Maybe they paid for that spot too?

This is the conference realignment and shit talk thread. I don't think any Mizzou fans were looking for any back-handed congrats or compliments from KU fans on winning the SEC East. We know what our team did. We don't need you all to validate it, thanks.

The Big 12 DESERVES to be ripped. They are shit conference with terrible leadership that does everything bass ackwards. It's why so many teams have left the conference and many (see Baylor, TCU for recent example) are still not happy. If the Big 12 had strong leadership and a better system in place, you would have had a representative in the Playoff. Your conference probably should have. But they were hamstrung by the bullshit "One True Champion" non-sense and then failing to name one, despite your own commissioners comments to the contrary earlier this past summer.

As far as exposing MU, you all have fun with your Mizzou obsession and figuring out ways night and day to disprove their relevance in football. I realize it's what you live for. We'll just keep winning games in the SEC each year and keep on keeping on. Enjoy your football program. Your new coach seems like he'll be a tremendous asset. Good luck in coming years.

I rest my case.

But good luck next year. You're sure to bust in sooner or later.

Ahh, back to basketball again. Shocker.


Really? Only Kentucky??

I can think of more programs in the 2000's that have been more successful than Kansas: Kentucky, UConn, Florida, Duke, North Carolina . . . . shall I go on?

Why are we talking about basketball in a conference realignment thread? Football drives everything.

Or you could jest be wrong.

NCAA tournament wins in the 2000s

1. Kansas 37
2. Duke 34
3. Michigan State 33
North Carolina 33
5. Florida 29
6. Kentucky 27
7. Connecticut 26
8. Syracuse 23
9. Louisville 22
10. Arizona 21
UCLA 21

Syracuse
Pitt
Missouri
Colorado
Maryland
Rutgers
Nebraska
Texas A&M
West Virginia
Utah

The football elite...

No, there was no vote for KU. They were 27 in the RPI and no team under 38 I believe has ever not made it so there was no discussion on them like Kentucky 2012 (or Mizzou 1994) wasn't "voted" in either.


Now back to Bammy 2011: they (arguably) did take someone's rightful spot in a major controversy. Your better argument would be KU football 2007.

Oh, but wait, I've been told by many a KU fans, including some on this board that success for the elite, the Blue Bloods, if you will, is defined by winning it all?

So I'm confused now? Which is it??

Because I see UConn with 3 titles in the 2000's, North Carolina with 2, Duke with 2, Florida with 2 . . . . .

How many has Kansas won in the last 15 years?

Once again, I see the narrative changes depending on the conversation.

(Updating my notebook, accordingly)


Thanks for setting me straight. :thumb:

Now that the regular season has ended, let's hand out some awards.


Fewest ranked teams award goes to...The Big 12

Worst out of conference record award goes to...The Big 12

Fewest wins against ranked teams award goes to...The Big 12

Fewest teams in the playoff award goes to...The Big 12


I'd say a round of applause is in order for the Big 12 competing the grand slam of ineptitude. Congratulations, guys. You've earned it.

I'm not setting you straight. The wins are.

League with multiple teams ranked before any other league has a second.

The Big 12

I like this game.

Yes... all those schools have better football programs than those which had no suitors in realignment.

Ahhhh suitors.

Petro said yesterday he would bet the SEC comes after KU once the BIG or ACC go to 16.

Maybe KU should finally tell the B1G SEC that they're interested.

Keep reaching for that rainbow. One day, your team may too, reach that level of success that the "true" Blue Bloods have attained.

But, hey, your team IS #1 in Title Game losses in the 2000's. So you've got that going for you . . . . .