Mizzou to SEC "inevitable and imminent"

[HoopsTournament]

Lemme break out some "Tigerboard Logic" (whatever that is):

There were only 3 types of schools in the old Big 12:

1. Those with options to join another conference (NU, CU, MU, TAMU, OU, etc.)
2. Those WITHOUT options (KU, KSU, ISU, Baylor)
3. Texas

In the last 18 months, EVERY school with options has either left the conference, is in the process of doing so, or has explored the possibility. Are they all irrational? Making a strictly emotional move? If ISU had the opportunity to leave the Big 12, they should and they would have.

Hoops believes that those schools with options are responsible for the instability (by leaving or threatening to leave). Now that UT and OU were rejected/opted not to join the Pac-12, their interests are now completely aligned with the remaining conference members. Long live the new Big 12.

I believe that the lack of a sustainable conference structure since 1996 is responsible (something that is everyone's fault) and that UT or OU will continue to look at other options and eventually leave the conference in the next several years. The day UT or OU is left out of the BCS championship because the computers say their schedule is weak will be the last day of the Big 12 conference.

Two things are certain: one of us will be proven correct, and the other really won't care at that point.

YES OU has explored. That is why they are NOT leaving. They understand that the grass is greener where it is at. I have explored other opportunities in my job several times, but have come to the realization that nowhere else is better. OU has realized that it is in their best interest to stay in the Big 12 and that they will be worse off in any other conference. You can not give me one reason why OU would be better off in another conference.

And yes those with options were responsible for instability. And yes, so was UT and OU. But the reasons that UT and OU WERE responsible for instability will no longer exist in the conference. (LHN is not a reason, just an excuse for You and A&M to cry.)

The others that were responsible for instability will be gone.

(we have no idea what opportunities ISU has or has not had because our AD doesn't announce his intentions to the world)

 

[HoopsTournament]

NO! I'm not saying that at all...I could care less what happens to them after Mizzou leaves. All I'm saying is that the competitive level of the Big 12 makes a difference in what UT and OU decide to do. The teams that have left (NU, CU, TAMU, MU) make up something like 50% of ALL division winners represented in the conference championship game since 1996. Most of the remaining teams (KU, ISU, BU, TTU, OKST) have NEVER been to the CCG. So far the Big 12 has replaced them with...TCU.

I am NOT saying that Missouri isn't replaceable from a competition standpoint...of course they are. What I'm saying is that replacing those 4 teams with remnants of the Big East (a conference we've ALL derided as the weakest in the BCS for many years) is not going to maintain the Big 12 as #1 or #2 in conference strength.

Athletic suicide? We've played in the Big 12 for 15 years - I wouldn't say that the SEC is THAT much stronger as a conference. You think Mizzou is going to get crushed by LSU, Alabama, and Florida? You're probably right (we've only beaten UT and OU, like, three times in the Big 12). You think we're going to get our ***** handed to us by Arkansas, South Carolina, and Tennessee EVERY single year? I'd say that's a stretch. You think we're going to get consistently rolled against Vandy, Kentucky, and Miss. St.? Not freaking likely.

Not because Mizzou's some kind of juggernaut...we're not. But the SEC is like every other conference; it has its heavyweights, its middle-of-the-road teams, and its doormats. In the Big 12, we've done pretty well against the middle and the doormats. I don't think the strength gap between the Big 12 and the SEC is as wide as, say, the gap between the MWC and the Big 12. Yet nobody believes TCU is about to commit suicide.

In the end, the ONLY program that left that is not irreplaceable is Nebraska. EVERYONE else including your (overvalued by your own fan base) Tigers will be replaced by programs that are just as good or better.

AND the current TV contract Was based on Nebraska NOT being in the league. This league will be a very strong league with or without Mizzou. But will be more stable without you. So don't worry about us. Just leave and let us enjoy our conference.

 

[Yes13]

Athletic suicide? We've played in the Big 12 for 15 years - I wouldn't say that the SEC is THAT much stronger as a conference. You think Mizzou is going to get crushed by LSU, Alabama, and Florida? You're probably right (we've only beaten UT and OU, like, three times in the Big 12). You think we're going to get our ***** handed to us by Arkansas, South Carolina, and Tennessee EVERY single year? I'd say that's a stretch. You think we're going to get consistently rolled against Vandy, Kentucky, and Miss. St.? Not freaking likely.

Not because Mizzou's some kind of juggernaut...we're not. But the SEC is like every other conference; it has its heavyweights, its middle-of-the-road teams, and its doormats. In the Big 12, we've done pretty well against the middle and the doormats. I don't think the strength gap between the Big 12 and the SEC is as wide as, say, the gap between the MWC and the Big 12. Yet nobody believes TCU is about to commit suicide.

I agree with the first paragraph there. The SEC isn't all that, and you need to remember that college athletics is very cyclical.

The second paragraph, why uproot your whole program, local rivalries, 100 years of history for a similar conference that you don't fit in? You canstantly say its because of stability. The Big 12 is pretty stable with a commited Mizzou, and even if the Big 12 does explode its not like you'll get left out of a major conference. Why not stay in the Big 12 continue your program, make similar money, in a similar competitive conference, with less travel?

 

[mt85]

Lemme break out some "Tigerboard Logic" (whatever that is):

There were only 3 types of schools in the old Big 12:

1. Those with options to join another conference (NU, CU, MU, TAMU, OU, etc.)
2. Those WITHOUT options (KU, KSU, ISU, Baylor)
3. Texas

In the last 18 months, EVERY school with options has either left the conference, is in the process of doing so, or has explored the possibility. Are they all irrational? Making a strictly emotional move? If ISU had the opportunity to leave the Big 12, they should and they would have.

Hoops believes that those schools with options are responsible for the instability (by leaving or threatening to leave). Now that UT and OU were rejected/opted not to join the Pac-12, their interests are now completely aligned with the remaining conference members. Long live the new Big 12.

I believe that the lack of a sustainable conference structure since 1996 is responsible (something that is everyone's fault) and that UT or OU will continue to look at other options and eventually leave the conference in the next several years. The day UT or OU is left out of the BCS championship because the computers say their schedule is weak will be the last day of the Big 12 conference.

Two things are certain: one of us will be proven correct, and the other really won't care at that point.

There is no doubt that you can justify a move to the SEC.

I wouldn't even argue that you can't compete in the SEC. The Big XII is currently a tougher conference then the SEC.

What I think Missouri fans are too quick to discount is the loss of their rivalries. Missouri fans hate KU fans. You guys obsess over each other. It is that type of passion that puts the excitement in college sports.

You won't have that in the SEC. You may think that you will, but it won't be there. You can try to manufacture rivalries, but they won't feel the same. True rivalries are born out proximity and history. You are going to throw it all away because you are taking for granted that which you already have.

The same can be said for Texas A & M and Texas. The A & M program is already trying to legislate keeping Texas on their schedule because a few folks are already figuring this out.

You will understand what you've lost only after you lose it. You may shrug your shoulders at the thought today, but after a few years you will understand.

Come back to our board in a decade, and let us know how it has worked out for you.

Another FYI there will be a Texas in every major conference you just don't realize that today.

 

[Die4Cy]

I agree with the first paragraph there. The SEC isn't all that, and you need to remember that college athletics is very cyclical.

The second paragraph, why uproot your whole program, local rivalries, 100 years of history for a similar conference that you don't fit in? You canstantly say its because of stability. The Big 12 is pretty stable with Mizzou, and even if the Big 12 does explode its not like you'll get left out of a major conference. Why not stay in the Big 12 continue your program, make similar money, in a similar competitive conference, with less travel?

Because they have the fever.

A person is rational and can be reasoned with. Put two or more of them together and you get this cluster ****.

It's like Kay said in MIB: " A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

 

[ISUboi12]

I don't know...maybe. UT and OU haven't flirted with another conference in about 6 weeks. That's an eternity in conference realignment time.

Really, the only BCS teams interested in the Big 12 are those from the Big East - a weaker, less-stable conference. And the most desirable schools from the Big East (Pitt, Syr.) are looking to join the ACC. The rest will take any offer that keeps their AQ status. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

It's funny...if you happen upon the WVU board, their fans are the mirror image of Missouri a few weeks ago: debating whether they should take an offer to join a less-familiar conference (in this case, the Big 12) or wait it out in an unstable one (Big East) while waiting for the invite to the league they wanted initally (SEC or ACC).

Sounds familiar.

What is your point on this board? You don't have to defend the economics or rationale for the move, everyone here is intelligent enough to understand it. It seems you are here to stir up some emotional responses from Cyclone fans.

I will admit, Missouri fits in culturally with the SEC very well, much better than Nebraska fits in with the Big 10. If you get my drift you should understand that my previous statement was not a compliment for either team.

 

[flander1649]

NO! I'm not saying that at all...I could care less what happens to them after Mizzou leaves. All I'm saying is that the competitive level of the Big 12 makes a difference in what UT and OU decide to do. The teams that have left (NU, CU, TAMU, MU) make up something like 50% of ALL division winners represented in the conference championship game since 1996. Most of the remaining teams (KU, ISU, BU, TTU, OKST) have NEVER been to the CCG. So far the Big 12 has replaced them with...TCU.

I am NOT saying that Missouri isn't replaceable from a competition standpoint...of course they are. What I'm saying is that replacing those 4 teams with remnants of the Big East (a conference we've ALL derided as the weakest in the BCS for many years) is not going to maintain the Big 12 as #1 or #2 in conference strength.

Athletic suicide? We've played in the Big 12 for 15 years - I wouldn't say that the SEC is THAT much stronger as a conference. You think Mizzou is going to get crushed by LSU, Alabama, and Florida? You're probably right (we've only beaten UT and OU, like, three times in the Big 12). You think we're going to get our ***** handed to us by Arkansas, South Carolina, and Tennessee EVERY single year? I'd say that's a stretch. You think we're going to get consistently rolled against Vandy, Kentucky, and Miss. St.? Not freaking likely.

Not because Mizzou's some kind of juggernaut...we're not. But the SEC is like every other conference; it has its heavyweights, its middle-of-the-road teams, and its doormats. In the Big 12, we've done pretty well against the middle and the doormats. I don't think the strength gap between the Big 12 and the SEC is as wide as, say, the gap between the MWC and the Big 12. Yet nobody believes TCU is about to commit suicide.

OU and UT don't care about the level of competition in thier conference as long as they have a BCS AQ. You really don't think they would rather have 1 game against each other every single year to decide who gets to play in the national title game? That is the only thing both those schools care about they don't care about MU they are laughing at you right now. Also Pinkel has never beat UT and he'll probably screw it up this year too.

 

[flander1649]

Another FYI there will be a Texas in every major conference you just don't realize that today.

Yeah it's Florida who already has their own network working for them where they are getting 10+ million a year from. The only difference is they have some pro sports stuff on their station too so it is actually successful. It's not the Gator network it is the Sunshine network which doesn't sound as univirsity centered as the Longhorn network.

 

[Peter]

OU and UT don't care about the level of competition in thier conference as long as they have a BCS AQ. You really don't think they would rather have 1 game against each other every single year to decide who gets to play in the national title game? That is the only thing both those schools care about they don't care about MU they are laughing at you right now. Also Pinkel has never beat UT and he'll probably screw it up this year too.

I disagree. It's not about winning your conference and going undefeated anymore. There are two teams this year, Stanford and Wisconsin which will likely run the table and still get left out of the BCS championship game.

Right now any team that runs the table in the Big XII or the SEC will automatically be invited to the championship game. Likewise if there is a group of one loss teams gunning for spot number 2, you can bet it is going to a Big XII/SEC school. The computers like these two conferences best.

Texas and Oklahoma need the Big XII to stay legit. Losing Missouri will hurt; they have a good national reputation. I think the only school that could really replace Missouri in terms of football quality would be West Virginia and I think they are waiting for an ACC/SEC invite. I don't think Missouri is as replaceable as people here are making them out to be.

 

[CyBer]

LOL at Missouri fans thinking that their team makes a huge difference to the big 12 if leaving. I would rather have them stay but really couldn't care less.

 

[LutherClone]

If mizzou goes sec, wvu will come and not wait for an acc bid that likely wont come. dont be silly. Getting wvu for mizz is a trade up.

 

[Peter]

LOL at Missouri fans thinking that their team makes a huge difference to the big 12 if leaving. I would rather have them stay but really couldn't care less.

No offense, but I think this is the kind of attitude that has already fragmented the Big XII so much. EVERY school makes a difference, even the little guys like ISU. I can guarantee you that Chuck Neinas isn't twiddling his thumbs in his office thinking "o'well." He is doing whatever he can to let Missouri know how valuable they are and how much he wants them to stay. Missouri is important, not because they are God's gift to college sports, but because they are a long time member with deep ties and violent rivalries with other Big XII schools. We won't just be losing a solid football program, we will be losing a limb and whoever we bring it will look like a prosthetic.

 

[CyBer]

No offense, but I think this is the kind of attitude that has already fragmented the Big XII so much. EVERY school makes a difference, even the little guys like ISU. I can guarantee you that Chuck Neinas isn't twiddling his thumbs in his office thinking "o'well." He is doing whatever he can to let Missouri know how valuable they are and how much he wants them to stay. Missouri is important, not because they are God's gift to college sports, but because they are a long time member with deep ties and violent rivalries with other Big XII schools. We won't just be losing a solid football program, we will be losing a limb and whoever we bring it will look like a prosthetic.

At this point, I think Neinas is looking at other teams and letting missouri do what they will.

 

[isuno1fan]

At this point, I think Neinas is looking at other teams and letting missouri do what they will.

This...he is not coddling them. They know we would prefer they stay. It has been stated several times. At this point, there is nothing more he can do. He is spending his efforts putting a plan in place in the event they choose to leave.

 

[Mizzoulander]

There is no doubt that you can justify a move to the SEC.

I wouldn't even argue that you can't compete in the SEC. The Big XII is currently a tougher conference then the SEC.

What I think Missouri fans are too quick to discount is the loss of their rivalries. Missouri fans hate KU fans. You guys obsess over each other. It is that type of passion that puts the excitement in college sports.

You won't have that in the SEC. You may think that you will, but it won't be there. You can try to manufacture rivalries, but they won't feel the same. True rivalries are born out proximity and history. You are going to throw it all away because you are taking for granted that which you already have.

The same can be said for Texas A & M and Texas. The A & M program is already trying to legislate keeping Texas on their schedule because a few folks are already figuring this out.

You will understand what you've lost only after you lose it. You may shrug your shoulders at the thought today, but after a few years you will understand.

Come back to our board in a decade, and let us know how it has worked out for you.

Another FYI there will be a Texas in every major conference you just don't realize that today.

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

 

[TXCyclones]

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.

Its Missouri, and they'll be hated immediately because they say things like "Mizzou". Its not a matter of "if", but "when".

 

[Wesley]

Personally, I would rather have OU and UT in my league than Alabama and Auburn.

If Mizzou thought they were under appreciated in the big 12-2, go play SEC on a trial basis and then decide in two years.

The recruiting will be the real mind number. Get your limos ready to go recruit. The question you may want to ask will a recruit rather play in the real SEC or a nearby state. Mizzou is not the real South.

 

[BooneCy]

Sooooo, what's the definition of imminent these days?

 

[StLouisClone]

I've been reading TigerBoard this morning. It looks like some of the anti-SEC fans are finally starting to voice their opinion. A couple key points:

- The Dallas Morning News posted an article that Mizzou leaving immediately would cause a huge scheduling problem for Big 12 football in 2012. Apparently everyone's schedule around the country is already set so it is too late for the remaining Big 12 teams to pick up another nonconference game. That means lawsuits.

- The Mizzou fans in KC who want to stay in the Big 12 are starting to gain some traction. Some fans point out that KC will have no loyalty to the SEC given the proximity of KU (and the possible loss of the Big 12 b-ball tourney in KC) and that means Mizzou will likely lose out when competing for recruits in KC. I didn't realize how much Mizzou has relied on KC in recent years... guys like Denmon, Rush, Aldon, Peeler, Dixon, Marcus Lucas, Temple, Coffman and Gaines.

 

[CyDude16]

One thing I noticed, every Missouri fan I talked to last weekend hates the idea of going to the SEC. The only ones who are cheering for the move are the message board addicts, and the students.