the drink question

doya said:

last nights tv analyst said something… “drink said 25 fortune 500 companies in missouri and none advertise in the stadium”…now we have heard that before, so not sure if true/false, also, dont know if he was told that this week or if he is parroting old stuff…. but we all believed mizzou could not keep up nil wise…i said last summer, that if drink leaves its because of lack of nil. It seems we got outbid for mateer, mendoza, and 2 linemen. i know we have good nil, but is it great ? honestly you cant make companies give $$$…its always been the frustration…companies in georgia, alabama etc want those schools football to be great..but the interest in missouri football by those companies has always seemed cold…i mean if they want to give millions to homeless shelter, animal groups, the arts, whatever you cant make them. I just dont know ifbthat interest is there…so if drink leaves i think that's the reason, and maybe right now drink is trying to see if that interest is there so he isnt getting outbid for those guys that will get mizzou over the top of the hill. the issue with this either way is you cant legitimately have that stance while simultaneously saying “playoff or bad season cant be our only choices” as he did this week.

pwc said:

The problem is if the Fortune 500 company is a public company they have to justify their spending to their board and shareholders. Advertising for a lot of them in a college football stadium doesn't likely make sense and certaily NIL makes no sense to most of them and that is the case virtually everywhere. Also, a lot fo companies donate a lot of their money to other parts of the school--for examply my Firm donates a lot to the School of Accountancy, which makes sense for us. Putting a sign up in Faurot really doesn't. Mizzou has already made it clear they are funding the full revenue share amount and again, the new NIL has to be legit--that is going to be really hard to do everywhere going forward and I think that will be fringe money--will help, but won't be make or break like it has been. Now if, the University Predident and BOCs change their posture and don't continue to go all in and fully support revenue sharing that would be different a different situation. For the record, Drink has been on this band wagon for a long time and even though I think he is really bright and been ahead of the game on the evolution of college sports/football and how its funded, I think this is a little misguided, but again, he has consistently made this point.

doya said:

🤷🏼‍♂️…tell drink that😂😉

pwc said:

I think he knows it--I personally think this is just part of the posturing process, but we shall see. I do think its about time for Laird Veatch to make a statement that we really want Drink to stay and that they are evaluating his current deal--just something would be helpful I think.

MIZ...SEC said:

Absolutely! The longer this goes without hearing anything, the more doubt there is about Drink staying at Mizzou. Glass half full thought would be that it’s all in the process of being negotiated privately.

doya said:

all i know is i dont care what he does cause i have no say in it..stay or go is beyond my control so what happens happens

Borderwartiger said:

That’s how I feel too. I want Drink to stay. I like him. And think he has raised recruiting overall. But he’s not a top tier coach. Not yet anyway. Not until he recruits and develops his own QB. And not unless he figures out how to train his players to quit committing back breaking dumb penalties. I hope he figures it out here. But won’t lose sleep if he goes to Florida or LSU.

pwc said:

I get the sentiment, but just don't want to start over at this point--early signing period for high school players is December 3-5--no chance to have a coach in place by then so likely loose a lot of our high school guys or at least don't sign them early. Then of course, who are we going to get for the coach/staff--we certainly won't be picking from any established guys so have to hope to get someone that can make the next step like Drink did and most don't. The job is certainly way better than it was when Drink took it so that should help a lot, but it is somewhat a crap shoot and as we all know, all the actual portal work is happening right now and that will likely put us quite a bit behind there as well. It could certainly work out just fine, maybe even better, but IMO odds are it won't.

pwc said:

I get the sentiment, but just don't want to start over at this point--early signing period for high school players is December 3-5--no chance to have a coach in place by then so likely loose a lot of our high school guys or at least don't sign them early. Then of course, who are we going to get for the coach/staff--we certainly won't be picking from any established guys so have to hope to get someone that can make the next step like Drink did and most don't. The job is certainly way better than it was when Drink took it so that should help a lot, but it is somewhat a crap shoot and as we all know, all the actual portal work is happening right now and that will likely put us quite a bit behind there as well. It could certainly work out just fine, maybe even better, but IMO odds are it won't.

MIZ...SEC said:

Losing Drink at this point would set Mizzou back at least two years and who know’s how long if it’s a bad hire. If Drink wants to be at Mizzou, then paying him is the far and away the best option.

doya said:

sure agree..but my point is i cant do a damn thing about it so no use worrying

pwc said:

I think he knows it--I personally think this is just part of the posturing process, but we shall see. I do think its about time for Laird Veatch to make a statement that we really want Drink to stay and that they are evaluating his current deal--just something would be helpful I think.

MUValjean said:

How do you respond to something that "does not exist?" So far, the chatter is all message boards and reporters speculating on things unsaid and unrevealed by the principals. We don't "know" anything about who is looking to hire Drink, or if he is really interested in leaving. I can't see Veatch coming out with more of a statement than: "we are really excited about the progress this year and what we expect to see next year under Drinks leadership. And we value all those contributing to the NEZ and NIL efforts".

MUValjean said:

How do you respond to something that "does not exist?" So far, the chatter is all message boards and reporters speculating on things unsaid and unrevealed by the principals. We don't "know" anything about who is looking to hire Drink, or if he is really interested in leaving. I can't see Veatch coming out with more of a statement than: "we are really excited about the progress this year and what we expect to see next year under Drinks leadership. And we value all those contributing to the NEZ and NIL efforts".

MUValjean said:

How do you respond to something that "does not exist?" So far, the chatter is all message boards and reporters speculating on things unsaid and unrevealed by the principals. We don't "know" anything about who is looking to hire Drink, or if he is really interested in leaving. I can't see Veatch coming out with more of a statement than: "we are really excited about the progress this year and what we expect to see next year under Drinks leadership. And we value all those contributing to the NEZ and NIL efforts".

doya said:

last nights tv analyst said something… “drink said 25 fortune 500 companies in missouri and none advertise in the stadium”…now we have heard that before, so not sure if true/false, also, dont know if he was told that this week or if he is parroting old stuff…. but we all believed mizzou could not keep up nil wise…i said last summer, that if drink leaves its because of lack of nil. It seems we got outbid for mateer, mendoza, and 2 linemen. i know we have good nil, but is it great ? honestly you cant make companies give $$$…its always been the frustration…companies in georgia, alabama etc want those schools football to be great..but the interest in missouri football by those companies has always seemed cold…i mean if they want to give millions to homeless shelter, animal groups, the arts, whatever you cant make them. I just dont know ifbthat interest is there…so if drink leaves i think that's the reason, and maybe right now drink is trying to see if that interest is there so he isnt getting outbid for those guys that will get mizzou over the top of the hill. the issue with this either way is you cant legitimately have that stance while simultaneously saying “playoff or bad season cant be our only choices” as he did this week.

pwc said:

I certainly am not worrying about it--it will obviously be what it will be--just discussing what is the best path forward--my view is its best for us for Drink to stay, but I can see the other side of the argument as well, but I can assure you I am not worried about it.

mkilker said:

We may have lost some recruits to NIL money, but Mateer followed his coach from Washington State, who went on to become the offensive coordinator at Oklahoma. NIL was not a factor in that decision. Mendoza wanted to play in a more pass-oriented offense and felt Mizzou was more run-oriented. Indiana also used Luther Burden slipping to the second round as proof that Drink's offense is not conducive to a QB hoping to get drafted in the first round. Mendoza was right, and NIL was not the reason he selected Indiana over Mizzou. Not sure about the offensive lineman. Missouri has 8 Fortune 500 companies, not 25 as mentioned above. Most of them give money to Mizzou, but not necessarily to the athletic program, which BTW is what people used to do. That money they invested in academics has been money well spent; Mizzou's academic accreditation standards are significantly better than Alabama's and Georgia's. So what do you value more, athletics or academics? On another note, Drink makes more money than a lot of the execs from the Fortune 500 companies he wants to get more money from. If those executives perform below average against their top competition, they are out of a job. Drink's record against the top competition in the SEC leaves a lot to question. I hope he stays, but I'm not sure I am thrilled with his blackmail tactics. Beat Alabama, Georgia, and A and M, and the money will come.

MelWest said:

I am not sure he is the top choice at any of the so called big named schools….and he is going to be much more expensive than those coaches at Tulane…Memphis…or South Florida. Unless he and his family are just really unhappy here…low odds he leaves. Maybe he doesn’t like it here and the same for his wife. If so…see you later. If they like it….get to recruiting.

doya said:

what if someone offers 10 years 150 million? let him go? match ? i have seen a lot of those long term contracts go south…