****The official NEW new conference realignment thread.****

[Saul Good]

the second thread has been pronounced dead.

[BourbonMan]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

It's like a girl who got really drunk at a party and let a bunch of dudes run train on her. The next day, she can try to console herself by thinking "at least it was the baseball team, there were some good looking guys...it could have been a lot worse". Then, someone shows up with pictures, and she finds out that it was actually the chess club. It's like, "wow, that was really bad...even for a gangbang that was bad".

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

I care a lot about college hoops. When MU loses it ruins my day. Which is an improvement, it used to ruin the entire weekend but I have grown, a little anyway.

However if you are asking me if I'd prefer hoops or football success in an either/or scenario it's football every day of the week and twice on Sunday. That said, life doesn't work that way. Having one doesn't preclude the other. The fact that very few schools are good at both just speaks to how difficult it is to win when everybody is trying very hard to do so and allocation of resources.

That said it seems to me that if you are not at a basketball school most college sports fans also feel that way but I have nothing to back that up other then that's the impression I get when talking to random fans.

I think where people take some of this too far is to conclude that basketball isn't important b/c football has driven realignment decisions. That would be an error and an illogical one at that. Look at the $'s involved. There's plenty of green proof in black and white that a boatload of people care. A lot. It's just a matter of what has driven things recently when push came to shove on said realignment. I also suspect that is driven by (just my own musing) the fact that this is revenue the schools have direct control over vs the hoops tourney so they are seeking to maximize that and they know quite rightly that it will have little if any impact on the hoops side in terms of the cash cow of college basketball which is the tournament.

College football is about the regular season, as I alluded hoops is about March. March Madness is a phenomenon in and of itself that kind of like the Super Bowl has crossed over and is a part of American culture outside of the context of the sports world. Think of all of the people that fill out brackets in your office that don't know **** from Shinola about it yet get into the thing.

To conclude that the sport isn't massive and important in it's own right is asinine.

It cracks me up when people use the term "basketball school". There is no such thing as basketball schools. There are only schools with terrible football programs. If a school has even a decent football team, they are a football school. If a team has a terrible football team and even a decent basketball team, they are a basketball school. Johns Hopkins is a lacrosse school because it's all they've got, but I think they'd prefer to have a football team like Bama.

Basketball schools:

Duke
Kentucky
North Carolina
UCONN
Kansas
Wake Forest

Football schools:

Ohio State
Michigan
Florida
Michigan State
Wisconsin

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

I assume it beats going 0 for the season in conference play, but I can't say for sure having never experienced it first hand. I suppose it gets easier each time it happens.

The shitty part would be if you tried to rationalize it away by fapping to Sagarin ratings and convincing yourself that it wasn't so bad because at least it was the best conference in football that turned your asshole inside out only to find out the truth when bowl season hit.

It's like a girl who got really drunk at a party and let a bunch of dudes run train on her. The next day, she can try to console herself by thinking "at least it was the baseball team, there were some good looking guys...it could have been a lot worse". Then, someone shows up with pictures, and she finds out that it was actually the chess club. It's like, "wow, that was really bad...even for a gangbang that was bad".

It's really funny when you guys try and pretend you're a football school. Mizzou is Minnesota: neither football nor basketball school.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

It cracks me up when people use the term "basketball school". There is no such thing as basketball schools. There are only schools with terrible football programs. If a school has even a decent football team, they are a football school. If a team has a terrible football team and even a decent basketball team, they are a basketball school. Johns Hopkins is a lacrosse school because it's all they've got, but I think they'd prefer to have a football team like Bama.

Basketball schools:

Duke
Kentucky
North Carolina
UCONN
Kansas
Wake Forest

Football schools:

Ohio State
Michigan
Florida
Michigan State
Wisconsin

IDK I guess it depends on how you define it. I live here (KC) of course and travel for a living and have interacted with plenty of Kansas but also Duke, Syracuse, UCONN, and Indiana fans and most of them don't care too much about football. I'm talking about the fans, not the schools. Sure if you talk to any AD they'd love to have a great championship(s) winning football program. Who wouldn't. The AD's aren't what makes a school what it is, it's the fans as a byproduct of success over a very long period of time (decades). And obviously no fan is going to say no to the question of winning vs losing at really anything, I'm just talking about importance in terms of priority. Heck compared to Duke and Indiana Kansas fans are rabid football fans comparatively speaking. In the northeast frankly college football isn't very popular at all compared to college hoops or college football across most of the rest of the country.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

It's really funny when you guys try and pretend you're a football school. Mizzou is Minnesota: neither football nor basketball school.

It is generational. Mizzou fans/alums from the 80s-mid 90s only know basketball success.

Older alums remember a Mizzou that won some football games and care a lot about it while younger ones know a football program capable of holding it's own.

Both sports are very important at Mizzou IMO.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

IDK I guess it depends on how you define it. I live here (KC) of course and travel for a living and have interacted with plenty of Kansas but also Duke, Syracuse, UCONN, and Indiana fans and most of them don't care too much about football. I'm talking about the fans, not the schools. Sure if you talk to any AD they'd love to have a great championship(s) winning football program. Who wouldn't. The AD's aren't what makes a school what it is, it's the fans as a byproduct of success over a very long period of time (decades). And obviously no fan is going to say no to the question of winning vs losing at really anything, I'm just talking about importance in terms of priority. Heck compared to Duke and Indiana Kansas fans are rabid football fans comparatively speaking. In the northeast frankly college football isn't very popular at all compared to college hoops or college football across most of the rest of the country.

Common theme among the schools you mention in your post: Their football programs are garbage.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

It is generational. Mizzou fans/alums from the 80s-mid 90s only know basketball success.

Older alums remember a Mizzou that won some football games and care a lot about it while younger ones know a football program capable of holding it's own.

Both sports are very important at Mizzou IMO.

If I were Mizzou, I'd go full-bore into basketball again like the years you referenced. First and obviously, there's no way to win football games down there long-term in the East. But more than that, the SEC is weak in basketball and only Kentucky is an elite program. Huge vacuum Mizzou could fill. Plus tons of untapped recruits down there that only Kentucky and Memphis have accessed for years.


That's my advice to you. Arky tried to become a football school again, like Mizzou did, and they're back to the bottom again. Short term football competitiveness is just fool's gold for 75% of programs.

[Mr. Plow]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Common theme among the schools you mention in your post: Their football programs are garbage.

I'm curious - would you consider MU a football school?

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow

I'm curious - would you consider MU a football school?

Inasmuch as the fanbase cares MUCH more about football than basketball, yes.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

If I were Mizzou, I'd go full-bore into basketball again like the years you referenced. First and obviously, there's no way to win football games down there long-term in the East. But more than that, the SEC is weak in basketball and only Kentucky is an elite program. Huge vacuum Mizzou could fill. Plus tons of untapped recruits down there that only Kentucky and Memphis have accessed for years.


That's my advice to you. Arky tried to become a football school again, like Mizzou did, and they're back to the bottom again. Short term football competitiveness is just fool's gold for 75% of programs.

I love college football too much to ever want to go down that path. In fact I'd be furious if the school did that.

That said I'm not oblivious to what MU is up against swimming with the sharks.

Hopefully they continue to try to do both. To your point though I do see MU as a school that is capable of making a final four and winning a championship in hoops whether it ever happens or not. I do not see it as a school capable of winning the SEC in football at this time. But I want them to try like heck anyway.

[Mr. Plow]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Inasmuch as the fanbase cares MUCH more about football than basketball, yes.

Alright, that's what I was wondering. You base it off of fan preference rather than sports results. To me, MU would be more of a 50/50 school based on sports results - some success in both football & basketball. That's obviously an outsiders opinion.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Common theme among the schools you mention in your post: Their football programs are garbage.

Yes that is true but if you survey the fan bases of those schools what they care about is basketball. The very definition of a basketball school.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

I love college football too much to ever want to go down that path. In fact I'd be furious if the school did that.

That said I'm not oblivious to what MU is up against swimming with the sharks.

Hopefully they continue to try to do both. To your point though I do see MU as a school that is capable of making a final four and winning a championship in hoops whether it ever happens or not. I do not see it as a school capable of winning the SEC in football at this time. But I want them to try like heck anyway.

It'll be easy to be in the top-4 of basketball every year there, and as we both agree, that is damn near impossible to do in football even more than 1x a decade. Seriously. With 14 teams, you have to be in the top quartile of SEC teams. If the conference is as great as every says, how likely is that to be accomplished?

Now, of course everyone wants to win football games. I want KU to win them too. I just realize the difficulty of competing with the South which for the Big 12, is 60% of the league residing in Oklahoma and Texas. West Virginia found out the hard way that football wins are rare in places where they care about it.

At any rate, with St Louis and KC both having NFL teams I think Mizzou is in a really tough spot generating the fan interest & the income to run with the big dogs down there. Where those teams have little to no competition. I'd say Arky & South Carolina are better long term bets since they have no NFL team close by. Missouri does lack an NBA team in either city. Since one could look at KU and see why that matters so much, I'd think Mizzou would eventually realize it too.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow

I'm curious - would you consider MU a football school?

I don't really disagree w/ that but MU isn't a football school in the sense that every school outside of Kentucky is in the SEC. Those fan bases are very lukewarm in regards to college hoops compared to the Tigers. I have never met a MU fan that isn't very interested in hoops success. I have met plenty of Alabama and/or LSU fans for example that don't know a thing about their own hoops programs.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

If I were Mizzou, I'd go full-bore into basketball again like the years you referenced. First and obviously, there's no way to win football games down there long-term in the East. But more than that, the SEC is weak in basketball and only Kentucky is an elite program. Huge vacuum Mizzou could fill. Plus tons of untapped recruits down there that only Kentucky and Memphis have accessed for years.


That's my advice to you. Arky tried to become a football school again, like Mizzou did, and they're back to the bottom again. Short term football competitiveness is just fool's gold for 75% of programs.

2 years ago, Arkansas finished top 5 in football. Then they lost their coach and sucked. What happened? They plucked a coach from Wisconsin...one who had just finished taking his team to it's third straight Rose Bowl.

Teams in the SEC get better players and better coaches because the SEC is the only conference that matters in college football. That's why SEC fans pimp their own conference. SEC success helps all of the teams (and hurts the rest of the conferences).

Just look at Big 12 recruiting. The best class in the Big 12 for next year is Oklahoma...at 13-15 depending on the site doing the rankings. That would be 8th best in the SEC. Ole Miss just locked up the #2 recruiting class in the country. Meanwhile, KSU came in at #56 despite being the class of the Big 12. The worst class in the SEC came in at #39...and they're the defending national champions in basketball... Must suck to be them, right Wickedson?