A&M assistant on their SEC recruiting obstacles

[OUHoops]

Glynn Cyprien asked about UT and other schools in Texas choosing not to play them in the future:

“It used to be that high school kids, coaches and parents could go see away games … when we go play at Baylor or over in Austin,” Cyprien said. “But now, it’s different. The closest conference game after this year will probably be down in Baton Rouge (against LSU). That’s been held against us in terms of recruiting. So we’ve got to change and we’ve got to go down to the Southern states … where we’re going to play and try and use that as a positive.”

Rick Barnes also didn't hold back:

“They already made that decision,” Barnes said during Big 12 basketball media days in Kansas City, Mo. “They chose to leave. We’re playing them twice (this season). They made the decision. We didn’t … They didn’t want to play us or anybody in the Big 12.”

Barnes said he prefers that his non-conference schedule be structured around high-profile national matchups for television purposes, which has led to recent games against North Carolina, Duke, Michigan State, Wisconsin and Connecticut.

“If we were going to play SEC teams, it probably would be Kentucky and Florida,” Barnes said. “Teams that would get the most exposure.”

http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.com/colleges/#ixzz1bMiQlJQM

 

[WTSooner]

Good for Barnes. I hope all the Big 12 coaches in all the sports, when appropriate, say the very same thing. And don't play them in any OOC games. Lock them out of Texas as far as recruiting and playing games.

 

[tycat947]

Good for Barnes. I hope all the Big 12 coaches in all the sports, when appropriate, say the very same thing. And don't play them in any OOC games. Lock them out of Texas as far as recruiting and playing games.

That works for football as well which is why I love that tu won't play them after this year. A&M wants their cake and eat it too!

 

[campbest]

Love Barnes' quote, UT does a great job of scheduling those national high-profile games and should continue to do so. A&M will do well in the SEC initially (because it sucks), however, that pipeline will begin to dry up as the Big XII become a much stronger bball conference with the addition of Louisville and WVU.

 

[AdaSooner]

Love Barnes' quote, UT does a great job of scheduling those national high-profile games and should continue to do so. A&M will do well in the SEC initially (because it sucks), however, that pipeline will begin to dry up as the Big XII become a much stronger bball conference with the addition of Louisville and WVU.

Campbest, you seem to be fairly certain that Louisville and WVU will be invited to join the Big 12. What have you heard to give you that confidence, and will they accept if an invitation is extended?

I hope you're right, though. Bringing Louisville and WVU on board would give the conference the boost it needs to survive and prosper over the longhaul. Travel distance aside, those two schools would be more than an adequate replacement for CU, Neb or A&M, especially in basketball. They're not bad in football either.

 

[tycat947]

Campbest, you seem to be fairly certain that Louisville and WVU will be invited to join the Big 12. What have you heard to give you that confidence, and will they accept if an invitation is extended?

I hope you're right, though. Bringing Louisville and WVU on board would give the conference the boost it needs to survive and prosper over the longhaul. Travel distance aside, those two schools would be more than an adequate replacement for CU, Neb or A&M, especially in basketball. They're not bad in football either.

I would suspect that since the Big East is crumbling faster than the Big 12 (if possible), Louisville and WVU would have their eyes wide open for a soft landing spot in another conference. I can see Louisville has a valid option for the Big 12 but not so sure about WVU. It would almost be like Hawaii to the WAC, out on an island and really no connection to the conference schools and extremely expensive travel budget. I know WVU has a decent football program (in spite of them beating us in the bowl!) but I just don't see them fitting in well with the Big 12. I'd rather have Air Force (if only for football) than the Mountaineers.

 

[Sawyer]

I wonder if Barnes would be interested in playing Missouri. Haith was a former assistant of his and as I understand it they are still close.

I'm not too worried about maintaining rivalries with Texas teams. I know kansas has more or less said they'll only play Missouri if it's in their best interest (I see no downside for them in playing MU in any sport, though; they'll usually beat us in the one they care about and make money in all the others they don't care about). Our curators said today that if we leave they'd like to play a traditional football rival in KC every year and will look to host a basketball tournament there, as well.

I would hope that the emotion can eventually be put behind people and there can still be non-conference games between teams that have played each other for decades. The Big 8 teams have been together or the better part of a century (some longer). There room for both pragmatism and sentimentality in college athletics...

 

[bocabull]

There is no emotion involved for OU, Texas or Kansas. If Missouri or A&M is in our conference we will play them as required. If not we won't give them a second thought and our scheduling will only take into account what is best for our programs and to the detriment of our competitors.

 

[Sawyer]

kansas deciding not to play Mizzou is absolutely an emotional decision at this point. They would be forfeiting a significant amount of money and media coverage and gain nothing.

 

[bocabull]

There is nothing emotional about it. Kansas City is Big XII country. You want to run away from Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State then you don't get to play them and get exposure in their markets. Period.

Now run along. You will be easily replaced. LOL @ the show me state. We're showing you the door losers.

 

[sys]

kansas deciding not to play Mizzou is absolutely an emotional decision at this point. They would be forfeiting a significant amount of money and media coverage and gain nothing.

they would alienate their fanbase, and more importantly volunteer to not exploit the advantage mu is allowing them in kansas city.

mu to the sec would be a move to turn it's back on kc in favor of stl. maybe that makes sense for mu, i have no idea, but ku would be stupid not to try and exploit that as much as possible.


also, lol @ the idea that ku (or the big 12) needs mu to get exposure in kc.

 

[Sawyer]

they would alienate their fanbase, and more importantly volunteer to not exploit the advantage mu is allowing them in kansas city.

mu to the sec would be a move to turn it's back on kc in favor of stl. maybe that makes sense for mu, i have no idea, but ku would be stupid not to try and exploit that as much as possible.


also, lol @ the idea that ku (or the big 12) needs mu to get exposure in kc.

kansas basketball will get coverage in KC either way. They will be forfeiting some coverage by not playing Mizzou. More important, though, theyll be forfeiting a major payday by ending the MU/ku game in KC. Each team takes home over a million/year from that game alone.

I'm not sure what kansas will exploit out of KC when Mizzou leaves. They already get the basketball players they want and will never beat Mizzou for football recruits there.

If you want to talk about alienating KCians, Mizzou has already stated openly their desire to play a football game every year in Arrowhead and hold a number of basketball games in the Sprint Center. Kansas, on the other hand, appears reluctant to do so. Ending the relationship with Mizzou affects the city in a lot of ways. That's on kansas.

The idea that KC is a ksu or ISU city before Mizzou is hilarious.

 

[sys]

kansas basketball will get coverage in KC either way. They will be forfeiting some coverage by not playing Mizzou. More important, though, theyll be forfeiting a major payday by ending the MU/ku game in KC. Each team takes home over a million/year from that game alone.

I'm not sure what kansas will exploit out of KC when Mizzou leaves. They already get the basketball players they want and will never beat Mizzou for football recruits there.

If you want to talk about alienating KCians, Mizzou has already stated openly their desire to play a football game every year in Arrowhead and hold a number of basketball games in the Sprint Center. Kansas, on the other hand, appears reluctant to do so. Ending the relationship with Mizzou affects the city in a lot of ways. That's on kansas.

The idea that KC is a ksu or ISU city before Mizzou is hilarious.

yes, ku bball will continue to dominate kc, no not playing mu will not reduce that.

ku would lose money by playing a fball game with mu in kc (because it would now have to replace a guarantee home game every year rather than a home conference game every other year). even ku makes more on home games than their share of the arrowhead guarantee.

only mu diehards buy the imbecilic idea that ku would share the blame in ending the rivaly. the ku ad stated it well.

we'll see how mu's idea of playing fball and bball games in kc works out for them. i would be surprised if it replicates the presence they have in kc as a big 12 member.

i never mentioned kstate or isu; i have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Sawyer]

Quoting you but also responding to boca on ISU.

You seem to be forgetting that KC is in Missouri. Those alumni and fans aren't going to just disappear or move away.

I have a hard time believing ku will earn well over a million playing any non-conference opponent in Lawrence every year.

 

[sys]

You seem to be forgetting that KC is in Missouri. Those alumni and fans aren't going to just disappear or move away.

no they won't. but non-mu big 12 fans will gradually stop paying attention. and fans with no direct affiliation will care less and less.

the likely winners will be the chiefs and the royals, as kc becomes a little more like almost every other city of its size - much more focused on pro sports than on college.

 

[sanguinetti]

Barnes gets ripped around OU hoops boards a lot, but as lame as UT's football OOC is normally...the horns usually play a tough basketball OOC slate.

atm can blow goats as far as i'm concerned. gillespie always played a very weak OOC. i won't miss playing home games for the Ags at Reed. i'd rather get screwed on the road at Allen FH or GIA than ATM.

 

[thebigabd]

Quoting you but also responding to boca on ISU.

You seem to be forgetting that KC is in Missouri. Those alumni and fans aren't going to just disappear or move away.

I have a hard time believing ku will earn well over a million playing any non-conference opponent in Lawrence every year.

There are about 15-20 teams out there that would make for a bigger game than the one vs Mizzou.

 

[bocabull]

15-20... 30-40 whatever the number Missouri is so easily replaceable. When you listen to Sawyer & A&M morons try to spin things saying Kansas/Texas are ending their rivalries it becomes crystal clear they belong with the rube southerners of the SEC.

Going to ge great for the Big XII to get rid of their dead weight and reward superior programs like TCU & Louisville.

 

[Sawyer]

There are about 15-20 teams out there that would make for a bigger game than the one vs Mizzou.

For kansas and KC... No.

 

[Sawyer]

no they won't. but non-mu big 12 fans will gradually stop paying attention. and fans with no direct affiliation will care less and less.

the likely winners will be the chiefs and the royals, as kc becomes a little more like almost every other city of its size - much more focused on pro sports than on college.

The Royals are never likely winners.

Most non-MU Big 12 fans in KC claim they don't care as it is. It will be no different than St. Louis is now.