Pacific Southwest Pod System Is Awesome

[Sawyer]

Some thoughts:

1. The SEC does have 2-3 legitimate national title contenders every year. And the Big 12 has had two for most of that time, as well. UT (save for the past year or two) and OU have regularly been among the nation's elite. There really isn't a significant difference between what MU's faced in the Big 12 and what they would face in the SEC. We'd be seeing a moderate bump in difficulty in a couple games/year, but for the most part the difference really isn't that drastic.

2. Should Mizzou go to the SEC, Auburn will likely head to the east (per reports published in a Birmingham newspaper today that claim Mizzou is all but in). MU would be in the same division as Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, LSU and Texas A&M. Alabama and LSU are the only two programs consistently better than MU in that group. Alabama was 7-6 the year MU finished in the top 5, and LSU lost earlier that year to the same Arkansas team Mizzou crushed in the Cotton Bowl. An argument could be made that MU would have had a legitimate shot at the SEC title that season.

3. No one's expecting or claiming MU will consistently compete for SEC titles, let alone national titles. We don't do that in the Big 12 and won't in the SEC, either. But we will consistently play in bowl games and will improve overall as a program because of the move. Occasionally we may push for more than that.

4. MU will still recruit Texas. Those players have to go somewhere. There's a lot of talent in that state and Pinkel has a lot of relationships he's developed over the past decade. Many of our best Texas-bred players (Weatherspoon, Alexander, Daniel, etc) have been guys no one else wanted. Our success in that state is based on Pinkel's ability to find guys other people overlook, not outrecruiting other major programs in the region. With UT and TT likely headed to the PAC, A&M in the SEC and Baylor in an irrelevant conference (maybe a Big 12/Big East leftover deal), there won't be one conference that dominates Texas like there is now with the Big 12.

5. I don't understand how being targeted by arguably the best athletic conference in the nation is "operating from a blatant position of weakness." But I don't understand most of the crap boca spews, so that's really nothing new.

 

[stoops4pres]

Some thoughts:

1. The SEC does have 2-3 legitimate national title contenders every year. And the Big 12 has had two for most of that time, as well. UT (save for the past year or two) and OU have regularly been among the nation's elite. There really isn't a significant difference between what MU's faced in the Big 12 and what they would face in the SEC. We'd be seeing a moderate bump in difficulty in a couple games/year, but for the most part the difference really isn't that drastic.

2. Should Mizzou go to the SEC, Auburn will likely head to the east (per reports published in a Birmingham newspaper today that claim Mizzou is all but in). MU would be in the same division as Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, LSU and Texas A&M. Alabama and LSU are the only two programs consistently better than MU in that group. Alabama was 7-6 the year MU finished in the top 5, and LSU lost earlier that year to the same Arkansas team Mizzou crushed in the Cotton Bowl. An argument could be made that MU would have had a legitimate shot at the SEC title that season.

3. No one's expecting or claiming MU will consistently compete for SEC titles, let alone national titles. We don't do that in the Big 12 and won't in the SEC, either. But we will consistently play in bowl games and will improve overall as a program because of the move. Occasionally we may push for more than that.

Agreed. Pretty much what I have been saying.

4. MU will still recruit Texas. Those players have to go somewhere. There's a lot of talent in that state and Pinkel has a lot of relationships he's developed over the past decade. Many of our best Texas-bred players (Weatherspoon, Alexander, Daniel, etc) have been guys no one else wanted. Our success in that state is based on Pinkel's ability to find guys other people overlook, not outrecruiting other major programs in the region. With UT and TT likely headed to the PAC, A&M in the SEC and Baylor in an irrelevant conference (maybe a Big 12/Big East leftover deal), there won't be one conference that dominates Texas like there is now with the Big 12.

Good point regarding Pinkel's recruiting success in the state of Texas. I still think a defunct Big 12 could somewhat hurt Mizzou in that aspect because they wouldn't get to accentuate playing in Texas as much (or close to the state in OU's case). That premise is a good selling point for recruits and their families traveling-wise. But if Pinkel maintains those coaching relationships and continues to develop Texas recruits that few major programs covet, then there isn't an issue.

I think OU and UT will still get the majority of recruits they covet out of that state, primarily because of both their stature and proximity. That dominance will likely abate to a certain extent should the Big 12 teams disperse to other conferences, but for the most part I still think OU and UT will get the recruits in Texas that they are after. But you're right, there isn't a conference that would dominate the state like the Big 12 currently does.

 

[Sawyer]

I looked at the list of all Texas signees for Pinkel after I posted that.

Not a single one of his impact players from Texas is a guy that I would expect to go elsewhere if MU was in the SEC. For the most part we beat out mid-majors or other out of state programs that would lack ties to Texas (Minnesota, kansas, etc).

 

[Tony]

Pac-12 just announced it will not expand.