Started By
Message
re: If SEC ever expanded from 14 to 16...
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:25 am to TheNotoriousGOP
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:25 am to TheNotoriousGOP
quote:
People either know you or they don't. I never knew what Missouri's tiger logo looked like til they joined the SEC, and I've been watching college football for....well a long time.
In a nutshell...this.
I knew Mizzou's colors were black and yellow and that their mascot was a tiger, but that's literally all I knew.
1
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:29 am to Henry Jones Jr
UNC and FSU.
honorable mention: Clemson and UVA.
honorable mention: Clemson and UVA.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:38 am to busey
quote:
In a nutshell...this.
I knew Mizzou's colors were black and yellow and that their mascot was a tiger, but that's literally all I knew.
I am pretty surprised by this. I probably know something about every BCS college Football team, especially in states that border mine.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:48 am to Stripes314
I think it's pretty much the the prevailing opinion of most SEC fans.
Most of the states bordering MO don't have pro teams, either. Or if they do, they are overshadowed by the college teams. You think MO sports and you think Cardinals, Rams, Chiefs and maybe even Royals before you think Mizzou.
On the other hand, you think Big 12 and you think the TX and OK schools.
Mizzou always just got lost in the shuffle.
Most of the states bordering MO don't have pro teams, either. Or if they do, they are overshadowed by the college teams. You think MO sports and you think Cardinals, Rams, Chiefs and maybe even Royals before you think Mizzou.
On the other hand, you think Big 12 and you think the TX and OK schools.
Mizzou always just got lost in the shuffle.
This post was edited on 4/9/12 at 10:51 am
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:51 am to Stripes314
quote:
I am pretty surprised by this. I probably know something about every BCS college Football team, especially in states that border mine.
Don't worry, Stripes. I too find this retarded. I guess Kentucky is a national brand too! Even though, whenever I've heard of Kentucky or seen Kentucky mentioned on TV, I've never thought of Kentucky the school. I think more of the Hatfields and McCoys and hoosiers than I do the University of Kentucky. On rare occasions,I might even think of the Kentucky Derby. Rarely do I think of or care about the University of Kentucky unless it's basketball season and they are doing well.
I guess Busey is right. It isn't about national championships because if it were, Kentucky would definitely be a national brand considering they've won 8 basketball championships, right? Am I right? They've won eight, right?
I guess Kentucky isn't a national brand.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:51 am to busey
quote:
Most of the states bordering MO don't have pro teams, either. Or if they do, they are overshadowed by the college teams. You think MO sports and you think Cardinals, Rams, Chiefs and maybe even Royals before you think Mizzou.
Ok. I could probably give you this. At least on the St. Louis side of the state we were always more Pro-Sports minded. But with the move to the SEC, college sports, and Mizzou in particular will get a lot more attention.
This post was edited on 4/9/12 at 10:53 am
Posted on 4/9/12 at 10:54 am to mizzoukills
Stop being so butt hurt. If Kentucky isn't a national brand I'd be surprised considering almost anytime I mention I'm from KY people bring up basketball.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:08 am to busey
quote:
Stop being so butt hurt. If Kentucky isn't a national brand I'd be surprised considering almost anytime I mention I'm from KY people bring up basketball.
That's how you view it. But I'm telling you without any trolling that whenever I hear of Kentucky, I normally don't think of Kentucky basketball. For a few months I'll think of Kentucky basketball simply because you won the championship. I thought about Butler for a while simply because they were a mid-major that nearly pulled off a championship. They definitely aren't a national brand.
In a few months, your national championship will wear off and whenever I hear about Kentucky, I'll probably just think of normal Kentucky stereotypes.
Alabama is a national brand. Whenever I think of Bama, I think of championship football. North Carolina and Duke are national brands.
Kansas...not there yet. Whenever I think of Kansas I think of the most boring state to cross in order to get to Colorado and then I think of the shitty people who populate it.
Same goes for Kentucky, minus the shitty people. I have nothing against y'all. I just don't normally think of the University of Kentucky when I hear "Kentucky".
And I agree about Mizzou. Missouri has pro sports that currently overshadow Mizzou. Cardinal baseball is a national brand. It'll be hard for Mizzou to match that sort of branding. However, Mizzou's going to try hard to become more prominent in sports...whether or not it will actually happen. Time will tell...
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:10 am to mizzoukills
quote:
If Kentucky isn't a national brand I'd be surprised considering almost anytime I mention I'm from KY people bring up basketball.
I believe this because if you mention you're from Kentucky to another person from Kentucky, the University of Kentucky will probably be mentioned.
This post was edited on 4/9/12 at 11:12 am
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:10 am to mizzoukills
quote:
North Carolina and Duke are national brands.
So Duke and UNC are national brands, but a program that has been more successful isn't? How does that work?
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:11 am to mizzoukills
I'm talking about all over the US, genius.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:20 am to busey
quote:
So Duke and UNC are national brands, but a program that has been more successful isn't? How does that work?
...but I thought "national brand" didn't necessarily mean championships? I know championships help make a school a national brand, but in Kentucky's case I would argue against it. I don't think Kentucky is a national brand...yet (stress yet).
Yes, Duke and UNC are more of a national brand than Kentucky. I 100 percent believe this. I see people all over the country wearing Duke, UNC, Alabama, and Nebraska attire. I hardly see anyone wearing Kentucky attire.
If your idea of "national brand" is the acknowledgement Kentucky receives in the southern States, then I guess you're a national brand.
However, I'd of course disagree with that. "National" encompasses the entire country.
When I lived in San Diego, I never once saw a Kentucky shirt. But I did see UNC and Duke shirts. When I lived near coastal North Carolina, I of course saw shite loads of UNC and Duke attire. Never saw Kentucky. North Carolina is barely 100 miles from Kentucky and I never heard about anything related to Kentucky. Don't see anything in Missouri related to Kentucky.
I don't know, Buse...
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:22 am to mizzoukills
quote:
...but I thought "national brand" didn't necessarily mean championships?
It doesn't. It only matters in that it gets you face time on national TV.
And UNC, Duke, and Bama have the largest and most widespread sidewalk/bandwagon fans in the nation. It doesn't make them any more of a brand.
This post was edited on 4/9/12 at 11:23 am
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:30 am to mizzoukills
Don't really mean to agree with Busey bc most of the time I don't but it really does seem that Kentucky is definitely a national brand
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:31 am to busey
quote:
And UNC, Duke, and Bama have the largest and most widespread sidewalk/bandwagon fans in the nation. It doesn't make them any more of a brand.
But it does! Fact is that when I hear the words "North Carolina", "Duke", or "Alabama", I actually think of the universities first. There are a plethora of things that I could think about in North Carolina other than universities such as the Smokey Mountains, Outer Banks, Ashville, Raleigh/Durham, etc. Same goes for Alabama.
However, the first thing I think of when I hear North Carolina, Duke, and Alabama are the universities of North Carolina, Duke, and Alabama because they are national brands.
When I hear the word Kentucky, I don't think of UK. I'd be willing to bet that many folks share my viewpoint.
Same goes for Kansas.
This post was edited on 4/9/12 at 11:32 am
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:33 am to mizzoukills
Ok, bud.
I'm done here. Kentucky basketball speaks for itself.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:37 am to busey
Kentucky basketball is really, really good.
Alabama is a national brand. North Carolina could lose in the first round of the tournament and still be more of a brand than Kentucky.
(psst: I do think that Kentucky is close to being a national brand, though. They just aren't at the moment.)
Alabama is a national brand. North Carolina could lose in the first round of the tournament and still be more of a brand than Kentucky.
(psst: I do think that Kentucky is close to being a national brand, though. They just aren't at the moment.)
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:38 am to mizzoukills
Alright, buddy. You have a nice day, now.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:45 am to PetermanFanClub
I don't think this is rocket science.
The SEC (if it ever expands, and it probably will) won't go for teams already largely covered by the SEC footprint, there is no money in that. So forget Clemson, FSU, Ga Tech, etc. Their SEC in-state rivals wouldn't want this anyway. Forget schools that don't have a decent market to bring to the table. So probably not Kansas or West Virginia. You could also rule out WVU for those shite academics and Kansas for its disaster of a football program.
There are plenty of articles that have been written concerning this topic, and virtually all point to a Virginia and a North Carolina school; Virginia Tech & NC State being the most likely. I could see Oklahoma/Oklahoma State being a lesser possibility, simply because of OU's powerful, national brand in football.
The SEC (if it ever expands, and it probably will) won't go for teams already largely covered by the SEC footprint, there is no money in that. So forget Clemson, FSU, Ga Tech, etc. Their SEC in-state rivals wouldn't want this anyway. Forget schools that don't have a decent market to bring to the table. So probably not Kansas or West Virginia. You could also rule out WVU for those shite academics and Kansas for its disaster of a football program.
There are plenty of articles that have been written concerning this topic, and virtually all point to a Virginia and a North Carolina school; Virginia Tech & NC State being the most likely. I could see Oklahoma/Oklahoma State being a lesser possibility, simply because of OU's powerful, national brand in football.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 11:50 am to busey
quote:
Kentucky basketball speaks for itself.
I don't think I've ever agreed with you before, but this is spot on. Kentucky is a national brand when it comes to basketball. I know this and I hate fricking basketball.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News