- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: West Virginia? Missouri? I'll pass
Posted on 9/17/11 at 6:50 pm to jcole4lsu
Posted on 9/17/11 at 6:50 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
does the acc want to go to 16?
I think they just want to be one of the 4 conferences left, and if the SEC and Pac12 are going to 16 they won't want to be left out.
There have been rumors in Atlanta of GT being invited to the Big10 since we're AAU
0
Posted on 9/17/11 at 6:56 pm to RunningBlake
quote:
your point is what? This shows interest, fanbase, etc.
in a very, very small population center
people pimp missouri for the st louis/kc markets close to missouri....those markets give a frick about CFB
missouri adds nothing
quote:
W/ 6 mill peeps in MO
and like 75k caring about CFB
quote:
nothing to lose
uh...share of the tv contract and the opportunity cost of not adding a better companion?
do you want to be stuck with missouri in perpetuity?
Posted on 9/17/11 at 6:59 pm to SlowFlowPro
You are FOS.
If it was up to me . . .dont add TAMU. But since we're expanding, the best option out there is MU.
Your telling me that out of 6 million people, less Columbia, which is 5,850,000 people to be exact, that only 75k watch MU football when on TV?
Flawed logic
If it was up to me . . .dont add TAMU. But since we're expanding, the best option out there is MU.
Your telling me that out of 6 million people, less Columbia, which is 5,850,000 people to be exact, that only 75k watch MU football when on TV?
Flawed logic
Posted on 9/17/11 at 7:01 pm to RunningBlake
quote:
the best option out there is MU.
frick that
SMU is better than missouri (TCU if they can get out of the big east deal)
Houston or Rice is better than Missouri, too
quote:
Your telling me that out of 6 million people, less Columbia, which is 5,850,000 people to be exact, that only 75k watch MU football when on TV?
if Missouri had a bigger fan base that supported the program, they'd be pulling in a lot more revenue than they are
there is a reason they're in the lower tier of the Big12 revenue
adding a market means nothing if people in that market don't watch CFB
Posted on 9/17/11 at 7:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
TCU would be a good university if they weren't a religious based university.
There are no religious universities in the SEC as of now, so why add one?
There are no religious universities in the SEC as of now, so why add one?
Posted on 9/17/11 at 7:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
if Missouri had a bigger fan base that supported the program, they'd be pulling in a lot more revenue than they are
there is a reason they're in the lower tier of the Big12 revenue
adding a market means nothing if people in that market don't watch CFB
May I remind you Mizzou's football revenue is higher than Stanford's?
Posted on 9/17/11 at 7:58 pm to TigerMattSTL
Per Forbes
University of Missouri $25,378,066.00
Stanford Univ $21,309,949.00
University of Missouri $25,378,066.00
Stanford Univ $21,309,949.00
Posted on 9/17/11 at 9:59 pm to TigerMattSTL
quote:
May I remind you Mizzou's football revenue is higher than Stanford's?
and namoi watts is hotter than my mom
now, i don't know what that has to do with this conversation, either
Posted on 9/17/11 at 10:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
and namoi watts is hotter than my mom
SFP snappin necks, and cashin checks.
Posted on 9/17/11 at 11:00 pm to Smoke Green
With all the acc teams out of the equation, or so it seems at this point, I just don't know who to go with.
Starting to think we add A&M and then slow it down and see what happens.
Starting to think we add A&M and then slow it down and see what happens.
Posted on 9/17/11 at 11:06 pm to jacks40
there isn't much too choose from, or so it seems. what sfp can't grasp, when throwing out rice, houston, and smu is that with a&m's acceptance...that rules out adding any new members from texas (according to Slive's own new members not being from a current footprint rule).
Posted on 9/17/11 at 11:10 pm to Smoke Green
Agreed. Sfp doesn't understand!
Who would want to add Houston, SMU, etc?
Who would want to add Houston, SMU, etc?
This post was edited on 9/17/11 at 11:14 pm
Posted on 9/17/11 at 11:14 pm to RunningBlake
quote:
Who would to add TCU, SMU
slow would.
Posted on 9/17/11 at 11:19 pm to Smoke Green
Speaking only from a football perspective I would rather TCU over WV as well.
Posted on 9/18/11 at 4:42 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
and namoi watts is hotter than my mom
now, i don't know what that has to do with this conversation, either
Look under your avatar "Stanford fan".
Posted on 9/18/11 at 6:59 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
why are we not including OU?
I think OU would be a good add with A&M. Both sides, SEC and OU, have been silent on this. I like the strength they bring. Prefer not to dumb this conference down by adding weak teams.
Posted on 9/18/11 at 8:43 am to RunningBlake
quote:
Who would want to add Houston, SMU, etc?
Houston has about as much potential as WV and it seals off the SETX corridor. WV adds nothing except another mouth to feed and a mediocre program
SMU = dallas. with some monetary infusion, they would likely end up on the Houston/WV level. the SEC gets a bigger footprint in the dallas market. SMU is also a good academic school
why don't you want to add SMU? what is so much better about WV or Missouri?
Posted on 9/18/11 at 8:43 am to TigerMattSTL
quote:
Look under your avatar "Stanford fan".
Posted on 9/18/11 at 9:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SMU = dallas. with some monetary infusion, they would likely end up on the Houston/WV level. the SEC gets a bigger footprint in the dallas market. SMU is also a good academic school
There is no possible way you actually believe this. SMU will not get that level. And hell, I don't think Houston is really on WVU's level.
WVU is a traditional mid-level football power on the level of a South Carolina. They aren't a "mouth to feed" on the level of the Mississippi schools.
And the idea Mizzou brings nothing is basically arguing there is no reason to expand at all to anyone. They are one of the best schools available.
Posted on 9/18/11 at 9:14 am to Baloo
quote:
And hell, I don't think Houston is really on WVU's level.
can be. they're not now
quote:
WVU is a traditional mid-level football power on the level of a South Carolina. They aren't a "mouth to feed" on the level of the Mississippi schools.
it's only slightly better. i just have no idea why we'd try to add them when they bring so little (geography, market, football)
quote:
And the idea Mizzou brings nothing is basically arguing there is no reason to expand at all to anyone.
not true. we just have to wait to see who we can get. best available RIGHT NOW? sure
so yes, i am arguing against expansion unless we can find a school that brings something. if a Florida State opens up? they bring something. if a North Carolina opens up? they bring something
if we're just adding a school to get to 14, we need to go cheap and solidify ourselves somewhere that will help the SEC get good football players into the conference
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News