The SEC needs Missouri more for image than for football
Former Mizzou man Sean Weatherspoon, now a Falcon. (AP photo)
Missouri’s curators voted Tuesday to ponder the school’s Big 12 exit. Put simply, Missouri’s curators voted — unanimously, FYI — to bail on the Big 12. At issue now is what the school would bring to its new home, which is apt to be the SEC.
Here were pause to note that some folks see Missouri as a better fit in the Big Ten — the Tigers already have a heated basketball rivalry with Illinois — but the Big Ten hasn’t been overt in its ardor to expand. The Big Ten might be happy as is. The SEC needs a 14th member to offset Texas A&M.
The SEC also needs Missouri for another reason: This whole round of conference-hopping has given big-time college sports the look of me-first-and-everybody-else-last Wall Street, and that’s not the look you want in the year 2011. (It’s reality, but it’s still an unseemly image for institutions of supposed higher learning.) Missouri plays pretty good football and good basketball, but that’s not its greatest lure for the SEC.
Missouri is a state school in a state — heck, a region — where the SEC doesn’t have an outpost, and it would also deliver the St. Louis and the Kansas City television markets. (That’s an upgrade over A&M, which delivers the less-prestigious College Station market.) Those are nice things to have, but they’re not essential. Of greater importance: The SEC views Missouri as another vehicle in its quest to spruce up its academic image, which could use sprucing.
If it adds Missouri, the SEC will count four schools among the high-minded Association of American Universities. That’s double from a month ago. Texas A&M is an AAU member, and so are Florida and Vanderbilt. Both the Aggies and the Tigers play good enough football that they won’t sully the SEC’s brand, and the SEC doesn’t need an Oklahoma or a Texas to burnish its standing as the best football league. (Check the latest Associated Press poll: SEC teams are ranked first, second, 10th, 15th, 17th and 18th.)
The SEC has been measured in its approach to School No. 14. It didn’t fall over itself when Texas and Oklahoma were making eyes at the Pac-12. It didn’t so much pursue Texas A&M as it allowed itself to be pursued. Adding a 13th member just sort of happened. Adding a 14th will be a considered choice.
Adding Missouri would do more for the SEC’s image off the field than on, and that’s a consideration a lot of us missed when this whole round of choosing-up got going. The SEC is often regarded as the root of all collegiate evil, but this is one time when the league ruled by football is trying not to act as if football is the only thing that matters.
By landing Syracuse and Pittsburgh, the ACC all but destroyed the Big East. The SEC doesn’t need to destroy anything to ensure its survival; it’s the biggest conference today, and it’ll be the biggest 20 years from now. Mike Slive, the SEC’s commissioner, didn’t always carry water for King Football. He was the AD at Cornell and assistant AD at Dartmouth; he was also commissioner of the Great Midwest and Conference USA.
Slive is 71. He’s at an age where thoughts of legacy loom largest. (Indeed, at the SEC Media Days in Birmingham this summer the hot rumor, quickly refuted, was that Slive would announce his retirement.) He has presided over a decade of massive SEC growth, and now he wants to make sure that growth won’t be regarded, in the cold eye of history, as rampant pillaging.
When Mike Slive leaves this conference, he wants to be able to say, “We tried to do it the right way.” Others will quibble over the definition of “right,” but if the SEC pairs Missouri with Texas A&M it will be harder to make the case that the biggest league was utterly craven in its desires. Those are two good schools. They’ll broaden the base without rendering the league top-heavy. They’ll make the SEC not just bigger but better.
And that’s the key. As fascinating as the notion of the SEC with Texas and/or Oklahoma would have been, it would also have given rise to the charge of overkill. At some point the best league has to realize, “We’re good enough.” Slive and his associates have come to that quiet conclusion. If Missouri is indeed No. 14, the SEC will have done something the SEC doesn’t often do: It will have made a subtle splash.
By Mark Bradley
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
506 comments Add your comment
fair and Balanced
October 5th, 2011
8:56 am
MO is not in the Southeast. The SEC does not need MO or TX A+M or anyone else. These TX and MO schools do not qualify, are not needed and I don’t want ‘em. Did not read article. You don’t need to read the article if you know geography. If we are going to open up to these kinds of schools – then why not invite ND or WA. Gosh man! It is a simple matter of geography.
kanoa captain
October 5th, 2011
8:57 am
Missouri can fit into either the east or west division,but the east creates less disruption for the rivalries.
Don
October 5th, 2011
8:59 am
From your second paragraph,
“Here were pause to note that some folks see Missouri as a better fit in the Big Ten…”
Care to try again?
NoGaGator
October 5th, 2011
8:59 am
UTx’s greed is what prompted this latest round of conference-jumping. When the Longhorn Network was unveiled and HS ganes were scheduled on it, TA&M saw the handwriting on the wall with the unfair recruiting advantage UTx would’ve gained with their constant access/branding.
UTx has continously refused any revenue-sharing among fellow conference members. OU’s President Boren tried to use the PAC-12 as leverage (they wouldn’t go for the SEC because of the SEC’s competition) but then the PAC-12 told OU they weren’t interested in expanding. OU is more than a little concerned about their future in having to deal with UTx.
Pitt and Syracuse used the occasion to make a preemptive jump to the ACC. They were concerned that the ACC would take UTx (and their non-sharing network) if the Big 12 collapsed and that they might be left at the altar if they didn’t quickly move.
It’s all about UTx’s greed. They wrecked their conference and others. (BTW, comparison to UND in this case isn’t valid since they were always an independent in FB).
Atlanta Gator
October 5th, 2011
8:59 am
“I hope they will be placed in the Eastern Division, contrary to the popular opinion Auburn will be shifted to the East.”
That’s not going to happen. The SEC was very pragmatic about the geographic placement of teams in divisions in 1992. To place Missouri in the SEC Eastern Division would put an unfair travel burden on the Tigers teams relative to every other SEC sports program. If the administration is thinking about their athletes and their teams’ competitiveness within their new conference, that should be deal-breaker.
If Missouri joins, they will be added to the Western Division, and the home office will have to find another resolution to scheduling the Alabama-Tennessee game. Since 2002, the Auburn-Florida rivalry became an intermittent rotating game, even though it was one of the oldest and most competitive rivalry games in the SEC. On the bright side, if Auburn moves to the east, the Auburn-Florida rivalry will become an annual game again . . . besides, three sets of Tigers in the same division is too d*mn many.
Corndog
October 5th, 2011
8:59 am
TAMU only brings College Station market?
What about Houston, San Antonio and Dallas? TAMU brings all of them into play with the HUGE number of grads in that state.
Bob
October 5th, 2011
9:00 am
For someone who was born and raised in St Louis and lived in Kansas City, I do not agree with the article at all. These two cities are pro sports towns and only cared about Mizzou since 2007. When it comes to college sports, people are big time bandwagon fans. Mizzou is probably going to be one of those teams in the SEC barely making a bowl game or not making one at all. These fans would care a less about the rest of the SEC.
DawgFan
October 5th, 2011
9:00 am
I cannot agree with putting Missouri in the East. The scenario I laid out earlier, moving Vandy to the West and Auburn and Alabama to the East, makes a certain degree of sense and doesn’t trash too many rivalry games. Your other option is mvoe only Auburn, which mean the Iron Bowl is broken up.
I took History in High School
October 5th, 2011
9:02 am
Missouri was a slave state, so it would fit in the SEC. Missourians hate Yankees. Didn’t anyone watch “The Outlaw Josey Wales?”
GeoffDawg
October 5th, 2011
9:02 am
Arkansas isn’t always considered a southeastern state either. Same for Kentucky. I agree that mutually beneficial synergy should be the goal here. Like was said when A&M joined, this is a 100 year decision and should be about more than just tv eyeballs.
bad moon
October 5th, 2011
9:03 am
Can we please add a team that brings some excitment to the league!! Mizzu yaaaaaaawwwwnnnnn!!!! What have they won lately? We’re not talking about Poetry Reading Mr Tucker. We’re talking about Smash Mouth SEC brand football. The SEC shouldn’t throw out an anchor. They should allow someone who is kicking ass and let them on , for the ride.
doodoobailey
October 5th, 2011
9:03 am
If you want academics, go get Baylor or Rice, just saying.
Atlanta Gator
October 5th, 2011
9:05 am
“MO is not in the Southeast. The SEC does not need MO or TX A+M or anyone else. These TX and MO schools do not qualify, are not needed and I don’t want ‘em. Did not read article.”
Sorry, fella, but that cow is already out of the barn. I might also point out that calling Kentucky, Arkansas, Texas A&M and even LSU “southeastern” is a little bit of stretch. So what? Those states are all geographically contiguous to the SEC’s existing footprint and are culturally Southern.
Joe Bob Thibodaux
October 5th, 2011
9:06 am
DawgFan
How about we restructure the league from I-20 to the Gulf of Mexico, vs. the North of I-20 SEC Division? That makes about as much sense as
making Missouri a part of the SEC.
\JBT
Doug
October 5th, 2011
9:06 am
I hope Mizzou goes to the Big 10. It’s a better fit and more money in the long run. I would rather drive to Neb, Iowa, Illi, Wisc, Indiana than Miss, Alab and La any day.
Shug
October 5th, 2011
9:06 am
Actually Rice is an inspired choice. It would balance out Vandy, and give each division a door stop.
doodoobailey
October 5th, 2011
9:07 am
Mizzo would be a mistake, but hell I thought A&M was a mistake. IF you go all the way out west like that to get A&M, just go to 16 teams and pick up 4 TX’s schools in each of the big TV markets. A&M, Baylor, Rice, SMU, Tx Tech, etc. just grab 4 then move 2 west teams to the eastern division. DONE.
Dawgsig
October 5th, 2011
9:07 am
But, Missouri is a northern state … full of Yankees. If the “SOUTHEASTERN” Conference is giving up its regional home why not go after Pittsburgh or Syracuse or Oregon??? Crazy!
Harrison
October 5th, 2011
9:08 am
You need academics…SMU is the Vandy of the West.
Two people involved in college athletic conference realignment efforts have said that the information in an e-mail acquired by PonyFans.com (a portion of which appears below) is, in fact, true: SMU reportedly has had conversations with the heavyweight of college athletic conferences, the SEC.
The two sources spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The president of an SEC university (which was not identified), they said, initiated contact with someone familiar with SMU’s realignment effort, and the conversations did center around the possibility of SMU as a target institution for further SEC expansion.
Part of the attractiveness of SMU, the sources said, stemmed from the fact that as a private university with lofty academic standards, SMU could become “the Vandy (Vanderbilt) of the West Division” of the SEC. Considerable attention also was paid to the conference’s desire to have a presence in the Dallas/Fort Worth market and the value of tapping into the Dallas area’s base of potential corporate sponsors.
The sources declined to characterize the intensity of the conversations and did not divulge whether the talks got as far as beginning construction of a plan to add SMU or if they were merely exploratory conversations.
It is unknown if further conversations have been scheduled.
doodoobailey
October 5th, 2011
9:09 am
And then you keep it real in the dirty south…..Mizzo is a little to yankee for me.
Or another suggestion…..lets help Ole Miss, MSU, Kentucky, and Vandy get more relevant on the national landscape and leave us at a TRUE 12 team power conference.
But what do I know, my handle is doodoobailey.
An Old Gator
October 5th, 2011
9:09 am
I always thought the SouthEast was anywhere “South of the Ohio River and East of the Mississippi
River.” Therefore West Virginia would be a better fit.
Bradley = Geography fail
October 5th, 2011
9:09 am
College Station is closer to Houston than Columbia is to either St. Louis or K.C. A&M also brings in the DFW and San Antonio market. You got a lot to learn about A&M son.
Brookhaven Tiger from StL
October 5th, 2011
9:10 am
ATLBAdger,
A few months in StL huh? If you think no one cares about Mizzou, then you know nothing about StL. StL in general is a great sports town and follows all its teams, but its an MU town and its not even close. Sports are what people live for in StL. It drives the pulse of the city. People are happy about a potential move, because they’re fed up with the Big XII. SEC fans will be pleasantly surprised at the passion, once we’re in the league. Spend some time on sites like Rivals and see for yourself.
Barry Clinton
October 5th, 2011
9:11 am
Let’s leave it as is. We flexed our muscle enough. We can live with 13 schools. Geeze. it’s all about power and money, kinda like the Wall Street issue.
Gordon
October 5th, 2011
9:11 am
Dawgfan,
The divisions would be too unbalanced if you moved both Auburn and Alabama to the East. Just move Auburn and be done with it. The only negative is the Tennessee/Alabama game is lost on a permanent basis, but the world didn’t stop turning when Auburn/Florida went that way.
Manofschwa
October 5th, 2011
9:12 am
The thread contains some very valid points. UM-C is not a big market draw in St. Louis, and Kansas City is split between the Tigers, Kansas, Kansas State, and Nebraska. With its existing national media exposure I don’t expect the SEC will gain much by adding Missouri.
Missouri is the party making the mistake by moving to the SEC. Not only can they not compete with the upper two-thirds of the conference, the move significantly reduces their footprint in Texas, which is their primary out-state recruiting base. The Tigers will be going from a scenario where they only had to survive two to three in-conference butt kickings a year to being fortunate to win three conference games most years.
Yet they wish to make the move in the name of stability. Perhaps the success of the past decade has erased the memory of the prior three in which the Tigers were steadily in the cellar of conference rankings. Consistency isn’t always a good thing.
Mtn Dawg
October 5th, 2011
9:12 am
Well, let’s hear it for greed. This is all about Slive.
Floyd
October 5th, 2011
9:13 am
Not to be argumentative, Mark, because you make some very good points here. But aTm is actually an hour closer to Houston than Missouri is to St. Louis. And it’s a half hour closer to Houston than Missouri is to Kansas City. Point being, if one can argue that Missouri brings the St. Louis / Kansas City market, then one can also say aTm brings Houston…and Houston is the nation’s third-largest city. Otherwise, good work, as usual. Thanks.
Chicago Bulls Fan
October 5th, 2011
9:13 am
Where is the guy that loves the BCS and told me that college football wasn’t about money, it’s about tradition and passion. Instead of going to the strip club, shout out to ONXY, I have decided to invest my money in to a aggressive growth IPO stock, called college football. Great returns on your investment. The company, sorry I meant universities & bcs members makes $$billons$$ in profit and play the players nothing. That’s right, they get a college degree in flat tire changing with a concentration in physical ed. Trust me, unversity presidents and bcs business men will kill your sport. Sooner or later, when the athletes, sorry fieldhands realize their value, they will go on strike until the are fairly compensated………it’s not socialism, it’s capitalism!!!
FLDawg
October 5th, 2011
9:13 am
NO NO NO
Never negotiate a weaker position.
If you want to virtually guarantee the TOTAL dominance of the SEC, then make OK and VT offers they cant refuse.
If you want to water down the best conf in cf, then bring in the weak teams, ala ACC.
We must bring in ONLY top 20 teams.
No flash in the pan like TAM, MO, Clem, Insects, etc.
The SEC is rich enough.
The SEC does not need ANY tv market anywhere.
CFB fans everywhere watch the SEC.
We dont need to recruit in Missouri! We need to recruit the state of Georgia.
DO NOT water down the greatest conf in cfb.
cantondawg
October 5th, 2011
9:14 am
Mark,
I agree with your comments. In addition, Missouri also makes the SEC a better basketball league too.
WhoCaresAboutTradition
October 5th, 2011
9:14 am
I wish we spent as much time talking about the academics of where we send our kids to learn as we do about the football teams. Money killed Tradition in football and without Tradition, no one will care about college football pretty soon. I predict that in 10 years all the college players figure out how much money the colleges are making and join a new semi-pro league instead. Why do kids waste four of the most productive years of their bodies on a sport where they don’t get paid but their masters at the universities do? Only because the NFL has a rule. Some millionaire is going to figure this out soon and “poof” – goodbye SEC, hello Southeastern Professional Football League.
Wow
October 5th, 2011
9:15 am
Folks, it’s simple math. At present, there are 6 teams in the west and 6 teams in the east. Everyone still with me here? If the SEC were to add Missouri and Texas A&M to the west, that would make for 8 teams in the west and 6 teams in the east. What I did there was add two (2) to the six (6) in the west, arriving at a final number of 8.
So, hang on here … if you take ONE (1) team from the west, that would leave them with seven (7) teams. 8-1=7. That one (1) team would be ADDED to the east, giving them seven (7) teams also. I believe that this idea would create balance … i.e. 7=7.
If, as many people on here seem to believe, two (2) teams would move to the east, that would create a situation where there would only be six (6) teams in the west and eight (8) teams in the east. I am not certain, but it seems that we would essentially be right back at the same problem as before.
Based on my analysis, I guess it would be best to move one (1) and only one (1) team to the east.
Evan
October 5th, 2011
9:16 am
Bob
You mean Mark Bradley wrote another clueless inane article? What a surprise.
fair and Balanced
October 5th, 2011
9:17 am
Look here – Lets stop this idea of expanding. College football is about tradition. The SEC is defined by geography! This expansion is just too NOT traditional and obviously disregards geography. For heaven’s sake, these are SCHOOLS. If we start saying that TX is in the SEC, we have just thrown out education! I say we get Tech back in and kick out AK. Then the Tech game would mean more to both schools and we would be right geographically and back to the original tradition of what the SEC was!
Atlanta Gator
October 5th, 2011
9:18 am
“Missouri was a slave state, so it would fit in the SEC. Missourians hate Yankees. Didn’t anyone watch ‘The Outlaw Josey Wales?’”
You’re statement is a gross simplification of Missouri’s history and cultural affinities. You might at least want to read the Wikipedia article or something else before commenting. Missouri, like Kentucky was a Civil War “border state” and experienced guerrilla warfare between dueling pro-Union and pro-Confederacy militias and partisans. Culturally, Missouri is split along Southern and Midwestern lines, a fracture that could be seen in the state’s politics well into the 20th Century, but the political differences have largely evaporated.
Bottom line: Missouri has its own unique history, but would be another solid addition to the SEC’s “BBQ Empire.”
observer
October 5th, 2011
9:18 am
You expert dog fans who claim A & M would give the SEC TV markets such as Houston, Dallas, etc, obviously haven’t lived in TX and know little or nothing about football in TX. In Texas, Texas owns all of the TV markets other than say College Station, Waco and Lubbock. I suspect the SEC primarily wanted to add a couple more usually weak programs to go along with the sure wins they have now in Vandy, KY, amd Ole Miss. A & M and MO will be perfect for that.
Tyrone Biggums
October 5th, 2011
9:18 am
Missouri is not a good addition. Who cares if it’s an AAU school- SEC is not about academics, and never will be (leave that to Big 10, ACC, and Pac 10). SEC should add West Virginia.
GeoffDawg
October 5th, 2011
9:19 am
In the interest of full disclosure, my wife is from Missouri and my brother and sister in law are both MU grads and I can tell you from firsthand experience, they’re passionate Tiger fans. That being said, I would agree that St. Louis at the very least is a pro sports town first, especially for the Cardinals but they throw a lot of weight behind all their local sports teams in general. You would also have to believe that the excitement of facing LSU, Bama, Arkansas, etc on a yearly basis would up the interest quotient considerably. Not to mention the boost in talent Mizzou would likely enjoy through regular exposure in the talent rich Southeast.
DePort
October 5th, 2011
9:20 am
You are all talking like you have lived in Missouri … Oh wait .. I have … and there is a bigger college football market up there than you think there is… bringing Missouri in will open up a different market and I believe they are a good fit.
James
October 5th, 2011
9:20 am
WHen I watch Clemson or FSU, I feel like I am looking at an SEC game, stadium and atmosphere. When I watch Missouri, West Virginia and even Virginia Tech not so much like an SEC venue.
Restore UGA
October 5th, 2011
9:21 am
Nice Image..
http://www.americasbestonline.com/2006missouri.jpg
Ace
October 5th, 2011
9:22 am
Missouri is using the SEC in hopes of leverage to obtain a bid to the Big-10 which is what they want. Some of you are so blinded you can’t even see what is right in front of you.
When the ACC swooped in and grabbed Pitt and Syracuse, the coveted NE market of available teams was diminished. The Big-10 can see the writting on the wall with the highly probable end to the big east football conference. If they don’t act then the ACC will and the big-10 will lose the leverage of putting the the big-10 channel int the coveted NE market. Of course, the NE is almost entirely pro-sports driven, but the high density of people makes the cable/satallite outlets potentially profitable.
As a side note…NO North Carolina school will ever leave for the sec and Va Tech is tied into the ACC based on how they begged and used legislative power to get an invite in the first place. The only ACC teams that make any sense to the sec are FSU and Clemson, adding any other teams, Missouri included is nothing more than a fall-back move by the sec.
For the SEC and big-10 both, it’s midnight and their chances of landing teams that fit and generate maximum revenue is running out. If they both don’t act they will end taking home more mediocre teams.
GeoffDawg
October 5th, 2011
9:23 am
And Missouri is not yankee, they’re Midwestern. Midwesterners are generally very nice people although they may be a little more reserved than their Southern brethren.
Joe Bob Thibodaux
October 5th, 2011
9:23 am
Atlanta Gator
Brilliant Retort!
Not only that, they talk kinda funny in Missouri. Show me this and that?
At least in Louisiana we know how to pronouonce Dis and Dat.
JBT
Taylor Fife
October 5th, 2011
9:23 am
Auburn to the East. Traditional matchups…Ga picks Aub, Aub picks Ala, Ala picks Tenn. No problems
GeoffDawg
October 5th, 2011
9:27 am
fair and Balanced, you want to kick out AK? Didn’t realize the SEC footprint extended to Alaska just yet.
Joe Tess Fish House
October 5th, 2011
9:27 am
Sean Witherspoon is a bust. Just cuz he was drafted in the fist round does not make him N E good it just prove the Flacons are stupid 4 drafting him.
Jack
October 5th, 2011
9:28 am
Enter your comments here
Tom
October 5th, 2011
9:28 am
I have never been crazy about kentucky, vanderbilt, and arkansas. Nothing personal against those schools, but they just aren’t top tier athletically. I understand Vanderbilt has a great academic reputation; which is probably the main reason they remain in the SEC. The SEC doesn’t want to look like a conference where the dumb kids go.
I think Missouri would be a great addition. I myself wouldn’t mind some new meat in the SEC. The conference has been spectacular over the 5-10 years, but adding something different to the pot could spice things up a little bit.
Alabama needs more of a challenger than LSU (I would say Auburn, but they are not having a championship year). Having South Carolina as the somewhat front runner in the East is comical. Florida has a first year coach that has put up big #’s, but isn’t ready to roll with the Tide. Georgia may never be a contender, more a 2nd tier program. I don’t think Tennessee will ever be what they were.
So I’m ready for Mizzou!!