a defunct system as a reason for throwing away over 100 years of conference affiliation (entered the MoValley in 1907 with kU and NU). A change that affects all sports AND academic standings?

Granted, some of those changes would be positive, and moving might be the best thing for us, but using the current Bowl system as a reason is just short-sighted. We’re too entrenched to be that short-sighted.

I hope that we are able to use some leverage as a tool to fix the inequities in the system. Yes, we may have sold our soul a bit by letting the SWC 4 into the conference in the mid-90s, but that doesn’t mean we can’t make things better. If the Big 12 thinks it would be better off trading Missouri for, say, Arkansas (why would they leave the SEC?) or Colorado State or TCU, then I guess we take our ball and play elsewhere, but I don’t think they would be, and (more importantly) I don’t think they think they would be.

that if Missouri was to leave the conference sees an opportunity to bring in TCU or whoever , and move OU to the North Division and the you have a Texas vs Oklahoma Big 12 championship game.

I mention it above but should probably bang the drum a little harder on this. The Big Ten school’s have a sterling academic reputation (have you ever looked at the out of state tuition pricing and admission standards for most of those schools? Sheesh.), and, at the end of the day, is it not the university’s mission to provide the best educational environment for its students, athlete or otherwise?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/stewart_mandel/12/15/bigten-expansion/index.html

Nebraska as a stronger money-maker than Mizzou? You’re nuts. Their true football glory days are dead and not coming back, the only other sports they have are baseball and women’s volleyball. And they have no TV markets. No way they take Nebraska over Mizzou (doesn’t even make sense).

Good points…good points, though I would say ND’s rep and marketability are largely based on their status as a very prestigious, national institution with a much wider influence and farther spread alumni base. And there is the whole officially the unofficial university of catholic America thing to consider.

So amidst all of this hoopla today that the Big 10 will pursue a twelfth team and add a conference championship game, the only addition that I find at all appealing would be Missouri. The entirely new market, the positive nationwide reputation, and great academic standards…

So as a guy who spent his fall traveling to every Big 10 campus on his own dime, I would certainly welcome Mizzou into the fold…but why on earth would the Tigers consider leaving the Big 12?

Us Big 10 fans can only dream…but hey, if you’d care to take a look at the campuses/venues/traditions that you could be traveling to over the next few years, here’s a recap of my fall traveling “big 10 country” from the average joe perspective:

www.THEbig10tour.com

Drew

Link: THE Big 10 Football Tour

Their takeon Missouri in the conference…

Also, don’t expect the Big ten Network be in every market in the state. Yes, StL and KC may get it right away, and maybe Columbia, as Mediacom is no longer the only fish in the pond. But outside of those areas, will anyone else? Hell, Bloomington, IN didn’t have Big Ten when it started, and it took nearly a year to get it onto the cable list there. Also, if you have broadcast only service, good luck ever getting it. My in-laws live an hour east of Indy, don’t get Big Ten off their Dig. Ant, but have SEC and Big East Network games (yeah, don’t know about that either).

Basically, I’m saying that even though Missouri can get hosed from week to week on the TV contract, having a network set up by the conference may not be the best bet, because you’re still going to be weighted more towards the Texas market.

Somebody needs to tell Mizzou Governor Nixon it’s best to do that after you cross them. His widely-reported quote on moving to the Big Ten, or Big Eleven, or whatever they are:

“I’m not going to say anything bad about the Big 12, but when you compare Oklahoma State to Northwestern, when you compare Texas Tech to Wisconsin, I mean, you begin looking at educational possibilities that are worth looking at,”

See you guys in Lubbock next year.

As a Texas fan, I’m a little bit conflicted. I don’t like the academic profile of the Big XII. I don’t like the small market value many of the teams bring to the table. To me, we (as a conference) never truly integrated. It’s still the Texas schools and the Big Ocho.

On the other hand, I like that we (Tejas) really are the conference. We are the most populous state with the most major markets and top recruits. We’re everyone’s lifeblood. So yea, that’s nice being the big kid on the block with all the money and influence.

However, I think the formation of the Big 12 was a compromise for Texas when our legislature prevented us from leaving the SWC leaving behind a&m, tech and baylor. We were granted certain concessions by agreeing to form this league even though we knew we didn’t like the overall academics or TV markets. TV revenue sharing is correct b/c the TV’s are in Texas by the way.

That being said, I do like the conference as a whole but we need more intergration rather than the old affiliations we’re in now.