Missouri Loves Company: Why the Big 12's Tigers Will Not be Asked to Join the SEC
by T Kyle King on Jul 31, 2011 3:44 PM EDT
in SEC Football
Email
PrintYesterday, when I saw that fans of the Texas A&M Aggies were pushing the Missouri Tigers as possible partners to join them in the 14-member SEC, I posted a fanshot whose purpose was to mock the Kentucky Wildcats, who also are pigskin underachievers from a border state that sent soldiers to both sides during the War.
Since then, I have learned that this wackjob idea actually is a real thing being discussed sincerely by some people, which strikes me as absolute nonsense. Accordingly, permit me to take this opportunity to rebut Beergut’s rationale for inducting Mizzou into the Southeastern Conference, lest this atrocious notion gain even the slightest degree of traction.
Beergut begins:
Geographically and culturally speaking, there is no argument for Missouri to join the Southeastern Conference. Yes, Missouri shares borders with Arkansas and Tennessee, but they are not a Southern school or area. Hell, Missouri was a border state during the Civil War, sending troops to both the Union and Confederate sides (albeit at a ratio of more than 2:1 for the Union). Culturally, Missouri does not identify themselves with the South.
Frankly, this ought to end the argument. The fact that Missouri had a star on the Confederate battle flag is the only reason I even bother continuing, but continue I shall.
He goes on to write:
Missouri shares physical borders with Iowa, Illinois, and Nebraska, all three schools members of the 12-team Big Ten Conference, and all three of whom share in the healthy television revenue offered by the Big Ten Network. As a lesser partner in the current 10-team Big 12 Conference television contract, Missouri is guaranteed to make somewhere around $15-$17 million per year, while Iowa, Nebraska, and Illinois take in over $20 million per year under the current Big 10 television deals. . . .
Missouri doesn't have the football-first culture of most SEC schools (they are closer to basketball-centric Kentucky, when speaking of athletic culture), but they would be able to bring the Kansas City television markets to the SEC, and they would even out the number of conference members at 14 (assuming A&M joins the SEC). The SEC allows member schools to control their own third-tier television rights, which means Missouri could cut their own deal with Fox Sports KC to show any third-tier media content. . . .
Moving to the SEC would also allow Missouri to further its reputation as a football program. While the Midwest is a basketball mad area of the country, the NFL's Kansas City Chiefs do have a fanatical following, sometimes compared to a passionate college fanbase. Even if they do not identify themselves as college football fans first, or even Missouri fans, i have no doubt some of these fans would travel to Columbia to attend an Alabama-Missouri or Tennessee-Missouri football game. SEC conference games would increase Missouri's football attendance, and raise the national profile of their program.
With one exception, those are all reasons why Missouri would want to join the SEC, not reasons why the SEC would want Missouri to join. This is the program that sat around all last summer waiting on the invitation to join the Big Ten that never came; there are reasons why no one is swooping in to snap up this program. Outside of the demographic appeal---Missouri is a good-sized state with significant media markets, and the Tigers have no in-state Division I-A competition---there’s not a lot of "there" there, and, frankly, Mike Slive isn’t running a charity.
This brings us to Beergut’s one and only reason why the SEC would have the slightest interest in Missouri: "they would be able to bring the Kansas City television markets to the SEC, and they would even out the number of conference members at 14." Technically, that’s two reasons, but the second one doesn’t count, because any warm body would fulfill the latter criterion.
That just leaves us with the notion that the Tigers deliver the Kansas City and St. Louis television markets. I don’t know how to say this, except to just come right out and say it: no, they don’t. The Kansas City market is shared with the Chiefs, the Royals, and the Kansas Jayhawks. The St. Louis market is shared with the Blues, the Cardinals, the Rams, and the Illinois Fighting Illini. Show me a media market that still has an NHL team, and I’ll show you a media market no college athletics program can claim to deliver.
The mere fact that Missouri is a Big Ten reject is alone enough to keep the SEC from taking the Tigers; Slive wouldn’t give Jim Delany the satisfaction of letting him condescend to us about taking the Midwest’s sloppy seconds. However, if Missouri---the state, not the university---and its major media market isn’t enough to attract the Big Ten, whose network model is based on how many subscribers are in the area, what possible interest could Missouri---the university, not the state---hold for the SEC, which actually needs some of those televisions to be on in order for the league to make money?
I’ve said this before, and I will continue saying it because it remains true: Texas A&M is a perfect fit for the SEC, culturally, financially, and geographically. Since the Aggies obviously would join the SEC West, bringing in Texas A&M would require bringing in another team in the East. Otherwise, the Auburn Tigers would have to be bumped over into the Eastern Division. Although I would be just fine with that, Auburn’s permanent cross-division rival would have to be the Alabama Crimson Tide, which would mean the end of the Alabama-Tennessee game as an annual affray. That will not happen, and Mizzou offers nothing even remotely attractive enough to make Mike Slive go through the political wrangling that such a move would require. (Also, three sets of Tigers in the West? Really?)
In short, where rumors of SEC membership are concerned, the team from the Show Me State has shown me nothing, culturally, financially, or geographically, that would make me consider Mizzou even remotely attractive as an option. It’s just a rumor, and it deserves as much credence as the claim that Arkansas is considering joining the Big 12, which is to say . . . none.
Go ‘Dawgs!
143 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Just Say No to both the Tigers and the Aggies!
The SEC needs three teams with the name “Tigers” like it needs three schools where Bear Bryant once coaches. In other words, it doesn’t.
by SWRT on Jul 31, 2011 3:50 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Bear Bryant
Assistant at Vanderbilt
Head Coach at Kentucky
Head Coach (and assistant pre-Vanderbilt) at Alabama
Though I assume you meant [head] coached…
Anchor of Gold
Twitter: AOG/JAWiv
Facebook: AOG
Show me a media market that still has an NHL team, and I’ll show you a media market no college athletics program can claim to deliver.
http://stars.nhl.com/
http://predators.nhl.com/
http://hurricanes.nhl.com/
http://bluejackets.nhl.com/
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
Aw, come on, Mr. Sanchez! :)
It was a joke, commenting on the fact that Atlanta just lost its NHL team for the second time. I was being facetious.
Although . . . Nashville? Really? You went to rebut that and Vanderbilt was your Exhibit B?
Go 'Dawgs!
Predators
Their TV network is FS Tennessee…so I would imagine using the Vawls as the exhibit over Vanderbilt probably makes more sense…
Anchor of Gold
Twitter: AOG/JAWiv
Facebook: AOG
I was going to say this
Except I was going to spell “Vols” correctly. Vanderbilt education. . .
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
If I don't have
my condescending spelling, what else do I have?
Anchor of Gold
Twitter: AOG/JAWiv
Facebook: AOG
That said...
this idea of adding A&M, while intriguing, is hard to work. I don’t see how effective a 14 or 16 team conference can be, so you’d be left with having to cut someone to add someone, and we’re not cutting anyone. I think 12 teams is just right.
12 team conferences, just like baby bear’s bed
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
Agreed.
For all the “superconference” talk a year ago, the fact is that both the Pac-12 and the Big Ten ultimately went with the SEC’s twelve-team, two-division model. It ain’t broke.
The wild card in all of this is Texas. The Big 12, being the first AQ conference to downsize from the SEC model, is the most unstable of the major conferences, and I can’t believe anyone seriously doubts that the Longhorns will be independent within a decade. Texas A&M is positioning itself to bolt when or before that happens, at which point all Hell breaks loose.
Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech all believe themselves to be in better positions than they actually occupy in all this; the Kansas schools, for instance, believe they’ll be able to parlay the breakup of the Big 12 into a bid for Big East membership, when, in fact, they’re likely Conference USA-bound. Iowa State knows it’s doomed, no matter what, while Baylor may have just enough political capital to get itself a golden parachute. Hey, Baylor to the Big East isn’t any dumber than TCU to the Big East. . . .
Go 'Dawgs!
Seriously, though...
… the best solution to Texas becoming an independent is to re-form a new Big Eight conference in the midwest.
OU, Ok St., aTm, Missou, Kansas, Kansas St., Texas Tech, and whomever the politicians like better between Baylor and Iowa State (ok, who are we kidding… Baylor).
That would be good enough to be a BCS qualifying conference, and we don’t have to add to the SEC to make it happen.
by vineyarddawg on Jul 31, 2011 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions
actually
if you make it a Big Nine, everybody gets 8 conference games.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, but it would be a just-barely, Big East-level BCS conference,
and it would likely slowly degrade with time. Oklahoma isn’t going anywhere, and Oklahoma State will continue to spend like a drunken sailor as long as Pickens is paying the bills. Texas A&M would be stuck as a permanent second fiddle to Texas, and the rest of the misfit toys would slowly decline from trying to get by on TV packages and income dwarfed by rivals.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Jul 31, 2011 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions
As long as high school football is a lesser god only to college football in the midwest (and it always will be)...
… the Oklahoma schools and the Texas schools will get the talent they need to compete on the national level. I mean, we’re not talking about Rutgers trying to poach south Florida for the SEC and ACC leftovers.
And it’s great to say that aTm will always be “little brother,” but in a school the size of Texas, there are enough elite recruits to stock at least two national championship-caliber programs (and that’s not even counting the poaching OU does in north Texas).
In fact, all we’re talking about is reforming the Big Eight, but with three Texas schools instead of Nebraska, Colorado, and Iowa State. Is trading Nebraska for Texas A&M really that much of a step down as to relegate the conference to “Big East” status?
And the Big East has never played for a BCS Championship, while OU has taken their turn handing the BCS trophy to the SEC Champion several times.
by vineyarddawg on Jul 31, 2011 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn't say A&M would always be little brother
I said that arrangement would condemn them to be the second fiddle. The conference would generate very little in rights fees relative to the SEC, Pac-12, and Big Ten Eleven Twelve Ten. That competitive disadvantage would preclude anyone that could do better from choosing this league if they had other options.
Oklahoma and A&M clearly can do better, and so they will. Others will either piggyback to a better conference, or get condemned to the wastelands. If the Big Eight couldn’t compete in the early 90’s, there is no reason to believe a reformulated Big Eight would survive at the Big Boy table a generation later.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Jul 31, 2011 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't think the issue in 1996 was that the Big Eight couldn't compete.
Rather, they saw the SWC collapsing and decided to make a “power play,” just as the SEC had done 4 years earlier by absorbing Arkansas and S. Carolina and creating the lucrative conference championship game. (And though the Big XII was a new conference in name, make no mistake… it was the Big Eight driving the move. After all, every one of the Big Eight made it to the Big XII, even Iowa State, and only 4 SWC members made the move.)
I don’t think there’s any question that a new Big Eight would be worth less in TV revenues than the SEC, Pac-12, or Big 10+2… but the issue remains that it’s the best option available to those schools if Texas goes independent.
The SEC already has a TV network that reaches virtually every TV set in the country, so they don’t need to pull any “new markets” into the fray. So from that standpoint, adding additional teams is likely going to simply mean dividing a similar-size revenue pie 14 ways instead of 12. (Or, at best, any increase in revenue would not be proportional to the increase in number of teams.)
Every indication is that Larry Scott is done expanding in the Pac 12 for now, and we all know that the Big 10+2 isn’t going to be blazing any trails in the super-conference territory.
The bottom line is that if Texas pulls the ripcord and secedes, the Big Eight is the best option left for OU, A&M, and their collective hangers-on.
re: keeping a 12-team conference...
… cutting Florida? Too big.
Cutting Vanderbilt? Too small.
Cutting these guys?
Juuuuust Right.
(They’re about to get the death penalty anyway.)
by vineyarddawg on Jul 31, 2011 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I never noticed this, but they can’t even spell the letter “A” correctly. It looks like an “R”.
"Kickboxing is great. It combines the style and grace of boxing with... kicking." -- Norm MacDonald
by Anthony Pace on Jul 31, 2011 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions
It's those massive pecs.
Hard to paint correctly on ’em.
by vineyarddawg on Jul 31, 2011 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair point.
That dude’s hair reminds me of Gary Oldman in The Fifth Element.
"Kickboxing is great. It combines the style and grace of boxing with... kicking." -- Norm MacDonald
by Anthony Pace on Jul 31, 2011 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
"Kickboxing is great. It combines the style and grace of boxing with... kicking." -- Norm MacDonald
by Anthony Pace on Jul 31, 2011 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
You got lucky with the NHL jab
What with the Knights just leaving Atlanta.
by blackertai on Jul 31, 2011 4:11 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Ugh...
…since Beergut’s inaccurate piece is apparently spreading beyond 12th Man, let me clear up a few things:
- Saying Missouri is a “basketball-centric” school is news to Missouri fans. The only reason this statement is only 80% laughable instead of 100% is because Missouri Football sucked for most of two decades. A good portion of Mizzou has always considered itself football-first. Circumstances disagreed. After two decades of sucking, they averaged in the high-40Ks in attendance. They averaged 50K+ in the late-1990s and early-2000s, and after just a few years of winning, they’re back into the 60Ks. I realize that’s not an amazing number for the SEC, but … Mizzou drew into the 70Ks for many games in the late-1970s and early-1980s before the drought, and they have started to do so again. Meanwhile, they sell out basketball games just a small handful of times a year.
- This is neither here nor there, but at this point Missouri really doesn’t fight it out with Nebraska, Iowa, etc., for nearly as many recruits as Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, etc.
- Missouri is very much a southern state. It’s also very much a midwestern state. I’ve said for a long time that it’s half-Illinois, half-Arkansas. It has an intra-state tension that I’ve never seen anywhere else, which makes it the swingingest of swing states. That said, a large portion of the state considers itself southern and would make the transition with no problem. The tailgating and gameday culture at Mizzou is great and getting better, and in terms of football culture, the Tigers would fit in pretty well. Maybe not as well as A&M or Clemson, but well. And if not being a member of the confederacy disqualifies the program, then … well … I’m okay with that.
(I’m going to ignore the NHL point because I’m completely baffled by it. And besides, “delivering” the KC and StL markets doesn’t in any way mean being the only show in town. It just means that it would give the conference a nice foothold. It is absolutely correct that Mizzou shares those metro areas with other schools, but … isn’t that the case with just about every metro area? The point is, KC and StL are relatively big areas which the SEC does not have in its footprint. Few schools would deliver two decent metros at once, and whether Mizzou ".)
All this said … I don’t really care about this argument because I think this whole “A&M to SEC” thing has been drummed up out of nowhere by anonymous sources and isn’t going to happen anytime soon. It might one day, but all of this “A&M and Missouri are talking to the SEC, and all the rest of the old Big 12 South is talking to the Pac-12” stuff is complete and utter nonsense. The Big 12 is probably doomed, but it’s not going to die right now, and this whole exercise is just an offseason time-killer. If you don’t want Mizzou to join the SEC, that’s fine since a) it’s not on the table, and b) you’re allowed to think whatever you want. But naturally I’m inclined to defend my school against inaccuracy. As you were.
Bill nailed it, and, in addition,
1. A vast swath of Missouri is decidedly culturally southern. Very much so. That whole “starting the civil war” bit wasn’t just a one-off.
2. Athletically, they are solid. You are getting a top 25 in hoops and football.
3. There are more markets than just KC. There’s also the southern contingent in STL, and the entire southern half of the state. Granted, the Northern border is Iowegian, but that doesn’t say anything about Southern Iowa, either.
4. They are a natural Mid-south addition to Kentucky/Arkansas.
5. The STL area churns out some good players. Why not open up another market for teams that can’t grab all of the sunbelt guys?
6. Most important reason to me, academics. Not an AAU sure, but it is a fine state school, with some renowned programs.
Nothing that raises the academic profile of the conference, gets more viewers, opens recruiting and provides steady athletic success is to be despised.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Missouri is a top 25 football team based upon records compiled in the Big 12 North.
I’m sorry, but I’m not buying the Tigers as a top 25 team based on the records they’d compile in the SEC West.
I concede the basketball point, however.
Go 'Dawgs!
I set the xbox to sim three seasons
based on the below 14 teams, and your observation is correct. They went 2-7, 3-6, 1-8 in Conference play.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
"Missouri is very much a southern state. It’s also very much a midwestern state."
There’s a lot of truth to that, Bill C. I only went there once, for a friend’s wedding in St. Louis in 1997 (I felt like Larry McDonald on KAL007 when we were over Illinois airspace), and that was very much my perception. There was very much a Midwestern flavor to the place and the people, but, on the other hand, as I say, Missouri had a star on the Confederate battle flag, and my grandfather was a Cardinals fan because it was the closest thing we had to a Southern major league team at the time.
Please note, I didn’t say that not being a member of the Confederacy disqualifies a state; Kentucky didn’t secede, after all. I was merely making a cultural observation, and the former national border makes a useful dividing line for separating South from not-South. However, taking pride in not having had Confederate forebears—-which may or may not be true in your case, but which is not the case for a great many Missourians—-is very much a bit of Big Ten condescension which would not be welcome, even by the many Southerners who are glad the Confederacy lost. It certainly is not a conceit to which Missouri, the state from which the Dred Scott case arose, is entitled.
I’m really sorry that everyone missed the hockey joke. Seriously, it was a comment on Atlanta, not on anyplace that isn’t Atlanta. For the record, though, there’s not a lot of overlap between hockey fans and college football fans.
Go 'Dawgs!
being a hockey fan and a college football fan
is a lot like being a soccer fan and a football fan.
I speak from experience on both counts.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions
...except that hockey sucks and soccer doesn't suck.
/trollface.jpg
by vineyarddawg on Jul 31, 2011 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm more of a soccer fan than a hockey fan
actually played for a year in college
But I spent this year following in relative depth (watching roughly half the TBL games, keeping up with the SB Nation blog, etc) and it won me over. In a way that baseball never has in its myriad opportunities. Yet being a baseball and football fan is expected. Being a hockey and football fan. . . not so much.
And even though you’re also an exception, you have to admit that there’s a large majority of soccer and football fans who hate each other.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
lots of football/hockey fans in the NE
In Jersey, basically you have Jets/Devils fans and Eagles/Flyers fans.
Also, I kind of like being the rare soccer fan… call it hipster syndrome, but I like “being in the know”.
"Kickboxing is great. It combines the style and grace of boxing with... kicking." -- Norm MacDonald
by Anthony Pace on Jul 31, 2011 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions
football/hockey isn't rare
college football and hockey is rare.
That was communicated in the original argument, but I dropped the word “college” for some reason. sorry about that.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree, Incipient_Senescence.
I will grant you that, as a native Georgian, I consider it a point of pride that Atlanta has twice failed to sustain an NHL team, but I don’t hold it against a man that he happens to like hockey . . . it’s just that, if a given media market is capable of sustaining simultaneously significant college football and NHL fan bases, it’s much more likely to a Big Ten market than an SEC market. That’s not to praise one and condemn the other, but it’s more likely than not true.
Go 'Dawgs!
agree that that's currently the case
but I think it’s more historical bias than necessary animosity. Nashville, as has been pointed out, is doing just fine in both, and Tampa is thriving as a hockey market. Good ownership and marketing can turn SEC markets into hockey markets without lessening the SECness.
Also, your feelings about hockey mirror my feelings about baseball.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair enough, . . .
. . . but at least the South’s is climatically suited to baseball; the same is not true of hockey.
I’d be willing to bet that most of the places in the South that support NHL franchises also have significant populations of transplants from other regions.
Again, though, it really was just a joke. I cannot stress that strongly enough.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jul 31, 2011 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I realize that it was
but as you can probably see from my sig, I’m apt to get into discussions regarding hockey markets in the South. Being a fan of a Southern hockey team with the media dominated by Canada is not at all unlike being a fan of an SEC football team with the media dominated by the Big Ten. . . but with the added bonus of not only rooting for Southern teams to lose but also to move to another city.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Valid point, Incipient_Senescence.
I have baseball, you have hockey, we both have football; may you find your way as pleasant.
Go 'Dawgs!
A native Disagrees
It is a great shame that NHL hockey has failed.
The attendance of terrible Thrashers team was only 2,700 behind a 3rd place Hawks team. If the team was properly managed and could compete for a division title (3rd place) attendance would likely pass Basketball.
The Thrashers failed thanks to piss poor management and the city’s Hockey fans will suffer because of it.
Hockey is my favorite pro sport to watch. Yes I am a native with all traced sides of the family going back to Southern states to pre Civil War times.
by OttovonRuss on Jul 31, 2011 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions
NFL doesn't count
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Jul 31, 2011 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions
To be sure...
…a good number of Missouri fans would be horrified at joining the SEC (just as a good number of fans would feel the same about the Big Ten). The decision-makers would obviously jump at an offer, but there would be some fanbase dissonance.
And because I can’t help but defend my school … Mizzou ranks 17th in schedule-adjusted performance over the last four years. We’ve racked up plenty of wins against the Big 12 North, but we’ve done alright otherwise too.
Sorry about the AAU oversight.
My point still stands: Mizzou is a fine school.
It is a public research institution, with an endowment of $974.9m. That would make it one of the top public dogs in the country, and certainly in the conference. The big money is at Vandy ($3bn) and UF ($1.1bn). No one else is close (the second tier are UGA at $575m and Alabama at $515m).
What is not to like here?
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks, Bill C.
I appreciate the data, and the tone; I apologize if I overreacted before, but, to me, there’s a difference between “I’m proud my ancestors fought for the Union” and “I’m proud my ancestors didn’t fight for the Confederacy,” just as there’s a difference between “I’m proud my team is in the Big Ten” and “I’m proud my team isn’t in the SEC.” As someone whose great-great-grandfather was held as a prisoner of war in Maryland, and whose office overlooks the railroad that was destroyed after the Battle of Jonesboro effectively ended the Atlanta Campaign, I will confess to being a mite sensitive upon the subject.
How does Missouri rank going back over the last decade, or the last two decades? How does Missouri compare to, say, Kentucky over the same periods? That’s not a challenge; I’m genuinely curious whether my perception matches up with the statistical reality.
Go 'Dawgs!
agreed
and regarding the first paragraph, this is why NoVas are evil (and probably why UVA would be a terrible addition to the SEC, as I’m under the impression it has a fairly high NoVa population).
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions
What is a NoVa?
UVa would be a horrible fit for the SEC. As a Southerner, it is sad to see what has become of large portions of the state.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Jul 31, 2011 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Northern Virginia resident
the people who are from what is historically the South but do as much as humanly possible to distance themselves from any form of Southern culture.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Aug 1, 2011 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions
In terms of recent history...
…Mizzou ranks 17th, directly between Georgia and Arkansas. Beyond recent history, my numbers get a little blurrier, but the short version is pretty simple: they were Vanderbilt from 1984-96, Kentucky in 1997-98, Vanderbilt again in 1999-01, Ole Miss 2002-04, Arkansas 2005-10. We’d have very well won the conference/national title in 2007 in the SEC (had we gotten LSU at home, anyway), but typically we could be counted on to finish somewhere in the middle of whatever division in which we’d be placed.
And yeah, I’m sure I came off as more defensive than I probably intended, primarily because I was half-horrified that Beergut and the anonymous rumors have dragged us into this conversation (needless to say, the “Mizzou isn’t all that” pushback is already starting for the second straight year, and we’ve just been sitting over in the corner, minding our own business), but the bottom line is, I would put Mizzou’s athletic department as a whole up against most of those that would be considered SEC candidates in the future. A&M’s is healthier overall, but Mizzou’s in very good shape, especially considering they have consistently improved the overall department’s performance with more money coming in. With SEC money, it’s not hard to say the improvement would continue.
(Alternately, the state of MO has been s***ting on the school financially for a couple of decades now, and consequently we’re not as strong academically as we were a while ago.)
You’re probably correct in that the major issue with Mizzou in the SEC, to me, would be cultural. It would certainly be a solid fit, but not a perfect one. And if the SEC ever chooses to expand, they can probably do just fine in finding perfect fits (unless they really do covet new markets).
Thanks again, Bill C.
I appreciate the SEC-specific comparisons, which very much put Missouri’s achievements in context . . . and, if ever there was a fan base that could sympathize with the proposition that a given team could’ve won a national title had it gotten a shot at LSU in 2007, it’s Georgia’s!
You make some very good points, and, unfortunately, Texas A&M is the only really good cultural, financial, and geographic fit. Clemson and Georgia Tech make sense culturally and geographically, but they add nothing financially; Virginia Tech makes sense culturally and financially, but, geographically, it’s a stretch; North Carolina makes sense financially and geographically, but not culturally. The SEC has plenty of options, but few truly good ones.
By the way, I may have been a bit premature in my cultural assessment of Missouri; I briefly forgot that the University of Missouri Press is one of the most pro-Southern of all academic presses. My library contains Suarez’s Southbound: Interviews with Southern Poets, DeRosa’s The Confederate Constitution of 1861, Wilson’s A Defender of Southern Conservatism: M.E. Bradford and His Achievements, and Winchell’s Where No Flag Flies: Donald Davidson and the Southern Resistance, all of which were published by the University of Missouri Press.
Moreover, as Clyde Wilson notes, Harry Truman’s mother came from a staunchly Confederate Missouri family; when, upon visiting her son in the White House, she refused to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom, a story was concocted that she took that position because Lincoln was a Republican. The truth was revealed in Harry Truman’s subsequent personal selection of a famous portrait of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson to hang in the entrance lobby of his presidential library. That, I believe, would be evidence of your point about Missouri being Southern in several respects.
Go 'Dawgs!
Didn't know that about Truman, actually...
…and yeah, I guess that’s a good point about candidates. If you’re truly looking to expand your footprint and remain even sort of in the south, then hey … sign us up. :-) We’ll fit in with our tailgates, and we’ll worry about the rest later.
Much obliged, Bill C.
We’ll see how it all shakes out in the end; sorry for what I’m sure came across as an unprovoked attack. I just saw Beergut’s piece and thought it was something he came up with, then I went over to Team Speed Kills and saw this was an actual thing. I totally didn’t see that coming.
Go 'Dawgs!
I thought the joke was pretty obvious
Then again, I also actively rooted for the hockey team to get out of town. If some of their “local” fans follow them to Winnipeg, that would be even better. I just think I tend to be of a similar mind about these things.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Jul 31, 2011 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you!
I was beginning to think I was the last person who appreciated a good piece of hockey mockery!
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jul 31, 2011 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions
glare (part two)
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Aug 1, 2011 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions
The Balancing Game
I agree with the statement that the number of teams in the Sec West and East must be balanced. An Auburn to the East and Alabama in the West is unlikely to be acceptable. What would be acceptable is to add another team to the East, such as Virginia Tech or West Virginia. In fact, if the SEC were to ask A&M AND Oklahoma to join, then there would need to bee two equally strong football programs added to the East. VT and WVU fit that mold. Mizzou will need to seek the BIG 10 admittance once again or join a new Conference USA.
I was thinking this earlier
Because Alabama would have to sacrifice rivalries with either Auburn or Tennessee, and neither sacrifice is acceptable for any of the three teams.
But if Alabama and Auburn both moved East and Vanderbilt moved West, might that not solve the problems? Vanderbilt can have Tennessee as their cross-division rival, so nobody loses their biggest rivalry. There might be competitive imbalance questions (Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Bama, and Auburn all in one division? Not to mention the recently good Cocks), but it seems workable from a rivalry perspective.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Easier solution:
Move Tennessee to the West. It’s where they should have been anyway. Then move Auburn to the East, and we’re done here. Most of Tennessee’s traditional rivals are in the West, anyway.
(What? Oh, I wasn’t talking about expansion. Just divisional alignment in general.)
by vineyarddawg on Jul 31, 2011 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
obviously, as you say, it wouldn't help in an expansion case
But additionally, either Kentucky or Vandy (whichever one lost the UT rivalry game) would be very put out. I know we don’t really care about them, but it’s tough to rob anyone of their biggest game of the year.
Also, Tennessee’s biggest traditional rivals are Bama, Auburn, Vandy, Kentucky, and Ole Miss. Right now, more are in the West than the East. But if you flipped Tennessee and Auburn, then the Vols would be in the West and most of their rivals would be in the East. The biggest loss in realignment was the Auburn rivalry, but it’d be just as lost under your plan.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions
That then gives us the Big Ten type situation
Knoxville, which is east of Nashville, is in the West. Nashville, which is west of Knoxville, is in the East.
The 984 Has Spoken!
that too
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Or we could call them
“Teams That Beat Ohio State in Bowls” and “Teams that Ohio State Beat in Bowls.”
On second thought, maybe that wouldn’t be a very even split.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
West Virginia has no business ever being in the SEC.
EVER. I feel very strongly about this.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Jul 31, 2011 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, not seceding is one thing, . . .
. . . but existing only because you’re a clump of counties that seceded from a state that seceded? That’s just wrong!
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jul 31, 2011 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, not for nothing, but . . .
. . . you can’t spell “secede” without S-E-C. I’m just sayin’.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jul 31, 2011 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
dont worry we dont wanna be in the SEC
you think people in KC care about the Jayhawks quite sim[ply the answer is no and Illini in STL? are you kidding me? we do stake a claim to those markets……./….. and SEC basketball is well……… SEC Basketball
I didn't say people there cared about either. I just said y'all had to share those markets.
An old friend of mine spent several years as the career services director at the law school at the University of Illinois, so I know for a fact that good seats were available for the Illinois-Missouri game in St. Louis right before the game. No one there cared.
As for your disdain for SEC basketball, Mike Anderson thinks your position is cute.
Go 'Dawgs!
Mizzou not bad but there is better...
Auburn could be in the East. They lost ties with yealy rivalaries in Florida, and Tenn. Auburn went long streteches without playing LSU or Ole Miss prior to expansion. Miss St. was regularly on the schedule but the record is squarely in Auburn’s favor. Auburn played Arky just once in a bowl before they joined the SEC. Auburn clearly lost the most tradition in the SEC split. The catch with the Iron Bowl being the one constant from the other side is UT/Bama. I do miss the days of the UF, Auburn, UGA rotation of games in October.
Mizzou could join the SEC. Yes the Big10 rejected Mizzou but they only needed one team and who can argue with taking Nebraska over the Tigers? If the Big 10 took Mizzou who would be the next team they would need to balance the conf.
The question is who is a better option than Mizzou?
The Va Tech Chokies are a trendy pick. ESPN tends to like them. But they skirted the NCAA in their rise and have since plateaued while cleaning up their program. They have routinely choked on the big stage. (What is their record against top 10 teams?) The TV market is comparable to Mizzou and talent pool maybe a slight lean to Virginia. Va Tech may also come with the baggage of Univ. Virginia, thanks to Va state government.
Clemson has historically been an SEC culture in the ACC. But…what do you gain? The SEC has access to SC’s smaller talent pool and TV market. I don’t even want UGA to play Clemson regularly now. Clemson gains far more by playing UGA than UGA does. Clemson’s program went in decline with the end of the UGA series. They can no longer market to Georgia talent with the UGA game. Yes they have GT but does that get TV ratings/high school kids worked up?
In my opinion the SEC should make a run at FSU. Yes the SEC has access to Florida with UF. FSU would greatly lock down the SEC’s presence in the TV markets of middle and north Florida (pretty much everything but the Miami market) along with the talent in all sports. FSU is a TV draw giving leverage in contracts. FSU also has a healthy baseball program. FSU would bring the most to the SEC and the biggest obstacle to the move maybe UF not the state government like OU or Va. Tech.
by OttovonRuss on Jul 31, 2011 5:13 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Here's your 14 team work around.
Put TAMU/Mizzou in the West
Move Auburn to the East.
Play a 9 game schedule, with 2 permanent cross-divisional rivals.
This preserves: the Iron Bowl, 3rd Saturday, WTLOCP, makes AU-UGA a division game, gives Arkie a border war, gives arkie a renewed acquaintance from the SWC, renews the LSU-TAMU rivalry, keeps LSU-UF intact, renews the AU-UF series, renews AU-UT
In short, it keeps all present divisional rivals intact, renews old ones, and sets up some interesting four-way races in the East with the addition of Auburn.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 5:17 PM EDT reply actions
2 permanent rivals
Interesting option. The down side is a longer tough slate in a historically brutal conf.
Who would be the permanent rivals?
Not sure...
Maybe set it up like so (represents good fit/some history)
Florida: LSU, Arkansas
UGA: Missy State, AMU
UT: Bama, Arkansas
USCe: Mizzou, Mssy St.
UK: OM, Mizzou
Vandy: TAMU, OM
Auburn: Bama, LSU
I am completely uncertain what to do with UGA’s two slots, USCe’s two slots, and at least one of UF’s. Obviously, there are arbitrary designations to be made for Mizzou/TAMU (hyopthetically), but I think it would work.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions
UGA would likely get Ole miss back as its second perm rival
They were, after all, our second permanent rival before the SEC switched the the 2 rotating, 1 permanent system it has now.
The 984 Has Spoken!
Good point.
It would require some tweaking to accommodate the new members, but it isn’t as though this is an entirely new concept.
Go 'Dawgs!
USC already has Arkansas as a rival
why take that away? Does Florida need them that bad?
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Oops, forgot. My bad.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, but we don't want them.
It would be better than making us go to Missouri every year, but I would take any of the other five current West members over Arkansas any day of the week.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Jul 31, 2011 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions
If it did go 9 games:
I would flip OM/MSU with UGA/Vandy. UGA has more history with OM.
Auburn gets screwed UGA, UF, UT, Bama. and LSU every year. Those would be the favorites every yr to win the conf. Give them Ark or Miss. St.
Overall 9 games greatly increases the chance that the SECCG would be a rematch, which possibly takes the SEC out of the BCSCG. In my opinion a conf. champ. game is played to determine the team from the conf which has the best chance to make/win the BCSCG.
by OttovonRuss on Jul 31, 2011 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions
no, that's the wrong way to do it
switch OM/MSU with UGA/Kentucky
Vandy’s West rival is currently Ole Miss.
Kentucky’s West rival is currently MSU.
I think Stuck in the Plains just didn’t pay much attention to the rivalries outside of the big three in each division (no offense meant, I still have to look them up from time to time).
Additionally, 9 conference games under this scenario actually decreases the chances of an SECCG rematch over what we have now. With six teams in each division and 8 conference games, each team plays 3 games against the opposite division—games against 50% of the division. With seven teams in each division and 9 conference games, each team plays 3 games against the opposite division—games against 42% of the division.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Aug 1, 2011 1:06 AM EDT up reply actions
Yea, no offense
I know for instance that OM plays Vandy every year, but it’s hard to remember all of the protected rivalries (beyond obvious ones like UGA-’Barn, UA-UT, UF-LSU, etc).
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Aug 1, 2011 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Another thing, I believe
with a 9 game conference schedule (that plays 75% of everyone), a CCG would be unncecessary. In the SEC this is fine, as historically, our game is not a “anything goes” game; the better team nearly always wins.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
There’s no way we’d ever get rid of the SEC CG. Aside from being a great game, it’s a cash cow and has the effect of offsetting a loss for the winner when bowl considerations are made.
"It'll only be reviewed because the guys up in the booth want to watch it a few times too." AJ's one-handed catch at Colorado
True,
In a 9 game brutality-fest, an SECCG would be more necessary, not less so.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Aug 1, 2011 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
again
would work from a rivalry perspective, but 9 conference games in a really tough conference is brutal. I wonder if non-conference scheduling would get even worse than it is now.
Also, nobody has done this so far, but it seems to me like a good idea: if we have an uneven number of conference games, have each team play one neutral site game. We already have Georgia and Florida. If Tennessee and Arkansas were made cross-division rivals again, they could play each year in the Liberty Bowl. I’m sure other sites could be found for the other 5 games.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Interesting idea.
Not sure I agree with it, but it’s intriguing enough to discuss, even though it would never happen because it would cost every team but two a home game they otherwise would’ve gotten.
Go 'Dawgs!
true enough
although it’s not a home game they would’ve gotten prior to 2006 or whenever they added the 12th game. Still, it would help a tad with the competitive imbalance of some teams getting 5 home and 4 away while others have the reverse split.
Although maybe this doesn’t move you, since Georgia and Florida fans have dealt with that for a good long while.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Costing a home game ...
It’s a far-flung notion and one of which I’m not especially enamored, but it might be worthwhile to pint out that UGA and UF each make much more money from the Cocktail Party every two years than we would make if the game were moved to home-and-home. Creating that kind of magic (that’s been nearly 80 years in the making so far) from scratch, however would be difficult, if not impossible.
by NCT on Jul 31, 2011 7:32 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
oh, and one more problem with that set up:
that’s eight games set every year, which means you only meet your rotational opponent once every five years (and only meet them at home once a decade).
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Am I the only one who wants UVA to join the SEC?
Probably…
"Kickboxing is great. It combines the style and grace of boxing with... kicking." -- Norm MacDonald
Cavs
What does the SEC gain with UVA? Academics obviously and a great Lacrosse program.
I've been in the northeast for too long
As such, academics and Lax weight too much in who I want to join an athletic conference… :-/
/theyalsohavegoodbaseball
//scurriesaway
"Kickboxing is great. It combines the style and grace of boxing with... kicking." -- Norm MacDonald
by Anthony Pace on Jul 31, 2011 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
What if the SEC took Princeton?
After all, it was the “Southern Ivy.” That said, given where Princeton football is within the Ivy League, it would be inhumane to have them play the theoretical 9 conference game schedule.
by Cantabrigian_UGA_Fan on Aug 2, 2011 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Tell you what we'd gain...
Starched khakis that would make the frat boys in Oxford feel underdressed.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon
by Stuck in the Plains on Jul 31, 2011 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I also like Charlottesville and the DMB...
"Kickboxing is great. It combines the style and grace of boxing with... kicking." -- Norm MacDonald
by Anthony Pace on Jul 31, 2011 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I like UVa
I’d have gone to law school there if they’d let me in. (still a bit bitter — I mean I was good enough for the Hoyas, but not for the Cavaliers, dammit.)
by NCT on Jul 31, 2011 7:36 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I have a great deal of respect for Virginia, . . .
. . . but, after Georgia faced the Cavaliers in bowl games three times in six seasons from 1995 to 2000, I’m in no hurry to take on the Wahoos again anytime soon!
Go 'Dawgs!
I had no idea this thread would take off like this......can we go back to hating on BSU again?
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
by tankertoad on Jul 31, 2011 6:01 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I'm splitting time between this thread and one on VolNation
trying to convince people that beating Georgia counts as a big win (the context is best UT wins of the last decade, and I’m the only one that has the ‘04 Georgia game in the top ten. . . I have it tied for 2nd. Y’all had a good team in ’04).
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Things to know about Mizzou...
Ok, so I read your article and felt that I should fill you in a few things…
You said…
1.
Geographically and culturally speaking, there is no argument for Missouri to join the Southeastern Conference.
Conclusion: WRONG -
The reason why Missouri and Kansas are intense rivals stems from the Civil War when William Quantrill led the Missouri Tigers to burn Lawrence, Kansas to the ground in the Lawrence Massacre of 1863 where 200 men and boys were killed. Tiger fans took it to the next level, making shirts to antagonize KU fans in 2007.
2. You said…
There are reasons why no one is swooping in to snap up this program.
Conclusion: HALF RIGHT
There was a reason, but its not what you said. Missouri and The Big Ten had the deal almost done when the state’s governor, Jay Nixon blabbed about it publicly. As you see in this article below…
“By making a giant public stink about moving MU to the Big 10, he was actively encouraging other schools to shop around – and Colorado and Nebraska ended up getting the deal that Missouri was never offered. So much for academic achievement”.
I give the credit to Nebraska’s Tom Osborn. Osborn outworked Missouri Athletic Director Mike Alden and got the Huskers into the Big Ten. Alden got outworked in 07, when KU snuck into the Orange Bowl ahead of Missouri, despite losing to the Tigers and the fact that Missouri was ranked #1 in the country heading into the conference championship game.
I guess what I am saying is that the reason why Missouri lost out to Nebraska for the Big Ten had nothing to do with it not being a desireable market and a lot more to do with the governor and athletic director’s mishaps.
#3. You said… "No, they don’t. The Kansas City market is shared with the Chiefs, the Royals, and the Kansas Jayhawks. The St. Louis market is shared with the Blues, the Cardinals, the Rams, and the Illinois Fighting Illini. Show me a media market that still has an NHL team, and I’ll show you a media market no college athletics program can claim to deliver.
Conclusion: ABSOLUTELY WRONG!
Look, I was born and raised in Kansas City and currently live in St. Joseph (another big city northwest of KC. There are sports bars all across the city that are designated specifically as Mizzou bars. Their following is huge. You have to remember that the majority of Kansas City is on the Missouri side of the state line. Only a small portion of Kansas City is on the Kansas side of the line. Are there a lot of Kansas fans? Sure, but you better believe that fans in the subburbs of Liberty, Gladstone, Lees Summit, Blue Springs, St. Joseph, etc… are all Tiger strong holds. KC is a football town, so we watch on both Saturdays and Sundays. We have tailgate with a caravan of people for both the Chiefs and Tigers (barbeque of course).
As for St. Louis, the Tiger fans far outnumber the Illinois fans for their annual border game in the dome. That’s for good reason, considering Mizzou has beaten Illinois the last six times they’ve played. Illinois last beat Missouri in 1994.
#4. You said…
In short, where rumors of SEC membership are concerned, the team from the Show Me State has shown me nothing
Conclusion: WRONG AGAIN
Ok, so we’ve corrected your Missouri Civil War history, we’ve talked about how it was a political leader and poor A.D. that was to blame for the Big 10 swing and miss (not any of the reasons you mentioned), and we discussed how KC and St. Louis strongly support Missouri (despite your poor assumptions. Now, let’s talk about what the Tigers’ do on the field. A guy I know told me that Missouri would become the Vanderbuilt of the SEC. Again, he would be WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
The Tigers haven’t lost against an SEC opponent in 8 years. Mizzou beat South Carolina 38-31 in the 2005 Independence Bowl and dominated Arkansas (with McFadden) 38-7 in the 2007 Cottonbowl. Mizzou also won during the regular season, winning at Ole Miss 38-25 in 2007 and 3…4-7 in 2006. In fact, the Tigers’ last loss against an SEC team came in 2003 against Arkansas in the Independence Bowl, losing 27-14. As for Texas A&M… The Tigers won in College Station 30-9 last season.
Now, I’m not dillusional. If they have to face LSU every year, they’ll suffer their share of losses, but they’ll also be competitive. Also, Mizzou has a strong alumni base that would definitely be willing to expand its’ football facilities to meet the needs of an SEC member. They last updated their facilities about 9 years ago and have the fan base to fill an 80,000 fan stadium.
Sorry for the long post, but man, you couldn’t have been more wrong with those comments.
Epic corrections:
1) The “Missouri Tigers” protected Columbia (from pro-slave factions, actually); they didn’t burn down Lawrence. The “burning Lawrence” thing has certainly been used to stoke the rivalry in, frankly, a pretty enjoyable way, and that’s fine, but the “Tigers” didn’t do the burning.
2) There was no “done deal” with the Big Ten, and Jay Nixon blabbed because Jay Nixon blabs. His shooting his mouth off was embarrassing, but he in no way blew a deal with the Big Ten. If nothing else, deals this important don’t fall apart because somebody blabs about it.
I understand that y'all wouldn't be Vandy or anything
But don’t get too puffed up over beating an 8-5 Arkansas team, a 3-9 Ole Miss team, and a 7-5 South Carolina team.
If Missouri joined the SEC, my guess is they’d end up performing similarly to Arkansas, who have been right around .500 in conference play since joining.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree
Look, all I have to go on is who they’ve played. They haven’t played Florida, Georgia, LSU or anybody like that. They’ve won when they’ve played mediocre SEC teams. I think they could be just as good as Arkansas in the SEC, which isn’t too bad. They’re competitive and they win the occassional big game. That’s a fair comparision to what I think Missouri would do.
That's a fair point, and, certainly, it worked out well for the SEC to add to the middle . . .
. . . with Arkansas and South Carolina in 1992, rather than add to the top. Missouri and Texas A&M would be comparable choices.
I don’t agree with some of your positions, but I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts. I hope you drop by and join in the conversation more often.
Go 'Dawgs!
Thanks T Kyle for you compliment above.
Solid comments from KC Guy. In my opinion Mizzou is as good of a fit as Arkansas and possibly Kentucky. Yes I amaware of the border skirmish etc. Also there is no shame is Nebraska being taken over Mizzou. Nebraska is a football dynasty and one of the most storied programs, that has typically been free of NCAA problems and solid academics outside of sports.
Mizzou does grow the conf more than Clemson. VT as stated above maybe a tossup. Mizzou has more history of being a good team. Where was VT before Beamer? Where will they be after? Mizzou has had stretches of being a very solid program. SEC money and recruiting grounds especially if that includes Texas (with the addition of Tx A&M) would do nothing but improve an already good program. I could see Mizzou doing better on average than Ark.
Also on conf. fit, Va. may have been in the CSA but they’re mostly Yankees now. VT also has new football traditions that belong in the Big East not the SEC. Metal over loud speakers before the game?
I have presented arguments for team on the assumption of a 14 team conf expansion. My real hope is that Texas goes independant and fails. Well….Ideally Texas would agree to a more even distribution of cash and TV networks but the chances of that seem rather low. The remaining teams form a new Big 12 with the addition of some mid majors and the 12 team model is retained. If the mega conf does take place I want to go on record as saying I want the SEC to have nothing to do with the Univ. of Tx.
by OttovonRuss on Jul 31, 2011 10:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Rereading the original article. I would give up Ark. to the Big12 to keep the conf model at 12… IF… Texas went independent and the SEC would get FSU as a replacement.
The ACC can take their pick of BigEast teams. Afterall didn’t they want Syracuse over VT?
by OttovonRuss on Jul 31, 2011 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
dude
1) you had a civil war skirmish and that means you have reason to be in the SEC? uh, what?
2) well, you agreed
3) there is a Mizzou following in KC. So what? There are Auburn followings in B-Ham and in Atlanta, what’s that have to do with the price of a KC Strip?
4) Mizzou beat some weak SEC teams in the 2nd lowest SEC bowl. color me unimpressed. I’ll give you credit for the Cotton Bowl. Beating aTm – yea, who hasnt lately?
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Re:
1. Look, the guy said that Missouri culturally doesn’t fit in with the SEC. People died in Missouri just like they did in any other state that fought in the war. Yes, it was on the far western lines and wasn’t nearly as involved as some of the other states… So what. All I’m trying to say is that Missouri has a lot to offer the SEC regardless of its history in the Civil War.
3. You obviously haven’t been here. You don’t live here and you don’t understand how much people love Missouri football. Basketball is by far the secondary sport (Sorry Coach Norm Stewart). You’re far off base if you’re trying to tell me that the Kansas City and St. Louis markets don’t provide enough fans to warrent being selected into the SEC. They’re both top 35 markets and both have loyal fan bases. Getting Missouri would grow the SEC fan base. Saying no to Missouri because you want Clemson instead is one thing. Saying no to Missouri because of all of the made up reasons you listed is another.
4. Once again, all I have to go on is who they’ve played. They haven’t played Florida, Georgia, LSU or anybody like that. They’ve won when they’ve played mediocre SEC teams. I think they could be just as good as Arkansas in the SEC, which isn’t too bad. They’re competitive and they win the occassional big game. That’s a fair comparision to what I think Missouri would do.
Ignorance is a wonderful thing, no?
1) “the guy” that would be the OP? and the mayor of this blog? Maybe reference your material. I reponded to a civil war reference as being part of the “SEC culture” which is a ridiculous reason. That war and it’s member states have no reason or baring on conference alignment and, frankly – shouldnt have even gone there.
3) I live in Kansas, visit KC regularly, travel through to St Louis upon occasion so maybe be careful about calling out “you obviously havent been here”. I get a lot more Kansas and Mizzou ball and fandom than I do SEC here. Furthermore, you argued that there were “sports bars” in KC supporting Mizzou, which I referenced as a “so what?” and I stand by that, so what? Your response took it in a different direction and I dont know where you get “made up reasons” from. Did you actually read anything from the OP, or even your own response?
4) You listed out how you have beating the SEC, now you change it to “all i have is who they’ve played”. Pick a side.
geez.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
(By the way, . . .
. . . I apologize for the two flagrant errors in that link; the January 1, 1960, game occurred at the end of the Bulldogs’ 1959 SEC championship season, so it was not Wally Butts’s last game, nor was Tarkenton a senior, as both men were back in Sanford Stadium the following fall, in the 1960 season. Nevertheless, the picture and the final score were worth the link.)
Go 'Dawgs!
Did I see a goat in the following year's photo?
Could be a sign!
Success is never final. --Winston Churchill
by Inteljumper on Jul 31, 2011 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm disappointed that no one beat me to it.
by NCT on Jul 31, 2011 7:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
That was awesome btw. lol.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Rivalries
I think it would be pretty cool to get the Arkansas – Missouri rivalry back and I could see new rivalries with Tennessee, Kentucky, and LSU forming. It would be fun.
advantage of Missouri to the SEC:
More puns in headlines
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:50 PM EDT reply actions
Partial criteria for inclusion:
1. Do you serve grits?
2. Is your iced tea sweet?
3. How do you pronounce the word “naked”?
4. If you call a Coca Cola “pop”, you’re automatically disqualified from further consideration.
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
again, Kentucky says "hi"
Missouri is split between “soda” and “pop,” whereas Kentucky is split between “Coke” and “pop.”
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions
you posted that map
with ESS EEE SEE Speed!
Link?
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
embiggened version link?
MOAR ESS EEE SEE SPEED!
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions
you know what?
I think this map says that the next SEC target should be Indiana University. Indianapolis is clearly an SEC market.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions
It's interesting
eastern North Carolina has a few counties shaded in green, which falls under the “other” category. Pepsi was invented in New Bern, North Carolina (Craven County). It was originally called “Brad’s Drink” and the pharmacy where it was concocted (some time after Coke was invented in Atlanta) is still there. I know this because I lived there briefly in the early 90s.
However, Craven County, NC – home of Pepsi – still calls a soda a “Coke.” I wonder if the Coca Cola company knows about this study?
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
Ha...
1. YES. A go-to for the wife and I (though I do not speak for all Missourians).
2. Yes, unfortunately.
3. Like you do whenever I can get away with it.
4. I’m personally originally from Oklahoma, so it’s “Coke” for me.
curiosity question:
do you also say “fireplug”?
(my favorite author is from Oklahoma, and his writing is about the only place I’ve seen that term)
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Jul 31, 2011 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Fireplug
You likely know the origins of these fire safety device — street-based water delivery systems were fitted with replaceable plugs so early firefighters wouldn’t have to destroy and subsequently repair the pipes to gain access to needed water. /londonfiredocumentary’d
by NCT on Jul 31, 2011 7:45 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
All right, Bill C.'s use of the word "Coke" carries a bunch of weight with me.
Dang, now I’m genuinely torn. I may have been talked out of (and, indeed, have helped talk myself out of) my original position.
That, or I’m now 100 per cent on board for kicking Kentucky the heck out of the SEC!
Go 'Dawgs!
I think a point is being missed here
Let’s all agree on one thing first, it’s all about money. If the numbers don’t make sense, nobody is moving anywhere.
That being said, it seems like many people arguing both for and against the possibility of Missouri moving point to the factor of “getting” the markets of St. Louis and Kansas City. This, presumably, was one of the factors the Big Ten was looking at when (if) they were considering offering Missouri a spot. Here’s the thing though, the Big Ten Network is fundamentally different than the SEC ESPN deal. The SEC schools will each get a payout from ESPN based on that contract (and obviously how they divide up the pie). The Big Ten schools will each get a payout not based on a contract, but based on the amount that the BTN pulls in, which changes year to year. It will go up again this year with the addition of Nebraska.
If you haven’t grasped the significance of this, think of it like this, the ESPN deal is fixed, but the BTN fluctuates based on subscribers. The BTN has been forced on consumers whether or not they watch it. If you live in the Big Ten footprint state and have cable or satellite service, you are paying the BTN fee even if you never watch anything. With the addition of Nebraska, virtually every household in Nebraska is now paying into the BTN, and due to that, the Big Ten coffers.
This is why the ESPN deal is so large, it has to be. They had to protect their interest in college football by stopping the SEC from making their own network (at least in the short term). If A&M and Missouri join the SEC, that contract will be renegotiated, but it will still be divided up along the same lines and the payout will be the same for the length of the contract. Therein lies the problem, Missouri can’t deliver the St. Louis and Kansas City markets because they simply don’t exist, not in terms of subscribers. Recruiting, advertising, and merchandising will all factor in to any decision, yes, but if you have cable/satellite, you have ESPN. They can’t expand. The BTN isn’t there yet, so any new area that moves the channel from premium to basic nets cash per household.
At the end of the day, this is why the Longhorn Network should scare the hell out of all of you. Texas getting a couple of dollars from every household in Texas all for themselves puts them in a category all alone, and no one else can compete with that.
It never gets to be easy.
Why the fuck doesn't it ever get to be easy?
by chitownhawkeye on Jul 31, 2011 9:34 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Big 10 Network
Is the Big 10 network not in Missouri already? It’s on my Atlanta cable lineup.
by NCT on Aug 1, 2011 10:17 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think the rate they recieve
is different based on if the market has a member school or not. So they get a certain pay for the Atlanta market subscribers, but substantially more for Cleveland and Indianapolis market subscribers.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
Ok, thanks.
I don’t know how long it had been in my lineup when I first noticed it, but as soon as I saw it, I sent a complaint email to Comcast just for kicks.
Take the EDSBS meme
and put Comcast in place of Clemson. Give ’em all the complaints you can.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
One other point you failed to mention, how many Tigers do we need?
We’ve gotten LSU and Auburn already. Add Missouri and Clemson, and let’s just go ahead and create the “Tiger” division. We can just create the Tiger and Bulldog divisions. Ther Tiger division consists of LSU, Auburn, Missouri, Clemson, Memphis, Grambling, and Princeton. With a Bulldog division of Georgia, Miss St, Butler, Fresno St, Citadel, Louisiana Tech, and Yale.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Aug 1, 2011 11:16 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Auburn would change the mascot to Bulldogs
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
And The Valley Shook!
I self-indulgently tweet @ATVSPoseur
the south
im not sure missouri moving to the SEC is gonna happen, but i take issue with some previous statements.
for clarification a very large part of missouri is part of the south. i am from the ozarks and if its not the south then nothing that doesnt border the gulf is. the best map for whats north and whats south is the denomination map, ill try to post it. anything outside of st louis metro except far north missouri is cultuaraly south. if you dissagree you should check out some history. the slavery part of the civil war started here with the border war with kansas. mark twain is from 100 miles north of st louis. look up Gen. Shelby, Quantrill or the James brothers. look up the words to the Missouri waltz our state song. at the very least watch the outlaw josey whales.
it's more hillfolk than south to me
like those of appalachia (eastern tn, west va and kentucky)
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
T KYLE KING, I have a question for you.
Does Missouri being a “union” state bother you?
Dr. S
Missouri is not a "southern school", and neither is much of the SEC
First, let me start by saying A.) I’m a Mizzou alum and B.) I would hate to see Missouri join the SEC over a better Big 12 or the Big 10.
The SEC culture is not a great fit for us, particularly if the SEC is “southern” and “southern” is defined along a South Carolina-Georgia-Alabama-Mississippi axis. Of course, if that’s the definition, somebody should let the folks in Baton Rouge, Lexington, the Villes (Gaines, Knox, Nash, and Fayette), and potentially College Station know because none of them fit that definition either.
Personally, I think the “hill folk” comment could capture some cultural similarities with SEC schools like UK, Arkie, Tenn, and Vandy… simply because a lot of Missouri’s population, including my hometown of St. Louis, lives on or very near the Ozark Plateau.
Similarly, there could be a “Mississippi River” connection with Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana all sharing similar music, food, and french-influenced culture (if I recall correctly, St. Louis hosts the second largest Mardi Gras in the country). Apparently the French influence was overtaken by Lutheran bachelor farmers if you go any farther north on the river, so no need to add Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, or Minnesota.
I’m tempted to take inspiration from the Leaders and Legends atrocity by suggesting an Ozark Hillbilly division versus an Appalachian Hillbilly division (wasn’t Deliverance set in the Dawgs’ part of the world?). I guess the swamp people from Florida could join the Appalachians and the swamp people from the Bayou could join the Ozarks (after all, swamp people are just hillbillies without enough dry land to cook meth or put a car on blocks). But I suspect that would also be a cultural definition that wouldn’t quite capture everyone in the conference.
by throwingoranges on Aug 7, 2011 12:37 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Dawg Sports
Related FanShots on Dawg Sports
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
