Speculation of Missouri to the Big 10 growing

Donate To GopherHole
T

tjgopherguy

New member
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Hi guys! Long time Gopherhole reader here, born and raised Minnesotan currently living in Missouri. Found a very interesting article about the possibility of the University of Missouri leaving the Big 12 (where they feel very disrespected after numerous bowl snubs) to the Big 10. Article in today's Kansas City Star by the Mizzou beat reporter, Mike DeArmond, has this area of the country talking. Any thoughts pro or con? I'd be for it, other than the fact that while the Golden Gophers are always my #1 team, and I dream of Rose Bowls and Final Fours, I've developed a very large soft soft for Mizzou, and I'd hate to see two schools I currently like quite alot become conference rivals. With Mizzou in the Big 10, I think I'd divide things into a "Big 10 North" (MN, WI, IA, UM, MSU, NW) and "Big 10 South" (ILL, IND, PUR, OSU, MISSOURI, PENN STATE). Good fit?

Here's the link to the Kansas City Star story. Lots of pretty juicy stuff in it.

http://campuscorner.kansascity.com/node/571
 


tjgopherguy said:
Hi guys! Long time Gopherhole reader here, born and raised Minnesotan currently living in Missouri. Found a very interesting article about the possibility of the University of Missouri leaving the Big 12 (where they feel very disrespected after numerous bowl snubs) to the Big 10. Article in today's Kansas City Star by the Mizzou beat reporter, Mike DeArmond, has this area of the country talking. Any thoughts pro or con? I'd be for it, other than the fact that while the Golden Gophers are always my #1 team, and I dream of Rose Bowls and Final Fours, I've developed a very large soft soft for Mizzou, and I'd hate to see two schools I currently like quite alot become conference rivals. With Mizzou in the Big 10, I think I'd divide things into a "Big 10 North" (MN, WI, IA, UM, MSU, NW) and "Big 10 South" (ILL, IND, PUR, OSU, MISSOURI, PENN STATE). Good fit?

Here's the link to the Kansas City Star story. Lots of pretty juicy stuff in it.

http://campuscorner.kansascity.com/node/571
Click to expand...

I would like Missouri in the Big 10, they have good football and basketball programs and I think would be a welcome addition to the Big 10. However, I don't think it will be aligned like that. I have a hard time believing that they wouldn't align the conference East to West (makes more sense as far as travel expenses and natural rivalries go).
Big 10 East:
Michigan
Ohio St.
Michigan St.
Penn St.
Purdue
Indiana
Big 10 West:
Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Missouri
Northwestern
Illinois

--The problem is that the Big 10 East would have more of the traditional powers, but I think this preserves most of the rivalries and is actually closer to two even leagues than one might think.
 

This year, only Illinois was below .500 in the West, while half the East was below .500.
 

I couldn't see the Big 10 putting football superpowers Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State in the same division. Could you imagine being Indiana? :eek::D:D I think a north-south split would be the way to go. You would have one North-South rivalry game that is played every year (which would keep things like Michigan-Ohio State alive)....although I could see a scenario in which Michigan-Ohio State played to end the regular season and then again the next week in the conference championship game, that wouldn't work out so well. As a Gopher fan, I would welcome Mizzou into the Big 10, their men's basketball program under Mike Anderson and football program under Gary Pinkel are definitely on the rise. I think they would be more successful in the long run in the Big 10 in comparison to the Big 12.
 


tjgopherguy said:
Hi guys! Long time Gopherhole reader here, born and raised Minnesotan currently living in Missouri. Found a very interesting article about the possibility of the University of Missouri leaving the Big 12 (where they feel very disrespected after numerous bowl snubs) to the Big 10. Article in today's Kansas City Star by the Mizzou beat reporter, Mike DeArmond, has this area of the country talking. Any thoughts pro or con? I'd be for it, other than the fact that while the Golden Gophers are always my #1 team, and I dream of Rose Bowls and Final Fours, I've developed a very large soft soft for Mizzou, and I'd hate to see two schools I currently like quite alot become conference rivals. With Mizzou in the Big 10, I think I'd divide things into a "Big 10 North" (MN, WI, IA, UM, MSU, NW) and "Big 10 South" (ILL, IND, PUR, OSU, MISSOURI, PENN STATE). Good fit?

Here's the link to the Kansas City Star story. Lots of pretty juicy stuff in it.

http://campuscorner.kansascity.com/node/571
Click to expand...
I've stirred up quite a bit of controversy over at another site by even having the audacity to suggest that Michigan and OSU would be in separate divisions. There's no good way to split up the conference that isn't going to upset a rivalry.
 

Al_4_State said:
TCU to the Big 12 and Okie State to the B12 North?
Click to expand...
I love the idea of TCU to the Big 12. It won't happen because of the shootout, but I'd like to see all 5 Texas schools and Colorado in one division and OK/OK St./Kansas/KSU/Neb and ISU up north.
 

Missouri?

I could go into a long disquisition on upholding cultural-regional markers, but I'll make this easy: no slave states in the B10.

I swear I'll go bonkers if they do this.
 

How is the ACC split? I'm a big-time sports guy (in fact I work as sports director at a Missouri radio station), but I've never actually spent the time to see how the divisions were created. Is there rhyme and reason to it, or something it looks like they are protecting rivarlies?

If it's the latter, the Big 10 could go: (and there would be one interdivision game played every year to keep alive needed rivalries, these being Illinois-Missouri, Minnesota-Wisconsin, Ohio State-Michigan, Purdue-Indiana, Michigan State-Northwestern, and Iowa-Penn State)......I know the last two matchups aren't really big rivalries, but Iowa-Minnesota isn't as big as Minnesota-Wisconsin, and Missouri would be a bigger rival for Illinois than Northwestern is

Division #1:
Illinois
Minnesota
Ohio State
Purdue
Michigan State
Iowa


Division #2:
Missouri
Wisconsin
Michigan
Indiana
Northwestern
Penn State
 



I can't remember if I read it here or on another site, but the assumption about the ACC was that they split up the conferences so that FSU and Miami would be likely to meet in the championship game.
 

tjgopherguy said:
I couldn't see the Big 10 putting football superpowers Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State in the same division. Could you imagine being Indiana? :eek::D:D
Click to expand...

Yeah, they'd almost never win the Big Ten from that division....
 

tjgopherguy said:
How is the ACC split? I'm a big-time sports guy (in fact I work as sports director at a Missouri radio station), but I've never actually spent the time to see how the divisions were created. Is there rhyme and reason to it, or something it looks like they are protecting rivarlies?

If it's the latter, the Big 10 could go: (and there would be one interdivision game played every year to keep alive needed rivalries, these being Illinois-Missouri, Minnesota-Wisconsin, Ohio State-Michigan, Purdue-Indiana, Michigan State-Northwestern, and Iowa-Penn State)......I know the last two matchups aren't really big rivalries, but Iowa-Minnesota isn't as big as Minnesota-Wisconsin, and Missouri would be a bigger rival for Illinois than Northwestern is

Division #1:
Illinois
Minnesota
Ohio State
Purdue
Michigan State
Iowa


Division #2:
Missouri
Wisconsin
Michigan
Indiana
Northwestern
Penn State
Click to expand...

You can't split up OSU and Michigan. They'd end up playing two weeks in a row way too often.

If a split does happen, we're assuming some inter-division games every season anyway. Otherwise, we'd only have 5 conference games a year.
 

Would love Missouri in the Big 10. Seems like a natural fit to me. Much more than an Eastern team like Syracuse or Rutgers.
 



I would go with east & west.

The schedule would be play your division & have the other division every year.

Assuming Mizzou joins the Big Ten, I would divide each division into 3 team pods. Us, Iowa & Wisconsin in West Pod 1, Mizzou, NU & Illinois in West Pod 2. MSU, Michigan & Indiana in East Pod 1, OSU, PSU & Purdue in East Pod 2.

You would play the pod 1 of the opposite division in odd years, pod 2 in even years. You would get a home game against the opposite division 1 time every 4 years. But unlike the Big 12, you would play every team over 2 years.
 

What red poo said. riavalry games can be protected with inter divisional games.
 

PlayHosea said:
I've stirred up quite a bit of controversy over at another site by even having the audacity to suggest that Michigan and OSU would be in separate divisions. There's no good way to split up the conference that isn't going to upset a rivalry.
Click to expand...

Exactly. But I don't understand where these OSU-Mich defenders are coming from.

Ohio State-Michigan would go the way of Florida-Alabama, Nebraska-Oklahoma and Florida State-Miami.

That's the whole point of having the "6-team-division with conference championship" format. You try to forge a monster match-up at the end of the season that Dr. Pepper will pay millions to sponsor. You don't give away the good $%#@ for free.
 

I would say Missouri or Pittsburgh are our best options and a north/south configuration is the only way to slice it. There's no way an east/west solution, as suggested, would fly with UM, tOSU and PSU all in the same division and any split will need to make geographic sense. Missouri and Pittsburgh are excellent academic institutions with some good football history and existing rivalries with big ten schools (Missouri with Illinois and Pitt with PSU). Minnesota had some good games in the past with Pitt and Missouri, and I bet Tigers would welcome the change to come up to Minnesota for football and basketball games and vice versa. I didn't used to be a fan of expansion, but I think it has become a necessity. If they asked me to choose, I'd say welcome aboard Tigers.
 

I'm assuming the writer of the article from the OP was joking when he said this:
"Heck, if Missouri can produce that kind of attention out of the Big 12, perhaps it ought to say it is considering taking Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska and Colorado with it to turn the Big Ten into a super conference that would leave the New Southwest Conference to what it once was."

....but, out of curiosity, is there anything stopping the Big Ten from becoming the Big 16? Let's kick this conversation up a notch. Why stop at one team? Bring in Mizzou, Notre Dame, Iowa State, Kansas, and K State. Throw them all in a new division with Penn State, Iowa and Michigan State and roll with the old-school Big 10 Division (plus OSU) and the newbie side. Then get a tie-in to every major bowl out there and dominate college football until the SEC and Big East merge.
 

West:

Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Missouri
N'western
Illinois

East:

Michigan
Ohio St
Michigan St
Penn St
Purdue
Indiana

No question about it, this is the way to go.
 

Mike DeArmond does tend to write with a bit of carcasm, so I believe he was joking about that. I don't see how a 16-team football league would work. That's too many, heck it's too many for the Big East for basketball, but that's another story. The Big 12 has become completely dominated in it's decision-making by the Dallas-Fort Worth market. There is growing unrest in the North about how the corporate side of the conference is ignoring it's former Big 8 roots in favor of the big money from Texas and Oklahoma. Missouri getting snubbed in bowl game selections in three straight years is just the tip of the iceberg, there is a big split developing between the have and the have not's in the Big 12, and the Have Not's aren't liking it one bit.
 

so if the Big Ten goes to twelve teams are they going to figure out how to put a 12 in the middle of BIGTEN like that ridiculous 11 now? Or are they going to rename the conference "Middle Earth"?
 

I'd just forget the whole tradition nonsense and call it something related to the Great Lakes. The "Great 12", something like that (granted that name is stupid, but I could do in ten seconds, lol)
 

NO WAY

Missouri's academics do not even come CLOSE to Big Ten standards. The are not even in the top 100 schools as ranked by US News and rank below Kansas for god's sake, the school with notoriously the worst academic reputation this side of Arizona State.

This is dramatically wishful thinking by the folks in Missouri.
 

Missouri's academics are certainly subpar by Big Ten standards. However, it is geographically ideal and gives us access to two major cities - while being a state's flagship university. Missouri would have natural rivalries w/ Illinois and Iowa. Despite my reservations academically, I do not think you can do any better, unless we get Notre Dame. Quick comparison of three schools that have been tossed around:

Geography (by proximity standards)
ND>ISU>Missouri
-All are pretty compatible, and overall I think the proximity factor is very limited when looking at these three schools.

Geography (by ability to create natural rivalries)
Missouri>ND>ISU
-Two notes: ND does have some built in rivalries already in place; ISU would maintain a rivalry w/ Iowa, but I don't see us or Illinois getting jacked up to play ISU every year.

Access to television markets (dependent on how ND's tv contracts would be handled)
Missori/ND>ISU

Flagship status:
ND>Missouri>ISU
-I am considering ND to be basically a national flagship, really going beyond its state borders.

Academics:
ND>ISU>Missouri

In general, I think the other schools mentioned would be jockeying with ISU for positioning in those rough rankings. Missouri just makes sense on almost every level... except academics. ISU is hurt by not being the "flagship" university, lack of access to a major television market, and to a lesser extent than Missouri, academics.
 

Missouri makes NO sense.

I can't believe we're having this conversation!

There is exactly one team that could join our august conference, and it's already in a B10 state--ND.
 

hyaluronic said:
Despite my reservations academically, I do not think you can do any better, unless we get Notre Dame. QUOTE]

Um, are you kidding me? What about the University of Pittsburgh?

Pitt is the ONLY acceptable team to add to the Big Ten. Notre Dame will never happen in a million years, so they are not even worth discussing.
Click to expand...
 

Studwell55 said:
Missouri?

I could go into a long disquisition on upholding cultural-regional markers, but I'll make this easy: no slave states in the B10.

I swear I'll go bonkers if they do this.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of reasons to not invite Mizzou but this isn't one of them. Slavery ended over 150 years ago.

FYI - Pennsylvania & New Jersey had slaves in their state until the 1840's. I guess we should forget Rutgers, Pitt and throw out PSU too. :rolleyes:
 

DarrenTheGreek said:
There are plenty of reasons to not invite Mizzou but this isn't one of them. Slavery ended over 150 years ago.

FYI - Pennsylvania & New Jersey had slaves in their state until the 1840's. I guess we should forget Rutgers, Pitt and throw out PSU too. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he meant rebel slave states of the Civil War, and he is correct that Missouri is a slave state (PA and NJ were not).
 

Missouri is fine academically. Yes, they're slightly below the Big Ten in the US News & World Report rankings (#102), but that number would increase substantially if and when they joined the Big Ten and the CIC. They're already AAU members, so that's a fit.

And reposting what I said on the bball boards:
I don't want Notre Dame and their cocky d0uchebaggery here.

Mizzou is an okay fit. They bring in a new market (KC, St. Louis), are okay academically (AAU member, #102 US News & World Report ranking), have a solid basketball program (so-called best school without a final four appearance), and their football program has been great recently.
Click to expand...

Pitt is an okay choice, but their athletic accomplishments don't really justify bringing them in.
 

Goldmember said:
Exactly. But I don't understand where these OSU-Mich defenders are coming from.

Ohio State-Michigan would go the way of Florida-Alabama, Nebraska-Oklahoma and Florida State-Miami.

That's the whole point of having the "6-team-division with conference championship" format. You try to forge a monster match-up at the end of the season that Dr. Pepper will pay millions to sponsor. You don't give away the good $%#@ for free.
Click to expand...

This is exactly correct. Nebraska and Oklahoma was a huge rivalry. And a super power conference doesn't happen? Can you spell the Big 12 South? Can you imagine Baylor playing in the same conference as Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom