Even the smallest slice of that - the $121 million Purdue received - would more than double what the Columbia campus spends on research from its endowment.

Mizzou loses a lot of professors because they have a hard time finding funding for their research projects. It has some research jewels (the reactor and life sciences center, as well as the Donald Reynolds Journalism Institute) that will take off given more funding.

Inclusion in the Big Ten should also help attract more out-of-state kids while also keeping more of the "high achievers" in-state rather than departing for other institutions. Enrollment is going to increase (thankfully, the school invested heavily in infrastructure improvement over the past decade).

More students, more great professors, more impact-driven research projects... all those factors create a building effect which is self-perpetuating. I've talked to someone in the academic financial management, and heard a little about the financial model of the university... the move to the Big Ten would benefit it in every way and put it in a position to continually keep improving (Penn State is an excellent example. It has improved a lot academically and sustainability-wise since joining the conference).

THat's why the AD has no real impact on this decision. Alden could be screaming from the rooftops that he doesn't want to go, and it wouldn't matter.

Yeah, it's an amazing deal. And I already know that ADs don't get much say in this whole thing.

Brady Deaton won't care one bit what Alden or Pinkel thinks of the Big 10. The academic opportunities will trump any athletic opportunities.

:facepalm:

I think that's really starting to hit home. The initial discussions about the B10 brought lots of "OH NOES, IT WILL HURT OUR TEXAS RECRUITING FOR FOOTBALL!!!!!!" Lately, I see very little of that and more and more people excited about the long-term academic and economic benefits to the university.

Sounds like the Big 10's main motivation with potential expansion would be to tap into the Sun Belt markets.

Misery and Nebraska aren't in the Sun Belt last I checked.

You bring up a good point. I'm sure the Big Ten is clamoring to see New Mexico State play Penn State. It's a natural rivalry.

http://www.cbssports.com//story/1339...football;cover

Pretty interesting article, it is mostly just bragging on Mizzou but it does bring up a few good points

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextr...1_ANYONE178350


Missouri can't hold its own in the Big 12

ANYONE vaguely interested in Missouri's interest in leaving the Big 12 for the Big Ten knows how the numbers seven and 22 factor into the decision.

Mizzou officials have told us for months about how every Big Ten team makes $22 million a year off the conference's TV network, while some Big 12 schools make as little as $7 million from the league's TV deals.

Ever since this debate began last December, when Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said his conference might expand, there have been two more numbers Missouri folks never mention.

Four and eight are numerals the Tigers prefer to keep hidden in the closet. Or locked in the attic like a crazy relative.

Here's why: Since the Big 12 started competition in 1996, Missouri has won or shared four regular-season championships and eight titles overall when you include postseason Big 12 tournaments.

No, I'm not talking about just football or men's and women's basketball championships. That is the combined number of titles the 18 men's and women's teams have won for Mizzou over the past 14 years!

And that's counting two Big 12 North football titles. And those came against only the five other teams that make up that division.

By comparison, including tournament titles, Oklahoma has won a combined 45 championships and Oklahoma State 35. OU fields 18 men's and women's teams in Big 12 play, while OSU has 16.

Here's what underachieving Mizzou really wants to keep quiet: It's the only Big 12 school with single-digit championships. Yup, Baylor, the league's so-called weakest link, has captured a combined 36 championships.

Mizzou's telling the truth about the desire to get away from Texas. And here's the real reason why — the Longhorns have amassed 113 combined championships over the same stretch the Tigers won eight.

Yes, Texas supports the most teams in the conference and has the biggest budget. Some league members would argue that the Longhorns' 23 championships in men's and women's swimming and diving shouldn't count because several schools don't sponsor those sports.

Mizzou, however, couldn't make the argument. Of the combined 20 championships awarded each year, including indoor and outdoor track, men's tennis is the only sport where a Missouri team doesn't compete.

Nebraska, the other Big 12 school reportedly on the Big Ten's hit list, has won a combined 76 championships, which is second only to Texas' massive haul.

No wonder Big Ten coaches are in favor of adding Missouri, but want nothing to do with overachieving Nebraska.

Conversely, logic suggests that's really why Big 12 coaches don't want to lose the Tigers.

When an athletic program wins only eight championships in 14 years, that's the kind of creampuff foe conference members want on their schedules.

Mizzou apologists will contend their sports teams will become more competitive in the Big Ten because the athletic department budget will grow because of the added TV revenue.

No one is denying Missouri will make millions more if the Tigers bolt. But will all that money remain in the athletic department?

History suggests the Tigers' athletic department won't be allowed to keep all it earns.

The tight purse strings Mizzou keeps on sports is precisely why Joe Castiglione resigned from his "dream job" as Mizzou's AD 12 years ago to become Oklahoma's AD.

When I went to Columbia, Mo., to interview Castiglione about why he had made a decision that stunned Mizzou fans, he was very candid.

"It's not my intention to criticize Missouri to make Oklahoma look better," Castiglione told me in May 1998. "But I sensed a much stronger commitment at OU. Commitment is just one word, but it means everything to me."

MU's athletic budget was $13.7 million compared to OU's $24 million when Castiglione changed jobs. Today, OU's budget is $81,404,991, while Missouri's is $58,604,216.

Even though MU's budget ranks ahead of Texas Tech, Kansas State, Colorado, Iowa State and Baylor, the Tigers are dead last in the Big 12 when it comes to overall team championships.

Doesn't that suggest its athletic department can't figure out how to do more with less like the five Big 12 schools that have more titles than the Tigers with smaller budgets?

Mizzou's budget would rank ninth out of the 11 schools in the Big Ten. But given the overall strength of the two leagues, the Tigers might be right in assuming they can be more competitive for championships in the Big Ten than the Big 12.

Missouri officials insist academics will be as big as athletics in their decision-making process if they receive a formal invitation to join the Big Ten. Other Tigers aren't so sure.

"As an alum, I would like to see them stay in the Big 12," said one Mizzou graduate who has closely followed the Big Ten expansion story. "There's a be-careful-what-you-wish-for element to this. Miami joined the ACC in football and has become darn near irrelevant."

"It's a money grab disguised as 'a good academic fit' by the chancellor."

Sometimes it requires ingenuity to win titles more than just taking your ball and going to a new home. It's a numbers concept, which those Mizzou academic folks apparently have yet to figure out.
By DAVE SITTLER World Sports Columnist

And this has nothing at all to do with their countless NCAA violations, poor academic standards, recruitment of less-than-moral players, coaching changes, as well as U of Florida swallowing up all great recruits...

This argument has become stupid. It's a great deal for MU. It's going to screw the Big XII, so those who aren't going to be invited to the dance are trying to discredit MU while acting like it's no big deal. Newsflash: It's a BIG F***ING DEAL that is going to transform the entire landscape of college sports, and Mizzou is at the forefront of it.

I'm beyond stoked about this.

My wife works for the university, we both have post-grad degress from MU and both have a stake in Columbia, MO. The revenue, the prestige and the security will all be incredible boosts for the community and the University.

And all of these "well screw MU, we'll be better off without them" people couldn't sound more like jaded ex-girlfriends. Every single one of those schools would absolutely bolt for the Big 10 if asked (and I exclude TX and OU because their backers simply don't care). If the B10 came for Kansas, they'd be out the door in a heartbeat.

If the B10 came for Kansas State, they'd.....damn, almost made it through that thought with a straight face. The Big 10 extending an invite to Kansas State - that's ****ing rich.

Don't you all worry about the door hitting MU in the ass on its way out. We'll be through that door and down the street before the door hits its jams.

Enjoy Conference USA.

Eh, maybe I'm being a homer, but IMO Nebraska is the linchpin here. If Mizzou leaves, yes, that hurts the Big XII, but it can still move on from that. However, if Mizzou and Nebraska both leave, that WILL screw the Big XII, because then the north will have no credibility whatsoever.

Exactly.

I've been in OKC this week and all these folks on the radio are saying is "Screw missouri, we don't need them."

Guess what folks -- Mizzou damn sure doesn't need the Big XII if they get an invite from the Big 10.

It's an incredible amount of sour grapes.

All the brave faces and false bravado in the world won't change things. The Big XII could very well fall here and for people to act as though Mizzou is just bailing because they can't compete is absurd. MU is moving up in the world and there's simply no rational argument to be made to the contrary.

is this some angry KU/KSU fan that writes for some no name paper in the middle of the dust bowl?

or does he just hate the fact that someone is talking about a B12 team not named OKLA?