- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How is it advantageous from a competetion standpoint for Mizzou to join the SEC?
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:00 pm
Will they make more money, yes. Will they ever win the SEC West? No. They were in a positon in the Big 12 North where they stood a good chance of getting to the title game every year, and anything can happen in one game (right Tennessee? Ha ha, you suck UT).
They will immediately get lost in the middle with MSU, Ole Miss, Kentucky, etc. Hope they enjoy Music City bowls.
They will immediately get lost in the middle with MSU, Ole Miss, Kentucky, etc. Hope they enjoy Music City bowls.
9
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:05 pm to alajones
With 10 members, the Big XII no longer plays a title game. Missouri has to play a complete round robin and won't benefit from playing in a weaker division if they stay in the Big XII.
But, to answer your question, it may not be advantageous in the short term, but it beats being left without a suitable conference home, which is a very realistic prospect if Texas ever gives up on the LHN, and takes OU, OSU, and Tech with them to the Pac 12.
But, to answer your question, it may not be advantageous in the short term, but it beats being left without a suitable conference home, which is a very realistic prospect if Texas ever gives up on the LHN, and takes OU, OSU, and Tech with them to the Pac 12.
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:05 pm to alajones
This is a tired and exhausted argument. For Mizzou, the SEC offers much more in potential for growth in all of their programs. You could argue that the SEC is not the best conference this season (top to bottom, the SEC is very top heavy this season, and then it drops off hard). Just like A&M, Mizzou has the potential for more revenue and exposure, plus a better fan experience. This will give them the potential to improve their product. The Big 12 does not offer this, so why would they stay there?
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:08 pm to twk
quote:For now. I'm sure they will add more soon enough.
With 10 members, the Big XII no longer plays a title game.
quote:I thought the PAC 12 was happy and staying put at 12?
to the Pac 12.
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:10 pm to NonregAg09
quote:Does not = competetive.
Just like A&M, Mizzou has the potential for more revenue and exposure, plus a better fan experience
quote:Because they would be the big dog in the Big 12 north.
so why would they stay there?
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:15 pm to NonregAg09
quote:
This is a tired and exhausted argument. For Mizzou, the SEC offers much more in potential for growth in all of their programs. You could argue that the SEC is not the best conference this season (top to bottom, the SEC is very top heavy this season, and then it drops off hard). Just like A&M, Mizzou has the potential for more revenue and exposure, plus a better fan experience. This will give them the potential to improve their product. The Big 12 does not offer this, so why would they stay there?
This pretty much sums up my thoughts as a Mizzou fan and Alum.
Something to take an honest look at, at least this year, from a competitive standpoint, is that the SEC East would be an easier schedule than the Big 12 round robin.
That obviously will change over the next few year Im sure but I think Mizzou going into the east will be a little bit easier as far as transition goes into the SEC. It might give our program a chance to get in and get used to the water a bit before some of the East teams rebound.
I dont think that Mizzou is going to come in and win division and conference. I do, however, think that many underestimate our program a bit.
Moving conferences affects many things for a program, especially recruiting. We will have to build up new networks in the SEC footprint while keeping one foot in Texas.
It will take time, but we will find our footing. Those that profess this team a yearly doormat will be mistaken.
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:18 pm to kilo
quote:I don't think they will be a yearly doormat by any means. Lost in the middle. Yes, absolutely. Chance at playing in the SEC Title Games, slim.
Those that profess this team a yearly doormat will be mistaken.
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:26 pm to alajones
quote:Not if they are put in the SEC East.
Will they ever win the SEC West?
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:27 pm to alajones
quote:
I don't think they will be a yearly doormat by any means. Lost in the middle. Yes, absolutely. Chance at playing in the SEC Title Games, slim.
Just for clarity, I was not implying that you were.
It was more a comment directed at the generalizations directed towards our program by some.
One thing that has always held our program down a bit was our inability to lock up our borders in recruiting. There are many inside the program that think a move to the SEC will help the University accomplish this, coupled with the diminished standing of the Big 12 and its instability.
I am no prophet, nor am I an expert, but there is little doubt that the reality is the program moving to the SEC IS the best chance at winning when compared to the current Big 12.
We are an underachiever. We do have potential.
You have to take a proverbial shot down field once in a while and this is Mizzou's attempt.
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:29 pm to alajones
quote:
Will they ever win the SEC West? No.
Stopped reading right there. Yall say the same thing about us. "Arkansas will never win the SEC West, or a SEC Championship game."
Arkansas(That lost the majority of its recruiting ground when it left the SWC) won the SEC West in 3 years of joining the SEC.
No reason what so ever to say that any team can't win a division. Will they come in immediately and win? Most likely not but to say they will never win their division is stupid.
This post was edited on 10/26/11 at 3:31 pm
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:35 pm to 870Hog
quote:Wasn't Alabama on probation that year?
won the SEC West in 3 years of joining the SEC.
Nevermind, confused with 2002.
Wasn't Arkansas almost dominating the SWC when they joined the SEC?
This post was edited on 10/26/11 at 3:38 pm
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:38 pm to alajones
quote:Not unless they want to take a pay cut. Fox has told them that they must have 10 in order not to have the contract voided, but that the money won't go up if they go beyond 10.
For now. I'm sure they will add more soon enough.
quote:And I've got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. If Texas is a free agent, without the LHN, then the Pac 12 will take them and the other 3 schools. There will be some anxiety over this (the Arizona schools, Colorado, and Utah won't be real excited, but the other 8 will be overjoyed), but the money will be too much to turn down. If they did, there would be a very realistic possibility of Texas going to the Big Ten (and a very remote possibility of Texas going to the SEC), and that would not be in the Pac 12's best interest. Once the Pac 12 gets their network up and running, they will really feel the acute need for some Central time zone schools in order to provide live events during prime viewing slots.
I thought the PAC 12 was happy and staying put at 12?
The Pac 12 didn't take Oklahoma and OSU because 14 teams just creates too many political headaches in how to divide the league (if you think the arguments in the SEC about whether Auburn or Missouri should go east are annoying, you can't imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would ensue if the Pac 12 tried to split into two 7-team divisions, for reasons that I will not belabor here).
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:50 pm to alajones
quote:
Wasn't Arkansas almost dominating the SWC when they joined the SEC?
Under Hatfeild but he left in '89
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:50 pm to alajones
quote:
Wasn't Arkansas almost dominating the SWC when they joined the SEC?
Under Hatfield yes
Under Crowe No
Posted on 10/26/11 at 3:58 pm to alajones
Not quite related to the OP, but I was surprised to find out that Missouri is one of the largest states (roughly 6 million people) with only one FBS school.
I believe the only states with a larger population and just one FBS school are:
Massachusetts (Boston College)
New Jersey (Rutgers)
I believe the only states with a larger population and just one FBS school are:
Massachusetts (Boston College)
New Jersey (Rutgers)
Posted on 10/26/11 at 4:00 pm to BrerTiger
At the time that Arkansas left the SWC they were not in a great place as a program. A&M is in a much stronger position by comparison.
Posted on 10/26/11 at 4:01 pm to BrerTiger
Mizzou and aTm makes arkansas a central place instead of a far west place.
Should help our recruiting a lot.
Should help our recruiting a lot.
Posted on 10/26/11 at 4:10 pm to NonregAg09
Arkansas went down hill after '89.
1990–1992(Jack Crowe)
Overall 9–15–0 37.5%
Conference 6–10–0 37.5%
Bowls 0–1–0 0.0%
1984–1989(Ken Hatfield)
Overall 55–17–1 76.0%
Conference 36–10–0 78.3%
Bowls 1–6–0 14.3%
1990–1992(Jack Crowe)
Overall 9–15–0 37.5%
Conference 6–10–0 37.5%
Bowls 0–1–0 0.0%
1984–1989(Ken Hatfield)
Overall 55–17–1 76.0%
Conference 36–10–0 78.3%
Bowls 1–6–0 14.3%
Posted on 10/26/11 at 4:12 pm to 870Hog
What you're saying is that Arkansas can't win bowl games?
Posted on 10/26/11 at 4:12 pm to alajones
What were Arkansas, South Carolina, etc. a few years ago? They're now in competition for division titles. Missouri is capable of doing the same eventually.
This post was edited on 10/26/11 at 4:14 pm
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News