Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[MaxBuck]

The thing I probably love most about this whole "realignment" business is that the EssEeCee apologists continue to spout off on how they're the best there is on the football field, ignoring the economics of Big College Football.

The SEC is, of course, the strongest conference around, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, the football programs of the Big Ten will continue to feed money into academics and into non-revenue sports at a rate the SEC can only dream of, yielding educational opportunities for countless young people who, if they were stuck in Arkansas, would be relegated to a life in the chicken processing plant.

 

[Gatorubet]

The thing I probably love most about this whole "realignment" business is that the EssEeCee apologists continue to spout off on how they're the best there is on the football field, ignoring the economics of Big College Football.

How does the SEC having success on the field ignore the economics of Big Time Football?

The SEC is, of course, the strongest conference around, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, the football programs of the Big Ten will continue to feed money into academics and into non-revenue sports at a rate the SEC can only dream of, yielding educational opportunities for countless young people who, if they were stuck in Arkansas, would be relegated to a life in the chicken processing plant.

We can all agree that four different B1G programs will not be winning back to back to back to back to back BCS Titles the next five years.


And Max, it is only your jealousy that makes you ignore the Walmart job opportunities in Arkansas.

 

[Nicknam4]

How does the SEC having success on the field ignore the economics of Big Time Football?

The SEC is the dominant conference but not the most profitable.

 

[Nutriaitch]

It'll be difficult for them to compete regularly, but I see them as more competitive annually than Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Auburn (minus Cam) and Ole Miss. They'll have a tough time of it because there aren't many off weeks, but really, the Big XII has had some pretty decent football for them to go up against, and they've done well enough. They're not going to win the SEC, ever, but they'll scare a team or two once in a while. They'll probably go .500 against the Georgia teams we've seen over the past ten years. Probably about .500 against SC.

in the Big XII, Mizzou only played 1 team annually (Nebraska) that would rank in the top 25 all-time , and 3 on a rotational basis (Texas, OU, A&M).

Moving to the SEC East, they would have 3 annually (Florida, Tenn, UGA), and 5 on a rotational basis (Bama, LSU, Auburn, Arky, A&M).


that's a big difference from the Big XII North to the SEC East.

 

[Gatorubet]

The SEC is the dominant conference but not the most profitable.

Certainly the new conferences and ESPN/CBS deals have created monsters.

Historically, we - the SEC - have done just fine financially, keeping pace with the Big-10 and vice versa. We have attendance that is at your level. Seats and concessions mean $$ as well.

There is a reason that we are both major BCS conferences, what with tradition, resources, facilities, revenue and on the field success. It is always great to see our two conferences match up. If we both start playing better maybe it can be this year.

 

[MaxBuck]

I actually have no bone to pick with UGA or UF, because they are both excellent universities with professionally-run athletic departments. Similarly, I have no bone to pick with Vandy or Kentucky. But the mouth-breathing pinhead fans of some other SEC programs (notably SoCar, Ole Miss and Miss St) who seem to think that if LSU wins the NC that means their team is great, too -- them, I got problems with. And it does my heart good to see them living with far lower revenues than we in the slow, plodding, talent-starved B1G enjoy.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I don't know, Max, I kinda feel like Ohio State already beat Wisconsin because Michigan State did. :p

 

[BB73]

in the Big XII, Mizzou only played 1 team annually (Nebraska) that would rank in the top 25 all-time , and 3 on a rotational basis (Texas, OU, A&M).

Moving to the SEC East, they would have 3 annually (Florida, Tenn, UGA), and 5 on a rotational basis (Bama, LSU, Auburn, Arky, A&M).

that's a big difference from the Big XII North to the SEC East.

Surprisingly, Ole Miss also makes my top-25 teams of all time, and excluding Colorado (from the old Big XII North) was OK, they just miss out at #26.

 

[knapplc]

in the Big XII, Mizzou only played 1 team annually (Nebraska) that would rank in the top 25 all-time , and 3 on a rotational basis (Texas, OU, A&M).

Moving to the SEC East, they would have 3 annually (Florida, Tenn, UGA), and 5 on a rotational basis (Bama, LSU, Auburn, Arky, A&M).


that's a big difference from the Big XII North to the SEC East.

Unfortunately, Missouri forgot to curl up into a ball at the feet of Nebraska's historic greatness in 2003, 2005, 2007 & 2008. Those jerks.

Historic greatness hasn't meant a whole lot for Georgia and Tennessee in the past several years. Moving forward, Missouri is going to go .500 against Tennessee and Georgia as they stand today. They'll be able to compete against Auburn and Arkansas, and they can definitely compete with A&M.

Annually there's only a few teams in the SEC that Missouri is outclassed by. You are underselling them by a large degree to think that they cannot be a viable SEC team.

 

[Woody1968]

Unfortunately, Missouri forgot to curl up into a ball at the feet of Nebraska's historic greatness in 2003, 2005, 2007 & 2008. Those jerks.

Historic greatness hasn't meant a whole lot for Georgia and Tennessee in the past several years. Moving forward, Missouri is going to go .500 against Tennessee and Georgia as they stand today. They'll be able to compete against Auburn and Arkansas, and they can definitely compete with A&M.

Annually there's only a few teams in the SEC that Missouri is outclassed by. You are underselling them by a large degree to think that they cannot be a viable SEC team.

Yeah, they aren't going to be another Vanderbilt, and they'll be able to recruit better in the south, as opposed to just Texas. They could be a solid program if their coaching situatiion remains stable. Of course, the competition will be much greater too...

I think they'll probably be mid-level SEC, comparable to Arkansas, South Carolina or Auburn prior to Cam.

 

[Muck]

I think they'll probably be mid-level SEC, comparable to Arkansas, South Carolina or Auburn prior to Cam.

They've (Mizzou) are 4-1 vs SEC teams over the past decade 2-0 vs Mississippi, 2-0 vs the Gamecocks & 1-1 vs Arkansas. Prior to that they hadn't played any SEC teams since the 80's (2-0 vs Miss St).

 

[Muck]

Neinas says Mizzou did not give Big 12 notice of withdrawal

COLUMBIA ? Intermim Big 12 commissioner Chuck Neinas just told The Star that Missouri did not submit a letter of conditional withdrawal nor did it notify the Big 12 on Monday of its plans to leave the Big 12.

?The conference encouraged Missouri to stay in the Big 12,? Neinas added, referred to a statement to be released by the league on the Big 12 Board of Directors meeting on Monday in Dallas.

When asked if following its release Neinas could be asked for further guidance, Neinas said: ?You could, but I won?t give you any.?

Moments later, the Big 12 statement was released, saying:
?In a regularly-scheduled meeting today at an undisclosed Dallas area location, the Big 12 Conference Board of Directors reaffirmed previous action to execute institutional grants of Tier 1 (over-the-air) and Tier 2 (cable) television rights to the Conference.

?The Board also discussed a wide range of topics including NCAA legislation, the Bowl Championship Series, and exploration of a Conference dedicated TV network.

?Additionally, a strong desire for the University of Missouri to maintain its Big 12 affiliation was expressed. All 10 member institutions and TCU participated in the meeting.?

.../cont/...

 

[jwinslow]

They've (Mizzou) are 4-1 vs SEC teams over the past decade 2-0 vs Mississippi, 2-0 vs the Gamecocks & 1-1 vs Arkansas. Prior to that they hadn't played any SEC teams since the 80's (2-0 vs Miss St).

so you're saying the big 12 mid-level teams are better than the SEC's counterparts (I'd include Aggy in that characterization also).

 

[Muck]

so you're saying the big 12 mid-level teams are better than the SEC's counterparts (I'd include Aggy in that characterization also).

I'm not saying anything, merely throwing up a data point.

Six games is too small a sample size to make a big deal over...Ohio State is 1-7 vs the SEC over the same time period. Do I think Buckeyes would fare worse in the SEC than Mizzou? Not a chance in hell.

My gut feeling is that over time Missouri's performance will be similar to what Arkansas has accomplished over the past 20 years.

 

[Woody1968]

I'm not saying anything, merely throwing up a data point.

Six games is too small a sample size to make a big deal over...Ohio State is 1-7 vs the SEC over the same time period. Do I think Buckeyes would fare worse in the SEC than Mizzou? Not a chance in hell.

My gut feeling is that over time Missouri's performance will be similar to what Arkansas has accomplished over the past 20 years.

Well, we have played some pretty good SEC teams, while Missouri has played some not so great SEC teams.