Started By
Message
re: Interesting, Just When You Thought It was All Over....
Posted on 3/5/13 at 12:45 am to mograyback
Posted on 3/5/13 at 12:45 am to mograyback
quote:
Ahh, I think it's a bigger group. I think St. Louis in general is afraid to consider themselves Missourians. For a lot of people there is very little (more like no) pride at all to be a Missourian if you're from St. Louis, and that's a shame.
Very little state pride if you're from StL, and without state pride it's hard to be a big fan of the school that represents your state.
For the sake of peace on the board, I'll choose to ignore this post. Many other quality posts to let this one ruin it.
1
Posted on 3/5/13 at 12:49 am to semotruman
Two things. We have a proud journalism school. Our journalists are not cheerleaders. If they were, we probably would not have a very proud journalism school. To base your recruitment off of that is ridiculous. But lets say that they were, this takes us to point two.
The Elliots were the ones that asked Missouri Media to keep the visit under wraps. They wanted it to be a quiet event. So how can they now turn around and complain about it? This is fundamentally why I have lost respect for them. I didnt really care about the press conference because it was a once in a lifetime opportunity for the kid and he wanted a presentation in front of his friends and family. Nothing wrong with that. There is absolutely something wrong with throwing media members that you trusted during your recruitment under the bus.
The Elliots were the ones that asked Missouri Media to keep the visit under wraps. They wanted it to be a quiet event. So how can they now turn around and complain about it? This is fundamentally why I have lost respect for them. I didnt really care about the press conference because it was a once in a lifetime opportunity for the kid and he wanted a presentation in front of his friends and family. Nothing wrong with that. There is absolutely something wrong with throwing media members that you trusted during your recruitment under the bus.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 12:59 am to mograyback
Main thing going for Mizzou in St. Louis is that there is little competition. The Illini, SLU, etc. have little market share comparably. I had a conversation with my friend about this. In K.C., they are supposed to keep it even between the three local schools. In St. Louis, if sports radio even brings up the Illini there is damn near a riot. Maybe you get a small game wrap-up about them on the news, but unless its Braggin' Rights or you are in Alton they are little existant.
Main thing going against Mizzou in St. Louis is that people dont look at Mizzou in the same vein as they do the Cardinals, Blues, or Rams. You dont have an extreme amount of casual fans come up who have no connection to the school. Usually if you are in St. Louis and you are a Mizzou Fan, it was passed on to you or you went there. This is not the same case in other states. Mizzou is not looked at as the State team, or the State representative, or the States Army/Defenders (as is viewed by some of our other fellow states in the SEC). It is just teams of the State University. And if you have no tie to the University, you are an outsider. There seems to be a backlash towards being a Mizzou Fan unless you went to the school. This is not the same case as in Alabama, Tenn, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, etc. Hell, it is probably not even the case in kansas. But we seem to have a serious problem with relating the Tigers to the entire state, and not just Alumni.
Thoughts?
Main thing going against Mizzou in St. Louis is that people dont look at Mizzou in the same vein as they do the Cardinals, Blues, or Rams. You dont have an extreme amount of casual fans come up who have no connection to the school. Usually if you are in St. Louis and you are a Mizzou Fan, it was passed on to you or you went there. This is not the same case in other states. Mizzou is not looked at as the State team, or the State representative, or the States Army/Defenders (as is viewed by some of our other fellow states in the SEC). It is just teams of the State University. And if you have no tie to the University, you are an outsider. There seems to be a backlash towards being a Mizzou Fan unless you went to the school. This is not the same case as in Alabama, Tenn, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, etc. Hell, it is probably not even the case in kansas. But we seem to have a serious problem with relating the Tigers to the entire state, and not just Alumni.
Thoughts?
This post was edited on 3/5/13 at 1:02 am
Posted on 3/5/13 at 12:59 am to Stripes314
I don't disagree with you, Stripes - I don't have much respect for the Elliotts anymore either. They wanted attention for Zeke, and they got it - and didn't care about how they may have damaged Mizzou in the process.
I also don't like them throwing the media under the bus - it isn't cool.
I'm going to disagree with you about the Journalism School point though. I realize that they are serious journalists learning about their field. I don't expect them to be cheerleaders. But, the media reports what they feel is newsworthy, and what their audience demands. So either those affiliated with the J-School don't feel recruitment is newsworthy, or they don't see a demand for the info - probably a combination of the two.
Besides, it's not the student journalists that were criticized here. It was professionals. My points about what is newsworthy and what the audience demands should be priorities for them. The fact that they don't do much in-depth recruiting coverage says the demand and the judgement of recruiting as newsworthy aren't there.
I also don't like them throwing the media under the bus - it isn't cool.
I'm going to disagree with you about the Journalism School point though. I realize that they are serious journalists learning about their field. I don't expect them to be cheerleaders. But, the media reports what they feel is newsworthy, and what their audience demands. So either those affiliated with the J-School don't feel recruitment is newsworthy, or they don't see a demand for the info - probably a combination of the two.
Besides, it's not the student journalists that were criticized here. It was professionals. My points about what is newsworthy and what the audience demands should be priorities for them. The fact that they don't do much in-depth recruiting coverage says the demand and the judgement of recruiting as newsworthy aren't there.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 1:02 am to reedus23
quote:
For the sake of peace on the board, I'll choose to ignore this post. Many other quality posts to let this one ruin it.
Ruin what? The thread? Also, you didn't ignore it.
Guess you disagree, but having lived in a few other states, I've always thought that St. Louisans was more about St. Louis, afraid to be overly proud to be a Missourian... I find it to be very different in the states I lived/live in.
I know there are a lot of huge Mizzou fans in StL, that's not what I'm talkin' about.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 1:04 am to Stripes314
quote:
And if you have no tie to the University, you are an outsider. There seems to be a backlash towards being a Mizzou Fan unless you went to the school. This is not the same case as in Alabama, Tenn, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, etc. Hell, it is probably not even the case in kansas. But we seem to have a serious problem with relating the Tigers to the entire state, and not just Alumni.
I would tend to agree with you here, Stripes. I did not go to Mizzou. I became a fan when I moved to Columbia for a job, and my employer was a sponsor. As the marketing director, I was involved in setting up the sponsorship and developed relationships with people in the AD. And I became a fan. But I don't see a lot of Mizzou fans without a connection to the school in some way.
I think Mizzou competes with the all the pro teams in Missouri for fans - the same level of competition does not exist in any other SEC state except Texas. So other SEC schools have more fans who did not necessarily attend the school.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 1:04 am to mograyback
There is something to what you are saying. Look at my post above.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 1:04 am to Stripes314
quote:
Main thing going for Mizzou in St. Louis is that there is little competition. The Illini, SLU, etc. have little market share comparably. I had a conversation with my friend about this. In K.C., they are supposed to keep it even between the three local schools. In St. Louis, if sports radio even brings up the Illini there is damn near a riot. Maybe you get a small game wrap-up about them on the news, but unless its Braggin' Rights or you are in Alton they are little existant.
Main thing going against Mizzou in St. Louis is that people dont look at Mizzou in the same vein as they do the Cardinals, Blues, or Rams. You dont have an extreme amount of casual fans come up who have no connection to the school. Usually if you are in St. Louis and you are a Mizzou Fan, it was passed on to you or you went there. This is not the same case in other states. Mizzou is not looked at as the State team, or the State representative, or the States Army/Defenders (as is viewed by some of our other fellow states in the SEC). It is just teams of the State University. And if you have no tie to the University, you are an outsider. There seems to be a backlash towards being a Mizzou Fan unless you went to the school. This is not the same case as in Alabama, Tenn, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, etc. Hell, it is probably not even the case in kansas. But we seem to have a serious problem with relating the Tigers to the entire state, and not just Alumni.
Thoughts?
Very true, especially the part bolded. I agree with all of this.
ETA: Yeah I didn't see that post until after I posted my last comment. What semo quoted from you is right on the money.
This post was edited on 3/5/13 at 1:08 am
Posted on 3/5/13 at 1:08 am to semotruman
If Mizzou could figure out a way to connect with people who have no connection with the school, we are set. The only FBS School in a State of 6 Million? I mean it is all there. We have just never utilized it. I will say though, it is much better than it used to be.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 6:43 am to semotruman
Also, EE's entire decision waas not based just on this aspect, but to say this was even considered as an aspect of recruitment decission is obsured. I think this is what Matter is trying to convey. Ms. Elliott wants to take it to extremes. The main basis of EE's decision is what Stacy should have stuck with instead of throwing his alma-mater umder the bus publicly.
Again, the blaim rests totaly with the Elliotts with this whole ordeal. If they wanted attention, EE should have decommited and took his visit. He could always stick with tOSU as he did in the end.
But why the Elliotts think Mizzou is resposible for the latest uprising and war of words is beyond me. Why punish Mizzou when they have done nothing to the Elliotts.
Good ridance EE. Have fun trying to fimd playing time at your new home. What the hell is a buckeye anyway?
Again, the blaim rests totaly with the Elliotts with this whole ordeal. If they wanted attention, EE should have decommited and took his visit. He could always stick with tOSU as he did in the end.
But why the Elliotts think Mizzou is resposible for the latest uprising and war of words is beyond me. Why punish Mizzou when they have done nothing to the Elliotts.
Good ridance EE. Have fun trying to fimd playing time at your new home. What the hell is a buckeye anyway?
Posted on 3/5/13 at 8:34 am to semotruman
I hear what your saying semo, and to a certain extent I agree. However, my problem is why open those wounds publicly when it's your alma mater and state school. Especially when the consensus is they used the local media to dick around Mizzou in the first place. Then it's taken a step further when they talk publicly about telling all the recruits they know that Mizzou is recruiting. Like it or not, many people, especially young kids, don't differentiate between MU and the local media covering Mizzou. As if she thinks that won't have a negative impact on the school that gave her a free education and an opportunity to further they're athletic careers. Just my 2 cents. 
Posted on 3/5/13 at 8:53 am to mograyback
quote:
Guess you disagree, but having lived in a few other states, I've always thought that St. Louisans was more about St. Louis, afraid to be overly proud to be a Missourian... I find it to be very different in the states I lived/live in.
I suppose being a St. Louisan, I don't understand what you mean then by state pride. Personally, I did not go to Mizzou, but grew up in St. Louis, shooting baskets in the backyard with the Mizzou game on, replaying the game pretending to be Stipo. Most of the people I know are the same way. As an adult with kids, the most popular thing to do for birthdays is load a half dozen kids in the car and take them to a game in Columbia. All parents in St. Louis who did not go to Mizzou.
Being in St. Louis, I root for the Royals to win and take pride when they do. Even my son bragged about how they are 9-0 in spring training. Take pride in the fact that Missouri may have 2 home grown kids drafted in the first 3 picks of this years NBA draft.
I don't doubt that there is a contingent of people like you describe, but I suppose, being a St. Louisan, I take offense to the generalization.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 8:56 am to mograyback
double post
This post was edited on 3/5/13 at 9:06 am
Posted on 3/5/13 at 2:10 pm to reedus23
Oh, I don't like the way they handled it. At all. Like I said - attention seekers. But I do think our media could do a better job of covering recruiting. We don't follow it like most of the SEC.
Now, the twitter war? That's just ridiculous. Did the comments that started the whole mess in the first place come from Ohio State's version of PM? If it was behind a paywall and not public information, that just adds another whole wrinkle to the mess.
And does this woman have anything to do other than tweet all day? Jeez.
Now, the twitter war? That's just ridiculous. Did the comments that started the whole mess in the first place come from Ohio State's version of PM? If it was behind a paywall and not public information, that just adds another whole wrinkle to the mess.
And does this woman have anything to do other than tweet all day? Jeez.
Posted on 3/5/13 at 4:06 pm to semotruman
I haven't seen that many news outlets in SEC country cover recruiting like SEMO is insinuating. Maybe they do but most what I find are fan sites that cover recruiting like rivals, scout, 24/7, etc. along with some independent fan sites.
I do not think newspapers and TV stations need to cover MU recruiting more. That is PowerMizzou and Show Me Mizzou's job.
I do not think newspapers and TV stations need to cover MU recruiting more. That is PowerMizzou and Show Me Mizzou's job.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News