Started By
Message
re: Hypothetical - Mizzoo and their potential
Posted on 9/6/13 at 3:41 pm to cardboardboxer
Posted on 9/6/13 at 3:41 pm to cardboardboxer
I look more towards Oregon than Texas A&M when it comes to the direction to take.
Getting the facilities up to top tier standards is huge, and the facilities at Mizzou are already pretty good. Going with the marketing is enormous and having the trendy recruit desired uniforms and marketing is a part of that, as non-traditional as it is. Oregon is pretty far from the real talent pools, and they've made it work.
I just don't see touting the SEC thing in Big12 country or Texas with aTm having the same pitch close to home being a major selling point. Similar scenario to Big Ten country.
Mizzou needs to be the place to come for the best facilities and experiences, not just an avenue to play in the SEC.
Getting the facilities up to top tier standards is huge, and the facilities at Mizzou are already pretty good. Going with the marketing is enormous and having the trendy recruit desired uniforms and marketing is a part of that, as non-traditional as it is. Oregon is pretty far from the real talent pools, and they've made it work.
I just don't see touting the SEC thing in Big12 country or Texas with aTm having the same pitch close to home being a major selling point. Similar scenario to Big Ten country.
Mizzou needs to be the place to come for the best facilities and experiences, not just an avenue to play in the SEC.
1
Posted on 9/6/13 at 3:47 pm to reedus23
Really? Not to flame UK, but if you guys started putting good players in the NFL a little more regularly, the choice would be clear.
The thing about the talent bases is that it's relative, not absolute. Pulling a 5* and a handful of 4* would probably net y'all a top-25 class... but might still be good for 7th or 8th in the conference, just because of how stacked the SEC is.
I'm not knocking the STL/KC talent base or Missouri's past success when I say what I said earlier, just pointing out that to become a top-tier team in the SEC, you've got to have a core recruiting area that can get you top-10 talent.
For example, LSU has Louisiana virtually locked down (inb4CamRobinson etc.), and has strong in-roads in Texas and Mississippi, plus a national brand to pull in some big talent from other large SEC states (Georgia/Florida). Alabama and Auburn both have Alabama, Georgia and Florida, plus a national brand. Florida has Florida and Georgia. Tennessee had shite in-state, but still became the poster child of the SEC around the turn of the millennium because they could recruit like crazy in the rest of the conference (and promptly collapsed in no small part because they lost that ability).
Missouri would need to compete with that to become top-tier in the SEC. That'd be hard short of having their pick of Missouri, Illinois and Ohio.
ETA: Agree wholeheartedly with above poster (Mizzeaux I think?) as well. Missouri gets lampooned for not being Southern enough; given the association of being Southern with being behind-the-times, it wouldn't be difficult for Missouri to market itself as a "modern" team in the SEC. State-of-the-art facilities, new uniforms, the whole nine yards. Someone said y'all have a "lost generation" of fans and that you have to appeal to prospects who don't grow up as fans instead of relying on tradition. As a "younger kid" myself (still in undergrad), I'd be stoked to play for a team that rocks a modern theme. Would work well IMO.
The thing about the talent bases is that it's relative, not absolute. Pulling a 5* and a handful of 4* would probably net y'all a top-25 class... but might still be good for 7th or 8th in the conference, just because of how stacked the SEC is.
I'm not knocking the STL/KC talent base or Missouri's past success when I say what I said earlier, just pointing out that to become a top-tier team in the SEC, you've got to have a core recruiting area that can get you top-10 talent.
For example, LSU has Louisiana virtually locked down (inb4CamRobinson etc.), and has strong in-roads in Texas and Mississippi, plus a national brand to pull in some big talent from other large SEC states (Georgia/Florida). Alabama and Auburn both have Alabama, Georgia and Florida, plus a national brand. Florida has Florida and Georgia. Tennessee had shite in-state, but still became the poster child of the SEC around the turn of the millennium because they could recruit like crazy in the rest of the conference (and promptly collapsed in no small part because they lost that ability).
Missouri would need to compete with that to become top-tier in the SEC. That'd be hard short of having their pick of Missouri, Illinois and Ohio.
ETA: Agree wholeheartedly with above poster (Mizzeaux I think?) as well. Missouri gets lampooned for not being Southern enough; given the association of being Southern with being behind-the-times, it wouldn't be difficult for Missouri to market itself as a "modern" team in the SEC. State-of-the-art facilities, new uniforms, the whole nine yards. Someone said y'all have a "lost generation" of fans and that you have to appeal to prospects who don't grow up as fans instead of relying on tradition. As a "younger kid" myself (still in undergrad), I'd be stoked to play for a team that rocks a modern theme. Would work well IMO.
This post was edited on 9/6/13 at 3:51 pm
Posted on 9/6/13 at 3:50 pm to TlGERBLOOD
quote:
Sounds like the Aggie m.o.
You would sell your soul to have a year like we had last year, or have the exposure we have today.
What works, works.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 3:55 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
You would sell your soul to have a year like we had last year
We had almost the exact same year in 2007, but with one more win and our QB only finished 4th in the Heisman voting.
Just saying, make sure you maintain.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 3:57 pm to BigEdLSU
Well in this day in age....apparently if your program has sucked and you have the potential resources to be good...you're a sleeping giant. RANT LOGIC.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 3:58 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
I look more towards Oregon than Texas A&M when it comes to the direction to take.
Sure, who is going to be your ultra-hip sugar daddy?
quote:
Getting the facilities up to top tier standards is huge, and the facilities at Mizzou are already pretty good.
Not even on the same planet as Mizzou. Who is gonna pay to get yall there? We got there because oil is more than $100 a barrel.
quote:
Oregon is pretty far from the real talent pools, and they've made it work
They made it work by running a fun offense and by selling the unique angle they had (the Nike Connection). Same overall battleplan.
quote:
I just don't see touting the SEC thing in Big12 country or Texas with aTm having the same pitch close to home being a major selling point.
The SEC is the big national brand right now. Kids all across the country crave that exposure and opportunity.
If you don't try, you will never know.
There is a lot of talent around you.
quote:
Mizzou needs to be the place to come for the best facilities and experiences, not just an avenue to play in the SEC.
Again, who is the sugar daddy that will get you there?
Posted on 9/6/13 at 4:01 pm to cardboardboxer
Knight's really only given 300 million to Oregon athletics. I say only, but that 300m has gotten them to where they are.
Here's to hoping Stan Kroenke wants to help out his alma mater with some Phil Knight type love.
ETA: Phil Knight had more to do with marketing Nike AND helping out Oregon than just helping out Oregon.
Here's to hoping Stan Kroenke wants to help out his alma mater with some Phil Knight type love.
ETA: Phil Knight had more to do with marketing Nike AND helping out Oregon than just helping out Oregon.
This post was edited on 9/6/13 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 9/6/13 at 4:17 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
We had almost the exact same year in 2007, but with one more win and our QB only finished 4th in the Heisman voting.
Ya sorry. We were having a reasonable discussion and that post put me back in my usual rant mode.
quote:
ETA: Phil Knight had more to do with marketing Nike AND helping out Oregon than just helping out Oregon.
Exactly. Just having a sugar daddy isn't enough. Everyone is trying to copy Oregon, but there is only one Nike.
Seriously Oregon needs every gimmick they can get. As that map shows you have talent all around you.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 4:18 pm to thatdude1985
quote:
apparently if your program has sucked and you have the potential resources to be good...you're a sleeping giant
Yeah, that is what that term means.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 4:25 pm to lsutothetop
quote:
I'm not knocking the STL/KC talent base or Missouri's past success when I say what I said earlier, just pointing out that to become a top-tier team in the SEC, you've got to have a core recruiting area that can get you top-10 talent.
If we're talking about making Mizzou a top tier team, then the answer is no, Missouri doesn't have enough. I don't think there will ever be a day in my lifetime at least where Mizzou is a top tier team. Just isn't going to happen. What I do think is there is enough to allow Mizzou to compete with the top tier teams and not embarrass themselves like last year. That means competing for a east title every now and then, playing better than .500 in conference over the long haul. Doesn't mean expecting to go 12-0 or 11-1 every year going into it.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 4:29 pm to reedus23
That sounds like a reasonable ceiling. You'd be in the top half of the conference in terms of talent, so being in the top half in terms of wins seems fair. Just depends on where the talent shows up from year-to-year. If the normal SEC recruiting grounds dry up for a couple of years, Missouri/Ohio/Illinois have a good run of talent and Mizzou can clean up, then you'd be able to compete for titles for those couple years.
FWIW I think you're also kinda close to being there - more work to be done, but the display last year was definitely hurt by injuries
FWIW I think you're also kinda close to being there - more work to be done, but the display last year was definitely hurt by injuries
Posted on 9/6/13 at 5:50 pm to BigEdLSU
1. I don't believe Petrino will ever coach any SEC school again. The main reason is because I think SEC presidents have agreed to blacklist him, but I'm also not sure that Petrino would be interested in coaching most SEC schools. He's from Montana and I think he prefers northern climates, so Missouri and Kentucky are possibilities (I know he was the OC at Auburn, but that doesn't mean he'd want to go back.)
2. I don't think Missouri would hire him, because Missouri has too much class; especially being new to the conference, they'd probably worry about upsetting other school presidents. Other SEC schools would probably hire him before Missouri.
3. If Missouri did hire him, he wouldn't lock down KC and STL. While players want to play in Petrino's offense, they don't really like Petrino. Even though he sets his sights high, he's actually not a very good recruiter. He'd still win big at Missouri, though.
2. I don't think Missouri would hire him, because Missouri has too much class; especially being new to the conference, they'd probably worry about upsetting other school presidents. Other SEC schools would probably hire him before Missouri.
3. If Missouri did hire him, he wouldn't lock down KC and STL. While players want to play in Petrino's offense, they don't really like Petrino. Even though he sets his sights high, he's actually not a very good recruiter. He'd still win big at Missouri, though.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:07 pm to reedus23
I am a big fan of y'alls potential. You just got to stop tip towing around the cesspool and dive in. You already made the decision, make the most of it. No going back.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:18 pm to cardboardboxer
Compared to Arkansas, Missouri produces a lot of talent. I think they have plenty for a good base to build upon, if they can keep them home.
How many SEC caliber recruits does Missouri produce each year? I'll guess 10-15, which means you'll need to find at least 10 more elsewhere. My advice wouldn't be to concentrate anywhere in particular, but to continue concentrating on SEC territories, Texas and offer a nearby SEC experience in the Midwest. That should do fine.
I actually think it's wrong to concentrate on specific regions, unless it's within 200 miles of your campus. The better solution is to hire coaches who have good contacts and let them do their thing. For example, if you want to recruit Florida well, then hire someone who knows Florida, like we did when hiring Randy Shannon. We have other coaches who probably recruit better in Florida then Shannon, but you may have never heard of them.
How many SEC caliber recruits does Missouri produce each year? I'll guess 10-15, which means you'll need to find at least 10 more elsewhere. My advice wouldn't be to concentrate anywhere in particular, but to continue concentrating on SEC territories, Texas and offer a nearby SEC experience in the Midwest. That should do fine.
I actually think it's wrong to concentrate on specific regions, unless it's within 200 miles of your campus. The better solution is to hire coaches who have good contacts and let them do their thing. For example, if you want to recruit Florida well, then hire someone who knows Florida, like we did when hiring Randy Shannon. We have other coaches who probably recruit better in Florida then Shannon, but you may have never heard of them.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:21 pm to BigEdLSU
Mizzou is Arkansas' top hat.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:23 pm to BigEdLSU
If they could dip into western Illinois for talent and lock down what was in MO they would compete well if not win teh SEC on occasion
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:29 pm to molsusports
Exactly!!!"
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:40 pm to BigEdLSU
quote:
Thoughts?
If I was running the Mizzou ship I would schedule this way :
OOC #1 vs Big 12 (anybody but UT or OU) with Baylor / Texas Tech / TCU for TX kids
OOC #2 vs B1G (the ones recruiting Chicago / Illinois)
These two games allow Mizzou to siphon off the lesser teams around them with the SEC brand
OOC #3 vs west coast for recruiting exposure
OOC #4 vs east coast for recruiting exposure
Since Mizzou is a net recruit importer they have to sell their brand outside the state of MO and use recruiting success there to lock down the good recruits inside their borders.
The key to all this tho is getting a 80K + stadium and filling it every game the way the SEC Big 6 do to create a very SEC atmosphere that makes recruiting against non SEC schools around them that much easier. The greatest recruiting advantage of SEC schools is the atmosphere. I have heard it constantly from kids when they are recruited for at least a generation or so. Huge selling advantage.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:43 pm to Cheese Grits
Just stealing a decent B1G coach would be huge. Arky proves they are on the menu.
Posted on 9/6/13 at 6:50 pm to GumpMaster&Commander
quote:
Mizzou is Arkansas' top hat.
And Louisiana's our schlong.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News