The MAC SUCKS.

I don't think that rule was in effect in 2007-08.

It was.

What are the antlers?

It is my thing. I'm weird that way.

I wouldn't hold your breath. I might suggest MU players keep their mouth shut when it comes to KU. Just makes them look silly.

Dear Warpaint*:


The Big 10 champ has gone to the Rose Bowl since the 40s. Anybody with a basic understanding of college football knows this. The only change that has ever been made to this was with the berth of the BCS, where the 2nd best team in the Big 10 is contractually tied to the Rose Bowl unless a 'higher ranking' bowl takes that team first, at which time the tie-in with the Big 10 is gone outright. (This has happened once)

But leave it to your dumb ass to not know any of this and demand others do your home work for you.

You are militantly uninformed.


Signed, DJ's Left Nut

Deal tool: the people complaining about the Antlers and demanding change are Missouri fans, mostly adults (especially alumni/donors) who don't like them. Mike Alden is simply responding to their requests.

Conveniently you only quoted a part of what I said instead of all of it. Way to cherry pick. No wonder everyone speaks so highly of you and your posting.

You seem to be overly concerned with what "other people" think on this board. You mention it in practically every post.

I hate you guys. You know who you are.

Interesting you say that in defense of him. Oh well if that is what you think so be it. As usual you are incorrect, but being wrong is what you are renowned for.

It was, but it's irrelevant to the question of whether KU deserved their BCS bid or whether MU was "clearly superior". One team was going to get screwed by rule.

KU was less deserving. It was proven in the rankings and on the field. So KU would not have been screwed at all, because a superior team would have gone instead. It is really that simple. KU fans can ****ing whine all they ****ing want...deep down they know Lew cheated and bribed KU's way into that game...he knew that it would be KU's only chance to ever do anything in football.

They promised ticket sales that Mizzou refused to do

I thought everyone knew that

That sucks for MU then. Hopefully they can get it done this season.

Of course, even the beakers around here at the time said things like, your school should have lobbied harder, the bowl committee can pick whomever they want, its a business, etc. Nobody argued that they were better on the field because that had been settled. And they are right about one thing, Alden got outmaneuvered by Perkins and his checkbook. Certainly that is true, but let's not pretend it was about football.

I am not sure how much it matters, though. The short period under which that system existed and when something like that was possible is ending. The season we have had this year, if we win the sec east, will mean in recruiting more than that ever would have. Recruits next season wont even remember what we did in 2007, they were 9 or 10 years old then. But they will remember what we did this year and where the program is today.

Like the rest of this former rivalry it's all in the past, and these two programs are headed in opposite directions now.

I am glad that the two programs are going their separate ways. It was a cool rivalry but it tore the city apart.

I find myself rooting for MU in the SEC because screw the SEC. I would be pleased as punch to see MU beat Kentucky in basketball for instance.

I can't believe that is true, but there it is.

And of course, you have proof of this?


Wait what am I doing, Mizzou fans don't need no stinkin proof of anything.

Interesting: 6 of the 7 teams in the SEC West are bowl-eligible, and 10 teams in the conference will be going bowling overall.

I really don't mind if you don't want to believe me.

You have to pay to play

It's not that I don't want to believe you. Anyone named "Tribal Elder" on an internet board with unsupported accusations is a guy I want to believe. I was just wondering if you'd come across anything other than wild speculation?

I have nothing solid only pure speculation

Also, It was apparent once Kansas made it to a game where the prize was a bowl of food items and mangino was involved the other team stood no chance whatsoever :D

This my be your best post yet, "Prison Bitch". LMAO

Well here's an alternative theory, which is controversial in that there are 2 facts here. One, Mizzou brought only 8k fans to San Antonio for the Big 12 title game. This could have concerned bowl officials who care about ticket sales. Two, all but one of the prior 22 conf game losers got shut out of BCS games. So it was the standard occurrence.

A lot of good that Fruit Bowl did the KU "brand" ROFL

One team went in the shitter....the other is competing for a league title in the premier conference in the premier sport.

We still talking about 2007? Lol. I guess I might be too, though, if I had that "pile of crap" as my team.

Because your fans in your biggest fan area (St Louis) don't even watch your games anymore- at least nothing like they did in 2007. TV ratings are down a whopping 24%. The Post-Dispatch article below suggests one of the reasons is the SEC's lack of popularity among area viewers:




Spirit For Mizzou Not Seen in TV Ratings

http://m.stltoday.com/sports/other/m...ile_touch=true

STL is fired up about Missouri football. Stop showing your ass.

Did you even bother reading the link you derelict?

Posting a link to a mobile site is amateur hour. :D

I've watched most of the Mizzou SEC games out at a bar with friends. How does that figure into ratings when people do that?

With all the time Prison Bitch spends following our team, it's a miracle he can follow his own.

(Well, I guess it's still football season.)

I have no ambition to read anymore cherry picked bullshit. I am going off first hand experience.

This quote is just full of awesome.

I wonder what Kansas ratings are this year versus 2007.

Check out the game-by-game ratings. The SEC games are 8.3, 8.3, 5.3, 7.8, 5.0, and 9.3. Clearly, the SEC isn't suffering from a lack of popularity; Indiana and Toledo are. The 7.33 average is higher than the overall average in 2007.

I imagine tomorrow's number won't hurt the average either. :)

Like I said he is a buffoon. Hilarious somebody outside of the area trying to tell me how it is.

Sagarin probably mentioned it once or something.

Jesus Christ

Loosely translated as "naw,didn't read it"

Cable games don't get the same ratings as broadcast tv. Shocking information there.

We will see what the SEC championship game brings in the St. Louis market if Mizzou makes it.

I got a bad feeling about Johnny Football and his amazing douchebaggery

Hopefully Mizzou stays focused in the chaos

http://i.imgur.com/huNooZo.gif

Who, me or you?

Prison Bitch's smack has been reduced to mean numbers of viewership for Mizzou games....

..in St. Louis.


Again.....Jesus Christ.

Read the article. It addresses your point.

I did this morning when it came out. Maybe you should post that when your little douche buddy brings up the Final Four ratings compared to the BCS title game as well.

How is this thread not rocking n rolling tonight?

Let me be the first to congratulate West Virginia on managing to lose to every Big 12 team in just two seasons. That is a pretty remarkable achievement.

This SEC game will present all sorts of moral problems for the conference. If Auburn loses, can the conference really allow Alabama whom they just beat to pass them for a BCS bid? I was told the SEC doesn't do that stuff, only the Big 12 allows such hijinks.

If Mizzou loses, does Alabama jump them despite not playing the game? And does South Carolina jump them in the bowl pecking order despite not winning the division? Again that is something only the Big 12 allows.

Credit the Big Dozen(ish) with solving that problem so perfectly going forward. No conference championship game...no top 5 teams fighting it out...

Maybe we should just use Sagarin's BCS computer to seed the bowls. Northern Illinois would be playing in the NCG.

Ah yes, the Beakers take us back to 2007 once again.

Let us know if they pick a team over us that we beat head to head. If we beat Auburn and they get picked over us, then you can crack yourself up over it.

I can imagine how angry Auburn or Mizzou fans will be when this whole thing shakes out. If the SEC doesn't protect these 2 after winning their divisions then they're just another Big 12. And that is not right.



Link?

...and is ranked below us in the polls.

You need a link to find Sagarin? Can't you just press your "home" icon?

You think PB will eventually run out of the straws that he just keeps grasping for.

Obviously that couldn't happen since you'd have secured an automatic bid which you didn't in 2007. But I digress: can you really fall below S Carolina despite having the same record and winning the division? That's bullcrap if it actually happens.

Well, my link doesn't show Northern Illinois #1 or #2. Are you reading an actual link, or just "eyballin" it again?

That shows Northern Illinois #38. How would they play in the NCG being ranked that low?

Good Christ you're stupid.

Maybe we should just use Sagarin's BCS computer to seed the bowls. Northern Illinois would be playing in the NCG.

:shrug:

They beat us head to head, and head to head seems to mean something in this conference.

Aside from that, if you're still jockeying that mule that we're supposed to be sorry we left the destitute Big 12 for the SEC, good luck...

Is that supposed to lend weight to Sagarin?

Are you really this unfamiliar with Sagarin? Even if you are, he gives you a hint with the whole "the BCS uses the pure ELO" statement at the top. NIU is #2 in his BCS poll.

Oh, I follow you now. The BCS does use the politically correct version but it isn't what Sagarin would use. That's on the BCS not Sagarin. Also Ohio State could jump to #2 after next week in Elo.

So his main version...the one with Arizona State 3, Wisconsin 10, and Washington 12...is the accurate one?

I just read that Sagarin was still tweaking his formula after the season had started. How can any system possibly justify this?

NIU vs Arizona state, now that would be a great National Championship /PB

Is the SEC vastly overrated, or just having a down year? I fully admit that I thought Mizzou was going to get their asses kicked year in and year out in that conference.

Or, is Mizzou that much improved that they are in position to win their first conference title since the 60's?

Perhaps a combination of both?

Does the poll know that the Wisc win is fraudulent?

Sagarin is a Polish name?

Florida is down, and they are usually not. That's really the only difference.

The SEC has 10 teams out of 14 which are bowl-eligible. 3 teams in the top 5, 7 in the top 25. Half the conference is ranked - in what a lot of people are calling a down year, which should say something.

Of course I don't think Missouri is as good as Alabama or FSU, but if you look at our record, we do only have 1 loss and it was in double overtime with our backup QB.

Mizzou has 3 wins this year that tell me they are absolutely legit.

Beating Ol' Miss on the road and really doing so in convincing fashion. The 14 point score was closer than the game; it never felt like Mizzou was challenged in that game.

The A&M win over an angry Manziel looking to put his stamp on his career.

The Vandy win. They housed an 8-4 football team on the road. That game was a slaughter and another one where Mizzou dicked around and let the score get a little closer than it was.

Mizzou's legitimately good. In fact, I'm not ready to say they're not as good as FSU. FSU has one good win and have otherwise dominated an awful ACC.

Any Saturday a team can have a bad game and watch their season go up in a puff of smoke. It could happen this Saturday as well. But Missouri is still a very good football team. They have a plus quarterback and the best group of skill position players (WR and RBs) in the country. If anyone disagrees with me there, go ahead and make your argument because I don't see anybody with the size, speed and skill, not to mention depth, that Mizzou has at WR and at RB. Going 5 deep with potential NFL WRs and 3 deep with HR hitters at RB is pretty damn uncommon.

We have a solid LB corps, the best DEs in the conference (arguably the country) and an experienced, healthy OL. Missouri is legitimately good.

I'll ask this again since it was never answered: if Auburn loses will the SEC allow them to be jumped in the bowl "pecking order" by the team they beat head to head in their rivalry game, finishing behind them in division?

It's a few things all coming together.

Mizzou might have its best team ever. We aren't as flashy on offense as we were in 2007, but we have a much better defense and a better running game.

I don't think you can attribute much to the SEC being down. There are still seven ranked teams (a record for most teams ranked to end the season) with three in the top five and four in the top 10.

We have been healthy on the lines this year, and we had the depth to overcome losing our most important offensive and defensive players for an extended period of time.

A lot of SEC haters/Big 12 apologists like to pretend that teams don't just get way better or way worse in two years. That is completely untrue, though. Baylor and Oklahoma State aren't exactly traditional powers, but they have dominated the conference.

We'll find out!

Hard to say, hopefully the S.E.C. isn't gutless like the Big 12 was.

So to recap: Baylor leaving the cellar to win in the Big 12 while a marquee program Texas hangs on at the end of the Top 25 = proof the Big 12 sucks and is in permanent decline.


Mizzou and Auburn leaving the dregs of 2-14 last year while a marquee program Florida becomes the single biggest national laughingstock = proof the SEC is great and has depth. Lmfao!

Good to see you got the point on this, because some MU fans are having trouble with it.