Started By
Message
Conference Realignment Talk.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 8:03 am
Posted on 7/21/16 at 8:03 am
With the talk of the XII considering expansion I thought I'd pop in on the Land Thieves board to revel in their gnashing of teeth a little. My takeaways are as follows...
With the ACC no longer poachable for the SEC and B1G, the only outcomes for the XII is to: a) stand pat, b) expand and extend their GOR, or c) expand and don't extend the GOR. If it ends up as the latter there will likely be an intense three-way courtship for Texas, Oklahoma and to a lesser extent, Kansas. And 90% of Sooners want no part of a diluted XII.
One interesting thought (if a league goes to 18-20) was the idea that the SEC or B1G would invite TU, OU and kU in a group with Missouri. And in the case of the B1G it would add Nebraska, Illinois and Iowa to the prospective plate.
Leaving any knee-jerk emotionalism out of it, would either outcome be a positive move for the University of Missouri and/or the SEC? Or if Mizzou and the SEC stood pat, how damaging would it be to the conference if the B1G were allowed to poach the best of the rest from the XII?
I see it as of little consequence if they moved West to the Pac-12. Thoughts?
2
Posted on 7/21/16 at 8:20 am to Mizz-SEC
quote:
would either outcome be a positive move for the University of Missour
Absolutely, B1G is about to own the money. Western Division games would be substantially closer. Better culture fit. So just athletically, it would be a positive. That isn't including the academic side, which would also be a big plus.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 8:28 am to 5thTiger
That's what I thought but didn't want to get killed for being the first to say it.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 12:12 pm to Mizz-SEC
Big12 is trying to appease OU.
OU is unhappy with their current situation to say the least.
OU is unhappy with their current situation to say the least.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 4:29 pm to 5thTiger
Going to the B1G would result in a mass exodus of the coaching staff and completely undermine the last 5 years of work in the south. No thanks.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 4:41 pm to navynuke
quote:
5 years of work in the south.
Which be honest, hasn't been fruitful.
If we go with OK, TX, and KS, we still get most of our kids from those states (and IL). Both athletically, and as part of the general student pop.
quote:
Going to the B1G would result in a mass exodus of the coaching staff
Why would you think that?
Posted on 7/21/16 at 4:49 pm to 5thTiger
80% of the kids recruited from the area were Sophomores or RSFr last year. In a program built on player development, what exactly were your expectations of 2nd year players?
This post was edited on 7/21/16 at 4:58 pm
Posted on 7/21/16 at 5:01 pm to navynuke
quote:
80% of the kids recruited from the area were Sophomores or RSFr last year. In a program built on player development, what exactly were your expectations of 2nd year players?
We aren't getting many players in general. Taking away states we touch (arkansas, tennessee), there are a grand total of 9 players on the roster from "SEC Country". We have 8 players on the roster from non Big-12/SEC connected country. The majority of our roster, and talent, comes from states nearby. That won't change I don't think.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 5:13 pm to 5thTiger
That doesn't answer my question but whatever.
There are 7 WRs on the roster from the SEC footprint. They make hay this year with better coaching and playcalling, they will be the best recruiters on the staff.
There are 7 WRs on the roster from the SEC footprint. They make hay this year with better coaching and playcalling, they will be the best recruiters on the staff.
This post was edited on 7/21/16 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 7/21/16 at 7:11 pm to navynuke
F the B1G. I can't believe any true Mizzou fan would in that group of turds after how things went down.
Mizzou's in the best athletics conference with tremendous demographics and growth opportunities and should stay there as long as Missouri has school sponsored athletics.
Mizzou's in the best athletics conference with tremendous demographics and growth opportunities and should stay there as long as Missouri has school sponsored athletics.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 7:25 pm to RocketBallz
5thtiger is whiney contrarian bitch. I wouldn't pay any attention to him at all.
This post was edited on 7/21/16 at 7:31 pm
Posted on 7/21/16 at 9:21 pm to RocketBallz
Big 10 didn't want the university back in 2011, so frick them. SEC is home now.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 9:44 pm to CRDNLSCHMCPSN11
The BIG 10 would have been a better fit, but we landed in a stable home that pays very well. We need to stay where we are and we get the bonus of pissing the SEC fricks for years to come.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 10:10 pm to JesusQuintana
I think taking the Jr partnership in 2010 would have been a huge mistake for football. That would have been terrible for recruiting Texas. Recruiting the Rust Belt? Forget about it.
The staff hit the ground hard in Texas and it took 6 classes for those relationships to produce. The relationships being built in Georgia and Florida are going to work. The talent is too dense in the area for it not to.
The staff hit the ground hard in Texas and it took 6 classes for those relationships to produce. The relationships being built in Georgia and Florida are going to work. The talent is too dense in the area for it not to.
This post was edited on 7/21/16 at 11:35 pm
Posted on 7/21/16 at 10:17 pm to navynuke
So true navy nuke. We would have been fighting for crumbs in the B1G recruiting. While texas recruits have been great for us they would have completely dried up in the b1g. We are just starting to build relationships in the SEC states. As much as i would have liked the b1g fit for rivalry sake, we would never have the chance to be good enough to make it to a playoff game. We were only 15 minutes away from the NC in the Sec.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 10:23 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Western Division games would be substantially closer.
Somewhat. Not substantially. At least not by my definition of substantially. Maybe by yours.
quote:
So just athletically, it would be a positive.
With all due respect, this is ridiculous. The only thing I can think of that the B1G has an advantage in is basketball. Football? Nope. Baseball? Nope. Softball? Nope. Well, I guess wrestling too since the SEC doesn't have wrestling.
quote:
That isn't including the academic side, which would also be a big plus.
IMO, this is what it comes down to for those that favor the B1G. The rest is just an attempt to not say their only reason is academics.
Posted on 7/21/16 at 10:31 pm to reedus23
Does anyone honestly believe that being in a different athletic conference would add value to their degree?
This post was edited on 7/21/16 at 10:33 pm
Posted on 7/21/16 at 10:32 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Which be honest, hasn't been fruitful.
Black
Zanders
Brown
Warren
Ross
Smith
Wilson
Mason
Johnson
Williams
Crockett
Blair
Walters
Christian Holmes
Terez Hall
Fatony
Stribling
Agbasimere
Utsey
Darvis
Holmes
Crawford
Brady
Adams
Culkin
Emanuel
Hall
Floyd
Jacobs
All disagree with you.
Posted on 7/22/16 at 12:13 am to JesusQuintana
I guess so culturally, but I'd much rather be in the SEC. There would be a lot of egg on the university's face if they ever tried to haul arse to another conference.
Posted on 7/22/16 at 7:19 am to navynuke
I don't disagree with you.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News