Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

Status
Not open for further replies.
Others chiming in that MU to SEC is a bad, bad idea for them. The only folks I've seen endorse the idea are the SEC beat writers (who want to take Mizzou for their potential money making ability for their own program) and irrational Missouri fans who are driven by fear (they'll be left without a chair), greed (more money), or bitterness (wiping away the shame of being denied by the Big 10 and being able to tell Texas off)

Conference realignment: Is Missouri about to play the SEC’s fool? | sports.omaha.com
 
cyman05 said:
Others chiming in that MU to SEC is a bad, bad idea for them. The only folks I've seen endorse the idea are the SEC beat writers (who want to take Mizzou for their potential money making ability for their own program) and irrational Missouri fans who are driven by fear (they'll be left without a chair), greed (more money), or bitterness (wiping away the shame of being denied by the Big 10 and being able to tell Texas off)

Conference realignment: Is Missouri about to play the SEC’s fool? | sports.omaha.com
Click to expand...

Apparently you didn't read to the end of the article, with the link to Shatel's column advocating the opposite view. Herbstreit thought the move made sense, as well as Barry Tramel from Okla. These aren't SEC writers.

The ones strongly against Mizzou to the SEC are KC tourism business interests (who don't give a rip about MU) and message board posters from schools who might be adversely affected by the move (who REALLY don't give a rip about MU). Most everyone else is OK with it.

I didn't think McKeowan's column made a lot of sense. Why is Mizzou to the B1G such a "sure thing." This is a conference that lived with 11 teams for more than a decade. They're not going to expand unless ND wants in (which is probably never).

We only border 3 major conferences. One doesn't want us (B1G). Another has lost 1/4 of its members in the past 18 months. The third is the SEC.
 
No offense to you and yours, Mizzoulander, but any Missouri fan wanting to go to the SEC is absolutely clueless. Joining that corrupt bunch immediately classes Mizzou with Vanderbilt and Kentucky as punching bags...and results in litttle, if any, increases in revenue. As for stability...the only real stability in the Big 12 now is due to Missouri's shenanigans. Missouri has much to gain as the Big 12 moves back to two divisions...and looks forward to its tier 1 contract in 2015.

The desire to go SEC can only be based in emotion...because as a rational exercise, its incredibly foolish for the health of the Missouri Athletic Department.
 
Mizzoulander said:
Apparently you didn't read to the end of the article, with the link to Shatel's column advocating the opposite view. Herbstreit thought the move made sense, as well as Barry Tramel from Okla. These aren't SEC writers.

The ones strongly against Mizzou to the SEC are KC tourism business interests (who don't give a rip about MU) and message board posters from schools who might be adversely affected by the move (who REALLY don't give a rip about MU). Most everyone else is OK with it.

I didn't think McKeowan's column made a lot of sense. Why is Mizzou to the B1G such a "sure thing." This is a conference that lived with 11 teams for more than a decade. They're not going to expand unless ND wants in (which is probably never).

We only border 3 major conferences. One doesn't want us (B1G). Another has lost 1/4 of its members in the past 18 months. The third is the SEC.
Click to expand...

Why are you still here? Take your SEC woody to another board.
 
Mizzoulander said:
The ones strongly against Mizzou to the SEC are KC tourism business interests (who don't give a rip about MU) and message board posters from schools who might be adversely affected by the move (who REALLY don't give a rip about MU). Most everyone else is OK with it.
Click to expand...

Actually I know A LOT more than would rather just see MU go away than "worry about being adversely affected". The 3 additions excite most of us a lot more than keeping MU around. We are just tired of the drama and would like MU to decide they have had enough limelight and move on so we can as well.
 
Mizzoulander said:
Apparently you didn't read to the end of the article, with the link to Shatel's column advocating the opposite view. Herbstreit thought the move made sense, as well as Barry Tramel from Okla. These aren't SEC writers.

The ones strongly against Mizzou to the SEC are KC tourism business interests (who don't give a rip about MU) and message board posters from schools who might be adversely affected by the move (who REALLY don't give a rip about MU). Most everyone else is OK with it.

I didn't think McKeowan's column made a lot of sense. Why is Mizzou to the B1G such a "sure thing." This is a conference that lived with 11 teams for more than a decade. They're not going to expand unless ND wants in (which is probably never).

We only border 3 major conferences. One doesn't want us (B1G). Another has lost 1/4 of its members in the past 18 months. The third is the SEC.
Click to expand...

Count me as one that does not give a **** if Mizzou goes. In fact, I kind of want them gone. I understand that we have a long history with Mizzou but they are to big of a pain in the *** to deal with.

If they leave, the Big 12 will likely move back to 12 teams which is better for us. It's like they want the other Universities to beg them to stay when the Big 12 has come out and said we are moving forward with or without Mizzou.

Leave, pay the conference a bunch of money to do so and have fun getting destroyed in the SEC. At least you and Aggie can still beat your chests chanting SEC SEC SEC, right.
 
DRCHIRO said:
Count me as one that does not give a **** if Mizzou goes. In fact, I kind of want them gone. I understand that we have a long history with Mizzou but they are to big of a pain in the *** to deal with.

If they leave, the Big 12 will likely move back to 12 teams which is better for us. It's like they want the other Universities to beg them to stay when the Big 12 has come out and said we are moving forward with or without Mizzou.

Leave, pay the conference a bunch of money to do so and have fun getting destroyed in the SEC. At least you and Aggie can still beat your chests chanting SEC SEC SEC, right.
Click to expand...

2 years of Mizzou-drama is enough. If they want to go, they can get that done. If they want to stay, they need to let go of the idea of leaving once and for all. Either in or out, but not some mixture of both.
 
cyman05 said:
Others chiming in that MU to SEC is a bad, bad idea for them. The only folks I've seen endorse the idea are the SEC beat writers (who want to take Mizzou for their potential money making ability for their own program) and irrational Missouri fans who are driven by fear (they'll be left without a chair), greed (more money), or bitterness (wiping away the shame of being denied by the Big 10 and being able to tell Texas off)

Conference realignment: Is Missouri about to play the SEC’s fool? | sports.omaha.com
Click to expand...

That's a great piece, and this line right here is why ISU will be fine in the end:
And folks, the big money isn’t really in football — it’s in scientific research.
Click to expand...
 
I almost 100% want Missouri gone.

In the short term, it looks like we will get to 12 teams almost immediately. I think this is best for ISU.

Then, if conference armageddon truly happens, it increases our chances, even if it is a small fraction of a percent, that ISU will get a B1G invite. I just can't see Missouri going from the SEC to the Big 10, but I'm probably wrong.
 
tim_redd said:
I almost 100% want Missouri gone.

In the short term, it looks like we will get to 12 teams almost immediately. I think this is best for ISU.

Then, if conference armageddon truly happens, it increases our chances, even if it is a small fraction of a percent, that ISU will get a B1G invite. I just can't see Missouri going from the SEC to the Big 10, but I'm probably wrong.
Click to expand...

Lets hope the SEC adds giant exit fees once mizzou joins because we all know mizzou wouldn't even be thinking of leaving if they didn't think it would be really easy to leave for the B1G in the future. Conference whores.
 
tim_redd said:
I almost 100% want Missouri gone.

In the short term, it looks like we will get to 12 teams almost immediately. I think this is best for ISU.

Then, if conference armageddon truly happens, it increases our chances, even if it is a small fraction of a percent, that ISU will get a B1G invite. I just can't see Missouri going from the SEC to the Big 10, but I'm probably wrong.
Click to expand...

See previous post. Grants are very important, especially to the Big 10-12. ISU does very well at attracting grants
 
wilnerhotline Jon Wilner
Look for Mizzou to walk in A&M's footprints from procedural standpoint
24 minutes ago

wilnerhotline Jon Wilner
@
I expect departure process to start in next 1-2 days. RT @BoiseCalvin: @wilnerhotline That suggests Mizzou will decide in 7-8 days ...
25 minutes ago
»

wilnerhotline Jon Wilner
Source: Next 7-8 days "momentous" for Big East, Big 12. Believes B12 goes to 12 if Mizzou leaves. No feel for BYU fate.
37 minutes ago
 
Once expansion for the Big conferences comes to a standstill in a month or two, expect the Big East to get hard at work negotiating their new TV deal...that is if the expansion schools chose to join up with whatever is left of the Big East. When they negotiate their new deal, expect them to use a grant of rights model similar to the Big 12 for a number of years.

What does this mean for the Big 12? It means that if you don't expand with the Big East schools now, you're not getting them for a while, if ever.

Big East was working on TV rights before losses - College Football - Rivals.com
 
Mizzoulander said:
Apparently you didn't read to the end of the article, with the link to Shatel's column advocating the opposite view. Herbstreit thought the move made sense, as well as Barry Tramel from Okla. These aren't SEC writers.

The ones strongly against Mizzou to the SEC are KC tourism business interests (who don't give a rip about MU) and message board posters from schools who might be adversely affected by the move (who REALLY don't give a rip about MU). Most everyone else is OK with it.

I didn't think McKeowan's column made a lot of sense. Why is Mizzou to the B1G such a "sure thing." This is a conference that lived with 11 teams for more than a decade. They're not going to expand unless ND wants in (which is probably never).

We only border 3 major conferences. One doesn't want us (B1G). Another has lost 1/4 of its members in the past 18 months. The third is the SEC.
Click to expand...

I thought that mini-me was supposed to be quiet and just act in a comical manner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back