MIZZOUEXPANSIONAPALOOZA 2010™: Did Anything Change Yesterday?
by Bill C. on Jun 12, 2010 9:35 AM CDT
in MIZZOUEXPANSIONAPALOOZA 2010™
Email
PrintI told a buddy of mine last night that, to follow up on what I said about Twitter being the "Internet of the Internet" a couple of days ago, that we saw all the best and the worst of the Internet over the past few days. When news is breaking quickly, like it did on Thursday, the Internet is amazing. I mean, we caught everything in real time. Something happened, and we knew about it within about 45 seconds. And with everything that happened on Thursday -- Colorado, USC, Masoli, etc. -- it was just a whirlwind.
Wednesday and Friday, however, it was a debacle. Why? Because the narrative now moves at 115 miles per hour, even when nothing is really happening. When we woke up yesterday morning, we knew one thing was likely to happen: Nebraska was going to agree to join the Big Ten. At the end of the day, Mizzou fans and others were dizzy with dismay and dread because ... Nebraska agreed to join the Big Ten. That's really it. There were a few small surprises -- 1) Boise State joined the Mountain West after all, 2) NU announced that they would be leaving after one year, not two (meaning their last trip to Faurot Field was their last ... which is depressing in so many different ways), and 3) NU stuck a shiv into Mizzou's ribcage on the way out the door with the "Well, we didn't want to leave, but Mizzou said nice things about the Big Ten a couple times, so we were forced to leave," nonsense.
But nothing happened that changed the overall plot line, and yet it felt like things were falling apart.
(By the way, I don't at all blame Nebraska for leaving for the Big Ten. They agreed to make the jump for all the reasons that Mizzou would have almost certainly accepted an offer. But using Mizzou as part of an excuse, for both leaving and ludicrously attempting to avoid paying the early-departure fee because they were "forced out" is absolutely bush league, and I expected much better than that from Tom Osborne and company.)
So where do things stand right now? Around the same place they stood this time yesterday. I said in my last post that I'm done making predictions -- I'm sticking by that, but I can at least drop some hints as to whether I feel options are more or less likely than they were yesterday. I'm adding an option here just because of a story that came out yesterday, but I'm not pretending it's very likely.
Big Ten
It's odd to say it, but I don't feel any different about Mizzou's chances getting into the Big Ten than I did yesterday, and for two main reasons:
1) I didn't read anything whatsoever into Beebe's "My understanding is there isn't any other conference institution being considered by the Big Ten" comment, and I would hope that you do not either. For those who did not think Mizzou was going to get in anyway, this clearly reaffirmed their viewpoint, and that's fine -- they might eventually be proven right. But whatever Delaney said to Beebe was a formality. A month or two ago, he told Beebe he wasn't looking at any Big 12 team ... and yet, Nebraska still made the move. No matter how you feel about Mizzou's chances, good or bad, Beebe's comment last night should not have had any impact on you.
2) I didn't feel amazingly strong about Mizzou's chances yesterday.
We all know the draws of Big Ten membership to Mizzou -- no need to go into it again -- but what we still don't know is the draws of Mizzou to the Big Ten. And it's sounding more and more like we won't know about that for a while. For that reason alone, and the fact that so many other factors could come into play (Texas, Notre Dame, other conferences' moves, etc.), you simply cannot rate Mizzou's chances for getting into the Big Ten very high.
We're all expecting either four or five members of the Big 12 South to be joining the Pac-16 sometime between now and mid-week (A&M is still floating around out there, thinking about the SEC). If that happens, then the Big Ten will go to at least 14, and probably sooner than they originally hoped. At 14, it's hard right now to love Mizzou's chances. Sure, they could still get in, but the weeks of naysaying about Mizzou have beaten me down a bit. At 16, however, Mizzou's chances are still very good. There are basically six supposed candidates for four slots at that point -- Missouri, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Rutgers, Notre Dame and Maryland. (And maybe a seventh: Kansas.) Depending on how the dominoes fall, or how the Big Ten wants them to fall, Mizzou's odds are far from great, but they're still decent, and nothing that happened yesterday changed that.
Big 12
Dan Beebe is actually right about something: when he says that the Big 12 still has quite a few strong, marketable programs in it, he's right. For at least another day or two. Clearly the odds of the Big 12 staying together right now -- with the Pac-16 draw looming -- are not good. It is still certainly a possibility, depending on how the supposed secret Big 12 conference call today goes, but ... if I were in Vegas right now, clearly I wouldn't be betting on the Big 12's survival.
(If I were in Vegas right now, I would be up at 7am, drinking a beer in a sports book and watching soccer for the next 6-8 hours. And I wouldn't be thinking about conference realignment at all. It would be glorious.)
EXPANDED Big 12
The goal of the Big 12, really, has to be to survive longer than the Big East. If they can do that, then there could be some higher-level programs willing to listen and find a new home. One problem: if the Big East dies, it's because the Big Ten does some raiding ... and the Big Ten is not making another move until the Pac-10 does. And what's the Pac-10 about to do? Raid the Big 12. Game over at that point.
Big East
Gabe at PowerMizzou made a good point this morning ($). Basically the one media outlet pushing the "Big East collects Big 12 leftovers?" story is the Washington Examiner ... which isn't exactly the Washington Post. If it were a real possibility, others would be pursuing the story. (Then again, they pursue everything else ... so why the hell hasn't somebody called Paul Tagliabue about this? I'm thinking he'd talk. Hell, I'll do it. Somebody give me his number.)
At the same time, if the Big 12's odds are going down quite a bit, somebody's odds have to go up, right? Zero sum, etc. So I'm bumping up the Big East's odds a tic, for one simple reason: they want to survive. If the Big Ten doesn't go after Big 12 teams, then they're probably going after Big East teams. That being the case, if the Big East wanted to improve their odds of survival, they would act aggressively the moment the Pac-16 makes its move.
Whatever the Mountain West Ends Up Being Named
This is still an absolute possibility, and really, maybe their odds increased a bit when the Big 12's odds fell. But I'm going to say they stayed level. Adding Boise was a no-brainer, and it did nothing to change the chances of making other moves.
Conference USA
In a potentially insane move, East Carolina athletic director Terry Holland came straight out and told fans yesterday that the Conference USA would move quickly to try to score Big 12 leftovers if the South goes to the Pac-10. Good luck with that. THIS, Mizzou fans, is the new worst-case scenario. Joining a Mountain West conference with TCU, BYU, Boise State, and (maybe) Utah is one thing. Joining a Conference USA with Memphis, Tulsa, UTEP, and Rice is another. I'm actually surprised I didn't have nightmares about this last night.
I don't think this scenario is even remotely possible, but since I technically had the odds of this at 0% yesterday, then technically they get the up arrow today for making the list at all.
(By the way, this doesn't really have much to do with CUSA, but I wanted to mention this somewhere: the thing Mizzou fans need to be rooting against the most is A&M straying from the others and going to the SEC. The Pac-10 would still need one more team in that instance, and early rumblings are that they'd go after either Utah or Kansas. If Kansas leaves, then Mizzou's leverage crumbles that much more. In that instance, the odds of Mizzou ending up in the MWC or CUSA increase a decent amount. Do the right thing, A&M, and stay with Texas and Tech.)
SEC
In Gabe's post this morning, he tried to convince me (and, well, everybody else) that the SEC is at least a slight possibility. (The reasons are behind the pay wall.) Let's just say that I still don't see it, but if I think there's even a 5% chance of this happening, that means I think there's a better chance than yesterday.
Independent
Yeah, still more funny than realistic.
---
In theory, we shouldn't get much news over the weekend, at least not until Sunday evening's meeting between Mike Alden and the Mizzou curators. (And even that meeting might not produce any news that we need or deserve to hear about just yet.) Clearly this remains in everybody's mind, but I recommend watching some World Cup, having a few drinks, hopping on the treadmill a bit, and doing other relaxing things that keep you mind off the thought of Mizzou in Conference USA. Alden, Gary Forsee and others are right -- Mizzou is a strong state university with a good fanbase, solid academics and great facilities. We'll almost certainly be alright, even if a) we don't get our #1 choice, and b) we remain in limbo for a while.
149 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm not sure if you all had a little editorial meeting, or not...
…but let me be one of the first to say, “Thank you” for your levelheadedness and calm demeanor in the face of all this craziness. Every front page piece, and about 98% of Bill, RPT, and ghtd’s posts have been anti-hysterical, anti-groupthink, and seemingly “on message” to keep the peace. I’m not sure I can firmly place myself in the same boat, but as my sports-fan-pissiness continues to grow in the face of all this jingo journalism surrounding Expansionpalooza, I find RMN a nice oasis to bring the blood pressure back down.
Thank you.
Bet me!
by TigerBartender on Jun 12, 2010 10:07 AM CDT reply actions 7 recs
No meetings...
Just kind of goes without saying. That was the entire purpose of why we formed this site.
We are proud members of the Big XII conference
But seriously, thanks for all that you guys do. Some of the other sites are fun to fool around in, but this place offers a real community. No matter what happens with conference alignments, it’s nice to know that Tiger Nation sticks together.
I love reading this site. The mods, you RPT included, are very hospitable.
With that said, I don’t think anything Harvey Perlman said yesterday was out of line. Mizzou going to the BigTen looked as though it was going to happen 3 weeks ago, Texas was still a bunch of douchebaggy ass-hats, the “Pac16” story had broken, and NU didn’t want to be left out in the cold, so to speak. None of that really needed to be said yesterday, as most of Nebraska already knew.
I honestly think NU did this now, even after being told they were the Big12 “linchpin,” so they didn’t burn the BigTen bridge for when they went through this again in 2016, if they stayed in the Big12.
Mizzou had made it known what it’s intentions were long before NU “accepted an invite.” If the “invite” from the BigTen came, Mizzou was gone. But, once again, Mizzou didn’t need to be thrown under the bus.
[Osborne's] school has this ultimatum from Texas to either spit or get off the pot. Commit to the Big 12, Texas is saying, or we'll take this Pac-10 offer, rake in more cash and kiss the Big 12 goodbye. It's on you, Nebraska. Texas is good at this sort of thing -- it could blame Cadillac for those Toyota brake problems and get away with it. - Dennis Dodd
by Screwface on Jun 12, 2010 5:40 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
"Mizzou didn’t need to be thrown under the bus."
I think that’s everyone’s main point in a nutshell. Missouri was “reportedly” looking around (and we can be pretty damn sure they were), but the public perception of Missouri’s wandering eyes was based on hearsay, not public groveling like has been pushed in the mainstream narrative.
Thanks for the kind words, by the way. And though Bill isn’t the type to say anything, I’m sure he appreciates them as well.
by RPT on Jun 12, 2010 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Funny-sad line from Joe Walljasper...
…on Mizzou “Urkeling” the Big 12.
Perlman said the only reason Nebraska ever considered leaving the Big 12 was because MU planned to do so and the Cornhuskers had to guard against being left out when the whole game of conference musical chairs ended. Then, Perlman added, Texas and the South Division schools who were contacted by the Pac-10 indicated they would stay in the Big 12 if Missouri or Colorado left but not if Nebraska departed.
By this logic, Missouri destroyed the Big 12.
I have this question. Is Perlman completely unfamiliar with Missouri’s athletic history? Missouri gets excited about things. It dreams big. But everyone kind of assumes that something awful will happen to ruin it all. Did Perlman not watch Shevin Wiggins kick a ball to Matt Davison in the end zone? These are the things that happen when Missouri is on the verge of something big. You don’t base life-changing decisions on your confidence in fate smiling on Missouri.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
The fact that Perlman even MENTIONED Missouri yesterday
(aside from saying he will miss working with schools like kansas and Missouri) was really about one of the dumbest things I have ever seen done by an Athletic Director. Totally classless and without place, made all the dumber because we could still end up a conference partner of theirs.
Advocating for the "Spreadbone" since 2010
Rock M Nation
I'm just happy that it gave me an opportunity to say "bush league."
That’s always been one of my favorites.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
FIFY
…was really about one of the dumbest things I have ever seen done byan Athletic Directora Chancellor.
But seriously, is anyone else a little offput by how all the other Big 12 fanbases have cried out “Thanks for handling this with class, unlike Missouri!” to Nebraska, even though non-school-affiliated Gov. Nixon was the only one that made even passing remarks about another university?
yeah...I would have complained about the edit button
but we all know we dont have one :-)
Advocating for the "Spreadbone" since 2010
Rock M Nation
Big 12 fanbases...national media...
…pretty much everybody has mocked Mizzou for “throwing themselves at the Big Ten” despite all evidence to the contrary.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
yes your point is what is actually making me upset
I am really happy that Nebraska is going to the Big 10 because it’s a good place to be, but blaming Missouri on your way out and then having thier fans blame us on top of that is infuriating.
I kinda wish I didn’t give all those beers to the tailgaiting Cornshuckers last year!
Given enough velocity even a pig will fly
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Jun 12, 2010 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Nebraska IS Class, didn't ya know?
They could take a dump in the middle of a White House dinner and if they did it with a helmet on, everyone would talk about how classy they were.
From what I've read
Nebraska has taken a beating. I haven’t really seen much from anyone except Husker fans that lets them off the hook.
Here's what I don't get
He blames Missouri, then goes on about how Texas would stay if Missouri left, then says that Texas wouldn’t commit long-term, or at least past 2016. I don’t see how you can blame anyone BUT Texas if this is true, because THEY won’t commit to the Big 12 for the long term.
Add to that fact the statement from either Alden or Forsee that when they heard Colorado was leaving, they called the Texas AD and HE HADN’T RETURNED THE PHONE CALL.
The national media just isn’t paying attention to what’s being said. They’re too busy making shit up and reprint Chump Brown’s crap.
yes x 1000000000000
Really, UT is still sitting in the power seat. If they want to keep the Big 12 around (and possibly be even more dominant) they could make overtures to Utah, Air Force, BYU, Colorado State, and probably some other schools I’m not thinking of. We could easily reform the Big 12 with an E-W split.
by jschooltiger on Jun 12, 2010 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Soooo....
Are you a good fanbase or a great one. Just checking. :)
good fanbase, solid academics and a great fanbase.
BOTH!
Fixed. Was aiming for “facilities” there.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
I will say I still feel good about the chances to the Big 10
These are the dominoes I need to see fall to keep feeling good about it.
* The Pac 4 need to move to the Pac 11
(On aTm, I am not sold they HAVE to move with the Pac 4 like Bill is. In fact, their going to the SEC would mean (to me) that the SEC is now into the fray and would have to add at least another school. But for me, I feel better about Mizzou getting to the Big 10 if the Pac 10 and SEC make it to 16, so aTm moving over would start that process)
* I would feel better if ND says no. I dont know what order the Big 10 will move in, but the next one is going to either be Rutgers or ND (in my opinion). Rutgers has no reason to say no, but ND certainly still could. I agree there are other candidates out there for the Big 10 with us, but I see us still being in front of the rest of them at this point.
As terrible as this part sounds, especially because of the internet and Bill’s description above, we need to remain patient and let this entire story play out. I agree with Bill in saying I don’t believe anything has really changed. The company line has been maintained because I think joining the Big 10 at this point is like Fight Club…you dont talk about it. I think the internet here will continue to work against us, especially as every unfounded rumor makes its way to it. I think we are on step 4 of about 12. Sure, I would have loved to have been a part of the first third of the movement, but we weren’t. I still think there is plenty of movement to come.
Advocating for the "Spreadbone" since 2010
Rock M Nation
by The Beef on Jun 12, 2010 10:25 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
If ND says no
aren’t we concerned that the Big 10 will stop at 14? I don’t think the Big 10 is going to be willing to shut out ND completely. If ND says no and Rutgers says yes that could leave 1 spot for Mizzou amongst Mizzou, Syracuse, Maryland and Pitt
If ND says no, I think that helps us
Because I think we would come ahead of Pitt, MD or ’Cuse.
Advocating for the "Spreadbone" since 2010
Rock M Nation
It's funny
I admit I was a bit defeated yesterday, as the irrational fan side of me had taken over.
I spent most of the day defense, lashing out at how we were being perceived as the pin that had been pulled, terminating the conference.
But then my wife reminded me of something, and it made it all clear to me:
For all of the talk about academics and fit and cultural equivalencies, blah, blah blah, it still all comes down to money.
I think this idea of market size and penetration is a bit of a red herring as well.
It’s about eyeballs and advertising. And while we can look at the last decade of Missouri Football and see that we’ve had a pretty good decade, the 1980s and 1990s have bitten us in the ass.
We are still viewed, on some level as nouveau riche.
Nebraska is old money.
And the Big Ten, as a tradition bound conference, wanted old money first.
Pigskin Punditry
Follow me on Twitter
I reject your reality and substitute my own." ~ Adam Savage, Mythbusters
People view program stature in two ways:
1) Have you been good for the last 50 years?
2) Were you good last year?
It’s silly, but it’s true. If this whole thing were taking place in the summer of 2008, nobody would be calling Nebraska the “no-brainer” they were this summer because they were terrible in 2007. They’d still have history on their side, and really, their overall case wouldn’t actually be any worse, but they’d have been treated completely differently in the media during this whole ordeal.
Meanwhile, Mizzou is hurt in (1) by sucking in the 1980s and 1990s, and in (2) by being worse than Nebraska last year.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
damn rain...
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
One has to wonder what would be different
If we played all four quarters last year and sealed the win.
by parliamentlite on Jun 12, 2010 6:08 PM CDT up reply actions
It really is fascinating (and sad) to think about...
…Mizzou pulls that game out, and they win the North again. They don’t give Texas nearly as good a fight in the title game, but obviously neither does Nebraska. NU finishes stronger, but Mizzou maybe doesn’t have to play (and get wrecked by) Navy either…ends up 9-5 or 10-4. Ifs, buts, candy, nuts, etc. (there’s no point to thinking about this, but it’s hard not to), but it really is interesting how much one rain-soaked game (and one sprained ankle) did to all the perceptions we’re dealing with now, both in 2010 predictions and the realignment mocking.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
I made the argument on a Big 10 fanboard
- don’t remember which, but I think it was Black Shoe Diaries - that over the past 8-10 years, Nebraska has less of a football resume than MU (no wins over top 19 teams, no No. 1 ranking, etc.). The rebuttal was basically “yeah, you got lucky with a recruiting class but Nebraska will always be Nebraska.”
Maddening.
by jschooltiger on Jun 12, 2010 6:22 PM CDT up reply actions
huh
I didn’t mean to x out that entire line. I guess double hyphens do that.
by jschooltiger on Jun 12, 2010 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions
this sounds like the beginning of a "What if...." piece
you know, in case you find yourself out of things to write about
Follow me on twitter.com/SteveCusumano
I've got a feeling...
… some version of that will appear in this season’s Maple Street Press “Cornhusker Kickoff,” edited by our colleagues at Corn Nation.
I was thinking something similar...
…except about the Orange Bowl. If Mizzou gets that bowl, it would be the equivalent of the Red Sox winning the World Series. So many demons would be exorcised that Mizzou probably doesn’t hold the same resentment it has now. Instead, to be screwed out of the bowl by Kansas, to be screwed out of the next two bowls, and to have Dan Beebe basically tell Mizzou fans that they aren’t important enough for the conference to stand up for, it creates a perfect environment to create chaos when the Big Ten moves. Did Jim Delany understand this when he started the expansion talks, or was everyone caught off-guard by the anti-Big XII sentiment from Mizzou? We’ll probably never know, but without that Orange Bowl snub, I think the Big XII is still together today.
by Gaknar on Jun 12, 2010 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Too true
Domino’s falling, and Beebe wonders why it fell apart
Rule 49. " Think and talk positive football off the field." Hank Stram
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 13, 2010 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions
First yes, but with all the other expansion that is about to happen
It is not ONLY.
NU and ND are all about clout for the Big 10 when they go to renew their NATIONAL television contract. Neither does much of anything (with ND doing actually nothing if I understand it correctly) when it comes to the Big 10 Network. Growth of that network will come through the addition of schools like Rutgers and Missouri and Maryland. None of those schools do much of anything on a national level, but do quite a bit for the growth of revenue for the BTN
Advocating for the "Spreadbone" since 2010
Rock M Nation
this is right, with the Nebraska pick
the Big 10 showed its hand of what criteria it’s going after.
Given enough velocity even a pig will fly
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Jun 12, 2010 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions
No...he is just saying we are on their radar...
Which I am quite sure we are. These are not rumors…this is taking a perfectly good story and turning it into a rumor. Schad does nothing wrong in this article.
Advocating for the "Spreadbone" since 2010
Rock M Nation
Again
I’ve haven’t seen anything from the Mountain West saying they’re looking at anyone. ESPN lacks credibility in my eyes, as not only are they involved in all of this to an extent (we’re talking TV contracts and the big fish is the ESPN/ABC contract) but the way they’ve propped Chump Brown up and given him a platform to continually spread HIS rumors.
The only fact in the entire piece was the quote from the Commissioner of the Mountain West. The rest was speculation and opinion. ESPN trying to pass it off as anything other than that damages its credibility.
And yet, despite hearing nothing from them
they picked up Boise State, which puts them at 10. Might as well go for 2 more if you’re opting to be a BCS Automatic Qualifier and the Big 12 is falling apart.
Right
and until they announced that yesterday, the only FACT was that they weren’t interested in expanding at this time. I’m not saying there may not be some truth to it, but the rumors are getting annoying quickly, and these so called “facts” from anonymous “sources.”
I certainly can understand growing weary of the rumors
but, right now, the only FACTS are that Colorado, Nebraska and Boise State have changed leagues and the Big 12 is run by a man that makes Gary Bettman look competent.
If you’re going to ignore rumors and speculation, this isn’t going to be nearly as fun.
I dont see that they were trying to pass it off as anything else though
First off, most of that article was about how they would try to block having to take Baylor. Beyond that, saying we are on their radar, what’s wrong with that? Everyone knows we SHOULD be on their radar if things dont pan out elsewhere. Nothing in that article which has anything to do with Mizzou should come as any sort of surprise, nor does it change anything. If you took it as something else, then I hate to say it, but you’ve not been paying attention to the last week.
Advocating for the "Spreadbone" since 2010
Rock M Nation
As a Florida Gator
I would like to have you in the SEC. we need to remember that what made you attractive to the Big 10, also makes you attractive to the SEC. My expansion scenario would include Missouri, Kansas, and then maybe Virginia Tech, and Virginia. I think you would certainly add a good bit of value to the league, having both the St Louis and Kansas City markets, as well as being an AAU member. If my scenario played out, that would add 3 AAU members, three or four major TV markets, 1 major basketball power, and some solid to strong football programs. Granted, your new rivals would be Alabama, LSU, Auburn, the MS schools, and Ark.
Well spread the good word.
SEC is my dream scenario…
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
It would be exciting, but you can pretty much kiss goodbye ever winning a conference title.
Not that we had much luck in the big 12.
Annoying You Since 1986
And we resent the one major basketball power.
Wait two years.
Annoying You Since 1986
New Rivals?
I mean, sure those other teams would be in the conference, but in your dream scenario, Kansas goes to the SEC as well. So long as KU and MU are together, the rest is just background. ;)
So I am guessing we still dont know the topic
of the special curators meeting tomorrow?
Great moments are born from great opportunity.
Follow me on Twitter @muwxman
People are really confused on the whole btn thing..
The current contract the big ten has allows them 10 cents per subscription in states where there is no big ten school. IE Missouri. It gives them 70 or 80 (I honestly can’t remember but for the purpose of this statement lets assume its 80). Now adding Missouri would instantly add the big ten about 17 or 18 million by increasing all the sets to 80 cents from 70. People say adding Nebraska would do less, and adding Notre Dame would not increase anything. That is just simply untrue. The idea behind adding those two schools are for their national following. If both schools were to come aboard, the big ten feels they would be able to renegotiate their contract from 10 cents in states they dont have a team to possibly 20 or 30 cents and states where they do have a team to 90 or a dollar. This would instantly add about 4x what adding the state of Missouri would do. This is the appeal in Nebraska and Notre Dame, and why they were higher on the wish list than Missouri.
Annoying You Since 1986
Missouri wouldn't raise it at all.
Because no offense, but outside of Missouri graduates, the average joe in other states doesn’t give a shit about Missouri football. Wether you like to admit it or not, there are Nebraska football fans all over the place.
Annoying You Since 1986
Yes, but this expansion has NOTHING to do with basketball.
For evidence. See Kansas.
Annoying You Since 1986
Just because nobody wants Kansas doesn't mean that it has nothing to do with basketball
Look at where they are located. Nowhere near the Pac-10, Big 10, SEC, etc…
I think it has even less to do with geography...
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
Yes,
but compared to the other remaining likely Big 10 expansion candidates, our football “pedigree” rates out just fine. Plus, all the Mizzou grads in the media works in our favor when it comes to coverage.
If this argument is true, we can throw Rutgers and Syracuse out of the discussion.
by parliamentlite on Jun 12, 2010 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions
"all the Mizzou grads in the media works in our favor"
This factor could not be more overrated.
Are you enjoying a Mizzou media slant right now?
We will have to agree to disagree here.
I think we get covered more nationally than teams with similar track records. It’s opinion either way, but let me ask this: if the heads of our University used this as a selling point to another conference, would you be opposed to it or upset?
by parliamentlite on Jun 12, 2010 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions
As far as our "pedigree" goes
We are #36 all-time in total wins, behind Syracuse (#15) and ahead of Rutgers (#38)
In the last 50 years, we are #46, behind Syracuse (#35) and ahead of Rutgers (#58)
In the last 25 years, we are #74, behind Syracuse (#38) and ahead of Rutgers (#82)
In the last 10 years, we are #42, ahead of both Syracuse (#90) and Rutgers (#79)
In the last 5 years, we are #23, ahead of both Syracuse (#108) and Rutgers (#29)
Rutgers has been to 6 bowl games with a 4-2 record (the most prestigious would be the 2005 Insight Bowl (w))
Syracuse has been to 22 bowl games with a 12-9-1 record (3 Orange Bowls – all losses, 2 Cotton Bowls – 1 win, 2 Sugar Bowls – 1 tie, 2 Gator Bowls – 1 win and 2 Fiesta Bowls – 1 win, and several lesser bowls)
Missouri has been to 27 bowl games with a 12-15 record (4 Orange Bowls – 1 win, 2 Sugar Bowls – 1 win, 2 Cotton Bowls – 1 win, 3 Gator Bowls – 1 win, 1 Fiesta Bowl – loss, and a host of lesser bowls).
So, we are certainly more prestigious than Rutgers, but Syracuse, not so much. Of course, recent history has been MUCH kinder to us than Syracuse, but if you look longer ago than this decade, they’re the better team.
I will say this for pedigree though...
… Rutgers at least has the claim to being the birthplace of college football.
And I think all the pedigree they need in the Big Ten’s eyes is OOOH SHINY NEW YORK TV SET NUMBERS WANT WANT WANT.
But they're wrong. We're right.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
by Bill C. on Jun 12, 2010 8:28 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Kansas claims the 1920 national championship even though Mizzou went undefeated.
We’re right, but they claimed the championship for no good reason and people credit them with it.
Kansas claims a mythical bird as their mascot
Their argument is invalid.
by Gaknar on Jun 12, 2010 8:34 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
You're thinking of 1922 . . .
. . . and Misssouri didn’t go undefeated (Missouri has never gone undefeated). The Tigers lost one game that year. So did Kansas (aside from a loss to KC Athletic Club). They lost to each other, both by ten points.
by Michael Atchison on Jun 12, 2010 10:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Interesting numbers.
I wasn’t slighting Syracuse, I said that that we rate out fine in comparison. Back in the day, I used to regularly build dynasties with them playing NCAA Football.
Pedigree includes fan support in terms of attendance, merchandise sold and atmosphere. Even in its worst years, Missouri has higher attendance numbers than Syracuse does- simply because of stadium capacity. Last year the were only taking in 35,000 a game for football. Mizzou tickets and sports gear sell just fine. The atmosphere has become electric. We have a brand, a solid fan base, and I would say our stock is higher.
by parliamentlite on Jun 12, 2010 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Still say Nub
got the first invite based largely on their leaving likely triggering the first mega conf., with UT stupidly telling the B10 how to get it started. B10 still wants their ‘hr’ first and foremost, meaning everything that could get ND to move is the best move for now. Which is why, unfortunately, Rutgers may be next (possibly with Pitt) in another effort to make ND jump.
Annoyingly, until somebody else comes seriously sniffing around MU (maybe we need to put on our short skirt again and wander down south?), we are a given for the B10- they can get us whenever they want. And unless UT decides to try to keep the conf. together, we don’t trigger anything or scare anyone by moving. We are a domino sitting among other B12 dominos, but we don’t touch anything else.
I really think we are considerably more attractive than either Rutgers or Pitt., but the B10 has such a hard on for ND, that they will take candidates a tick less appealing strictly to get ND.
Unless the B10 stops at 14 (unlikely, I think, the momentum to 16 will be unstoppable for all the conferences that can pull it off), or UT suddenly actually wants to go to the B10 with some buddies, we are such a no brainer for the B10 that we have to be one of their 16, although we may be #16. Which seems like suckage, but I really don’t see the ‘it won’t be done until next year’ timeframe happening. I think its more likely it is done (as in we know were everyone will be) in the next week or two.
Everybody HATES being in limbo- there will be huge pressure, political or otherwise, to see that everyone anyone cares about (essentially, present BCS schools) isn’t twisting in the wind for months.
And the other factor in this going fast is the ‘grab them now before some other conf. does’ deal- as the pool of available candidates gets smaller, bet things move even quicker, as nobody want to be stuck pulling in a Memphis (no offense to Memphis) to get to 16 with the other big boys.
by tigertiger on Jun 12, 2010 11:56 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Good thoughts
Rule 49. " Think and talk positive football off the field." Hank Stram
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 13, 2010 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions
As a Bama Fan
I see the only scenario for Mizzo making it in the SEC, is if Texas AM decides to go SEC. Then we would need one more West school to make a balanced SEC, which I think would either be Kansas or Mizzo. On the other side of the SEC there would be a choice of 2 of the following FSU, the U, Va Tech, Clemson, Ga Tech.
It's Mizzou (with a "U")
I find it interesting to see that people in the SEC actually see us (or Kansas) as a legit choice. Sure, we’re better than Vandy, Kentucky and Mississippi State, but I don’t see us having the perception as a perennial top-20 team just yet.
What other perennial power would join?
I’d say we’re more likely to thrive than the likes of GT or Virginia.
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
If they INSIST on going West
and neither of the Oklahoma schools are interested (and, it does appear that OU will go with UT and OSU will go with OU, if possible), I guess we are their best remaining choice. But, who says they have to go west? Miami, even though they’ve been down for a few years, seems like a great choice for them. Florida State may be willing to move into the SEC if they’ve already got Miami and Florida. The ACC might be is certainly a better opportunity for them to make it to a BCS Bowl game, but it’s also certainly a weaker conference and having UF and UM in conference would allow them 2 easier non-con games.
Clemson would be a decent fit for them, too. As would Va Tech, as bigcdiddy16 pointed out.
Curious:
Why would Mizzou be more likely to thrive than GT, the reigning ACC champions and a former SEC member?
strictly speculation. zero factual information to back it up.
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
Because teams that run the triple option
are AWFUL. They will never be able to beat bigger team with the spread offense.
Annoying You Since 1986
Just a heads up...
Next time, you might want to slap a “/sarcasm” on there so as not to invite the trolls.
I figured that even the dumbest casual fan could get the joke there.
But based on the general Mizzou fan reaction over the past couple of days, I guess I should have known better.
Annoying You Since 1986
I'm sure Mizzou fans would get it.
I’m more concerned about the traveling blog lurker from other schools not as privy to the joke.
The only reason I could see Mizzou in the SEC...
…would be to give Arkansas a natural rival. Other than that, I don’t see it happening. Of course, I thought Mizzou was a more logical Big Ten target than Nub.
When you look at our choices
We could choose 4 from the ACC, but that means you would have to re-align the orginal 12 schools, were if we get 2 from the west and 2 from the East you keep the orginal 12 in same division and actually add depth to football(Texas AM(at least traditionally), Most of the ACC), and add depth in B-ball(truthfully doesn’t play a factor).
While the SEC is not my first choice - for several reasons
The Big 10 is my first choice primarily for what it would mean to us academically, so while the SEC wouldn’t be an academic downgrade from where we are now, it’s not the upgrade I was hoping for. Also, frankly, while I don’t buy that the SEC is a NFL Minor-League, I really don’t want to be in a conference with Bama, UF, LSU, Auburn and Tennessee. It’s a little scary for someone who would like to see a conference title at least once in my life.
Maybe my fellow Missouri fans aren’t of the same mindset, and ya know, maybe I need to grow a pair. I don’t want to be in a conference where we’re way beyond everyone else, either, which we would be in the CUSA.
... And, I never finished that thought, did I?
While not my first choice for several reasons….
I certainly GREATLY prefer it to ending up in the Big East or C-USA. It would be exciting and flattering to be part of the SEC.
A big part of me, though, would like to end up in an improved MWC with KSU, ISU and kansas, just because I’d hate to lose EVERYTHING we’d built the last, oh, 80 years.
Joining the SEC
would be incredible. I lived in Tuscaloosa for 5 years. The football atmosphere at those schools in unlike anything else i have experienced.
Yes, it would be an incredibly tough league to win in, but not impossible to do,, and think about the increased recruiting potential from that part of the country!!
by Mizzoufarmer on Jun 12, 2010 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Yep
Open recruiting for Mizzou into Florida? That and Texas, lock up MO like Pinkel wants.
Why not expect a step up in talent.
Rule 49. " Think and talk positive football off the field." Hank Stram
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 13, 2010 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions
It's 10:30 on a Sat. and I want a Martini
….gotta calm the nerves.
Given enough velocity even a pig will fly
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Jun 12, 2010 12:30 PM CDT reply actions
anybody else find it ironic
That we have a fanpost from a NU guy titled ‘respect’?
I get what he is trying to do, but talk about bad timing.
‘Hey, we just s-canned the league, ex-Big 8’ers, come over to our place to reminisce over the still warm body, we’ve got plenty of Rotel!’
Sure the KSU folks are beating a path….
The author of that post...
… has never been inflammatory in nature either on RMN or elsewhere. I can imagine the intentions were good, at least.
sure, not saying he has nefarious intentions
and the idea is sound, but I’m not sure he’s going to get much right now. And a bit indicitive, IMO, of a remarkable tone-deafness a chunk of the NU camp has.
Once everybody has a home, or even after things have cooled a bit, fine idea. Right now (well, for me, it’s probably never regardless) I have about as much interest in chatting amicably with NU fans about anything Big 8/12 as I do in poking my eyes out.
Not that I think less of anybody who can, you are a better man than I if so.
I held my tongue for that reason...
…but yeah, bad timing. Especially considering the only “good time” most Mizzou fans would remember is the Burning of Lincoln.
Regarding the caption for that pic of Director Doctor Representative Osborne (R) of Lincoln
It’s not like we liked him to begin with.
What is the motivation
for texas, tech, oklahoma, etc. to join a new conference? What do they lose by staying in the big 12 and what do they gain by joining a new conference?
They could have had money in the Big XII as well...
…if they would have made the sacrifices necessary to keep the conference together and get the Fox Sports deal. No, this is about pride. Neither Texas nor Nebraska were willing to back down. Missouri didn’t cause the breakup, we’re merely the excuse they used to carry out their blood feud.
It seems that KU, K State, and Mizzou
Are all being eyed by the MWC as candidates for expansion. Didnt have the time to look through the comments to see if this has been posted yet
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5279018
Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes; after that, who cares?! He's a mile away and you've got his shoes!
Penalty situation
Can someone shed some more light about the penalty situation? Will Neb be penalized for sure, or is this just a paper tiger clause in the Big 12 contract? Does Neb get penalized more than CU since it is leaving one year earlier?
born Dodger blue, now dyed Cardinals red
The penalties...
Are structured as withheld revenue, not financial liabilities. So if the Big 12 ceases to exist, it doesn’t really matter as much.
I got you, if B-12 disintegrates ...
Absent the B12 dissolving, the remaining schools will share a percent of Neb and CU revenues as a penalty for leaving. I am curious if such revenue witholdings have ever been applied in the past. Can anyone recall an actual case? In other words, I wonder if conferences don’t fuss with actually enforcing them, or the contract language contains too much wiggle room. So could Neb legitimately use the excuse that I “heard it through the grapevine that Mizzou was leaving” thus we can opt out because of the insecurity?
born Dodger blue, now dyed Cardinals red
Here's an (unrealistic) idea!
Let’s “join” (stay in) the new Big 10! Add TCU to the South, move Oklahoma and OK State North and boot ISU (sorry Cyclones)! Boom. Balance. Credibility.
Pipe dreams.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog.
- Mark Twain
Le'ts say we wanted to boot ISU
I can’t imagine how hard it would be to kick a team out of a conference. I’d imagine it would be easier to disband the conference, then start a new conference with all those teams.
Same result, same idea.
Whatever.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog.
- Mark Twain
espn ticker...
an sec ad says texas is their first choice and they would consider atm.
also, schad and katz: sec is not considering fsu, miami, ga tech or clemson
The story online...
explains that the SEC sees neither as realistic options, however. It also goes on to shoot down any speculation of kU joining, and didn’t even mention the prospect of Mizzou joining.
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
I'm starting to like the Mountain West. I'd still prefer the Big 10, but I might like the MWC
instead of the Big East. I understand that the money is not there, so it might make more sense financially to go East, but the MWC would be a lot of fun. If a good TV deal could be made, it would be awesome. Also, with the addition of Boise State and the Big 12 leftovers, the MWC would have to be considered a “power conference” for football and basketball.
Nah.
Screw playing Wyoming. Even though I love Christianson.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog.
- Mark Twain
Think of Wyoming as another Iowa State.
If we don’t get into the Big 10 (which looks likely), the Mountain West would not be bad at all. If they happened to expand to 16 by also getting Nevada and Baylor, then we’d be just as good as the other mega conferences. Maybe there could be a 16-team playoff where the 5 mega conferences get an auto, you have 11 at-large bids, then you also have bowl games. Eliminate crappy bowls so that you still have the same of teams participating in post-season, then you have something like college basketball.
The NCAA Tournament is just as prestigious as it is in basketball in this scenario, then the bowls (depending on the tier) would be like the NIT, CBI, or CIT.com tournaments.
"We'd be just as good as the other mega conferences."
In quantity, yes. Please tell me that was your point.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
With the "mega-conference" scenario in play...
…I still fail to see how we wouldn’t be in the Big Ten (16). Why would that be?
It's not the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog.
- Mark Twain
In no way is playing in MWC equivalent.
There is such a big drop off between the top of the conference and the bottom. It’d be great to play Boise, TCU and BYU, but half the games just wouldn’t be high quality. What if we got a bad home slate? we’d be playing Colorado State, Wyoming, San Diego St…and then the cupcakes.
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
Right, the MWC with Missouri, Kansas, K-State and Boise
oh yeah, and Iowa State and Baylor may not be that far behind the Big 10 or Pac 10 as they stand 2 weeks ago, but not as they will stand after they expand to 16 teams.
In the old Big 12 in 2009:
5 teams had 5 wins or more in-conference, 4 teams had 9 wins or more overall. 2 teams went 4-4 in-conference, 5 teams had 3 wins or less in-conference, 3 had 5 wins or less overall.
In the old Mountain West in 2009 (only 9 teams):
4 teams had 5 or more wins in-conference, 3 teams had 10 or more wins (none had 9). 1 team went 4-4 in-conference, 4 teams had less than 3 wins, one went winless in-conference. 4 teams missed out on bowl games.
Now, let’s add in Boise State and you get another top-tier team, Missouri went 4-4 last year in-conference and would probably only improve by a game or two had we played in the MWC last year. There are many top teams in that league, adding KU, KSU, and ISU would give more teams that are in the middle (except KU would be lower level). Sure, San Diego State, New Mexico, and Colorado State were bad last year, but so were Baylor, Kansas, and Colorado in the Big 12. It would be slightly top-heavy, but not as much as you may think.
Let’s say that one year we brought in Wyoming, Boise State, Colorado State, and Air Force for the conference season. 1 of those teams is okay (Wyoming), 1 is bad (CSU), and 1 is pretty good (Air Force), and another is great (Boise State). Last season in-conference we brought in Nebraska, Texas, Baylor, and Iowa State. One of those teams is great (Texas), one is pretty good (Nebraska), another is mediocre (ISU), and another is bad even though they did upset us(Baylor).
I know that other MWC teams do have some small stadiums, but if a good TV deal were worked out, a lot of money could still pour in. I do believe that with the additions of Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State, Boise State and Iowa State that would be a very good football conference. Nevada went to a bowl game last year, and Baylor is bad, but adding those two teams brings you to 16 and the basketball conference would be pretty good too.
Perhaps “equivalent” was the wrong word here, but these teams are all very good and would make up a very good “mega conference” worthy of an automatic bid to the BCS/tournament (or whatever ends up happening, if auto bids exist for that).
It's not really about the quality of the teams
you’re pulling in a vast TV wasteland there. In some ways, that works to our favor (Unequal revenue sharing = more money for MU) but, overall, you’re not going to pull 20% of the TV dollars the Big Integer, Pac-XX and SEC do individually.
by jschooltiger on Jun 12, 2010 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't know what exactly the MWC has now on TV, I think it's something with Versus,
but I know it’s not great. I’m not really a businessman, but I would assume that the MWC could get a really good tv deal going with the quality of games.
When the Big East was created, it was nothing important. In about 5 years, it became one of the best basketball conferences in the country. People would see how awesome the MWC was, and shortly it could start to be seen as one of the best football conferences in the country (and right now, many college fans do see it as one of the best conferences in the country).
What?
YOU’VE NEVER HEARD OF THEEEE MOUUNNTAIN? The Mountain is teh bestz TV network.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog.
- Mark Twain
You're excused.
I was referencing it’s post-expansion self with hearty Big 12 scraps added, “THEEEE MOUUNNTAIN.”
Part of this balanced breakfast.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog.
- Mark Twain
Desperate Times call for Desperate Measures
We need to pack the University’s website and post Rotel images all over it. Rotel will see a jump in product sales in Columbia and help lobby Mizzou for the Big Ten.
Also RMN we should put up a Rotel ad.
/Imjustsaying
Great moments are born from great opportunity.
Follow me on Twitter @muwxman
While never previously on the table for SEC, MU would now be smart target for SEC is they expand (add A&M, or if mega-conference push forces them to add)
Mizzou and the SEC make a good fit
(NOTE: This becomes (especially) viable (only?) IF Texas goes to Pac10 and Big10 doesn’t take MU)
+ Two large, unshared market media markets in St. Louis and Kansas City.
+ Seven new media markets in all including Springfield, Columbia/JC, Joplin/Pittsburg, Cape/Harrisburg/Marion, Hannibal/Quincy
+ Entire state of nearly 6 million people (w/o Div. 1 FB competition) — only Fla. and Ga. have more people.
+ Historic border state (like Ky) w/ similar cultural and political demographics
+ Potential natural rivalries with Arkansas, Kentucky, Ole Miss (esp. good at giving Ark close-by school). Some rivalry/Big12 history with A&M, if they join first.
Geographic fit; shares borders with three SEC states (Ky., Tenn. And Ark.) and travel to most distant campuses (Fla. And SC) close as Boulder or Austin.
+ Impressive winning FB record vs. SEC in both regular season and bowl games (7-1). Only Tenn. and MU have never played.
+Prestigious basketball program, which would elevate entire conference.
+Historic football power in the ‘60s experiencing steady resurgence and enormous ongoing potential.
+Great facilities, comparable or better (basketball) in most sports.
+Success in non-rev sports such as baseball, softball, gymnastics, soccer, swimming, which are strong in SEC.
+Increased academic reputation with AAU affiliation (like Florida and Vandy).
+Campus enrollment of 30000 and system-wide of 60000+, making it one of largest in conference.
+Increased corporate sponsorship potential for SEC network (Busch, Sprint, Monsanto, Hallmark, EDJ, AG Edwards, Scottrade, etc.)
by sfprman on Jun 12, 2010 5:35 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I still don't see the SEC as realistic...
…but a) I’d be happy if I were wrong, and b) I have trouble believing that the only SEC team we haven’t played is one of the closest ones. Just odd.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
Mu is 20-7-1 vs. SEC in FB all-time
Ala. (2-1), Ark. (3-2), Aub. (1-0), Fla. (1-0), Ga. (0-1) Ky. (1-2), LSU (1-0), Miss. (5-1), Miss. St.. (2-0), SCarolina (2-0), Tenn. (0-0), (Vandy (2-1-1). Tennessee is actually one of the farthest away teams from MU. Why haven;t they played yet? I dunno, but generally UT plays one strong non-conf. team and the rest patsies. MU is in the middle, neither power or patsy. MU is an impressive 7-1 in bowl games vs. the SEC, all in the south, of course.
Knoxville is a long way from Columbia
Too lazy to look up the numbers, but I’d say it’s one of the longer trips
Im with Bill C on this.
We arent on the SEC radar, but you make some very valid points for our team that would work in any conference. Well done!
Great moments are born from great opportunity.
Follow me on Twitter @muwxman
That'd be fantastic.
But I’m not holding my breath. Those non-KC/STL markets aren’t bringing Slive to his knees.
Nice comment and rec
We fit as well as Arkansas into the SEC
Rule 49. " Think and talk positive football off the field." Hank Stram
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 13, 2010 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions
My 2 cents
Nebraska will still be playing in the Big 12 until the 2011 season. I read Colorado is set to begin playing in the Pac 10 in 2012, leading me to believe that the likely creation of the Pac-16, which I believe will include Texas, is due to start play then as well. This means Mizzou still has a suitable home for as many as 2 years. In light of this, the stated 6-12 month timetable on further Big 10 expansion is something we can live with. There appears to be no extra heat on talk of Rutgers or Syracuse at the moment, so I don’t think we should be sweating too much just yet.
I still think we are higher on the Big 10’s list than Rutgers is. The selection of Nebraska shows that quality of teams and national branding are more important than tv sets in the school’s state. Rutgers has neither. Syracuse, ND, Pitt and Mizzou (in no particular order) do. The presence of so many Mizzou grads in the sports media, in my mind, does a great deal to improve our national branding- because I do believe we get more sports media coverage than we would based solely on our teams’ performances on the field. Mizzou would lobby hard for Kansas over a team like Pitt and I would like to see that happen. I think growth to 16 is inevitable and we are in- maybe even with just 14. All this is of course taking a move of Texas to the Pac 10 as a given.
I think the Big 10 may have tabbed Nebraska instead of us because of the tradition they represent- and their willingness to so quickly abandon that in the face of some extra money would send a stranger signal to ND that if say, the Tigers had. I can live with that. Taking Nebraska also does more to precipitate the “fall of the Big 12- rise of the Mega Conference” scenario.
If we do wind up out, I think we will find a nice home with what is left of the Big East with the rest of the leftover Big 12 schools.
one other factor:
Stadium size. The Big Ten is full of 80,000 plus capacity football stadiums. Nebraska fits there. Mizzou is in the ballpark, so is Pitt. Rutgers and Syracuse, not so much.
Syracuse has a 50,000 seat stadium, kind of small, but what might help them is the fact
that the Carrier Dome is the largest dome in the northeast part of the country and the largest on-campus domed stadium of any college campus.
That's great and all
But it doesn’t change the fact that it is small, decrepit, and prone to roof collapses. As small as it is, they still can’t fill it. If you mentioned the basketball capacity, you might have a point. But it really doesn’t seem like basketball matters here.
by parliamentlite on Jun 12, 2010 6:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Mizzou to the MWC?
Several reports coming out KU, KSU, and MIZZOU are going west
Do you have those reports, by chance?
All I’ve seen are reports that the Mountain West is interested in these schools.
One more time...it's not a "report"...
…it’s an article that says the Mountain West is interested. Of COURSE they’re interested.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
We won't. Not yet at least.
To switch a conference like the MWC so quick with so many of the cards not down? That would be a massive, uncalculated error.
Honestly, screw the Mountain West.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight; it's the size of the fight in the dog.
- Mark Twain
I may be suicidal...
but I am way more ga-ga about the possibility of going to the SEC than the Big 10.
Academics – yes, I understand it’s a loss.
Girls – hotter
Weather – warmer
Food – better
Football – maybe being in this football crazy conference will finally do whatever it is needs to be done to this team/coaching staff to prevent being blown out in big games.
"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan
Also, both Big Ten and SEC are great fits for us. If both come calling,
I’ll trust the university to do what they think is best.
Duuuuuude...
I’m ALL for a Joakim Noah is ugly joke, but not when it means passing up conversation of the wonderful, wonderful amount of “talent” that resides in the Southeastern portion of our great country.
Joakim is a babe, haters.
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
