I would be crushed if we wound up in the B1G instead of the SEC. The Corndogs can have their junior membership. SEC or bust.

Of course it is... some MU fans are practically demanding it, so I can see why your mind would spin every post from a KU or KSU fan into envy and jealousy.

If someone could just let me know what I'm supposed to be jealous about... :shrug:

I've watched the SEC for years and love SEC football, but there's no way in hell I'd want to watch KU football get slaughtered every week. If it gets to a point that KU is going to the MVC, then sure, I'd be jealous of every team that found a new/better home.... MU, Nebraska, Colorado, A&M. I'd hate to watch KU in the Big Ten, and they don't really fit geographically with anyone else, so hopefully the Big 12 survives, because I'd much rather watch tournament games in KC than Atlanta or wherever. So, outside of being completely left out of a competitive conference.... meh. :shrug:

As long as B12 is viable, it's by far my #1 choice.

Too bad I can only rep this once

Same. MU, A&M leaving doesn't change that. When Texas and OU announce they are leaving is when I begin to get envious/jealous/desperate.

I want no part of the SEC. We'd get killed.

But, but, but 12 million dollars more.


Ignoring the need to spend another 30 million just to be middle of the pack

SEC East:

Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
Kentucky
Vanderbilt
Tennessee

Missouri would be the 7th team, and we might be better than any team in that division right now.

I honestly don't give a shit about the money. More money just means that the university has to spend more keep up in the arms race that is college athletics. It has very little to do with the product on the field.

Not true.

More money = ostensibly better facilities = advantage in recruiting = better product on the field.

Which is why it's so nice to see donor funds having to be secured for all that crap. :grr:

I also think the money grab is being driven by the universities, and not so much by the athletic department. With the possibilities of lower amounts of research dollars, rising tuition costs and less attendance, they have to make up ground somehow.

Which makes sense. Could be difficult for a university to go hat in hand to state politicians crying about the need for more funding if they just turned down (in Mizzou's case) the potential for $12 million more per year.

State appropriations are decreasing and significantly so in some cases. However, tuition is always rising and economic downturns result in high enrollment.

Most large institutions are far less dependent on state appropriations, but the decrease greatly affects the state regional university.

Anyway, this is all a long way of saying that the increased revenue will basically be a boon only for the athletic department, since the likes of $12M isn't shit when it comes to the operating budget of a place like Mizzou.

Fed. grants, private donations, state appropriations, and tuition dollars are driving research funding.

LMAO

If I'm UT I take the same stance. aTeamInsecure wanted out. Why would UT indulge that request?

That's a really good point. When you think about it, what good has all that extra money done for SEC schools in terms of its product on the field? Other than 5 straight national championships, I mean.