BleacherCoaches.com

12.17.2009 1:38 pm
Would move to Big Ten be good for Mizzou?
By Roger Hensley
Email this Share this Print this Digg Yahoo! Del.icio.us Facebook Reddit Drudge Google Fark Stumble It!
THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Do you think moving to the Big Ten would be a good thing or a bad thing for Mizzou?

BERNIE MIKLASZ
It would be a great move for Mizzou for at least — and I’m sure many more — five reasons:

1. The Big Ten is more of a fit academically.

2. The Big Ten is a better fit geographically.

3. The Big 12 is a southwest-based conference; the Texas-Oklahoma Conference if you will. It’s laughable. Unless Mizzou plans to actually move the campus to, say, suburban Dallas — MU will continue to be a second-class citizen in this league.

4. Additional exposure through the growing Big Ten Network.

5. Mizzou, at least short term, would benefit from the buzz of being part of a “new” Big Ten.

VAHE GREGORIAN
First of all, it merits noting that the Big Ten’s decision to study whether to expand and the recent Internet screeching by some MU followers are absolutely coincidental occurrences. Not that Mizzou isn’t of potential interest to the Big Ten, or vice versa.

That being said, I don’t see the Big Ten zooming in on Mizzou since it already believes (albeit incorrectly) that it has the St. Louis TV market with Illinois, and presumably would look to add a new market (Rutgers/NYC area) and truly covets only Notre Dame. Maybe it would look MU’s way if other options just weren’t there and it determined it just has to have a 12th team for a playoff.

But other than some more coin for TV revenue and the supposed greater academic prestige of the Big Ten, I also don’t see why the Big Ten is a more appealing scene for MU.

Year in and year out, the Big 12 is one of the two best football conferences in the nation (along with the SEC, of couse), and top to bottom its men’s basketball appears better now, too — especially with Kansas and Texas 1-2 in the polls. Moreover, at long last, MU has begun hitting its competitive stride in the conference, among other feats last school year: winning the soccer championship, a second straight Big 12 North football crown, sending softball to the College World Series and men’s basketball to the elite eight.

Yes, it’s a shame about the way the bowl pecking order has worked out the last few years, and the conference could do more to bring that in line. But that’s more a function of the warped bowl system than the Big 12, and anyone who thinks otherwise should study the Big Ten more closely and will realize that its bowl assignment standards also have wiggle room and would offer no panacea. In fact, with the same record this season placed in the Big Ten, MU could well have been passed over by the same bowl (the Insight) and relegated to the Little Caesars Bowl.

Moreover, from what I can tell MU overall actually has benefited from the slights.

Yes, going to a BCS bowl over Kansas two years ago would have meant more visibility and prestige, but plowing Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl did plenty for MU’s perception in the heart of its recruting base in Texas.

Last year, which started with national title talk, it meant playing in the Alamo Bowl in San Antonio … and needing overtime to beat Northwestern of the Big Ten. This year, the insult means that MU is playing 9-4 Navy on ESPN in Houston instead of 6-6 Minnesota (yawn) in Phoenix on a limited network.

Besides, if there is an underlying resentment of Texas and Oklahoma supposedly controlling conference decisions and policy, does MU really expect to suddenly have more clout as a newcomer among Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State?

For sure, there could be some initial excitement in the novelty of new rivalries in the Big Ten. But in the long run, staying put wouldn’t be just standing pat. It would be the right thing to do.

JEFF GORDON
Some Mizzou fans have been clamoring for this change for years. But why? The Big 12 is a power conference in football and basketball. Baseball, women’s basketball, softball . . . this is a solid conference. Missouri’s rivalry with Kansas is one of the nation’s best. Some Tigers fans whine about the Big 12 being run by the former Southwest Conference, but what’s the big deal about that?

TOM TIMMERMANN
Missouri would seem a good fit for the Big Ten. It geographically fits and it probably has more in common with Big Ten schools than it does with schools like Texas Tech or Texas A&M.

But the move would have an effect on the MU-KU rivalry. You wouldn’t be able to play the football game the last week of the season anymore, and the basketball teams would almost certainly have to scale back to one meeting a season rather than two. That’s livable in football, perhaps not so much in basketball. In any case, it would change the rivalry dynamic: Mizzou-KU will always be rivals; they didn’t fight a war for nothing. But Mizzou’s games with Illinois would take on greater importance. It would also kill off the Braggin’ Rights game at Scottrade Center.

It would likely be good for the so-called Olympic sports. Mizzou baseball doesn’t have a chance against Texas schools. All of a sudden, as the southern-most school in the league, outdoor sports start looking a lot better in Colubmbia. So I think Mizzou moving to the Big Ten would be a good thing for the school. Still, I think Mizzou should stay put. Tradition counts for something, even if Mizzou’s tradition is the Big 8 and not the Big 12. The Big 12 schools are closer to Mizzou than the Big Ten’s would be. Mizzou needs to be in a league with Kansas. The two are joined at the hip.

KATHLEEN NELSON
I think the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. I realize some people will consider this comparing apples and oranges, but Missouri’s record of 8-4 overall and 4-4 in the conference would have ranked the Tigers behind Northwestern and ahead of Michigan State in the Big Ten. The Spartans are bound for the Alamo Bowl, which is where Missouri found itself last year. So, how would they would be better off? They’d be on the western fringe of the conference, as opposed to the eastern fringle. The move seems a wash.

KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX)
There are only two ways the move would absolutely be a good one. One, Mizzou would need to agree to continue playing Kansas every single year in a non-conference matchup. Two, the money had better be insane.

You could argue the competitiveness working in either direction because you have traditional powers in the Big 12 (Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska) and the Big Ten (Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan) so that part would probably end up being neutral over the long haul. The potential for regional rivals in the Big 10 (Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Northwestern) is similar to what you have already in the Big 12 (Nebraska, Iowa State, K-State, Kansas) so there’s no advantage there and that’s probably even a disadvantage since you’ve already got something established against the Big 12 North schools.

In the end it wouldn’t make much sense for Mizzou to move to the Big Ten unless it was a financial windfall for the school. The move would be much more beneficial for the other schools being mentioned (Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Rutgers).

12.18.2009 3:51 pm
Governor Nixon says MU should consider the Big Ten
By Reid Laymance
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Email this Share this Print this Digg Yahoo! Del.icio.us Facebook Reddit Drudge Google Fark Stumble It!
Speaking to the Associated Press today, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon said the University of Missouri should consider leaving the Big 12 and joining the Big Ten Conference if it gets an offer to do so, Gov. Jay Nixon said Friday.

[b]“I’m not going to say anything bad about the Big 12, but when you compare Oklahoma State to Northwestern, when you compare Texas Tech to Wisconsin, I mean, you begin looking at educational possibilities that are worth looking at,”[/b] Nixon said in an interview with The Associated Press.

“If a significant conference with a long history of academic and athletic excellence talks about you joining them, you shouldn’t just say, ‘We’re from the old Big 8 and I remember when …

“If they want to talk, we should talk, and we should listen,” Nixon added.

Missouri Compromise II?


By David Vranicar
[email protected]
Posted Dec 18, 2009



| More

With the Big Ten officially announcing it is considering expanding to 12 teams, there are rumblings that Northwestern could have itself a new interstate rival in Missouri. Purple Reign looks at the specter of the Tigers joining the Big Ten, and why – from the Tigers’ "frustration" with the Big 12 to the resurgence of their teams – MU and the Big Ten is a seemingly logical marriage.

There is a mix of speculation and acknowledged fact regarding the expansion of the Big Ten. That much – the part about the Big Ten possibly expanding – falls in the something-we-know category.
On Tuesday, the conference released a statement saying that, yes, the Big Ten – already sitting at 11 teams – is considering adding twelfth team.

“The COP/C [Council of Presidents and Chancellors] believes that the timing is right for the conference to once again conduct a thorough evaluation of options for conference structure and expansion,” the statement reads.
“Only after these notices have occurred will the Big Ten engage in formal expansion discussions with other institutions. This process will allow the Big Ten to evaluate options, while respecting peer conferences and their member institutions.”

In addition to that official release, some Big Ten heavyweights are supporting expansion. Penn State’s Joe Paterno was outspoken last May about adding a 12th team – Penn State, of course, was the latest addition to the conference – and Wisconsin athletic director and former football coach Barry Alvarez told the university board that he thinks the conference is serious about adding another team. Also…
There was also Michigan State athletic director Mark Hollis, who said, “With the changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics, now is a good time for the Big Ten to review its current structure and evaluate the potential for expansion.”

And Ohio State president E. Gordon Gee, who told The Columbus Dispatch, “We have to be thoroughly modern and realize the world has moved on, and having a playoff for the Big Ten championship makes sense. I’m not planting a stake in the ground on that issue, but it’s something we now need to tackle.”
So, that much we know. There is an evaluation being conducted, and there is considerable (if not overwhelming) approval for the idea of expansion. It would, after all, allow for two evenly divided divisions – much like the SEC East and West, Big 12 North and South, ACC Atlantic and Coastal, etc. – and it would let the conference have a conference title game in football, something that, per NCAA rules, you need 12 teams to do.

But who that 12th team could be? Well, that’s anyone’s guess. A bevy of names have been mentioned. Out east, schools like Syracuse and Boston College and Rutgers have been floated. A little further south, people have uttered Louisville’s name. And toward the geographical center of the Big Ten, Cincinnati is on the list what ifs as well.
But it’s a school in the Midwest, Missouri, a potential new next door neighbor for Northwestern, that has possibly received most attention (outside of Notre Dame, which already turned down the Big Ten once and has preemptively taken itself out of the conversation.)

There are a few reasons why Missouri would be an attractive candidate for the Big Ten – and vice versa. First off, it makes sense geographically. Missouri borders* Iowa and Illinois, and the addition would place the St. Louis TV market firmly inside Big Ten country. It would also make Kansas City – where a slew of Missouri grads reside – more of a player on the TV front as well. And if you listen to people wax on about Big Ten expansion, TV and the Big Ten Network invariably come up, so it’s ill-advised to downplay the importance of TV in this expansion equation.
* Fun fact: Missouri borders more states than any other state in the nation, eight. And while we’re talking about geographical fun facts, can you name the four states in the nation whose capitals start with the same letter as the state? Answer below…

Now, the St. Louis and Kansas City TV markets are nothing compared to New York, which could be in play if Syracuse or Rutgers were included. But then again, New York isn’t much of a college town. Not with a pair of pro baseball teams, a pair of NFL teams, an NBA team and an NHL team. So St. Louis and Kansas City may be small peanuts in terms of numbers, but not interest in college sports.
And there are reasons that Missouri may want to bolt the Big 12. On an intangible level, there is something about the Big Ten that just sounds good. It’s old, it’s established, it’s not going anywhere. The Big 12, on the other hand, is little more than a decade old. It’s a hodgepodge of the old Southwest Conference and old Big 8 conference. Indeed, the most recent addition to the Big Ten, Penn State in 1990, is more tenured that the Big 12 Conference.

There are also tangible reasons MU would leave the Big 12. The Tigers’ football team has gotten the really short end of some recent bowl selections, and that is a direct result of the Big 12’s laissez-faire policy toward bowl bids. Most conferences have stringent guidelines about which teams bowls can select. For instance, if one team obviously had a better season than another, a bowl would not be allowed to take the lesser one based solely on the specter of increased ticket sales.

But this has happened to Missouri a few times, costing the schools oodles of exposure, prestige and money.
Two seasons ago, Missouri won the Big 12 North with an 11-1 regular-season record. The Tigers were No. 1 in the nation heading into the conference title games. Yet Kansas – also 11-1, but with a loss in a head-to-head matchup with Missouri – was selected for the Orange Bowl while MU, which lost to Oklahoma in the Big 12 championship, went to the Cotton Bowl. And this season, despite an 8-4 record and a win over Iowa State, the Tigers are headed to the (relatively) lowly Texas Bowl to play Navy. Iowa State, meanwhile, which had a 6-6 record and a loss to MU, is heading for the more prestigious – or at least better-paying – Insight Bowl. Missouri will lose about $500,000 by going to the Texas Bowl instead of the Insight. (Both Missouri coach Gary Pinkel and Missouri AD Mike Alden called the Big 12 bowl-selection process “frustrating.”)

So in 2007 Missouri missed out on its first-ever BCS bowl to a team it beat, and this year 6-6 Iowa State nabbed the Tigers’ spot – and $500K – in the Insight Bowl. Who knows how much of an impact the Big 12’s inability/unwillingness to intervene will have on the Missouri’s decision should the Big Ten come calling. But it seems like it could be in the back of Tigers’ minds.
According to the AP, Missouri spokeswoman Mary Jo Banken said that MU hasn’t been contacted by the Big Ten, adding, by email, “Should there be an official inquiry or invitation, we would evaluate it based on what is in the best interest of MU, athletically and academically.”

And just as the Big Ten could be an attractive suitor for Missouri, Missouri isn’t so bad itself. They have won two of the last three Big 12 North football titles – accumulating 29 wins over that span – and the hoops team just went to the Elite Eight last season.
Now, because we’re so early in this 12th-team debate, everyone’s still a candidate. But it just doesn’t make much sense for some of the schools that have been mentioned to join. Syracuse, for instance, is a basketball-first school in the nation’s elite basketball conference; same goes for Louisville. Plus the Orange are so far east that it doesn’t make as much geographical sense as it does for Heartland-based Missouri. And despite its recent football success, Cincinnati doesn’t have the cachet as some other schools; neither does Rutgers.

There is a ton of time to go before any invitations are extended, and even longer until a school would jettison its conference. But with the Big Ten being The Big Ten, and with Missouri’s recent two-sport success, don’t be shocked if, one day, this speculation turns into more than that, giving Northwestern another rival close to home.
Oh, those four states are Hawaii, Indiana, Delaware and Oklahoma.

The Ancient Enemy wrote:Kirk,

You are a smart guy. Why so much tunnel-vision with this? This is not just a football decision!

And don't the other women's basketball teams want to measure themselves against those nappy-headed ho's at Rutgers?????? :mrgreen:

In all seriousness, I am very excited for Rutgers (or anyone else) because of the domino effect. BE will have to add someone. That will cause C-USA to add someone, etc. Should be very interesting.

I've been waiting for this to finally happen for a long time.