(11-19-2012 03:46 PM)#1UABFan Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:26 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:20 PM)#1UABFan Wrote:  And let me say I didn't not slam either A&M or Mizzou. I simply said people scratched their heads over their invitations to the SEC and that is a true statement.

I know Mizzou was a good pick up but raised a few eyebrows, due to the fact that everyone thought they would take an eastern school, but come on. The A&M was an absolute no-brainer for the SEC.

I live in SEC country and maybe you do to. SEC people here were not excited at all about A&M addition because it did not carry the name cache like UT and OU did. Even less excited about Mizzou. But most folks here understood that the conference was extending their footprint into huge TV markets which meant more money.

No conference is ever happy letting new kids into their little club, but I think that if you ask the fans from the schools we played in the East you will find that after getting together, they are very on board with Mizzou now. I was in the Big XII long enough to know the SEC did not need the BS that comes with UT. Now Okie would have been a good pick up.

(11-20-2012 12:07 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:46 PM)#1UABFan Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:26 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:20 PM)#1UABFan Wrote:  And let me say I didn't not slam either A&M or Mizzou. I simply said people scratched their heads over their invitations to the SEC and that is a true statement.

I know Mizzou was a good pick up but raised a few eyebrows, due to the fact that everyone thought they would take an eastern school, but come on. The A&M was an absolute no-brainer for the SEC.

I live in SEC country and maybe you do to. SEC people here were not excited at all about A&M addition because it did not carry the name cache like UT and OU did. Even less excited about Mizzou. But most folks here understood that the conference was extending their footprint into huge TV markets which meant more money.

No conference is ever happy letting new kids into their little club, but I think that if you ask the fans from the schools we played in the East you will find that after getting together, they are very on board with Mizzou now. I was in the Big XII long enough to know the SEC did not need the BS that comes with UT. Now Okie would have been a good pick up.

The Mizzou fans that came to Auburn for baseball this past February were great and they came in pretty good numbers for baseball. They're bright, decent, and have good fun. It was great talking with them. You could definitely tell which ones were from Southern Missouri and which ones lived around Kansas City just by listening to their accents.

(11-20-2012 12:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-20-2012 12:07 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:46 PM)#1UABFan Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:26 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 03:20 PM)#1UABFan Wrote:  And let me say I didn't not slam either A&M or Mizzou. I simply said people scratched their heads over their invitations to the SEC and that is a true statement.

I know Mizzou was a good pick up but raised a few eyebrows, due to the fact that everyone thought they would take an eastern school, but come on. The A&M was an absolute no-brainer for the SEC.

I live in SEC country and maybe you do to. SEC people here were not excited at all about A&M addition because it did not carry the name cache like UT and OU did. Even less excited about Mizzou. But most folks here understood that the conference was extending their footprint into huge TV markets which meant more money.

No conference is ever happy letting new kids into their little club, but I think that if you ask the fans from the schools we played in the East you will find that after getting together, they are very on board with Mizzou now. I was in the Big XII long enough to know the SEC did not need the BS that comes with UT. Now Okie would have been a good pick up.

The Mizzou fans that came to Auburn for baseball this past February were great and they came in pretty good numbers for baseball. They're bright, decent, and have good fun. It was great talking with them. You could definitely tell which ones were from Southern Missouri and which ones lived around Kansas City just by listening to their accents.

I can tell ya that the Mizzou fans are totally stoked about the SEC and the fun and competition it brings. Tail-gating mecca of football. Thanks JrSEC for the compliment.

You guys are totally missing my point. Of course Mizzou and A&M fans are happy about being in the SEC. That's a no-brainer and a better situation for both programs. My point was initially SEC pundits (media and fans) were not excited about the additions from a competition standpoint and the name cache of both programs. Now that's fans and media pundits, the 12 SEC programs themselves may not have felt that way so I speak only from a casual fan perspective.

Now of course feelings can change and maybe these same pundits who didn't like the additions initially have had a change of heart. In particular with A&M because they have definitely competed very very well in the SEC.

(11-19-2012 03:43 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Texas A&M or Rutgers?

Missouri or Maryland?

It's completely different. The B1G expanded simply for the B1G Network. The SEC bolstered basketball with Missouri. The SEC bolstered football with Texas A&M.

More like...

Texas A&M or Nebraska

Missouri or Rutgers / Maryland

Missouri bolstered SEC basketball??

(11-20-2012 10:04 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  Missouri bolstered SEC basketball??

They're definitely not Kentucky, and given Donovan's success they're not Florida either, but Missouri does bring a program that cares about basketball to the football-crazed SEC. Given that it'll be an uphill climb to the top in SEC football (and I mean that not as a shot at MU but as a compliment to SEC football), it would probably be wise for Missouri to continue to focus attention and resources on the basketball side. While many SEC fans would probably like an SEC Network to just show football reruns during the offseason, that network would need quality hoops programming from December through March, and that is a niche that Missouri can help to fill.

(11-19-2012 03:58 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

Quote:You're gross, your school is gross (not to mention creepy), and your conference is the most ethically questionable thing this side of Gitmo (which you probably see nothing wrong with).

This from Memphis "We deserve to be in the SEC" University? Please. I get that you are completely butthurt right now because while you knew deep down that the SEC invite you crave so desperately is NEVER coming, you consoled yourself with the idea that you were escaping CUSA and joining an AQ league in the Big East....until it all fell out from under you and now you are back in non-AQ CUSA 2.0 and might as well not spent money to change the logo on the 25 yard line because no one can tell the difference between your old league and new one.

Quote:I live in SEC country and maybe you do to. SEC people here were not excited at all about A&M addition because it did not carry the name cache like UT and OU did. Even less excited about Mizzou. But most folks here understood that the conference was extending their footprint into huge TV markets which meant more money.

The folks in Auburn and Tuscaloosa did a GREAT job of pretending to care to when we visited, sold out their stadiums and invited us to their tailgates and told us how thrilled they were to have us. If we have to suffer through that level of non-excitement all the time, I can live with it.

And I second that as well!

When two parties make the same, or similar moves, in concert we call that a dance. The question is if they are dancing together who's playing the music? It's the music that's keeping them in step. I can tell you the name of the tune, "WE'RE IN THE MONEY".