Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Here's something that I think is kinda strange, and it's a point I made last season during the B1G thing:
Why does everyone keep saying "it's all about moneyA" without acknowledging where that money goes and what it's used for?
You're absolutely right that it's all about money - but here's the thing: General revenue cannot be used for athletic programs (well, not above a certain nominal threshold). If you're Missouri and you want to upgrade your facilities, it has to be done through private donors or revenue generated by the programs themselves.
So yeah, of course this is about money. But why don't we say what the true end game is? It's about larger facilities. It's about upgraded amenities. It's about new and improved athletics complexes and additional exposure.
It's not about increasing profit. It's not about downsizing staff. It's about improving the University of Missouri. It's about trying to give us an advantage in an environment where there are precious few places you can actually gain a competitive advantage if the geography doesn't allow for it.
So yeah - keep on calling it a money grab if it makes you feel better. But that's simply ignoring the fact that money means something very very different for a major university than it does for a Fortune 500 company or a private individual. It means the ability to elevate the school.
|
You belong to a conference for two reasons:
1. Money
2. Scheduling convenience
That's it. The rivalry thing is woven into the scheduling convenience. If any of you think that any other reason trumps either of those two items, you are deluded.
DJ's point is spot on. Look at what South Carolina and Arkansas have been able to build (both facilities and program) since joining the SEC? It's sick. Both schools are far better off than they were.
This has NOTHING to do with grits or sweet tea. Eat and drink what you want...I want what is best for Mizzou, period.