You know, I think you are right about that. If there's one aspect that probably has been overlooked, it's the rivalry thing. ISU fans might have a unique perspective on this. You don't really have ONE key natural rival in this conference; your "circle the calendar" rival has always been in another conference (Iowa). At least you play them every year.
I don't think a lot of Mizzou fans realize what they'll miss by not being hated by somebody else. Scheduling KU to the non-conf. schedule fills a lot of needs: a VERY beatable BCS conf. team that's nearby (they should play it on campus thought, not in KC) and draws a lot of local interest. But that's far from a done deal at this point.
As much as I hate to admit it, the conference hasn't been the same since NU and CU left. I've never felt much about playing the TX schools - that Big 8-to-SWC graft just never took. But whether you think the old Big 8 died in 1996, or finally expired last year with realignment, one thing is clear. It's not the same anymore.
Maybe we'll rekindle the rivalry with Arkansas (which actually goes back a ways, and just got fired up again with the return of Suitcase Mike Anderson). Who knows? It won't be the same in the SEC...but it's not really the same in the Big 12 either, especially once the Big East refugees are added.
Oddly, I thought that Tom Shatel from the OWH (Mizzou grad, but still a Nub) summed up the majority of Mizzou fans' emotions regarding the move. SIAP.
M-I-Z, S-E-C, Y-E-S | sports.omaha.com
I will guarantee you that a conference rival is a whole different level then a non conference rival. I highly doubt the KU MU rivalry will continue in the near term. If you divorce your spouse you shouldn't expect him/her to continue to sleep with you. From what I've read, KU is not going to let Missouri have its cake and eat it to. The same is happening with Texas and A & M.
As to Shatel's article, there are no guarantees in any conference. These mega conferences are just as likely to fail for the very same reason he cites about Texas. I would actually contend that the SEC at 14 to 16 teams is more likely to destabilize then a 10 team Big XII.
Lets be honest every school is out for itself. You don't need to look any further then your own school.
The day will come when the Alabamas, Floridas, LSUs of the SEC are just as likely to say we can make a lot more money if we bust away and form a smaller conference. A 14 to 16 team conference gets so diluted that the traditions and rivalries between divisions will start to fade, and there is going to be push back when people start to understand this.
You say that Texas never moved the needle for you. Why do you think that is? Is it because you only faced them every couple of years? Is it because it takes so much time to build a history that creates passion? I think it is a combination of those things.
The tough thing for Missouri is that as the new kid on the block in an expanded SEC, it will be that much tougher for you to build rivalries. You will face the opponents for the other division so infrequently they will always feel like non conference opponents. If my speculation is true that these mega conferences will eventually destabilize, ironically, Missouri may end up in a more precarious position then they would have been in a smaller Big XII.
Abandoning your long time mates may come back to bite you in ways you haven't contemplated.
Last edited: