True Colors
25+ Posts
If this deal to join the SEC falls apart then Missouri will have an ENORMOUS amount of egg on their face.
Last year Missouri did not exactly hide the fact that they were begging for an invitation to the B1G. But that went down in flames. If the same thing happens this year with the SEC, then from a PR standpoint, Missouri will look like a bunch of disloyal morons who overplayed their hand.
Worst case scenario for Missouri....... the SEC shoots them down and they have to come crawling back to the Big 12. Then the Big 12 decides to punish Missouri for their disloyalty by moving the Big 12 men's and women's annual tournaments out of Missouri. That would cost their state millions of dollars in revenue every year.
TC
The Link
Majority of SEC presidents favor Missouri, but not yet enough
Published: Thursday, October 06, 2011, 5:30 AM
BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Missouri demonstrated it's ready to publicly dance with the SEC. But will enough SEC presidents agree to the overture?
Two sources familiar with the SEC's discussions about Missouri told The Birmingham News Wednesday that as of now it appears that a majority of SEC presidents and chancellors would support Missouri's application. But the sources said that majority falls just short of the nine votes required to add a new member.
One source said there's a group of presidents that wants to sit tight, believing the SEC can do better than Missouri and that No. 14 should come from the East. According to both sources, Alabama wants to look East and not risk losing its annual game against Tennessee, while Auburn favors adding Missouri and moving to the Eastern Division.
The majority that support Missouri like the school's academic profile, getting the SEC into the St. Louis and Kansas City TV markets, and avoiding the awkwardness of an unbalanced 13-team schedule. SEC athletics directors spent about four hours meeting in Birmingham on Wednesday, after which two ADs said only 13-team scheduling concepts were considered, not 14.
SEC expansion these days resides on two different tracks: the one trying to line up No. 14 and the one trying to build 13-team schedules. Both are bumpy journeys that will merge at some point, but it's not clear when or who will be aboard.
On Tuesday, Missouri Chancellor Brady Deaton received authority from his board to look elsewhere. Deaton also took the necessary -- and long overdue -- step of resigning as chairman of the Big 12 board of directors to avoid a conflict of interest.
Those actions make an Associated Press story Wednesday out of Missouri all the more bizarre. The AP quoted an anonymous Missouri official as saying the school hopes to join the SEC but preferred a Big Ten offer that never came.
"That's what's left," the Missouri official said, referring to the SEC.
Talk about a clumsy PR way to win support from the SEC, whose large ego doesn't like the appearance of accepting leftovers, especially the Big Ten's. Was this simply one Missouri official's opinion, a last-ditch plea to the Big Ten, or an attempt to sabotage moving into the SEC?
Either way, it should be troubling to the SEC that Missouri continues to trip over itself when trying to leave the chaotic Big 12. Public flirting with the Big Ten last year left Missouri with egg on its face. At this rate, Missouri would instantly become the most unstable SEC member in a conference fiercely concerned about stability and speaking with one voice.
Missouri isn't a good SEC fit. While it would alleviate unbalanced schedules and add cable subscribers for a potential SEC Network, it's a cultural head-scratcher, the SEC's version of Boston College in the ACC.
Meanwhile, SEC ADs met Wednesday to consider how to schedule with 13 in all sports with the least amount of disruption and most amount of fairness. Good luck.
The "simplest" option in football may be giving Texas A&M four teams from each division and let the dominoes fall from there.
Sure, Texas A&M could play an SEC schedule for one year but not be eligible for Atlanta. But that would be a shocking and unnecessary move by the SEC. Once you're a member, you should be a full member.
Consider the headaches in men's basketball. Changes will be necessary to the new 18-game model that would have kept two annual games between old division foes.
Then there's how to stage an SEC basketball tournament with 13. Leave one team at home? Keep five teams home? Stage a play-in game between the 12th and 13th seeds? Give the regular-season champion, which might have played an easier schedule than others, two byes into the semifinals?
Baseball could easily keep eight teams for its tournament in Hoover. But how is it determined who qualifies? Would there be more SEC games, even perhaps jumping from 30 to 36? And how might that affect NCAA Tournament bids?
Mississippi State AD Scott Stricklin said a couple of football models, which he wouldn't identify, received more consensus than others and probably affect the fewest number of current schedules. But, he cautioned, "There's a lot of moving parts."
None more so than the elephant in the room at the ADs' meeting: Will Missouri be No. 14? There's support, but not yet enough.
Last year Missouri did not exactly hide the fact that they were begging for an invitation to the B1G. But that went down in flames. If the same thing happens this year with the SEC, then from a PR standpoint, Missouri will look like a bunch of disloyal morons who overplayed their hand.
Worst case scenario for Missouri....... the SEC shoots them down and they have to come crawling back to the Big 12. Then the Big 12 decides to punish Missouri for their disloyalty by moving the Big 12 men's and women's annual tournaments out of Missouri. That would cost their state millions of dollars in revenue every year.
TC
The Link
Majority of SEC presidents favor Missouri, but not yet enough
Published: Thursday, October 06, 2011, 5:30 AM
BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Missouri demonstrated it's ready to publicly dance with the SEC. But will enough SEC presidents agree to the overture?
Two sources familiar with the SEC's discussions about Missouri told The Birmingham News Wednesday that as of now it appears that a majority of SEC presidents and chancellors would support Missouri's application. But the sources said that majority falls just short of the nine votes required to add a new member.
One source said there's a group of presidents that wants to sit tight, believing the SEC can do better than Missouri and that No. 14 should come from the East. According to both sources, Alabama wants to look East and not risk losing its annual game against Tennessee, while Auburn favors adding Missouri and moving to the Eastern Division.
The majority that support Missouri like the school's academic profile, getting the SEC into the St. Louis and Kansas City TV markets, and avoiding the awkwardness of an unbalanced 13-team schedule. SEC athletics directors spent about four hours meeting in Birmingham on Wednesday, after which two ADs said only 13-team scheduling concepts were considered, not 14.
SEC expansion these days resides on two different tracks: the one trying to line up No. 14 and the one trying to build 13-team schedules. Both are bumpy journeys that will merge at some point, but it's not clear when or who will be aboard.
On Tuesday, Missouri Chancellor Brady Deaton received authority from his board to look elsewhere. Deaton also took the necessary -- and long overdue -- step of resigning as chairman of the Big 12 board of directors to avoid a conflict of interest.
Those actions make an Associated Press story Wednesday out of Missouri all the more bizarre. The AP quoted an anonymous Missouri official as saying the school hopes to join the SEC but preferred a Big Ten offer that never came.
"That's what's left," the Missouri official said, referring to the SEC.
Talk about a clumsy PR way to win support from the SEC, whose large ego doesn't like the appearance of accepting leftovers, especially the Big Ten's. Was this simply one Missouri official's opinion, a last-ditch plea to the Big Ten, or an attempt to sabotage moving into the SEC?
Either way, it should be troubling to the SEC that Missouri continues to trip over itself when trying to leave the chaotic Big 12. Public flirting with the Big Ten last year left Missouri with egg on its face. At this rate, Missouri would instantly become the most unstable SEC member in a conference fiercely concerned about stability and speaking with one voice.
Missouri isn't a good SEC fit. While it would alleviate unbalanced schedules and add cable subscribers for a potential SEC Network, it's a cultural head-scratcher, the SEC's version of Boston College in the ACC.
Meanwhile, SEC ADs met Wednesday to consider how to schedule with 13 in all sports with the least amount of disruption and most amount of fairness. Good luck.
The "simplest" option in football may be giving Texas A&M four teams from each division and let the dominoes fall from there.
Sure, Texas A&M could play an SEC schedule for one year but not be eligible for Atlanta. But that would be a shocking and unnecessary move by the SEC. Once you're a member, you should be a full member.
Consider the headaches in men's basketball. Changes will be necessary to the new 18-game model that would have kept two annual games between old division foes.
Then there's how to stage an SEC basketball tournament with 13. Leave one team at home? Keep five teams home? Stage a play-in game between the 12th and 13th seeds? Give the regular-season champion, which might have played an easier schedule than others, two byes into the semifinals?
Baseball could easily keep eight teams for its tournament in Hoover. But how is it determined who qualifies? Would there be more SEC games, even perhaps jumping from 30 to 36? And how might that affect NCAA Tournament bids?
Mississippi State AD Scott Stricklin said a couple of football models, which he wouldn't identify, received more consensus than others and probably affect the fewest number of current schedules. But, he cautioned, "There's a lot of moving parts."
None more so than the elephant in the room at the ADs' meeting: Will Missouri be No. 14? There's support, but not yet enough.
