Started By
Message
re: Prediction: Mizzou's rivalry with Arky will not be forged in football...
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:40 pm to BennyAndTheInkJets
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:40 pm to BennyAndTheInkJets
quote:
Not moving anything, quit assuming my argument. Mizzou chokes in the NCAAT, Arkansas chokes in bowl games. You're deflecting a lot more than I could even be considered changing parameters.
Im not deflecting shite.
You were not very clear with your question.
So a bowl loss is equal to losing in the sweet 16 or elite 8?
None of your argument makes much sense honestly.
1
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:44 pm to kilo
quote:
I went to several of those games. I was actually embarassed for the MU fans when they stormed the field after beating a subpar Nebraska team.
You are probably not a rival when your fans storm the field after beating a bad team. What you are saying is you are still pissed off about how much they owned you in the past
Meh. You are shoe horning to fit your opinion.
Nonsense. Because I did a residency in Columbia I lived there for a while and passively rooted for MU sports.
I admit to being a football snob RE: MU in the same way I'm a football snob RE: say South Carolina. I just don't think they are a premiere program. But I don't have a rooting interest regarding Nebraska either so there's no reason I wouldn't say Nebraska/MU was a rivalry if I thought it was.
It was very clear that the Nebraska/MU series was a series that mattered much more to MU than it did to Nebraska. That becomes even more obvious when you would go to local shops and see people selling posters commemorating the first time they beat Nebraska in a very long time. Try as hard as you might you will never find shops in Nebraska commemorating the time they beat MU for a fairly insignificant regular season game.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:47 pm to BennyAndTheInkJets
quote:
Mizzou basketball, A Tradition of Fluke Tournament Losses.
That isn't a flame at all, its a legimate statement that I own and any Mizzou fan has to be able to man up and own. It's reality.
Look, Mizzou is the only team in America that has lost to a 15 seed as a 2 seed, to a 14 seed as a 3 seed, and to a 13 seed as a 4 seed. Now do individual upsets like that happen in the Big Dance every year? YES. Hell, just hours after our Norfolk disaster this year, a fellow 2 seed Duke ALSO went down to a 15 seed. It happens.
Now those three stunning Mizzou upset losses I mention above? Here's how slim the margin was: Mizzou lost those three NCAA tourney games by a TOTAL of five points. AND, in each of those three games, Mizzou had a shot to tie or win it in the final five seconds.
Those kinda crazy last second upsets happen in the Big Dance every year. By definition, there has to be one team in the country who has had it happen to them more often than most. That is Mizzou. But that also makes it a bad measure of our program strength.
I mean Mizzou had a shitty, underachiving team in 2002 that barely slipped into the Big Dance as a 12 seed, then got hot and became the first ever 12 seed to advance to the Elite Eight. Does that brief run by that team put it on par with the best teams in Mizzou history? frick and no. Does Norfolk State's crazy hot shooting single game this year against us put its program as a whole on par with Mizzou's on the national scene? frick and no.
And I'm sure a similar case can be made for Arkansas' bowl game history, which I don't know much about. To me the mark of a good program is getting to the postseason consistently and doing well in one's conference and the national rankings consistently. Postseason play is a place where anything can happen and often does, so it just isn't always the best barometer.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:48 pm to bona fide
Mizzou fans are fanatical 'bout football and basketball. No former rivals want to play us defectors, cuz Bevo says so.
Football is where it's happening for now, but basketball is also major deal in CoMo. I think we will spark some increased SEC interest for the sport!
Football is where it's happening for now, but basketball is also major deal in CoMo. I think we will spark some increased SEC interest for the sport!
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:50 pm to molsusports
quote:
molsusports
There is littel doubt that the first win was all about Mizzou and the Nebraska fans really didnt care. That is not true after that. The games were heated and always played a significant factor in the Big 12 north division race.
To say that the Nebraska fans didnt veiw the game as a budding rivalry is not true.
Just talking with their fans as well as interacting with them on message boards it is clear that that series was picking up steam and both fan bases have expressed disappointment that that game has been one of the casualties of realignment.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:50 pm to kilo
quote:
None of your argument makes much sense honestly.
I'll clarify and simplify.
Choke: v. To lose to a team deemed by perception to be lesser than you.
Arkansas - Chokes in bowl games.
Mizzou - Chokes in the NCAAT.
You can try to equate on a micro view but its very convoluting, but it becomes clearer on the macro view.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:51 pm to Mizzou Fan in Da ATX
quote:
And I'm sure a similar case can be made for Arkansas' bowl game history, which I don't know much about.
We lost to UNLV. I could go on but I don't want to.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:54 pm to molsusports
quote:
Try as hard as you might you will never find shops in Nebraska commemorating the time they beat MU for a fairly insignificant regular season game.
Generally not, and for that matter as you know from spending time in MO, there would never have been a Mizzou fan who would have told you Nebraska was our "arch rival" - that was always kansas.
But, there is no question toward the end of the Big 12's run that Nebraska fans were more focused on their game against Mizzou than any other North opponent. Their message boards were cluttered with hate for Chase Daniel, and several times newspapers in Lincoln and Omaha ran stories about the Mizzou-Nebraska rivalry "heating up" and that perhaps Mizzou was gradually replacing Colorado as a yearly "rival" for them. It was definitely on their minds as to the nature of their rivalry with us, though they hadn't really decided yet what to make of it, see here:
What Cornshuckers Thought of Mizzou Series
Posted on 7/27/12 at 2:59 pm to kilo
quote:
There is littel doubt that the first win was all about Mizzou and the Nebraska fans really didnt care. That is not true after that. The games were heated and always played a significant factor in the Big 12 north division race.
To a very small extent I agree. Because the Big 12 North was essentially a football wasteland after Nebraska and KSU faded the games between MU and Nebraska became more relevant.
For the larger part I obviously disagree. The 2003 storming the field I understood because that was still a good Nebraska team (and a middling MU team) and they hadn't beaten Nebraska in a ridiculously long time.
I think the storming the field in 2005 was idiotic though. It showed a lack of expectations on the part of the fans and the team (I saw several players waving the crowd onto the field). I remember thinking "seriously?" It was like that was the only objective MU had was to beat a mediocre Nebraska team. And that lack of focus clearly showed in the rest of the regular season IMO - as they closed out by losing 3 of the last four conference games to finish with a much worse record than they were capable of IMO.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 3:07 pm to molsusports
quote:
molsusports
With all due respect you are moving away from the original point which was "Mizzou didnt have any other rivals outside kansas".
The Mizzou/Nebraska game was a pretty good game and series for a while after Mizzou turned it around.
Im not going to start getting into the other comments in which you are disparaging Mizzou success because ksu got worse? Come on man. lol.
Anyway, it is what it is. None of it matters anymore and Mizzou will have to forge new rivalries. Something that will probably take longer than my lifetime to come to fruition. A most unfortunate bi product of relaignment.
Cheers man.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 3:10 pm to molsusports
quote:
To a very small extent I agree. Because the Big 12 North was essentially a football wasteland after Nebraska and KSU faded the games between MU and Nebraska became more relevant.
Kinda odd how the 2007 winner of that "wasteland" was within one half of football in the Big 12 championship game away from keeping your team from even having a chance to play for its 2007 national championship, don't you think?
I will not argue that 1 through 6, the Big 12 North was not a paragon of excellence in those years, BUT that doesn't mean some of the teams at the top of the division in given years weren't capable of competing well with other top teams in the country. On the contrary, usually the two two teams or so in the North were solid Top 20 material and the winner was more often than not a Top Ten team heading into the Big 12 championship game toward the end of the Big 12's run. In the mid-2000s the North did really see some lean years were unranked and unremarkable Colorado teams kept backing into the Big 12 title game with 7-5 records and what not, and that's when the North's rep as a mediocre division was forged. But the Mizzou and Nebraska teams that were duking it out for the North title from 2006 to 2010 were generally legit competitors on a national scale - not national title level contenders, but Top 10 and Top 20 type contenders for sure.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 3:12 pm to kilo
quote:
With all due respect you are moving away from the original point which was "Mizzou didnt have any other rivals outside kansas".
Plus, we had a rivalry with Iowa State for the rights to the Telephone Trophy. Now I don't care who's involved, you're talking about a football game being played. For a trophy. Of a telephone. A fricking telephone. That's epic, by any measure.
Posted on 7/27/12 at 3:16 pm to Mizzou Fan in Da ATX
quote:
Mizzou Fan in Da ATX
Posted on 7/27/12 at 3:26 pm to kilo
RING RING RING! Hello? It's for you, it says IOWA STATE SUCKS! 
Posted on 7/27/12 at 3:35 pm to kilo
quote:
With all due respect you are moving away from the original point which was "Mizzou didnt have any other rivals outside kansas".
I don't see how I am really.
I expressed an opinion that Kansas was MU's only true rival and some MU fans seemed to argue that at least Nebraska was also a rival. I disagreed and when pressed explained why I thought that was.
I'm sorry for any accidental butt hurt. And regarding the other snide remark from your friends about 2007? MU absolutely had their fate in their own hands and failed to take advantage of that by beating OU. There is no real shame in that since OU was just a better team - but there's no real bragging about it either IMO. As a LSU fan I figured it was over when we lost to Arkansas - the game was there for the taking and LSU just showed up too flat.
Man, 2007 was a weird year. MU losing to OU a second time just wasn't really a surprise... the thing that still makes you wonder is how the hell WVU lost to Pitt.
Sometimes it isn't enough to be the best team IMO - sometimes you just got to get a little lucky as well as be the best
Posted on 7/27/12 at 4:01 pm to molsusports
quote:
Sometimes it isn't enough to be the best team IMO - sometimes you just got to get a little lucky as well as be the best
Very true.
How did Kansas leap Mizzou for a BCS Orange Bowl spot when Mizzou beat them head-to-head, was ranked #1 in the country going into the Big 12 Championship game against Oklahoma, and only lost to one team that year...Oklahoma.
bullshite.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News