I would take that bet!

Look, we know SEC is tops in football. It's the driving force behind this and with the possible super conferences forming, UT & OU are wanting to make the move.

To all of you MUron's, the SEC only took you at the time for 3 reasons, just coming off of several good football years, a few good BB seasons and most of all, you had a greater TV market in Missouri. The KC, STL, SPFLD, and Columbia/Jeff City far out numbered the. KC, TOPEKA & WICHITA
& Ks market. It was a numbers game with TV marketing.

How has your football & BB programs done W/L records since leaving the B12? Football I can understand, hard to win in the SEC. BB? Come on, the SEC has been a down conference for several years and you sucked in BB
It wasn't until the last 2 yrs you started to come around, I must say too, in a conference that has been less than stellar!

It's not your football or basketball programs ability to win that is attractive to the SEC, it's the TV market for viewership that is attractive to the SEC! If MU was in a less populated state like KS, Ne, SD,ND. etc. You would be left out, wouldn't have gotten an invite to the SEC.

Texas A&M may have the biggest hissy fit of all time, but nobody really believes they will leave the SEC if Texas joins. Where would they go?

(Typical MU fan) But, but, but. MU has to be in here somewhere in the top 10!

They are not leaving! Just winning about having to play UT and OU again in the players rich TX markets.

Cracks me up that people continue to treat the Big 12 like it’s the WCC. Really easy way to identify an amateur or a troll. Or, most likely, an amateur troll.

The only league that’s been clearly better than the Big 12 over the last decade or two is the ACC. And even the ACC’s been below the Big 12 the last few years.

KU pulled off that streak because they’ve been the most consistent program in basketball and because Self is a master. No other school was consistently good enough to have been able to pull that off. Not even Duke. They all have the occasional 8 seed or NIT team or even a losing record. A top 15ish 4 seed is as bad as it gets for Self. And that’s once a decade when he has devastating injuries.

Rep

And he goes to AFH for games !

You all have a very weird standard for who is and who isnt relevant

I don’t know why I would care about this from a Mizzou perspective as some do, other than it’s interesting to watch the Big 12 finally break apart in mid air.

I’m sure the b1g or someone will take Kansas. Although one wonders if they could dominate that conference in modern times they way they have the Big 12, they at least bring something valuable. Let’s face it, football drives everything and there aren’t any marquee schools looking for homes anymore. If you’re going to fill the conference out to an even number you may as well get a top school in the second tier sport.

I wonder if the Big 12’s wreckage will end up merging with another mid major conference when it’s all said and done.

Oh look! Another college athletics thread has turned into a Kansas/Missouri pissing contest.

*yawn*

We havent had 1 of these in a long long time. Embrace the nostalgia

You provided the screenshot of a MS Excel 2011 table. Burden of proof is on you.

I prefer to keep it simple. Relevance = winning.

Also, you’re like the Mitch Holthus of nicknames. Most are embarrassing for him. This one I’ve seen you use a few times with no reaction. I just sort of laugh…Mizzouche. Cuts deep, lol.

Where do you draw the line with that? Just winning titles or playoff appearances? If so theres only a handful of schools that match that criteria. Constantly winning 9 or 10 games? Then schools like Iowa and Wisconsin are relevant. I think theres alot more that goes into it than just winning.

Yep. And if it happened today vs a decade ago, they wouldn’t get invited.

The only advantage they have vs KU is being located in a larger market. Which is a very strange thing to flex about. Hey, we never win, but there’s a lot of people in St Louis!

It’s Texas-esque douchebaggery.