Brought this right behind the TCU news. If I were a Pres, AD, I'd have a hard time with Missouri just from a geographical and good "fit". Maybe I would change my mind if I visited. I do believe if we are patient, we will eventually grab another school to the east that right now seems out of reach.
Van Pelt- hearing Mizzou may not have enough SEC votes
- Thread starter Hector.sixpack
- Start date
Brought this right behind the TCU news. If I were a Pres, AD, I'd have a hard time with Missouri just from a geographical and good "fit". Maybe I would change my mind if I visited. I do believe if we are patient, we will eventually grab another school to the east that right now seems out of reach.
Missouri is likely our best option unless we really feel that at some point we can get an ACC team to switch and unless the environment changes I just don't see it. Right now our only options are picking off lesser Big 12 teams (TX and OK aren't coming and I personally don't want them) or get a Big East team. Given that Missouri is as good of an option as any. I personally wouldn't mind one of the "lesser" Florida programs (USF, UCF) but I don't really see that happening either. I'm fine with dumping Auburn off into the East and picking up Missouri in the West. I'd much rather play a sane program like Missouri than play a program like Auburn who is paying players left and right so they can try to compete with Bama on equal footing.
The SEC's choice is do you want to add Missouri now or stay at 13 for a long time. Cause the SEC isn't going to have the option to add anyone as good as Missouri for a long time. I know I'm in the minority but I see advantages and disadvantages to both options. But the time to make the choice is now. The worst thing the SEC could do would be to pass on Missouri now and thenwind up settling fora former Big East school later.
you'd have to think sending auburn to the east would only help with recruiting. it might make a couple of MS kids think twice before singing with auburn. probably depends on the signing bonus though. you'd also think being in the east might turn auburn's eyes more toward georgia and florida for out of state recruits than to MS.
is going to be a continued problem so I don't see that happening. I think we take Missouri but are just publicly downplaying right now. If Missouri wants to come you would have to be an idiot to turn them down and stay at 13 "a long time" unless you've got an ace in the hole with another school that fits better that nobody else seems to know about. Only way we stay at 13 is if there aren't any real viable options this year and Missouri IS a viable option.
It could be done and it could be done fairly easily.One disadvantageto expanding past 13is that it makes it much harder to stay with a 8-game schedule withoutvirtually splitting the conference into two different conferences. With 13, you'd still see the teams in the other division 3 times in 7 years on average. With 14, that would move to 2 times in 7 years on average. If you kept a permanent opponent in the other division (which you'd have to do if you move Auburn to the East), you'd only see the other 6 teams in the other division 2 times in 12 years.
All that said, I think Missouri brings enough to the table to make it worthwile to take them and move Auburn to the East. I just hope this doesn't mean we wind up with 9 SEC games.
All that said, I think Missouri brings enough to the table to make it worthwile to take them and move Auburn to the East. I just hope this doesn't mean we wind up with 9 SEC games.
That means there are seasons when there are five conference road games, which means the 2-for-1 nonconference games will have to be juggled very well to not have 6-game home schedules.
The good things about a 9-game conference schedule-- we have a ready-made replacement for Louisiana Tech on the 2012 schedule & MSU only has to worry about juggling 2 2-for-1 games.
The bad thing about a 9-game conference schedule-- we're playing 9 games against SEC opponents.
The good things about a 9-game conference schedule-- we have a ready-made replacement for Louisiana Tech on the 2012 schedule & MSU only has to worry about juggling 2 2-for-1 games.
The bad thing about a 9-game conference schedule-- we're playing 9 games against SEC opponents.
If you're only playing 6 of the teams twice in 12 years, you almost may as well not even be in the same conference. I do think the SEC ADs are smart enough to realize that adding another conference game makes it that much harder to get to a national championship game or to get 2 teams in a BCS bowl though and probably will mean at least 1 less bowl-eligible team every year. If we do wind up staying at 13, there's really no other option than to stay at 8 games (unless you want to go to 6 or 10).</p>
And it looks like to me the plan is go foward with 13.Obviously we'll add a 14th member at some time, probably before next year. But there is no reason to rush it without good information from all possible candidiates- stuff that we won't know till long after the fact. Slive is just now starting to show his pot of gold to possible members to the East, since A&M is now official. </p>
Realistically, I'd much rather see Ga. Tech, Clemson or FSU join than Mizzou. Mizzou just doesn't have an SEC feel. Their rival is freakin' Kansas. </p>
just as soon as they were allowed in...
They also have a big rivaley with Illinois, which is obviously inconsequential here.
Mizzou would be a good fit for the SEC. It's hard to see it now if you've never been up there, but they'd fit in just fine. Their athletic department in the big 3 sports has outperformed our football and basketball programs the past 10 years and is very similar to our baseball program.
They also have a big rivaley with Illinois, which is obviously inconsequential here.
Mizzou would be a good fit for the SEC. It's hard to see it now if you've never been up there, but they'd fit in just fine. Their athletic department in the big 3 sports has outperformed our football and basketball programs the past 10 years and is very similar to our baseball program.
The MAC doesn't have them, so it's not as big of a deal. <div>
</div><div>Also, we won't be able to go to 9 games with 13 teams (math makes it impossible...at least one of X games and Y teams must be even).</div>
</div><div>Also, we won't be able to go to 9 games with 13 teams (math makes it impossible...at least one of X games and Y teams must be even).</div>
Said we'd have to if we went to 14. I think if the SEC doesn't take Missouri, it'll be at 13 for a long time. And if that happens they'll tell Bama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia, "Look, we know you guys really want to play each other every year, but the fact is we can't have permanent oponents with 13 teams and if we go to 14 we're going to have to go to a 9-game schedule. Most conferences are already playing 9-game schedules. So if you really want to play each other every year, you're going to have to play it as a non-conference game 4 out of every 7 years. It's not like you'd be playing more SEC teams than you would if we expanded to 14."
to Mizzou joining. They don't want to lose the TN game. Auburn voted yes and wants to move to the East.
put Missouri in the East. Its not what I want (would like to dump Auburn out of our division) and it doesn't make a lot of sense geographically but it would be the best way to preserve the current schedule structure and not bust up any current rivalries.
Just like Auburn moving eastmakes our schedule and recruiting a little easier, it makes Georgia, TN, SC, FL's harder. If I were to guess the NO's would be:
Bama
TN
UGA
FL
SC
Vandy and KY just need money.</p>
Bama
TN
UGA
FL
SC
Vandy and KY just need money.</p>
cause thats the difference. I don't want 9 conference games, but they're coming. Mizzou seems the easier game to me.
The question is do you want to play Missouri plus 8 other SEC teams or would you rather play Auburn and only 7 other SEC teams? Because a 9-game schedule is impossible with 13 teams. Hell, it's not like we'd be totally dropping Auburn anyway. We'd still play them 1/3 of the time.
Stricklin gets it and has figured out not to schedule anyone OOC that you shouldn't easily be able to handle.
If you keep that up, then having 4 gimmes is better than having only 3.
I would hope that if we go to 9 conference games, Boone or whoever our AD is will be smart enough to buy us out of the Texas, Boise, and Clemson games in the future, so that we can ensure at least 3 easy OOC games.
And yes, I'm aware that we've fumbled away a couple of our "easy" OOC games recently, but going forward we still need to understand scheduling better.
If you keep that up, then having 4 gimmes is better than having only 3.
I would hope that if we go to 9 conference games, Boone or whoever our AD is will be smart enough to buy us out of the Texas, Boise, and Clemson games in the future, so that we can ensure at least 3 easy OOC games.
And yes, I'm aware that we've fumbled away a couple of our "easy" OOC games recently, but going forward we still need to understand scheduling better.
ACC's probably going to a 9-game schedule too, so it may not even cost anything to get out of the Clemson and GA Tech series. As for Boise, I think by the time you play them they'll be just an ordinary mid-major team. ESPN may want to buy them out of that game (of course if y'all don't start winning again, they may want you out of it too).
Good points. Georgia Tech is way in the future, but I think they'd be more than willing to drop the series. Clemson may be as well by 2015/2016.
You may also be correct on Boise. They're a senior-laden team this year, and this may be the year Petersen finally takes one of those better jobs. I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't stick around for the rebuild.
If he leaves and they rebuild with a new coach, they would be middle of the road by 2014.
The Texas series is the only one left on the docket. With the upheaval in the Big 12, they may be willing to postpone the series indefinitely, but otherwise we may be stuck with that one.
You may also be correct on Boise. They're a senior-laden team this year, and this may be the year Petersen finally takes one of those better jobs. I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't stick around for the rebuild.
If he leaves and they rebuild with a new coach, they would be middle of the road by 2014.
The Texas series is the only one left on the docket. With the upheaval in the Big 12, they may be willing to postpone the series indefinitely, but otherwise we may be stuck with that one.
They already had 9 Big 12 games scheduled as of last year, so if they haven't come to you about buying out of it, you're stuck. And it's pretty late in the game for you to buy out of it and have to line up replacement games (like we're having to do because of LA Tech). As for Boise, they also may be on probation or just coming off of it by the time you're scheduled to play them. Regardless of whether Petersen stays or leaves, I really doubt they'll ever be as good as they have been the last few years.
There are no plans to ever go to 9 games. It will be 6 division games and rotate the other division teams every other year with no perm opponents.
ETA: The reason they don't want to go to 9 conference games is because they realize it will be hard for teams like State, OM, Vandy, and UK to become bowl eligible. With 4 "easy" non-conf games we only have to win two conference games. Knocking out some bowl teams from the SEC will cost the conference too much money in the long run
ETA: The reason they don't want to go to 9 conference games is because they realize it will be hard for teams like State, OM, Vandy, and UK to become bowl eligible. With 4 "easy" non-conf games we only have to win two conference games. Knocking out some bowl teams from the SEC will cost the conference too much money in the long run
coming into the West and Auburn shifting to the East tooth and nail. Given that scenario of no permanent opposite division opponent, if Auburn moved to the East Bama would lose their annual game with both Tennessee and Auburn. Can't see them accepting that.
I know UK might have some heartburn, but it'd give the SEC a little more visibility in Ohio. Actually, it might end up helping UK football.