Sort of looks like a reverse Florida now.

He would get off, just not off the airplane.

A little off topic, but thought it was interesting so thought I'd post it.

1. Big XII has 8 teams in top 26
2. 4 teams in top 10
3. 5 teams in top 15
4. Iowa #58 , ISU #62
5. Iowa’s top ranked win (Pitt) #67
6. Other Iowa wins and where ranked…..NW 110, LM 122, IN 142, TN Tech 171
7. ISU losses: Texas #24 Baylor #21 Missouri #26 Texas A&M #6
8. strength of schedule rank: ISU #7 Iowa #118
9. Other teams with hard schedules - Auburn 5-2 #1 Kansas 2-5 #2 A&M 5-2 #3 Tenn. 3-4 #4 Mizz. 3-4 #5 AZ. 2-5 #6 ISU 3-4 #7 MD 2-5 #8

A little off topic, but thought it was interesting so thought I'd post it.

1. Big XII has 8 teams in top 26
2. 4 teams in top 10
3. 5 teams in top 15
4. Iowa #58 , ISU #62
5. Iowa’s top ranked win (Pitt) #67
6. Other Iowa wins and where ranked…..NW 110, LM 122, IN 142, TN Tech 171
7. ISU losses: Texas #24 Baylor #21 Missouri #26 Texas A&M #6
8. strength of schedule rank: ISU #7 Iowa #118
9. Other teams with hard schedules - Auburn 5-2 #1 Kansas 2-5 #2 A&M 5-2 #3 Tenn. 3-4 #4 Mizz. 3-4 #5 AZ. 2-5 #6 ISU 3-4 #7 MD 2-5 #8

BCS appearances: TCU (2), WVU (2), A&M (1), Missouri (0)» truth hurts.. bye

Am I the only fan that doesn't give a shit about BCS bowls? It's an arbitrary designation. The only reason that a BCS bowl game is important is because say it is, because we let the BCS exist. If you're not in the national championship then all I care about is win-loss record. Bowl games are so stupid and meaningless.

slmandel Stewart Mandel
by ChrisMWilliams
Survey: Did Big 12 upgrade going from Mizzou to WVU? WVU 2 BCS appearances and a Final Four since '05. Mizzou: zero and zero.

Those were a few tweets from earlier... sorry if already posted(sure they were).

The only thing interesting about any of that? I don't think a lot of it is true. What poll is this? The Big 12 doesn't have 8 teams in the Top 25 of either major poll or the BCS, nor does it have your next 2 stats.

Mandel BUTTHURT!

One of the most hilarious things to me is the BCS conference fans who not 12 months ago sat around arguing how TCU wasn't deserving of anything... have now done a 180 and are arguing how they're such a great addition to these conferences and holding their BCS appearances in great esteem.

I really don't know what poll that came from.

To be fair I don't think it was the "team" that people didn't want. It was the state of Texas they didn't want another school from and the small following because they think $$$ is the one and only thing that matters. But I could be wrong.

Yeah, it's really rough for a Big East team to get a BCS game. Last year that raging juggernaut Connecticut got in, and they only had four losses!

BCS Bowls - the ultimate achievement for the easily led and deeply reeruned.

Lol. Bye Bye Mizzou! Enjoy getting your ass kicked in SEC. Hope the payday was worth it because your now on same level as Vanderbilt without the scholastic accolades.

The Big East is so shitty that Iowa State could probably back into a BCS game.

lol, uh yeah

Pinkel is 8-2 vs SEC.

Hey Rust...


.....is next year gonna be the year Iowa St. brings it? I look forward to your annual saber rattling.

So what's this I read about MU being stuck in the Big IX for another year?

Pay no attention, I've been assured there are no scheduling deadlines and it is a simple exercise of "insert Missouri here".

Well Stewie has now been out-dipshitted.

LMAO

It's close... but I'm not sure about that.

Quite a stunning post really...

Nobody said that. Nobody said the process of realignment was a simple one just that the scheduling part of the process was different.

Of course you have been a clueless hack this whole time why ruin it so late in the game.

Nobody? So, if I pulled up a past post that did intimate that, would the cluess one title fall to you?

HolyHandgernade's probably right. He's used to speaking from a position of authority.

You're right maybe I jumped a little bit. Stewie has spent a greater amount of bandwidth posting bullshit.

Whatever the cluess title is...

People have been talking about the differences in the intricacies of making the schedule. Not that Missouri going somewhere is like flipping a switch.

It is ok if you are behind everyone else though...it wasn't that long ago you were seriously confused why Missouri would even want to leave.

Those fries won't get put into their proper Jack In The Box bag.

Actually his posting style in these threads is explained here.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=3527

Would you call it a secondary achievement?

"Nobody".

I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

That is great...it is exactly how I described it. Thanks for the backup there. He was referencing the process in association with scheduling.

I think your ideas of "exactness" are not so, exacting.

He's king of the small sample size!

I just keep hearing about how we can't compete with all these other teams. We have beat 2 of them in bowls...swept a home & home with Ol' Miss. But the legend around the hater campfire is that we will be in the basement with Vandy.

I am bored by your lack of originality.

I wish more people in life that I had disagreements with made my own case for me.

Probably.

When you back into it by not playing anybody, I wouldn't even call it that.

I'm sure in your mind, they do.

It is much better than HH style. Who wants to drone on and on about something they fundamentally don't understand?

Present company excluded?

Hey. This is a great take. You really had a good feel for this stuff after all...

Swept a home & home with Ole Miss. Rock on!!! You going to base your agrument on Ole Miss! Argument fail. Look forward to you being bottom third in SEC if you're lucky.

I think the more telling statistic about where Mizzou football is going to be in the SEC long term is the fact that in the history of the program between the Big 8 and Big 12 you haven't won a conference championship since 1969 and not outright since 1960. That doesn't happen by accident. I've already mentioned the money thing before in here, so I'm going to skip over that. Then there is the fact that you guys are fairly dependent on Texas for players and are moving from having guaranteed games in Texas to a game in Texas like once a decade. Going to be a lot harder to sell those kids and their families on playing for you in that scenario regardless of what conference you play it.

There are many here who have dealt with the myth of Texas players going the way of the dodo bird for Missouri. Duncan's posts explain it quite well.

There are only 3 teams that Missouri will have trouble year in and year out competing with. I know it is fun to hope that we fall in our faces but there a lot of guys playing great football on Sundays who did so by going to Mizzou. We are not strangers to big football.

No I am not basing it on that only.

Are you reeruned?

Ahh, I see you are from the camp in opposition to Heraclitus. Very well then, sir.

Yes, he is.

We don't play the SEC that often...but when we do it has gone well. I don't know why an apples to apples comparison is deemed completely unworthy info. Nobody is saying we are going to go into the SEC and win the title game next year...but compete? Yes, Mizzou will compete and hold its own.

Bowl game win against Arkansas
Bowl game win against South Carolina
Home and home sweep of Ol' Miss
Pinkel is 4-1 against our fellow SEC newcomers A&M

If you wanna really go back to stuff that is ancient history dating back to the 19th century Missouri is 20-8-1.

Whatever camp that is in opposition to hacks wearing Kansas goggles is the one I align myself with.

(sigh)

It's like some of you folks ignore every post in the thread but your own.

As has been explained already - SEC scheduling has nothing to do with this. The IIX needs 10 teams to avoid breaching its television deal and WVU can't come onboard until 2013

The IIX is keeping MU in the conference for another season, the SEC is not keeping them out.

Just keep patting yourself on the back; you'll stumble into a win one of these days.

:banghead:

At this point I doubt anyone could say anything at all to change your mind. I still say the biggest single issue you're going to face in the SEC to be competitive is that you are going to in all likelyhood be firmly entrenched in the bottom quarter or third in terms of athletics money.

I don't believe that to be entirely accurate. Mizzou is trying to avoid the largest of exit fees in delaying, the Big XII can't "keep" someone in. MU could go tomorrow if they wanted to.

My initial statement was that scheduling is not a simple matter of "insert team here". There are deadlines for numerous things, MU does not have free reign if it wants to compete in the SEC next year.

Going below the 10 team quota COULD trigger a breach, it doesn't necessarily have to. If the networks are satisfied with the direction the conference is going, the conference could operate as a nine team league without penalty if there is a delay in bringing in a new member. Network contracts are written to the benefit of the network and they don't have to declare a breach if they don't want to.

That is why I do not understand why people think Mizzou would struggle in the SEC. Granted they will not win it for a few years as they are clearly not on the level of an Alabama or LSU, or in most years a Florida. But they are good enough to be mid to upper tier (except this year which is a down year) there. The biggest myth of the SEC is that it is tough from top to bottom. That is not the case at all. The top teams are clearly elite, but there are plenty of average to below average teams in the conference as well. As long as Missouri keeps its Texas pipeline open then they should be alright. If they lose it then it could be a few years before the rebuild it elsewhere in SEC country.

ESPN was saying tonight that the Big East/MWC/C-USA were going to at least discuss creating a 28-32 team super conference. Yikes.

It's the WAC all over again, except this time on 'roids. This is a sad and ultimately desperate move to try and hold on to the BE's AQ bid. I hope they don't get it. It is that AQ bid that has allowed for a crappy, unranked, and frankly undeserving UConn team to play in and ulitmately get destroyed in a BCS bowl game. It wont get any better with this uber conference. Worthy teams will miss out on BCS bowl games because they play in a tougher conference while a garbage team gets one because they play in this crap 28-32 team frankenstein conference.

No conference is elite from top to bottom. However, the top of our conference is usually the best in the country (this year LSU destroying Oregon/WVU and Bama beating PSU) and the mid-to-bottom of our conference is usually better than the middle-to-bottom of other conferences. Hell, this year even our bottom feeders Vandy beat UConn (middle of Big East) and Ole Miss beat Fresno St (#1 in the WAC). Tennessee (towards the bottom of the SEC East) also beat Cincinnati (#1 in the Big East).

I'm convinced. Let's round up the Kansas teams and go to the Big East. It just feels right.

Tennessee is a lot better than their record. A lot people are down on Dooley, but they have been killed with injuries. It wouldn't shock me at all if they won the East next year with Tyler Bray and Justin Hunter back on the field.

Yes. They'll win the SEC just after they win the Big 12.

They have talent, no doubt. Florida's also had a ton of injuries and should be much better next season. I read somewhere than we have 33 underclassmen making up our 2-deep roster.

I'll be curious to see how they adjust to the grueling season. The main thing I see in the SEC is the depth that is necessary to compete, because you're going to have significant injuries every year (watch the way Bama and LSU play defense if you want to see why). The better SEC teams are able to plug people in to fill those key positions (look at Arkansas at QB last year when Mallett went down and Wilson stepped in or at our receiving corps or at our runnning backs) whereas the lower tier teams crumble when they experience a few key injuries.

Don't forget Kentucky. Saul Good told us they were awesome, but South Carolina is done.

Isn't that why the BigIIX was flirting with Kentucky, because of the pure awesome factor they bring to the table?

ROFL It must be, because it couldn't be their basketball prowess. That sport doesn't matter. :p

Well, duh. ;)

Mizzou, in their best years in the Big XII (2005-2010) is 8-12 vs South teams. That includes 2 Big XII title game losses.

In those 6 seasons, i'd argue Mizzou really took advantage of a down Big XII North.

In the skill positions we'd probably be fine. Prior to actually witnessing their performance this year, I'd have said we'd be fine along the D-line and linebackers as well (but beyond Hamilton, the D-line has been abysmal and the LBs have been invisible).

The secondary is garbage among the starters - so how much worse can the backups be? That counts as 'depth' right? The O-line evidently doesn't have a backup tackle on it, we've been playing with 4 guards on the field for most of the year, so yeah, we'll need some help there as well.

I'm trying to temper my pissivity right now. This season has just been a disappointment on every single level on the field. If you try to pin me to a prediction for next year, I'd say they win 1 game in the SEC then excoriate James Franklin some more. However, that's probably just coming from pure rage and isn't really fair to the team. They're better than they've shown this year and I suspect they'll be ready to go once they finally start the SEC slate.

I'll blame Stoops for the majority of that. He has absolutely ahd Pinkel's number over the years. And no real defense here - Mizzou straight up hasn't been good against the South. I think they were competitive by and large, but that doesn't win you anything.

The SEC could possibly break Pinkel after a few years if he doesn't pick up his game. The whole program will need to step it up.

I could have sworn I said that Kentucky' football program has improved even as the rest of the conference got tougher as evidenced by the fact that they have been to 5 straight bowl games after going to 10 in the 60 years prior. What a stupid observation on my part.

South Carolina's season is completely ****ed. They lost their QB and Heisman-candidate RB last week.

You got me.

Mizzou will lose to LSU and Bama just like they lose to OU and TX now, and just like almost every team loses to those teams now.

Ex OU and TX (combined 1-7 if my math is correct), Mizzou is 7-5 against the remaining South teams, which have been comparable to the mid-tier SEC teams.

So hopefully win the 4 non-con games, and go 4-4 or 5-3 in the SEC. I'll take an 8-9 win season in the SEC with a nice New Year's Day bowl in Florida every year.

The Big IIX will take any warm body they can get right now as evidenced by the Loiusville and Cincy overtures. That said, I don't recall seeing anything about UK being courted. Surely Kentucky would rather be in the Big IIX. I mean, who wouldn't want to make that upgrade?

And evidenced by the West Virginia invitation after they were turned down by every other conference in the country. I'm sure they are solid on the Big 12 now though.

KSU and ISU would be natural rivals with 'tucky.

Stewie, I've forgotten more about the airline industry than you've ever known.

Mizzou fans will get aroused by Vern Lundquist.