I think it's been proven that no matter what conference you play in there's plenty of money for everyone.

Mizzou has moved to the SEC and it's been interesting to watch how you guys need to adjust to what is admittedly a much more college sports centric part of the country. The work is just beginning for your school and out of the gate who can argue with what Pinkel has been able to do with the football program.

As we start another year the cycle begins again. Good luck

I think it means that, if true, all sec schools will get that same payout. Given Mizzou is near the bottom of that league in revenue they're still at a major competitive disadvantage, esp vs the big dollar schools. If money matters as you claim, then you've got a huge uphill climb in league.

Not being ranked dead last in recruiting could be a good place to start.

Where's that Big 12 Network?

I'd say it worked out okay this past season.

More money means better facilities and better exposure. They're not only competing with the other SEC schools, they're also competing with other power conference teams and leagues that recruit in the areas they do. Being in the SEC helps Mizzou in a way that the Big 12 did not.

Besides over the last seven years or so, Mizzou has proven to be competitive while being at a financial disadvantage (ie not having a large revenue stream) against many of the schools in both the Big 12 and the SEC. I just think it will be interesting to see what they can accomplish with said revenue stream, irrespective of the other SEC schools.

If ever there was a chance to shine and take the FB program to the next level, this is it.

Recruiting rankings aren't the be all, end all. (See 2013 Florida Gators, for example). Good coaching can make up for a lot of that and Mizzou has a very good coaching staff. They know how to coach guys up and make them competitive with the big boys.

I'm pretty sure the last 5 years Mizzou was in the Big 12, they were in the bottom half of the recruiting rankings every year and they seemed to do okay.

Everyone takes home their own 3rd tier. It's all kinds of cash.

Tennessee has more money than God and they don't win shit.

I'm not saying steady cash flow from the SEC is going to hurt Mizzou but I think what PB's point was that all the teams in your conference get the same thing. You're going up against psychopaths that will do anything to win in football. Money isn't what makes Champions.

Tennessee's coaching staff is shit, so that nullifies they're recruiting advantage.

Secondly, I don't think anyone is arguing that money equals championships. If it did, Texas would be dominating every year instead of getting their ass handed to them at home by bottom tier SEC teams.

I'll agree with you on Texas.

But if you're going to take your little shot at the end I'll remind you that the Big 12's flagship made the SEC's flagship their bitch in 2014.

Saying bottom teams beating Texas is fine. Those teams being SEC doesn't have anything to do with where UT is as a program.

I thought Texas was your 'flagship'?? Now it's Oklahoma? Does it change year to year based on who is doing the best??

I was merely using Mississippi as an example. If you prefer, I can cite K-State making Texas their bitch on an almost yearly basis?

I'm excited to see what he can do. Iowa State is pretty loaded at the skill positions. Let's see if he can get some production out of the QB and OL.

Huh? Why would Texas be the flagship? You never heard me say that.

Oklahoma rules in FB, KU in basketball, OSU in golf/wrestling, maybe Texas is our baseball?

UT hardly reps the Big 12 in football nowadays. Obviously they can return to that position perhaps one day but when Oklahoma is pounding the team that won 3 out of the 4 last NC's into submission I think it's pretty safe to say who's #1 in the Big 12.

Texas is the #1 money maker in all of college football. Isn't that a rather BIG part of the entire discussion that's been had in this thread?

And they're the last Big 12 team to rep your conference with a National Title in college FB, the engine that drives the machine that we speak of. If that doesn't make them the flagship school for the Big 12, then I guess we have differing definitions of 'flagship'.

I know the OK win over Bama was a big feather in your conference's cap, but methinks we might be losing sight of the big picture here.

There's a reason ESPN financially backed The Longhorn Network as opposed to the Sooner Network, the Jayhawk network, the Cowboy network, etc. etc.

I guess my point was its all vis a vis other league teams. I would strongly challenge your assertion it "worked out well" so far when you judge Mizzou against the top half of league teams either now or in the Big 12. Drinkel has done a good job winning against peer programs but he has to prove it vs elites. Just my .02

2 years in the SEC and already an appearance in the SEC Title Game and Cotton Bowl victory over a top tier Big 12 FB school. Mizzou shouldn't have to apologize for anything they did last year, irregardless of what you or anyone else thinks.

And in Mizzou's last 2 years in the Big 12, 'Drinkel' managed to knock off Texas and Oklahoma. Would you consider them 'elites'?

I'm interested to see what Strong does at Texas. He seemed to do well and get good production out of his players while having that positive team atmoshoere. Mack always under achieved with one of the most talented rosters in the nation.

Missouri doesn't have the same resources as other SEC teams in terms of in-state talent production (Georgia, Florida, Texas A&M and Alabama/Auburn will always have an advantage there, and LSU will in most years) and it doesn't run the AD budget quite as high as most SEC schools.

And yes, all schools are going to get equal payouts that are ridiculous.

But it's about competing with their peer institutions in the SEC and other local leagues. Dwarfing local Big 12 schools and tying or exceeding local Big 10 schools allows Missouri to step up above KU, KSU, ISU, IU, U of I and to be in the same competition area as Oklahoma State and Nebraska (narrowing the money disparity with those teams is a big deal).

Missouri's long-term strategy has to involve getting more top tier talent from surrounding midwest states - Kansas, Iowa and Illinois are part of that, as - it appears - is Indiana. It has to sell playing in the SEC while staying in the Midwest, getting a little bit better education (than if you went to Arkansas or Tennessee), and still being close to home for family.

Missouri needs to become THE school in some key areas (East St. Louis, which seems to already be happening with this recruiting class, and Suburban Kansas side of KC, which is showing some positive trends, come to mind. They're also making stronger efforts in Indianapolis and the surrounding regions than when in the Big 12).

Missouri football will always need a coach who can succeed in player identification and development, like Pinkel has. Bringing in a stronger recruiting coach when Pinkel eventually retires could reduce how much the program depends on player ID and development, but it will always be an important component (and is important even if you're at Texas, as the past few years under Mack Brown has proven).

Anyway, ultimate point is that it looks like the SEC Network is going to be wildly successful financially (and honestly, considering how generally excellent Slive is at his job and how rarely he has made a misstep, that was to be expected) and increase exposure of school and league while making piles of cash for everyone.

If the Big 12 was smart, it would be working to turn the Longhorn Network into a legitimate Big 12 network. Teams that make a lot from their Tier 3 payouts would likely make more, and it would strengthen the brand of the league a lot.

Is Jake Campos going to play this year? Still think he's a very high end OT prospect and wish Missouri could have held on to him. He and Rhodes would make for very nice bookends, IMO.

:LOL: ....you have to excuse me here LMAO

I excuse you constantly, just like I do all mentally challenged people.

In talking about TV payouts, Missouri and other SEC schools are nearing that range. You can project the CURRENT setup of the SEC network (28 million in footprint, 47 million out of footprint) to bring in $611 million in gross revenue. Even if you assume the network's operating costs exceed ad revenue by $100 million AND a 50/50 split between ESPN and the league (which is the model used for B1G) , you're talking about a payout to the league of $256 million. Or about $18 million/school.

And all signs indicate TWC and DirecTV will be on board at launch as well, which adds another 40 million subscribers. Not sure what those numbers will break down as in the footprint, but I know TWC is huge in the Southeast. Let's assume 1/4 of those are in-footprint (which is lower than the current percentage in-footprint). Now you're up to $809 million in gross revenue off subs. Apply the same formula ($100 million in operating costs, 50/50 split) and you're talking about a payout to the league of $355 million. Or $25 million/school.

The money potential here is huge. But keep F***ING DOUBTING the SEC Network and Mike Slive. It's worked out pretty well for you so far...

25$ per school. That's great. But it doesn't "dwarf" what the other local schools bring in. Not even close. Especially Kansas.

Just stop.

The Big 12 paid out, what, $22 million last year? I know it's posted somewhere down the thread but don't have that at the top of my head (I remember it being like $2 million more than the SEC payout, and those schools got something like $20.5 million).

Even the biggest Tier 3 rights for those local schools in the Big 12 are producing what, $8-10 million/year (Kansas?) So they're looking at $30-32 million a year at the top end. That's about in line with what the B1G has received recently (actually a little more than full members like Iowa are receiving... which Nebraska is not until 2017).

That's what I'm referencing when I'm talking about "Dwarfing." SEC schools are looking at a potential payout of around $45 million/year at the top end in year 1. Or about 150 percent of what the other local schools yanked in.

If I made $50,000 a year and you made $75,000, would not consider that salary to DWARF the first one?

If my numbers are off for the Big 12, let me know.

He's second string currently. They were talking about him looking real good in the spring and potentially starting... But I don't think he will yet.

Shoot, should have stuck with Missouri. SEC money and weight training would have him ready to start right away (LOL).

Can't fault a local kid who grew up an Iowa State fan for staying home, honestly. Good for the kid and hope he's successful.

I love how Year 1 didn't happen. Already erased from the memory banks.


And yet, you guys all demanded KU "apologize" for (at minimum you discounted) 2007 where we missed the Big 3 schools in the division rotation just like you did last year. Funny how that works when the shoe is on the other foot.



Gary Pinkel went 1-7 vs OU and 1-5 vs Texas.

It happened. This year will be a nice indicator if it was an aberration, as many Mizzou fans think (based on the number of injuries).



Please point out to me the team Missouri lost to that it receive the Cotton Bowl bid OVER. Also please point out to me the conference championship game KU played in, where it faced one of those schools from the other division. [/quote]




Gary Pinkel went 1-7 vs OU and 1-5 vs Texas.[/QUOTE]

He sure did. Weird quirks of luck with the way the schedule against those teams always seemed to work out.

By the time Pinkel rebuilt the program (really about 2006, his second full recruiting cycle), he seemed to always play the one of the two that was up (05, Texas won the national title, 06 and 07 - Oklahoma was the better team and won the conference both years; 08 and 09 Texas was better).

Of course, he beat Oklahoma in 2010 when they were ranked No. 1 in the BCS and Texas in 2011.

Duncan ill agree Pinkel has a good program right now and he offers recruits stability, but I don't think anyone would honestly say they're any better than Kansas State the past decade. Or even the past 5 years really. KSU was also 11-1 recently. If I were a KSU fan I'd seriously be wondering where the sense of superiority exhibited by Mizzou towards them comes from. And they've done it without any $

I don't think DI's claiming superiority over KSU. Its my opinion that most of his posts are referring to KU. Of course, I've been wrong before.

But that last game was quite a statement by Snydz.

"Roll Snyd" as they say. ;)

Missouri dwarfs KU, KSU, ISU, Iowa. Couple other schools in there too.

IMO, he'll prove to be a great pickup for you guys.

I'm not referring to DI necessarily in that group of Mizzou mouth-breathers. I'm guessing you sense the superiority they feel towards KSU. Go browse their forums under "Kansas State" if you haven't noticed their opinions of y'all.

I wasn't talking about on-field performance. Was talking about money in the program. KSU has had a nice resurgence in Round 2 of Bill Snyder, though he has benefited a bit from Texas and Oklahoma falling off from where they were even 5 years ago.

Over the last decade, Kansas State is 68-54 (.557). Missouri is 85-45 (.654). That's a pretty sizeable gap, though Kansas State does have a conference title in there, Missouri has had 3 teams that could have won the same title if plopped into the Big 12 in 2012 (2007, 2010 and 2013).

Cut it to 5 years, and it gets pretty even. 42-21 for KSU and 43-22 for Missouri.

It's going to be interesting to see who does a better job replacing their coach. Both are going to retire in the next 5 years, in all likelihood. KSU failed disastrously in its attempt to replace Snyder and has been one of the worst major programs in America without him. Missouri has a mixed bag pre-Pinkel. There are a few very successful coaches, a few moderately successful, and a handful of disastrously ineffective coaches (Windehofer, Stull).

Both schools should be in better shape to hire the next coach, though, due to facility improvements, improved brand perception and more cash.

Over the past decade, Missouri has been more successful. Over the past 5 years, they've been very similar programs. That's what I would say when comparing Mizzou and Kansas State.

Which last game are you referring to? Just curious. You mean the 2011 game?

Notes from big 12 media days.

http://www.foxsports.com/southwest/s...-survey-072214

Sagarin preseason rankings came out today:

1) Bama
2) Oregon
3) Fl St
4) Stanford
5) Okie St
6) ou
7) LSU
8) S Carolina
9) Wisconsin
10) Ohio St
11) Texas A&M
12) Southern Cal
13) Mizzou
14) Ariz St
15) Baylor
16) Georgia
17) Clemson
18) K State
19) Mich State
20) ND
106) Chunky Cholly

SEC with 6 in top 20, 3 in top 10.
big 12 with 4, incl. 2 in top 10.
Pac 12 ..3 in top 20, 2 in top 10.
Big 10, 3 in top 20, 2 in top 10.

Sagarin heavily weights based on prior season until he gets more datapoints from 2014 to incorporate, usually by October something legit starts to form.

The Stoops smack-down of the SEC continues…

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...olation-remark

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/col...%20Stacked.png

4 in the top 20 with 2 in the top 10.

10 teams, 9 conference games, 1 True Champion.

love it

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BtQ2SVvCYAE5w5e.jpg
Looks like my school is 2nd in the state now.

Nice. George O'Leary really has done quite a job down there.

But look out for Miami. Now that they got Jake Heaps comin in to run the show! ;)

that was a consolation game though ROFL

I can appreciate some good smack talk. Saban with a clever line after he got curbstomped by a superior program. I probably would have said something similar.

after losing to auburn the way they did and getting bumped out of a shot at the national championship you can't seriously believe they actually got up to play a consolation game vs a big 12 opponent

seriously ROFL

Of course they did. Stoops talked shit on the overrated SEC at the beginning of the year. He then backed it up.

Do you even follow this stuff or just talk out of your ass?

One True Champion

It's like KU acting like the conference tourney is no big deal every year they don't win it. The years they win it, watch out it's crazy important.

pathetic

Stoops is a scumbag who is busy picking up Mizzou rejects. Nobody gives a **** about them. LMAO

This is a great post. It needs to be preserved for a long….long time.

KU fans get butt hurt easily.

so true.

www.Foxsports.com

Oooooooh this is rich coming from a Clone. Or should I say, "Booooooo this is rich"

Interesting read about the SECN & Miss St:

hailstatebeat.wordpress.com

All this SEC money and still getting bitched slapped by Oklahoma.

Keep it comin Clay, it's hilarious

KQuiefs1, Will you please quit spamming the board with your boring full articles nobody reads? It's called "a link". Not one person is going to read Clay Travis or even five words about a shit school like Miss State



You're 10x worse than DeBerg.

Saban is seriously the most butthurt, sore-loser bitch in college football. He never loses a game, his team just didn't try hard enough and there needs to be several rule changes to rectify the situation. :rolleyes:

He's just lucky he's coaching at a "brand-name" program so he can cheat to his heart's content instead of getting exposed like he did at Michigan State.

If I was Clay Travis I'd be worth $1 billion dollars.

It's kinda hilarious that the SEC hasn't realized that the only people who care about CFB are people who live in the "SEC".

Here you are, again, spouting off nonsense and lies. If that statement were true, why does the B1G network of Pac 12 network exist? Sure, the highest ratings are in the southeast portion of the map...it's also where 7 of the past 8 champions and the majority of the top 25 comes from. Makes sense to me.

On another note, I personally think Saban is an arrogant douche. The guy does come off as having a "god-complex" and I'm not a real fan. That being said, Stoops is obviously irked by the love the SEC gets. And yes, he beat Alabama last year. He also got his dick kicked in by 30 to A&M the year before, and the other 2 games the past 10 years against an SEC opponent were losses as well. Not exactly a record to brag about...

Don't forget the fans in Big 12 country either. They don't care about CFB at all. That's why they spend so much time in this thread arguing the same points over and over and over again . . . . . . . you know, cause they don't care . . . . .

So getting back to Pinkel (since the Moo fans never answered the question).....what is up with him from a mental standpoint constantly mentioning KU? Now it's gone weird: "they're being babies".


Either Pinkel needs therapy moving on, or he's just doing this for his fan base. Who would need help moving on. Which is it? Has to be one.

I'll play nice. Do you really think he just mentioned KU out of the blue? It's possible, but I'm going to go ahead and guess he was simply answering a question asked by a member of the media. Correct me if I"m wrong, but that seems more plausible then him bringing up a DII program.

People keep asking about it.

Why do you think Charlie Weis keeps talking about what a pathetic pile of shit his program is?

Because people keep asking him about his program, what's been accomplished, the state of it, etc.

Who has been asking Weis about Mizzou?

Why ask Weis about Mizzou? Everybody knows that Bill Self pulls the strings for the athletic dept.

Pinkel constantly thinking about KU. Saban constantly thinking about Oklahoma. Feels nice to own space in the SEC... especially when you don't have to pay $1.40 for it.

SEC network is all sports there buddy :facepalm:

It's hilarious reading the garbage posts from the ku twins

The best part about it is I think they actually believe that shit they post ROFL

Here's the chart for everyone to reference once mizzou starts dwarfing the other area schools.

Quite a hill to climb but when one thinks of achievement the missouri tigers are #1.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...ools/finances/

Keep ignoring the following, bro. You've got plenty of experience with that.

The "dwarf" comment refers solely to the money the AD is going to receive from TV rights. If you can't see that's a major advantage, you're either legitimately mentally challenged or being dishonest to troll away.

You're a sad little dude. Hope your life stops sucking so much internet trolling is a critical part of your daily life.

Didn't Florida State & UCONN definitively prove this year that conference affiliation is meaningless?

All realignment has done has made more teams eligible to win shit. Congrats to those taking advantage of it.

ROFL

It's as though you have no idea what words actually mean.

The following numbers definitively prove nothing, but they provide some interesting data points:

That makes no sense at all. Kentucky and Florida basketball are hurt, not helped, by playing those garbage teams. You may have a case for football but again that didn't seem to bother the ACC team who beat the SEC best for the title.

Conference affiliation isn't meaningless... it's not as important in basketball, where minor conferences are more competitive. But UCONN also won its title with 5-star talent recruited while it was a member of the biggest, baddest basketball league in America.

We'll have to see how they do in terms of recruiting and program success down the road. THe double-whammy of losing Jim Calhoun and switching leagues at the same time could be an issue (though it likely isn't, since they've become a blue blood, have great facilities and private donor support, and have an energetic young coach who should be able to capitalize on his natty).

Florida State doesn't prove anything regarding conference affiliation. They're a national program in a major football conference. The ACC TV money is not great (I think FSU is at around $25 million by the time its T3 rights are included), but FSU also has a huge and generous donor base (benefit of being a blue blood in a talent-rich state).

It's crazy how much that state doesn't care about pro sports with as many teams as they have, granted this is based solely on the people I have talked to there.

Rays, Marlins, Jags, Dolphins, Bucs, Panthers, Lightning, Heat, Magic are all second fiddle to the Gators and Noles. Dolphins may be the only team that is even close and even that is probably a stretch.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>ESPN, Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks have reached an agreement for carriage of the SEC Network</p>&mdash; Joe Schad (@schadjoe) <a href="https://twitter.com/schadjoe/statuses/492400758110056449">July 24, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>SEC Network now is in about 60 million homes. Distribution has turned out much better than some privately worried about months ago.</p>&mdash; Jon Solomon (@JonSolomonCBS) <a href="https://twitter.com/JonSolomonCBS/statuses/492402559001194496">July 24, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

BTW Why isn't the Longhorn network available in KC?

It's on Google Fiber but you have to pay extra for it. SEC Network will be on regular cable just like the Big Ten Network.

****The Official NEW new new conference realignment & shit talk thread****
 

Sorry for repost

Are there any cable systems left that won't be carrying all the SECs games?