Blog Entry

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

Posted on: October 4, 2011 8:12 pm
Edited on: October 4, 2011 9:02 pm
 

Since it started it, maybe Missouri figures it can finish it.

Or as finished as conference realignment can ever be.

Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton got permission Tuesday night from the school's board of curators to seek new conference membership. Nothing surprising there. In case you haven't been following, this would the first move toward Missouri becoming the SEC's 14th team. One problem. No one is sure if the SEC even wants a 14th team at the moment, much less Missouri being that school.

The hand-wringing, then, will continue from BYU to the Big East. Missouri's decision controls the fate of several teams and conferences, including their current one, the Big 12. The fractured league cannot move on with expansion, or even a future, without knowing if Missouri is going to be a participant.

And all indications are Missouri is going to take its good, old time. That was evident when Missouri AD Mike Alden met with the curators for four hours on Tuesday. Perhaps Missouri was contemplating the fact  it kicked off this latest round of realignment. Reacting to Dec. 9, 2009 statement that the Big Ten was considering expansion, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon quickly added:

"I want to look at what options the Big Ten may have to offer. This is not something that should be kept on the sports page and treated with the back of the hand. We have an obligation to make our schools as excellent as they can be."

Big 12 nervousness followed. In the next month, Nebraska began talking with the Big Ten. In June, issues came to a head at the 2010 Big 12 spring meetings. Shortly thereafter, Nebraska left for the Big Ten. Colorado went to the Pac-10.

"The [Missouri] governor's remarks got me going. We had to do something, and fast," CU AD Mike Bohn said at the time.

Turns out Missouri wasn't near the top of the Big Ten's list. Now things have come full circle. Everyone can blame Texas for throwing its weight around, but how is Missouri different at this point? It suddenly has leverage. It is holding a league hostage. It is making a perceived money grab.

It could be the fourth school to leave the Big 12 in 16 months -- and it doesn't care. Expect the next few weeks -- if not months -- to be a period of introspection for Brad Pitt's school. Missouri has to decide if it wants to leave its ancestral home. The Big 12 has roots that go back 104 years for Missouri.

It has to decide if it wants to change its culture from a Midwestern school to one with its base in the heart of Dixie. Does it want to be Bubba or Brad? Does it want to be at the center the Big 12 or a western outpost in the SEC?

There is no right answer. The difference in revenue is negligible. Missouri could stay in the Big 12 and be secure at least the next six years. But the SEC would provide long-lasting security. Missouri football is an above middle-of-the-road program in the Big 12. It would be a middle-of-the-road program in the SEC.

But this isn't about football. This is about emotion, which can be a dangerous thing. That's why Deaton merely has permission at this point. The last two presidents to get similar permission from their boards of regents, came to different conclusions. Texas A&M went to the SEC. Oklahoma, eventually, stayed in the Big 12.

For now. 


Category: NCAAF
Tags: Big 12, Missouri, SEC
 
Comments

Since: Feb 24, 2008
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:41 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

Big 12 needs to give Mizzou an ultimatum.  Either commit or be kicked out.  Go play in the WAC.  You may be able to compete there.



Since: Nov 11, 2008
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:30 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

Missouri is my school and I will always be a Tiger.  I'm not going to point fingers, because I don't have enough fingers to point out every school, athletic conference, or tv network that deserve blame in this mess.

I hated to see Nebraska and Colorado leave the Big 12.  I attended MU when we were still the Big 8.  We often lost to those 2 schools in football, but there were great games and great rivalries.  Missouri leaving the Big 12, in my opinion, would be a mistake.  But Texas has become the uncle who came to visit and would not leave.  Tier 3 revenue is the current issue, but the fact is that Texas will try every angle and every avenue to circumvent league rules in their own best interest regardless of the consequences to the conference or anyone else.  Just like the oil men of the 19th century, enough is never enough.  Some will say that any school would do the same if they had the chance, but I honestly believe that is not true.

Regardless, the Big 12 cannot survive, let alone thrive, until all members are on the same page and rowing in the same direction.  The commissioner needs to have enough authority to enforce the will of the majority. 

I would be in favor of adding 1 or 3 teams to get back to 10 or 12 teams in the conference depending on the wishes of the majority of schools, but I think there needs to be changes to the Tier 3 revenue and the LHN.  I would like to see ESPNDallas offer whatever UT programming that they were planning to run on LHN.  Then a Big 12 network should be formed with equal revenue sharing (tier 2).  Texas would get an equal share of an even bigger pie, losing out on a few million but keeping the conference viable and ending the drama which has made this conference look very bad.

JackMO Rob




Since: Sep 6, 2009
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:24 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

I'm confused...I thought all the Big 12- schools had some moment of solidarity last week?  Guess it didn't last.



Since: Nov 23, 2008
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:21 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

topdogg18sjo: Those are just my hopes.  And I could return that argument for Iowa/Iowa State right back to you. Why would Kentucky allow Louisville to be in SEC?  Case I'm making for ISU is they've been victimized and deserving of a better home.  And Michigan and Michigan Stat are doing fine.  So are Indiana and Purdue (well, as bottom dwellers).  Also, if you dig around you'll see that WVU brings no academics, no market, no recruiting ground.  And there is a reason ND is not joining B1G (dig around for that too).  And why not Penn St if ACC gets sexy enough?  But that would be very far in the future.

While I'm the subject, let me continue my hopes.  I hope that at the end of the day, Texas and OU (to lesser degree) goes begging to SEC to join and get whipped around all over Texas by Bama and LSU year in and year out.  I really think SEC is the only conference that can reign in Texas and Bevo knows it.



Since: Oct 1, 2006
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:17 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

The Big Easr would take them in a minute-but it won't happen.
It almost seems clear the SEC doesn't was them or the would have applied today and been accepted Weds. (like the Cuse and Pitt in the ACC).
I think Missouri may be stuck in the Big 12.  Plus it's tough to pickup new teams with so much up in the air.



Since: Sep 17, 2011
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:16 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

So Jcowpoke,
Your contradicting statements baffle me. You say Mizzou is not good at all, but we should stay in a conference where we have a chance? Why would a team that sucks so bad, in your eyes, have a chance regardless of thier conference affiliation?



Since: Aug 5, 2008
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:14 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

"too bright" ... hate when I have a misspelling when I am ridiculing someone for their idiotic post!



Since: Aug 5, 2008
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:13 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

For someone criticizing the SEC schools, you don't appear to bright:

When I think of the SEC, I think of southern schools. 

Really? Was it the "Southeastern" part of "SEC" that tipped you off?

Mizzou is hardly a southern school and their academics will have them near the top, if not the top, of the "duh" SEC conference. 

They would be 7th of 14, with 6 of the current 13 teams higher - Vandy (17), UF (58), TAMU (58), UGa (62), Alabama (75), Auburn (82) - Missouri (90). Duh!

I could see The Big Ten adding Mizzou though.

Except for the fact that they didn't when they could have last year.

Other than that, great post!



Since: Mar 17, 2008
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:06 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

You are correct about Missouri being a divided state.   But the strangest fact was that the southern part of the state was pro northern and the northern part of the state was pro southern.   I feel that Missouri would do well in basketball in SEC but would struggle in football.  But you never know..... I sure hate all this realignment.



Since: Jun 11, 2010
Posted on: October 4, 2011 11:01 pm
 

Missouri officially looking (unofficially at SEC)

Hey, the only thing for certain is that w/o Mizzou, CU, Huskers and aTm.....and by adding Louisvile, W. Virginia, Navy, AF, BYU, SMU, Houston etc. it doesn't matter what the number is (Big 8, 9, 10, 12, 16) it will become the "Bush League".


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com