What message boards did you link to?

I missed those links. I don't remember anything on PowerMizzou, which is one of the biggest. It doesn't have archiving that would allow to look back that far.

I don't look at TigerBoard.

Rock M Nation is the other big Missouri message board, and it has nothing on the game.

http://tigerboard.com/boards/missour...ssage=10393583

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=2351

I sent 41 Action News an email earlier today. I think that's where I saw it, could be the other local news. It would be Tuesday January 8 2013 if anyone can help locate it.

Kind of doubt anyone is going to do your work for you...no one wants to waste their time.

How are those links for Saul coming? All of this Mizzou standing ovation distraction does not take away the fact that Saul called you out for posting lies, and you have failed up to this point to counter said accusation by providing proof.

I'm certain you don't want to dig it up. You've got a lot riding on it after accusing me of being a liar, despite the fact you don't even know either way. Ballsy, brah.

I did not accuse you...Saul did. I just agreed with his assessment.

I was at last year's Mizzou vs Bama basketball game. There was no standing ovation but the douchebag pa guy did make a comment about them winning a national championship.

There you go PB. An actual witness to your lies

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl...on-richardson/

SI's NFL Re-draft: Chiefs should have taken Big Shel.

Yes

Why aren't the witnesses I've cited on the internet acceptable? Are they lying about what they saw? Should we give credence to one anonymous internet account here on ChiefsPlanet over several others?

Woulda loved to have Keenan Allen. Sucks we missed out on such a talent. Reid/Dorsey have all these Chiefs fans on a hook and I find it hilarious.

Where is "Safe" No. 1 overall pick Eric Fisher ranked in said re-draft?

(I already read it and know he isn't listed).

Good to see our OT was still (barely) a first round talent. Richardson would have been fantastic.

Actually, they have him going to the Ravens.

Crap, I missed page 2.

So glad the Chiefs went with someone "safe" there, though!

The entire notion of one fan base giving another one a "standing o" for a championship is absurd. I've never heard of it happening anywhere, let alone Mizzou. If it were true it would be very embarrassing.

To your question the answer is no. Every person can & will make up their own mind but given the above I would need something probably beyond the shadow of doubt or at least reasonably close to that to believe it. We don't even have a preponderance of evidence.

It isn't so much a matter of saying you or anyone else is necessarily lying. First of all as you said, they're all anonymous internet sources. Credibility is a complete crap shoot. Second, what you have described could be unintentionally or intentionally exaggerated &/or open to interpretation. Or none of it could be & you & a couple others could be wrong about what you saw. Or you could all be exactly right in what you saw.

So in the absence of more concrete evidence no, I don't believe it.

Sure, there's an element of perspectives here. The main point is that there's plenty of smoke around the fire, and for Saul-MN et al to completely dismiss it without knowing either way is far more stupid than an unproved claim.

WTF are you talking about? I said the PA announcer acknowledged it. There was no ovation, and I don't give a shit either way...a year ago. I've been asking...as has MN...for you to quote the comments about the SEC having all this money while all the other conferences would be paupers. There were only 26 comments, so it shouldn't be hard to find...unless you lied...which you did.

The SEC and SEC Network were in great shape to land truck loads of cash up until the recent bowls when they got smacked down like bitches.

?

They had the best record?

The Sun Belt's sparkling 2-0 not w/ standing.

I thought they won a record number of bowl games finishing the BCS era as the only major conference with a winning record in bowl games. But what do I know? I watch the games, and according to Prison Bitch, that's a waste of time that could be better spent checking computer models that tell me what should have happened rather than what actually happened.

Those other bowls are nice but for the big money there are only 5 that matter. Fiesta, Orange, Rose, Sugar and BCS.

0-2 hurts when trying to launch a network for $1.30 a subscriber.

I didn't realize that only BCS bowls mattered. That 17-10 all time record for the SEC is going to be a much bigger deal than I realized.

The SEC has a winning record in BCS bowls against every major conference but one.

According to the ratings and payouts yes, they're the only bowls that matter.

It's akin to reaching a Final Four. People remember Final Four teams, no one remembers simply making the tournament.

That being said we all know that when it comes to TV deals and such it is important to strike while the iron's hot. Not shit the bed like the SEC did this year.

I still think the SEC Network is going to get off the ground but just imagine what could have been.

So people remember who lost in the Final Four, but they don't remember who lost in BCS games? Good point.

You must be really hurting for material although you shouldn't be.
If I were you I'd focus on the dumpster fire that is the CFH regime but that's just me.

People say stupid shit they're going to get called out on it.

It's come home to roost for Clay Travis and his idiotic followers.

He's nailed realignment more than any other writer.

Allow me to interrupt this love-in to ask an actual realignment question. Who do you think is going to be the 12th Sun Belt member (and probably the last school to join the FBS)?

Who are the first 11?

Really? I thought it was this guy...

Big East, ACC may team up for football

January 15, 1993 | Mark Blaudschun, Globe Staff
DALLAS -- The Big East and the Atlantic Coast Conference are conducting casual talks that could lead to the formation of a 17-team super football conference. Such an arrangement would give an ACC-Big East alliance a solid hold in television markets from Boston to Atlanta to Miami.

Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese would not comment on the matter other than to say, "The Big East has always been a proactive rather than a reactive league."

The move would give the Big East and the ACC a jump on what is expected to be another major quake in the conference structures in the next few years. Leagues such as the Big Ten and the Southeastern Conference are expected to expand once again.

The idea of a Big East-ACC alliance has been discussed for the past few years. The conferences have become compatible in many of their goals as Tranghese and ACC commissioner Gene Corrigan have worked closely the past two years on the bowl coalition which was formed this year and includes the Big East and ACC.

The Big East's desire to solidify its base is obvious. When Penn State moves to the Big Ten next season, it will create an Eastern recruiting window for the league. Many Big East people fear that Penn State will push hard to add another Eastern school to the Big Ten.

Although Rutgers has received some attention and has expressed interest in the Big Ten, the most attractive school would be Syracuse.

"If you want to drive a stake in the Big East's heart, taking Syracuse would do it," said one source familiar with the Big East's concerns. "It would give the Big Ten a huge advantage in the East and it would really hurt the Big East by taking away one of its best teams."

Syracuse officials have indicated a reluctance to go west, feeling their base of support is still in the East, but no one is saying never when expansion is mentioned.

Tranghese feels confident that Syracuse's inclination is to remain with the Big East, but he also wants to solidify his bargaining position with the Orangemen by offering them even more of a reason for staying.

Although Tranghese emphasized that there is nothing imminent, he did not deny that the Big East is exploring its options and talks are being held about a variety of possibilities.

An agreement with the ACC could include several scenarios. The easiest and likeliest initial arrangement would be an alliance, rather than a merger. Each league would play its separate schedule, with a few crossover games and the possibility of an interconference championship game, which would be permissible under NCAA rules because the alliance would be more than 12 teams.

Another possibility, which seems to make more sense if the concept of a super conference is followed, would be to merge the two into one football league of 14 teams. Take the nine schools in the ACC and add Syracuse, Miami, Boston College, West Virginia and Pitt from the Big East.

The new league would then be broken down into two seven-team divisions, and the first-place teams would meet for the league championship.

The problem with that, of course, is that it jettisons Virginia Tech, Temple and Rutgers, although Rutgers could already be in the Big Ten.

Tranghese has a unique problem because he is commissioner of a league that has two almost separate entities, basketball and football, with different concerns and goals.

Under the current arrangement, any talk of expansion in football must account for the impact on the basketball members. There has been talk about including Notre Dame as a basketball member, but that would only be palatable to the football-playing schools if the Irish also joined in football, something Notre Dame has said it does not want or need to do.

By creating a super football conference, the Big East could work on basketball as a separate league and there would be less of a problem admitting the Irish as simply a basketball entry.

No expansion plan could be implemented overnight, nor would it be universally accepted. But there is clearly a movement in that direction.

"I know there are talks being held," said Duke athletic director Tom Butters. "I'm personally against it, but I speak only for Tom Butters. I like the old-fashioned idea of conferences, where teams play each other in every sport. But then I voted against having Florida State join the league, not because I was against Florida State, but because I didn't like the idea of expansion."

Butters realizes changes are coming. Gender equity and equal funding for men's and women's sports, expansion, playoffs -- all are part of the new look of college athletics.

Tranghese and the Big East also see the future and know that changes of some kind are coming. The key question they must ask themselves is: Do they want to be trend-setters or followers?

By talking to the ACC about a merger, the Big East is making its choice obvious.

Idaho
New Mexico St
Texas St
Arkansas State
The UL's
Troy
South Alabama
The GSU's
App State

I think...

Obviously, after losing a bowl game this year, no one will be interested in Alabama football anymore. LMAO

So much irony.
One has little to do w/ the other on it's own.

If anything the holistic bowl season is being pointed to as evidence that the SEC is the strongest league once again.
I've read it in more than one place. Which means simply as far as this conversation goes that the narrative is out there.

Which again singularly has nothing to do w/ what success the SEC Network ultimately has.

Whatever the SEC Network $'s end up being the outcome of a couple bowls won't have any impact on it so again your angle puzzles me.

Clay Travis is an idiotic dbag. Of that much you are certainly correct.

So Syracuse moved to the Big 10, and the Big East created a super football conference? I must have missed that one. Credit him for predicting that the Big 10 wouldn't remain at 11 teams forever, though.

The South simply doesn't have to population base to command the numbers CT is thinking are going to come in. Nationally there is interest with the top programs (Alabama, Florida, LSU, Auburn, and possibly Georgia) but not coming through and being shown to be lower than the top Big 12 and ACC programs it's going to be unrealistic for the SEC Network.

The SEC has the largest population base. You should try saying something correct sometime.

LMAO Nobody remembers final four teams. Nobody really remembers BCS teams. The only ones that people will likely remember are the champions. kansas has that in basketball and you should be proud. Then again, I polled my office mates and nobody could recall who won the national championship in basketball last year. I'm guessing a few might remember if I actually told them. Of course, I can't remember who they played.

1 New York
2 Los Angeles
3 Chicago
4 Philadelphia
5 Dallas-Ft. Worth
6 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose
7 Boston
8 Atlanta
9 Washington, DC
10 Houston
11 Detroit
12 Phoenix
13 Tampa-St. Petersburg
14 Seattle-Tacoma
15 Minneapolis-St. Paul
16 Miami-Ft.Lauderdale
17 Cleveland-Akron
18 Denver
19 Orlando-Daytona Beach-Melbourne
20 Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto
21 St. Louis
22 Portland, OR
23 Pittsburgh
24 Charlotte, NC
25 Indianapolis
26 Baltimore
27 Raleigh-Durham
28 San Diego
29 Nashville
30 Hartford-New Haven
31 Kansas City
32 Columbus, OH
33 Salt Lake City
34 Cincinnati
35 Milwaukee
36 Greenville-Spartanburg-Asheville-Anderson
37 San Antonio
38 West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce
39 Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo-Battle Creek
40 Birmingham
41 Harrisburg-Lancaster-Lebanon-York
42 Las Vegas
43 Norfolk-Portsmouth-Newport News
44 Albuquerque-Santa Fe
45 Oklahoma City
46 Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem
47 Jacksonville, FL
48 Memphis
49 Austin
50 Louisville

The top big 12 team Baylor lost to UCF. The #3 big 12 team lost to Mizzou.

Again, IDK what the #'s will be. I'm not even really following it frankly. It's not relevant to me.

But I do know the outcome of a couple bowls in a given season isn't going to impact whatever the $'s end up being one way or the other. That notion is ridiculous. As I alluded said outcomes didn't even so much as sway many views as to which league is strongest in this given season let alone impact something w/ many more layers of factors.

lol, maybe you should work somewhere else. More people watched multiple CBB games last year before the 2nd CFB game.

But it's all your office right? lol


# Date League Event Net Rating Viewers

1 Mon., 1/7/13 CFB: BCS Champ. Alabama/Notre Dame ESPN
15.1
26.38M

2 Thu., 6/20/13 NBA: NBA Finals Spurs/Heat Game 7 ABC
15.3
26.32M

3 Mon., 4/8/13 CBB: Final Four Louisville/Michigan CBS
14.0
23.43M

4 Tue., 6/18/13 NBA: NBA Finals Spurs/Heat Game 6 ABC
12.3
20.64M

5 Wed., 10/30/13 MLB: World Series Cardinals/Red Sox Game 6 FOX
11.3
19.18M

6 Sat., 4/6/13 CBB: Final Four Michigan/Syracuse CBS
10.2
17.10M

7 Tue., 1/1/13 CFB: Rose Bowl Stanford/Wisconsin ESPN
9.4
17.02M

8 Sun., 2/24/13 NASCAR: Sprint Cup Daytona 500 FOX
9.9
16.65M

9 Sun., 6/16/13 NBA: NBA Finals Heat/Spurs Game 5 ABC
9.5
16.27M

10 Thu., 6/13/13 NBA: NBA Finals Heat/Spurs Game 4 ABC
10.0
16.23M

I don't doubt viewership and I imagine many will be able to name national champs (I could). I'm a sports fan, though, and I had to look up who Louisville beat in the title game. I have no clue who they beat in the final four.

I can never remember FF participants although I readily recall CFB NC game opp's. I usually will watch both.

What that says as far as I'm concerned is next to nothing. In hoops you have so many teams in the dance every yr I just think they all run together in retrospect. At least for me.

As do the bowls.

And how would you know? Were you there or not? If you weren't then your certainty about this is really strange.

What happens with this?

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...tigation-finds

Heck if I know...first I've heard of it. University letter to OTL reporter:

http://www.espn.go.com/pdf/2014/0124...ttertoESPN.pdf

I know they took a very hard line with Mike Dixon, will have to wait & see as more comes out about this.

Seems Mizzou has been pretty harsh on players in this type of scenario, so I doubt they did anything wrong, here. (Mike Dixon, D. Washington)
That said, if there's any wrongdoing, heads need to roll.

It's really hard to know.

What I do know...

It will make people sad and upset because this young woman's death is a tragedy.

It will make a lot of people sick to their stomachs because the events that are described are disgusting. No one should experience what this young woman experienced.

Beyond that?

I expect the Missouri AD to handle itself as poorly as possible in the press, because that's what it does.

I thought Moeller's letter to ESPN was appropriate and solid, but hate seeing the comments about not pursuing an investigation because that's what they thought Sasha wanted. Just a really dumb thing to say, and offensive, to be honest.

The real question comes down to a disagreement between what's in the dead woman's diary and what the advisor she said she told about the rape says about what happened.

Did she tell Meghan Anderson she was raped? Did she tell her it was a member of the football team?

Only Meghan Anderson knows the truth.

Good one.

More back & forth

http://www.mutigers.com/genrel/012414-otl-exchange.html

If MU dropped the ball it'll bear out. I'll be surprised if they did b/c of how they handled DWash & Dixon.

Either way I hope justice is served.

Didn't Dixon have to rape twice before Mizzou took this hard stance?

Wow, horrible story.

wow, KK saying that the story is all BS and another SEC school called it in on Mizzou.

wat

KK has no love for Mizzou at all, so maybe he is right?

Because Mizzou.......

KK loves ratings. And I have no idea why any of you oblige him.

First incident never saw any charges filed. Mike Anderson met with the victim personally and it's known he told her they couldn't do anything unless she filed charges.

Second incident, again, no charges filed, but it was enough for the student review board to vote Dixon out, a decision that was upheld by the chancellor.

It's not as black and white as it should be when no charges are actually filed.

Yes I admit. What him and Clinkscale are doing right now is downright insulting.

Typical frat boy blame the victim type shit.

http://theosophical.files.wordpress..../skeptical.jpg

If true: Overzealous Hog boosters? REC? Someone mad that "a bunch of Yankees are winning in our conference?"

Right. That was it.

Couldn't remember exactly.

It DOES look a bit to me like ESPN came into this with some preconceived notions about what Missouri should have done.

For example, there seems to be an assumption the medical professions at MU hospital should have informed MU administration about the incident when they heard about it. This would be a blatant violation of HIPPA and patient privacy. Title IX does not override doctor-patient confidentiality. Unless the patient specifically says he/she wants to involve police/etc, it must be kept confidential.

They ambushed Mizzou 25 hours ago with the names of the health professionals who knew beforehand and asked if they'd spoken to any of them yet. Yet it's presented in that article in a way that suggests they provided that LONG ago and got no response.

And as for Mizzou not investigating prima facia, I think the steps taken here - asking the parents what they want to have happen - are appropriate. Moller should not talk quite so much about how they are honoring her wishes by not investigating and instead focus on the legal restrictions that tied the hands of the medical pros and the lack of response from the family regarding whether they wanted an investigation.

Rape is terrible. It has affected people close to me. Missouri needs to take a long, hard look at what it is doing in terms of educating its male athletes about it. They have enacted a lot of reforms over the past 2-3 years, since Derrick Washington and since this then-unknown incident, but it would be best to review those and make sure they go far enough.

I'd recommend reading both letters from Chad Moller in response to ESPN.

First one is linked in the story, buried about 3/4 of the way down in a sidebar. Second one was posted to Twitter.

Shed some light on things and I think show that the investigative journalism going on here is not very balanced.

It's a complete joke they made the healthcare professionals' information available to Mizzou at noon yesterday and then wrote the story to insinuate they had provided that information and Missouri had done nothing with it, as if Mizzou was sitting on it/avoiding investigating it.

I wouldn't comment on something until I read it, and I doubt I will. But I sures he'll wouldn't get the info from KK.

Not exactly. He was never charged in either incident.

So they ran him off after being accused twice.

The second accusation lends credence to the first in spite of no charges being filed in either case.

It's a very depressing read.

But also an instructive look at what happens when you start an investigative journalism piece with a pre-conceived slant. Could be as much slanting going on here as in the SI/oSu piece.

If the parents push for an investigation into the incident (which they have the right to do but which I can't imagine leading to a conviction unless the tape Woodland references resurfaces - the tape he has been hanging on to for 4 years), this is going to get even more sickening and disgusting.

I have a close friend who was raped in college (and impregnated by her attacker). I tried to be there for her in the aftermath, which was the worst thing I've experienced emotionally other than the death of my grandfathers. It was terrible. At one point, she told me she wished he'd just killed her, because each day she lived though it again and again, and it was like he got to keep killing her again and again.

She's mostly OK now - a decade later, married and with children - but I know it still causes her intense pain and still comes back to her far too often.

One of the reasons I consider rape to be the worst possible thing you can do to another human being, and have zero sympathy for convicted rapists.

Good Call.

I suppose you can call yourself that. One with a terrible memory.

I don't read these stories because they are depressing and they are full of conjecture. I also avoid stories by Espn because they are sensationalizing schools/pro teams (in this case one I hate) which is patently unfair to the accused.


In this instance, without knowing anything about the actual article, they're already creating an unfair attack on Mizzou at large. Which is bullshit.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10...opular-mlb-2nd

I think these numbers are about the same as before.

We didn't even have to wait a day to get our trash SEC tweet of the week

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Is it just me or are some of the Grammy performances so far seem to be really demonic?? Looks like there is a lot of evil in the world..</p>&mdash; AJ McCarron (@10AJMcCarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/10AJMcCarron/statuses/427616830774321152">January 27, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

why do the beakers keep getting put on ESPN-U?

they are playing another game on a non standard channel. I see Ole Miss vs Tenn on TV but I would expect the local channels to carry the beakers

ESPN makes crazy decisions. I questioned why they put KU Football in such prime tv slots this fall.

both teams are ranked I think and they put it on a shit network

kinda BS

KU fans booing the refs....I thought only ISU fans did that.

Good try.