if a school in our conference doesn’t want to participate in our conference, it would be difficult to continue having an athletic relationship."
More posturing by Lew? What does everyone here think..if Mizzou goes to the Big 10, do you still want the Border War series to continue?
almost 2 years ago
Owen
102 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Yes and no -
I see what Lew is doing here, and I agree in principle, but man, I would really hate for the Border War to go away. K-State is a nice in-state rival but Mizzou really gets the blood going…
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
Only comment I've read and not sure I need to read anymore.
but Mizzou really gets the blood going
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
If Mizzou does leave then we have to keep the Border War going
But I’d say that they should look at moving it to the Spring Center in KC if that happens. A once-a-year, winner-takes-all battle for bragging rights in KC. It’d be pretty fun. Almost as fun as playing twice a year in our own stadiums, but that wouldn’t happen anymore.
by 2.1 seconds left on May 13, 2010 9:00 AM CDT reply actions
Yuck.
I’d rather go home and home. They need to experience the Phog.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
Lew is a funny man...
on the same topic, I do think all of these rumors could create the urgency necessary for the Big XII to get its act together…decent case made here if you’re interested.
by hiphopopotamus on May 13, 2010 9:20 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Doesn't the Big XII
have a bylaw or something that says if a team leaves the conference, the remaining teams can’t play them for several years? Was that just a rumor?
When is Late Night?
I've heard the rumor
but never seen any evidence.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
There's no such rule
Dan Beebe dispelled that myth in an interview on 810 yesterday.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
I said this somewhere else, but I'll copy and paste it here:
It’s difficult to keep an on-going rivalry with teams that are in different conferences. The mu-illinos games are often brought up but is that for every sport or is it just football and baseball? And I’m not sure anyone outside of missouri or illinois even considers it a rivalry. Off the top of my head I can only think of one non-con rivalry, and that’s GT vs. UGA. And thats really only for football. I’m sure there are more out there but none jump out.
Also, with these supposed "super conferences" how many non-con games will there even be for football? I’m thinking 2-3. Depending on how your conference schedule shakes out on any given year, teams will need every easy win you can get just to become bowl eligible. Why take the chance in scheduling a neutral game against an equal opponent when you can schedule a home game against an inferior one?
Clemson-S. Caro., USC-ND (football only)...
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
You're both right
I forgot about those. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but I still think it becomes increasingly difficult with these “super conferences.”
being in-state makes a big difference
and the hype was very low about USC-ND until they both became national title contenders
by SagehenMacGyver47 on May 13, 2010 7:03 PM CDT up reply actions
In state makes a very big difference
In fact, if mu goes o the Big 10, and KU and ksu were to end up in different conferences, I think our rivalry w/ ksu would have a better chance of surviving. Mostly because the state would make us play if we were in the same conference. Much like they once tried to make us play Wichita State annualy in basketball.
Miami doesn't play Florida every year
In fact, they have rarely played each other during the reason since the 80s
by Texas Wahoo on May 13, 2010 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions
It'd be sad to see the rivalry go, but I do think it will lose value
over time anyway if MU moves on. Personally I say F’em. I’m sure KU could make better money trying to get a yearly game vs Duke, NC, Kentucky, Florida, etc that would draw more of a national audience and therefor bigger $$$$.
by MichiganJayHawk on May 13, 2010 9:42 AM CDT reply actions
I honestly don't care for this "screw em" attitude
This is MISSOURI we’re talking about. I don’t need to tell you guys about this history of this rivalry. And we want to give it up for a little more TV money? It will lose some luster if it’s non-con (and it’ll guarantee we’ll never get another game like the first one at Arrowhead). But this is 119 years of battling our most hated rivals. That is extremely rare in college sports, and I don’t want to see it suffer.
by knayte on May 13, 2010 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
Bingo.
Oh my dear lord...this is RETARDED boss...
by tequilaprophet on May 13, 2010 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions
119 years is extremely rare in ALL of sports
Especially in the U.S. There might be a couple of European soccer rivalries that old, but certainly no American pro sport could compare. If we can’t keep a 12-decade old tradition alive, I really feel like we as a community have kind of failed, to be honest.
I mean, that’s older than the Rock Chalk cheer, isn’t it? Benjamin Harrison was president when we started to do battle on the athletic field (rather than the battlefield).
Honestly, I feel like the history and sports culture of KC would keep the rivalry strong even if Mizzou goes to the Big Integer. Colorado/Colorado State is a surprisingly bitter rivalry, despite the different level of conference prestige the two schools have. There’s definitely a culture clash between the two schools that creates more tension. If anything, this could make the rivalry that much more bitter, as Mizzou proceeds to adopt “Big Ten Culture.”
You can never have too much talent.
by KennyGregoryRockThaCradle on May 13, 2010 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions
But the fact is if they leave, it will suffer.
I love the rivalry, I grew up with it (being in my 40’s now) I suspect I’ve been attached to this rivalry longer than people on this board. I would say my ‘Screw Them" reaction is because of what THEIR (potential) decision to leave the the Big12 does to the league, it pisses me off. Yeah we’ve been their rivals since the we were both in the Missouri Valley conference, all the way though the Big6, 7, 8, 12. Now they have the potential to fuck the conference royally. I have no desire to provide them any additional resources and attention by continuing to associate with them. Yeah I’m acting like a baby, but I guess I was never on to continue to chase and grovel at a girl’s feet if they dumped me for someone else.
Sorry, it just pisses me off and that’s my take right now., very well could change at a later time :)
by MichiganJayHawk on May 13, 2010 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions
no, you make a good point
there’s no need to appologize. It is frustrating to me as well that two original Big 6/Mo Valley schools would consider bolting. Granted the Big XII is much different from the Big 6 or the Big 8 for that matter but the conference still has the same flavor that it did when I was a kid.
It seems more than selfish on their parts to not only break with their own tradition but to potentially break up their traditional conference and putting many of their sister institutions in collegiate sports purgatory.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
Let's not forget the Bugeaters too
F*ck them too. Tom Osbourne can kiss my ass.
There simply is no substitute for experience.
I don't get why the Big 10 would take Nebraska.
I see the financial possibilities with MU, the fairly large state population coupled with access to both the St.Louis & KC markets, but Nebraska brings little in the way of media markets, and this whole scenario seems to be a pure money play based on TV demographics.
by hunter s. royal on May 13, 2010 8:10 PM CDT up reply actions
They still have somewhat of a national brand name...
…from their dominance in the 1990s, not to mention the fact that they were really good for the previous 40 years. Their games apparently still draw good national ratings.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
How can their games draw good national ratings??
When most all of them are pay per view and only Nebraska fans are willing to pay the fee. :)
It does seem more like a one sided deal though, where Nebraska makes all the gains, but the Big 10 gets little in return. Not much TV market at all, not much in terms of academics, not much in athletics other than maybe a minor boost in football since they already have strong followings in football and 3 traditional powers, and a couple of the women’s sports. Really, what is really in it for the Big Televen?
Again, ratings
When 60 percent of their revenue comes from advertising, and they have a chance to bring in a school that pulls good national ratings, that makes the Big 10 Network games in which Nebraska is involved attractive to advertisers. Expansion isn’t about on-field ability (past some certain level of minimum competence), it’s about the ability of a school to make the Big 10 Network more money.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on May 14, 2010 6:54 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah,
The Big 10 doesn’t so much want Nebraska the football team of the 2000’s. They want Nebraska the brand.
Yeah, but...
who’s buying that brand other than Nebraska fans right now? Also, I was joking about the pay per view thing, but can you point me at something that shows how their nationally televised games have better ratings? Their bowl game last year had about the same attendance as that bowl game has had for the past 5 years in a row and it was 7,000 seats shy of being sold out. And the Nielsen rating was down from the 2008 Holiday Bowl with Oklahoma State and Oregon.
I just don’t think the Nebraska brand has the pull it did 10 or 20 years ago and I doubt adding the 105th and 76th biggest TV markets, which if combined would be about the same as the Albuquerque, NM TV Market, would do much for the Big 10 network.
Think about it
Would you really want to play MU every year in football? That game for the most part has been 50/50 I think. The game is almost always close and you never know who is going to win. So potentially, it could be 1 loss every year that gets us further away from our Bowl Game. Yeah, scheduling one decent team (MU) a year would actually be good for KU but look at what the Big 12 and PAC 10 are doing? They are looking into playing games against each other every year. Would you really want to play 2 teams in a BCS conference every year in your non-con schedule? Yes, I love competition but at the same time the big schools schedule easier non-con games for the purpose of having a better record, which means a better Bowl Game. But at the same time it’s tough to turn down a million bucks every year to play MU. That and it would suck not having that rivalry. Just foot for thought I guess…
Its no difference though
Than us playing Georgia Tech this year, South Florida in 2008, etc. Top 20 teams. If we play Mizzou and add three creampuffs around them I would be perfectly fine with it. Worst case scenario is 3-1 with a stronger non-con profile, best case scenario is 4-0 with a stronger non-con profile. Works for me.
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 13, 2010 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions
That's not what I said though...
It’s not going to be just one decent team we’re playing against each year most likely. With the Pac 10 / Big 12 relationship, we might be playing a CAL, UCLA, USC, Oregon, or another Pac 10 team every year on top of MU. So therefore we have a chance to go 2-2 in non-con. That’s not good when you’re trying to make a Bowl Game.
And I’m all up for keeping the Border War alive, but people have to remember that it could mean not going to a bowl game as well…
Or we could not suck and beat whatever Pac10 team we play
And possibly Mizzou as well. Sheesh, KU football fans…too used to losing :)
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 13, 2010 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions
You know what though?
Needing to beat our most bitter rival to qualify would make a bowl berth that much more satisfying.
I’ve thought a lot about how much more difficult KU’s schedule could be from now on, but maybe that’s kind of necessary for our program to make the kind of jump to prominence we’d like it to. Mangino’s “4-0 against creampuffs 2-6 in league play” got us to some bowls, which definitely helped in recruiting and in building the off-the-field infrastructure necessary to improve. But we need to start playing more big games to push ourselves to that next level.
You can never have too much talent.
by KennyGregoryRockThaCradle on May 13, 2010 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions
especially if we keep the Mizzou game
for the last game of the Season.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
Not sure if this is possible.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
why not?
Florida and FSU often play during conference play season…
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
This is what I was talking about.
for the last game of the Season.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
Or it could put us in an even better situation
If we actually win said games. Beating quality opponents is what helps you move up in the rankings which leads to better bowl games. I would rather see them go to bowl games because they beat quality opponents and deserve to be there, not because they had an easy schedule and their record dictates they at least get an invite to a mediocre bowl.
Everybody hears, but few listen.
especially since the added bowl games
basically mean that 6 wins is a automatic qualifier.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
You're all right
it COULD make us better. But I think there is a reason most other schools schedule the cream puffs. Maybe because they get better bowls with more wins? They don’t like chancing it. I love the fact that you guys are very positive about having to play 2 potentially good BCS teams every year but I don’t think you see how it could backfire.
Winning your conference is how you gain respect, not by beating non-con opponents. No recruit would say, “Man, that KU beats some PAC 10 team and MU every year. I think I’m going to go there. Who cares if they lose to every other team in the Big 12?”
Coaches like those cream puff games in non-con plus one or two games that challenge even though they know they will win 9 times out of 10 to those teams. It gets them ready for the conference games that mean the most.
What happens in the years that we have UT & OU? Do you honestly think that KU can beat all 4 teams in one year? I’m a huge KU fan, but we are no where near that dominate as of now. Sorry! All it does is ruin the season on not give our players any motivation.
But...
don’t be surprised if Bowl Games die. I mean if college athletics evolve into a bunch of superconferences and those conferences participate in some type of football tournament…….bye bye bowl games (at least as they’re known today).
This could be a whole new world we are entering.
There simply is no substitute for experience.
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 13, 2010 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions
"Whole New World" reference
Nicely done!!
I love that movie btw. Robin Williams was hilarious as the genie.
There simply is no substitute for experience.
Its my favorite Disney Movie
Lion King second.
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 13, 2010 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Dudes. What about "Robin Hood?"
That movie was great.
Oh my dear lord...this is RETARDED boss...
by tequilaprophet on May 13, 2010 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions
The one with the fox playing Robin Hood
And the bear playing Little John? That was solid too
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 14, 2010 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions
Yup
Beat the hell out of the ones with Errol Flynn, Kevin Costner, and the new one with the other guy.
There simply is no substitute for experience.
Russel Crowe
Basically they remade Gladiator but this time he takes on British Royalty rather than Roman Royalty
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 14, 2010 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah pretty much
When he isn’t foightin round the world with his best mate Tucker
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 15, 2010 12:30 AM CDT up reply actions
if it means keeping the Border War relevant, then yes.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
by labbadabba on May 13, 2010 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I said this earlier...
But I think we should keep the series with MU, but it will lose importance. It will become a novelty game, much like MU-Illinois is now. When league/big12 race implications are thrown out, it loses a lot of its bite. Look at games in the past where KU and MU were battling for Big12 hoops titles, the first Arrowhead game that decided the North, etc.
It just won’t be the same.
I think over time our little brothers out West move up as more of our main rival due to the fact they are actually good at hoops now and will likely be battling us for a shot at a Big12 title (if they can ever beat us…2-40 or whatever it is now since the 80s isn’t very good) and the sunflower showdown in football is always a huge game since its a north vs. north game.
Shit happens when you win championships
I don't think it will descend to the level of a novelty game
Missou and Illinois are not really rivals, they just happen to share a border and part of one market. It doesn’t have near the history (both in sports and real life) that the Border War has.
I don’t know, I think there’s a chance being in separate conferences will boost the rivalry on a national level. It will be one of those things where people say, see, they hate eachother so much after 150 years that they’re STILL fighting…
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
yes and no
I think the rivalry will keep going, there is no way we wouldn’t play.
I do think, however, that the fans would not put as much meaning into it. The KC area bragging rights would falter because people just wouldn’t care as much.
It would be an attitude of: “Well we really want to beat them, but honestly, it really doesn’t matter if we lose.” Or when one fan says to another:
“ohhh we beat you this season”.
“well we finished higher in our conference than you even though we don’t play in the same conference but we still finished higher.”
Crickets will chirp and we’ll look ahead to the K-State game cause it will actually matter.
by I need more Esteban on May 13, 2010 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions
No way.
Mizzou is Mizzou. There is nobody I prefer beating, and I think that is true for 90% of the rest of the students/alumni. They could falter to IAA and I would still enjoy kicking their ass.
by play4'ships on May 13, 2010 11:21 PM CDT up reply actions
no doubt
We’ll still really want to beat them, and they’ll still really want to beat us and we’ll take pleasure in that. But when it’s not a game to win the Big 12 conference or to go to the Big 12 championship game, the luster falls off of it for me and I think a lot of other fans.
by I need more Esteban on May 14, 2010 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Posted this is the previous FanShot
But I think it’s worthy of a repost.
WHB did an interview with Big 12 Commish Beebe and the guy doing the interview suggested that if Missouri, Nebraska, and Colorado leave then the BIg 12 should add Arkansas, Louisville, and Memphis. Beebe seemed to imply that the Big 12 is in talks to stay with 12 teams with whatever happens and implied that schools added would be from states other than Texas. Very interesting.
....my quick smells like french toast...
Twitter: @mstreeter06
Also
Beebe said that the so called Big 12 / Pac 10 alliance could mean a B12/P10 matchup in the Rose Bowl. Thatd be fun.
....my quick smells like french toast...
Twitter: @mstreeter06
by mstreeter06 on May 13, 2010 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions
now that would be a fairly big deal...
taking the Big 10 out of the Rose Bowl.
I like Arkansas…just don’t see it happening.
53 Conference Championships!! and now 6 IN A ROW!!! Holy Hell...Good Luck with That!!
I agree with both points
I don’t know why Arkansas would leave their situation with the SEC. But yeah a Pac 10 / Big 12 Rose bowl deal would be a big deal.
....my quick smells like french toast...
Twitter: @mstreeter06
by mstreeter06 on May 13, 2010 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions
Only think I can think with Arkansas
is they’re spending tons of money on their athletic programs and getting nowhere in the SEC. They’ve got history with the Texas schools and maybe a chance to compete in the Big 12.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
Yes, they may let their ego
get ahead of their pocketbook. They may well think a chance to be competitive is worth more than the SEC guaranteed money.
by hunter s. royal on May 13, 2010 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Honestly, with all of the money flowing through that area now
they might make more money with wins than they do in the SEC.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
"Other than Texas"
Is a very interesting remark. I don’t see us going into Louisiana- LSU ain’t leaving the SEC. Tulane could theoretically bring in the nice-sized New Orleans market, but they really are terrible. So bad that it would be blatant that the league only cared about marketshare, not on-fieldd quality.
Arkansas would have to take a look at it due to their traditional rivalries, but in the end, they’d take a huge paycut to come to the Big 12.
I’d say New Mexico, Memphis, Colorado State would all be possibilities. If Utah goes to the Pac-12, as predicted, we might go after BYU. But honestly, I’m not sure the BYU market is worth it for all the increased travel expenses the other member-schools would have to face.
Maybe the league decides, you know what? Smaller marketshares can be overcome with great games with a lot on the line—the kind of games where casual college football fans everywhere flip over to check it out. If that was the case, I say bring in Boise State and Utah if you can pull it off. I’m sure the Boise market is tiny, but I feel like watching the Broncos get their chance to face the “big boys” on a weekly basis would draw in a lot of fans from around the country.
You can never have too much talent.
by KennyGregoryRockThaCradle on May 13, 2010 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Salt Lake City is a decent TV Market
If you’re going to consider Louisville and Memphis, why not Salt Lake? Its as big and close as those other cities, not to mention BYU and Utah are 1,000 times better at football than Memphis, and likely now Louisville as well.
If Colorado departs for the Pac-10, grabbing Colorado State might not be a terrible idea to grab the Denver/Denver area market
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 13, 2010 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions
I believe Utah and BYU will be handcuffed
so where one goes, the other is sure to follow.
Tulane
They are “terrible” now, but what if they were to become a member of a major conference with the additional prestige, money, and commitment that comes with that?
I think people are making a mistake in only taking a historical look at possible players in a new conference. Try taking a proactive look instead. LAs got a lot of football talent and could easily support LSU and Tulane as powerful football schools.
Another common thought I’ve heard lately: “Screw CU….they suck anyway and we don’t need them”. Damn, I guess people forget that it wasn’t that long ago that CU won a national championship in football. In the early days of the Big XII, CU and NU were kicking the shit out of Texas and OU. Football is cyclical. You simply can’t go from recent experience and make a conclusion. I really think you have to evaluate a lot of factors, take in the entire picture, and do your best to forecast what the future will look like. At least, I hope to God that that’s what these conference commissioners are doing…
There simply is no substitute for experience.
that's the argument I've made regarding Tulsa and Memphis...
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
Tulane dropped out of the SEC to avoid having to compete at that level
They also almost dropped the football program just a couple of years ago.
WTF Lew
"They’ve all been basically full houses," Perkins said. "I think it’s a great, great, great game. But if we have to play K-State or Iowa State, there’s always somebody else out there."
I really hope he is just posturing.
Yeah
I don’t think we would be playing ISU in Arrowhead. I could maybe see KSU, but I don’t think that happens every year either. Arrowhead is a perfect fit for KU/MU because it is in the center of both schools. I think he’s just trying to act tough and show MU (if they do get a big to the Big 10) that if you accept it, you will be losing more than you think and we won’t lose a thing.
K-State vs Kansas
is not a game I want to see in Arrowhead.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
2 Kansas schools making money for Missouri?
What's wrong with that?
by hunter s. royal on May 13, 2010 8:04 PM CDT up reply actions
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-bigten-missouri
“Missouri’s flirtation with the Big Ten isn’t its first effort to upgrade its dance partner. In the early ’90s, with the Big Eight Conference on the verge of collapse and the Big Ten also talking expansion, Missouri pushed to join the 114-year-old league. A group of state business leaders even formed a lobbying group to boost its efforts.”
I don’t think the Big 10 wanted them then, and i don’t think the Big 10 wants them now. I could be completely wrong, but I am really starting to think that the Big 10 mainly wants ND, and if they do add two more teams, they will pull them from the east coast.
But let’s say MU did go to the Big 10. Here is the cost from the Big 12 side of it:
“Now, a "breaching member" wanting to withdraw would owe the Big 12 a payment equal to 80 percent of its two-year conference revenues if notice is given by June 30. The penalty increases to 90 percent before the end of the year or 100 percent is notice isn’t given until 2011.”
I remember that.
basically they said the same thing then as they were saying now. i.e. Mizzou is a Big 10 school at heart, Arkansas would fit better in the Big 8 ect ect.
The difference between then and now is that the Big 10 at that point wasn’t looking to expand.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
Recruiting KC
I read on a fan post or an article, maybe even here on RCT an opinion that I agree with.
If MU leaves and we stop playing them, then KU will be able to slowly claim KC as our home turf leaving MU to be considered a St Louis school for recruiting
I think this is a very real possibility...
Kansas has an alumni base much larger than Mizzou in the KC metro area.
53 Conference Championships!! and now 6 IN A ROW!!! Holy Hell...Good Luck with That!!
Yeah this is the biggest fear I'm hearing from most MU people who I talk to
They are afraid they will lose the KC market, recruiting from Rockhurst, Blue Springs, etc etc etc
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on May 13, 2010 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions
screw KC -
If they back out of the Big XII they’ll lose a good chuck of Texas/Oklahoma recruiting. It’s a lot easier to sell kids to Mizzou when they know they’ll be in the Southern Plains 2-3 times a year.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
and on tv because they're playing Texas teams.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
Just imagine all the hate
that will be spewing from both sides if Mizzou leaves. As much as we all love to hate on Mizzou I still will pull for them in alot of games just because it’s good for the Big 12, but now there will be no love. This goes much deeper than a conference rival and to lose this would be a shame, because it seems to me like this will make for an even more heated battle than it’s ever been before.
Everybody hears, but few listen.
agree,
this means I can officially not pull for them under any circumstance.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
I'll still root for MU
if they’re playing the f*ckin golden domers.
There simply is no substitute for experience.
IT REALLY PISSES ME OFF
When people even think about discontinuing the rivalry. MU/KU is not like any other rivalry— anywhere.(UT aTM doesn’t even compare and i’m a native Texan) It really goes beyond athletics and even money, because it frames the relationship between the two states and their entire populations.
I do feel Mizzou has to move to the Big 10 for a few reasons. mainly the jump in academic rep, potential access to the CIC, and of course the extra 10 mil a year.
(We have to remember they are academic institutions first). I also want to dispute the claim that Mizzou is unhappy with revenue sharing because that is not the case. In fact it cannot be the case because the difference in monies earned between Mizzou and Texas is pretty negligible than if the money were shared evenly among all schools. Missouri is moving because it improves the position of the University and not just the athletic program.(this is assuming it gets an invite, of course)
Ideally, I would love the Big 10 to add MU/KU/NU and call it a day, because it would keep the core of the Old Big 8/6/5 together. And I would also rather have KU over NU as a rival because they are not really a rival outside of football and even that has been just recently.
i think what really gets me is that today where every place you go in America you encounter the same strip malls, suburbs, franchise restaurants, etc., local culture gets drowned out, and, i think it cannot be overstated how important it is to protect our cultural heritage here in the midwest.
maybe I’m just freaking out, but I hope lew is just trying to put pressure on Mizzou to stay and not really considering shutting down the rivalry.
by TIGRPRIDE on May 13, 2010 4:31 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Threatening not to play Mizzou is really the only card Kansas has.
Lew has to play it as hard as he can because he has no other options.
Hahaha
Don’t worry dude! MU is staying in the Big 12 (if ND accepts the Big 10s invitation). You won’t have to worry about having our rivalry discontinued. But let’s say you do go, then you’re absolutely right. And yes, I think Lew is just trying to make leaving look scary to MU.
You know what? I'm gonna rec that.
You are the first Mizzou fan I’ve heard from or read about that’s been willing to admit this:
I also want to dispute the claim that Mizzou is unhappy with revenue sharing because that is not the case. In fact it cannot be the case because the difference in monies earned between Mizzou and Texas is pretty negligible than if the money were shared evenly among all schools. Missouri is moving because it improves the position of the University and not just the athletic program.(this is assuming it gets an invite, of course)
That revenue sharing argument was stupid. It’s sad that it took weeks for a regional paper to finally take a look at what each school was getting paid in TV money. It was a lot easier to sell some papers by drumming up anti-Texas sentiment to rally support behind the move, I suppose.
If Mizzou goes, they’re going for the academic reputation bump, and the money. And you know what? I can’t blame them for that or get upset with them for that. It appears to be a rare opportunity for a school to advance BOTH its academic and athletic aims. If Kansas had the chance, I would definitely have expected our AD and Chancellor to seriously consider it (at least).
I just wish they would stand up and admit it and quit all this “waaaaah Texas is a big meanie” BS.
You can never have too much talent.
by KennyGregoryRockThaCradle on May 13, 2010 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions
I think it's inevitable that the rivalry...
will lose some of its importance and luster if Missouri were to leave. Even if we continued to play in non-con games, it just wouldn’t mean as much. It wouldn’t be overnight, but after several years it would become a lot less of a big deal than it is now. Who knows, after a decade or two it might become just a total novelty game like Missouri-Illinois is right now. It’s just an unavoidable consequence. I also heard that current Big 12 bylaws prohibit any remaining member from playing a member who left for several years.
The KC area will become even more of a KU stronghold than it is now and no doubt about it, Missouri would lose out a lot more in recruiting Oklahoma and Texas. They’re fooling themselves if they think they won’t, because like someone already said, a lot of those recruits chose Missouri over Illinois or Arkansas, or some other decent school in another Conference because they’ll still be playing Big 12 football, which includes games back in their home state. Missouri instead would be going after more recruits in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, and Michigan against the big boys of the current Big 10 and in places where they don’t really have any relationships or history with.
Missouri moving to the Big 10 would also relegate them to one of the lower tier schools in their conference academically. Missouri ranks at or near the bottom right now when compared to other Big 10 schools in academics. Missouri will be in an uphill battle for all that potential research money they’ll have access too. Sure, even then they’ll have advantages academically that they don’t have now, but maybe not quite as much as is being implied with all of the talk right now. Missouri will lose a lot with a move to the Big Televen in terms of immediate money, loss of geographical influence and history and rivals, but also gain some things, mostly long term potential money. Is it all about the $$ for Missouri or do any of those things they’ll lose matter more? I guess if the Big Televen comes a calling, we’ll all find out.
by WildHawk on May 13, 2010 5:29 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I think this would only make Mizzou want to go to the Big 10 more
I’d get sick of being beat down by your biggest rival
Beadlemaniacs - Award winning* college basketball blog (new and improved!)
College Hockey!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
