BreakawayZou83

I wish that Mizzou gave a damn about its baseball program. Tough to get too excited about it in its current state.

It’s hard to take these games seriously with the quality of refs being this absolute dog shite.

Arkansas fans would trade a thousand national championships in football for a single indoor track and field championship.

Alabama-Ohio State
Arkansas-Maryland
Auburn-Michigan State
Florida-Oregon
Georgia-Michigan
Kentucky-Indiana
LSU-Wisconsin
Ole Miss-Iowa
Mississippi State-Purdue
Missouri-Illinois
Oklahoma-Penn State
South Carolina-Washington
Tennessee-Nebraska
Texas-USC
Texas A&M-UCLA
Vanderbilt-Northwestern

"What an enormous, state of the art college baseball stadium!"

-Only the Mizzou fans on this board

(It actually looks really nice)

Mizzou was sold out for the whole season. Our capacity was reduced for construction this season and it looks like that was not factored into these lazy stats.

Doesn't matter; had Super Bowl.

quote:

---

3. Mizzou 124

---

quote:

---

1. If you go to 9 conf games, did SEC gain additional dollar commitment from ESPN?

---

Yes. It'll equate to about $5 million more per SEC school. Seems like it should be significantly more though. This is where the SEC/Sankey dropped the ball.

quote:

---

2. Can you at least get the committees to agree that a larger percent of the SEC is ranked, making a tougher SOS for consideration in playoffs?

---

This already happens but the SEC has shite the bed in the Playoffs for the past couple years.

quote:

---

3. More competition means more injuries and wear/tear. Can this explain lack of finals appearances? ***or has the big 10 caught up?

---

I think NIL and the Portal have a lot more to do with it. Especially since the SEC hasn't even played a nine-game conference schedule yet.

quote:

---

4. Did Sankey move to 9 games just to get the national media off his back?

---

Or... a nine-game conference schedule made more sense from a scheduling perspective, added revenue, and ensured SEC teams play each other more frequently. Half the whining on this Board is about how "x school has only y school twice since 2012". This new format fixes that problem.

1. The Blue Bloods became the best programs because they had success in the early modern era of football (post WWII). Almost all of them rose to prominence by the 1960s at the latest. Their success became a formula for a self-sustaining cycle.

2. Because they won the most, Blue Bloods generated the most attention and therefore the most revenue - they could sell more tickets, build bigger stadiums, hire better coaches, and attract more tv dollars (which were relatively small back then).

3. Blue Bloods typically invested in facilities and coaches decades ahead of their peers. Programs like Nebraska were ahead of their time with their state-of-the-art training facilities. This made it easier to attract higher caliber players in an era where players weren't paid (wink wink).

4. Blue Blood programs (aside from Nebraska and Notre Dame) are almost all located in high school talent hotbeds. Before NIL and the Portal, kids tended to stay closer to home. This has radically changed almost overnight.

5. Prior to the Portal and NIL, a top recruit's logical track was to commit to the best program and work his way up the depth chart over the years. So the Alabamas and Ohio States of the world often had better second or third-string players than the starters at smaller P5 programs. Now, those 5* sophomores who couldn't crack the rotation has financial and scouting incentives to transfer to a smaller program, start earlier in their career, and potentially get paid millions of dollars. This more than anything else has leveled the playing field. I used to watch Mizzou hang with the Nebraskas or Oklahomas of the world for the first half, then slowly collapse because they simply couldn't compete with the depth of their opponents.

But let's be real - top programs probably made more shady dealings in the pre-NIL era than the likes of Indiana football who probably couldn't generate enough interest in the program to justify such a risk.

I've quit giving a damn about recruiting or transfer rankings after watching Indiana this season. They are ranked 72nd in Team Talent Composite - beneath Boston College, Tulane, and even UTSA.

I don't think the evaluations are worth much for transfers. These scouting services excelled at evaluating high school talent with an assumption that those kids would go to a school and continue to develop. Now it's madness and I don't think they have any clue how to evaluate whether a former 3* recruit with five years of experience can become a top talent at different program. I'm not sure it's even possible.