Why did the SEC add Missouri?

Listen to people from Missouri talk and they don't fit the B1G. Sound southern to me.

That sweet St. Louis market baby

Since the addition of Missouri to the SEC East, here are the teams that have won the East.


Georgia (7)
Florida (3)
Mizzou (2)


Seem like they fit just fine

quote:

---

Iowa's a better program. I'd rather have them

---

No offense to any new addition, but I’d rather have the South Eastern Conference, be only teams in the South Eastern US.

Hey the United States didn't really want them either we had to come up with a compromise to let them in

We were short on Tiger mascots

quote:

---

It was a total failure from a footballing and marketing standpoint.

---

It was a business success which was the point. A&M and Missouri were added just before the SEC Network was created. That was around the peak of the now virtually obsolete cable model where ESPN was paid for every cable subscriber whether they watched ESPN or not. Texas was the more important but Missouri has 2 large cities so it made sense to add them vs say Florida St since Florida was already covered

There are only a handful of folks that care about it being a business success…the ones that banked dough because of it.

For everyone else, it has done nothing to enhance SEC football

quote:

---

doesn’t fit the culture of the south

---

Have you been to Missouri?

quote:

---

It’s a bland, generic big 10 type school that doesn’t fit the culture of the south…

---

Dude, the region thing is over. WWE has stepped in. This ain't 1970s wrassling where you had territories.

It's like arguing over the National League vs. The American League in baseball at this point. The South won battles on the field but lost the war again by being absorbed by ESPN. Sports Reconstruction.

Everyone can pay players now, so the SEC is no longer unique in that regard.