Is there a bigger loser in conference realignment than Mizzou?
- Thread starter UNIGuy4Cy
- Start date
Again, I stand by my personal experience in Columbia. Especially among locals it is a very southern town.
My prediction on Missouri:
Mediocre in SEC for about 5 years (like Big 12).
After 5 years = bottom feeder.
Missouri recruits Texas pretty hard, and that area will probably dry up after this move. Missouri also probably doesn't have the money to cheat as well as the other schools in the SEC.
Mediocre in SEC for about 5 years (like Big 12).
After 5 years = bottom feeder.
Missouri recruits Texas pretty hard, and that area will probably dry up after this move. Missouri also probably doesn't have the money to cheat as well as the other schools in the SEC.
Overall--don't disagree. I think MIZZOU will be tough this year in Football, but BB will be down. After that....who knows? But I think over the long haul, MIZZOU will regret the move.
Congrats. We used to play dimes (not quarters) with shot glasses and whenever anyone had to drink we would say "Yankees suck!". Again, everyone's opinion is different. I will say this, my first exposure to Bisquits and Gravy was in Columbia. And no, I don't mean Brown gravy.
+1
Went down to a few football games when McCarney was coaching. Also visited several other times when a good friend worked down there. Was treated well every time and thought the fans were pretty decent.
I like Columiba. Flatbranch is still one of my favorite food/micorbrew places.
For those keeping score at home ISUAgronomist told me to "Please go **** yourself." Which reinforces my opinion of his IQ. I love it when a plan comes together.
I would think most UM fans will miss the B12 more during basketball season than football. Not being able to play KU in columbia and having the conference tourney in so far away in Atlanta will be a bit depressing for a while.
I'd rather have UM than WV.
I'd rather have UM than WV.
The governor of Missouri, big boosters and the lunatic fringe from the internet pushed hard for it. I live in KC and not one of the MIZZOU fans I know personally were excited about it. However, I think Mizzou would have stayed if Boren and OU hadn't pulled their shenanigans. I could be wrong.
CBS and ESPN aren't just going to offer up more money if they don't have to. Keep in mind they already have the SEC under contract for 13 more years. This expansion is also driven by the SEC's desire to start their own network.
I think a lot of it is just saving face. They wanted to make the move to the B1G, which in reality, would be a good fit for them as it would for us. But they basically got caught with their hand in the cookie jar by screaming and yelling, "HEY, MY HAND IS IN THE COOKIE JAR!" So, when in reality, they found out that the B1G and Nebby had left the cookie jar out there for them as a trap, they didn't want to look like fools and then started playing the, "Anywhere but the Big XII is the best place" card. This, combined with the constant ******** about Texas power, basically gave them the space to jump and they took it. I really don't think it was a good move and in reality, I don't think a lot of Mizzou people think it was good either, but they were too proud to admit a mistake.
Slive has been open about it. They plan on starting an SEC network, and to do that you have to have **** to put on TV. Because most of their quality inventory is already owned by somebody, they have to add teams to build the inventory.
If you are starting a cable network you look at markets. Like KC and SL over Morgantown WV. Because they will be purchased on a per subscriber basis when the exclusive cable network is built.
But what incentive do the contract holders for SEC inventory have for offering more on a per team basis? As it is, they are not gaining any additional inventory for themselves, just different choices from it. Current rights holders care less about markets than they do about ratings. I think that for them, an MU game against Mississippi State has less commercial appeal than MU/KU. aTm versus Vanderbilt isn't going to ring the cash register the way aTm/Bevo did.
I expect the contract look-in from adding aTm and the Tigers amounts to little more than bringing up the per team distribution so that it equals what all teams were receiving when the league had 12 teams. If they didn't have assurance of that, most of the teams would have been voting to reduce their TV payout. But the real money to be made is getting a conference network showing football games on Saturdays. That's the gamble they are taking. The Big 10 network changed everything.
If you are starting a cable network you look at markets. Like KC and SL over Morgantown WV. Because they will be purchased on a per subscriber basis when the exclusive cable network is built.
But what incentive do the contract holders for SEC inventory have for offering more on a per team basis? As it is, they are not gaining any additional inventory for themselves, just different choices from it. Current rights holders care less about markets than they do about ratings. I think that for them, an MU game against Mississippi State has less commercial appeal than MU/KU. aTm versus Vanderbilt isn't going to ring the cash register the way aTm/Bevo did.
I expect the contract look-in from adding aTm and the Tigers amounts to little more than bringing up the per team distribution so that it equals what all teams were receiving when the league had 12 teams. If they didn't have assurance of that, most of the teams would have been voting to reduce their TV payout. But the real money to be made is getting a conference network showing football games on Saturdays. That's the gamble they are taking. The Big 10 network changed everything.
All the remaining Big 8 venues are much more exciting road venues than the SEC outside of Kentucky and Vanderbilt and all are relatively close to Columbia. The Texas schools are pretty much the same as SEC schools in terms of not giving a crap though.
Old Miss? Mississippi State? Georgia? South Carolina? Alabama? Auburn? Not exactly a basketball fan hotbed there.
Easier road wins, less excitement.
I'm glad we're getting WVU in to replace Missouri, even though they're not ranked this year I've seen their arena is packed and crazy. TCU's obviously not great but they have 5 NCAA tournament wins to Nebraska's zero.
Except once again they turn away from tradition in that they will have to go to Atalanta for their conference tournament instead of close by in Kansas City. They could bring 1000s of fans to the arena in KC and will hardly have any in Atlanta. How is that a good thing for their fans?
Last edited:
