Showing posts with label Missouri Tigers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Missouri Tigers. Show all posts
Sunday, June 6, 2010
An Ultimatum? That's the best you can do?
(Update: 12:08pm PDT) According to the Austin American Statesman, it was the Big 12 presidents who delievered this ultimatum to Nebraska and Missouri. My original sentiment still stands, though, that the conference commissioner has to have something to do with this ultimatum. Oh, and I still think the ultimatum is bullshit.)
I rarely use this space to beat the drums for my own school or to vent about the goings on affecting my alma mater.
But with the expansion rumors flying fast and furious over the last few days (while I've been fighting sickness, naturally), I feel that I need to take a stand.
I've yet to say anything about the spineless, feckless leadership of Dan Beebe, current commissioner of the Big 12 conference.
Well, I think it is time for that to end.
Dan Beebe took over as commissioner of the conference in 2007.
In three years, he might be overseeing its death, and he has no one to blame but himself for this.
Of course, instead of owning up to the responsibility, he is trying to force the responsibility for the demise of the league on two schools from the North division.
At least, that is how it appears to me with the rumor that Nebraska and Missouri have been given until either this coming Friday or next Friday to pledge their loyalty to the Big 12.
Excuse me?
This is all Missouri and Nebraska's fault for wanting to move to the Big Ten?
The timeline for Big Ten expansion still has about six months (minimum) before it will probably be resolved.
And having worked at a Big Ten institution, I can tell you that the glacial timeline is appropriate for that league. Tradition demands that one be deliberate, after all.
Meanwhile, the Pac-10 appears to already be set on offering the entire south division except for Baylor an invitation, and yet there is no mention of an ultimatum for those schools — who are a helluva lot closer to being given an shot at a new league.
Let's say you run a multi-million dollar corporation. You have two fellow corporations looking to steal away some of your twelve employees. You know that one company may be coming by within the next six to twelve months to poach two solid employees, and that another company is planning on trying to poach six employees tomorrow. Those six include your top two producers.
So why would be willing to let those six employees talk with the rocket fast corporation while telling the two employees who might be interested in the opportunity six to twelve months away that "We need to know your future plans now?"
It logically makes no sense to shame Missouri and Nebraska into staying, telling them, "You'd better stay or else." while letting Oklahoma and Texas et. al do whatever the hell they want.
You've already acknowledged, by refusing to discuss changes to the revenue-sharing model, that you consider the conference's bread to be buttered by Texas and Oklahoma.
If that be the case, then why let them walk with a smile and a hearty wave and instead try to lower the hammer on Missouri and Nebraska?
The perception is already out there that Missouri isn't worth the trouble; they're too busy trying to run away from the league because it's been too hard for them and hell, even if they leave, it won't matter because the league will thrive. Heck, they might even get an exemption to play a championship game because it's Division 1 football. It's the Big 12. It ain't intramurals.
Never mind if perception is reality or not in this instance, because in Dan Beebe's world, you don't try and get loyalty oaths from the schools that are bringing in the most revenue. That, apparently, is too logical.
Would a Big 12 network have been a panacea in this instance? Who knows? If the revenue from that network was distributed inequitably, it probably wouldn't have been.
But why have the talks about a Big 12 network seemingly been ongoing for three years with no movement towards actually establishing a network, while the Big Ten and the Mountain West both have television networks? (Granted, the Mountain West Network has issues of its own, but that's a conversation for another time.)
Can someone tell me what Dan Beebe's greatest accomplishment has been in three years running this league? Because as hard as I try, I can't seem to find anything that he has done that has helped move the Big 12 forward.
As far as I can tell, the death of the conference might wind up being his greatest accomplishment.
But if the conference goes down in flames next week, well, he can always say he stuck it to the Huskers and the Tigers.
Way to go, Dan.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Big Ten Expansion Round 3: C.R.E.A.M.
(For previous installments on Big Ten Expansion, visit here and here).
One thing that I found interesting about the Pac-10 analysis was how few of the athletic departments ran overall surpluses. Football made money and was in the black, but the departments were balanced.
In the Big Ten? Not so much.
Big Ten Financial Analysis
I would say that Texas and Notre Dame come out favorably in this examination based on overall revenue and how well their football programs have performed financially (and in Texas's case, on the field as well.)
Of course, I probably should mention that it appears that Texas will not be joining the party, if Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez is to be believed.
I believe that this is a fluid situation, so we will have to stay tuned.
One thing that I found interesting about the Pac-10 analysis was how few of the athletic departments ran overall surpluses. Football made money and was in the black, but the departments were balanced.
In the Big Ten? Not so much.
Big Ten Financial Analysis
I would say that Texas and Notre Dame come out favorably in this examination based on overall revenue and how well their football programs have performed financially (and in Texas's case, on the field as well.)
Of course, I probably should mention that it appears that Texas will not be joining the party, if Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez is to be believed.
I believe that this is a fluid situation, so we will have to stay tuned.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Big Ten Expansion Round 2: Television Market Share
In the first round of Pac-10 expansion talks, I posted the reputational academic bonafides of the current Big Ten Schools and their potential new brethern.
In this round, we will look at the television markets that are currently being utilized and what a newcomer would have to offer.
Now, when talking markets, we are going to refer to the specific regional markets for these teams. The market sizes are done based off of data from Nielsen Media Research.
As with the Pac-10 television markets exercise, note that some markets may contain more than one city. With the Big Ten, the largest market may not necessarily be the city where the school is actually located (see Penn State):
Illinois (Champaign-Urbana/Springfield/Decatur): 84
Indiana (Indianapolis): 25
Iowa (Cedar Rapids): 88
Michigan (Detroit): 11
Michigan State (Lansing/Jackson): 115
Minnesota (Minneapolis/St. Paul): 15
Northwestern (Chicago): 3
Ohio State (Columbus): 34
Penn State (Altoona/Johnstown): 101
Purdue (Lafayette): 191
Wisconsin (Madison): 85
Not a lot of large markets. At least, not as many as the Pac-10. But that's also because of the nature of where the campuses are located and how the conferences evolved.
So let's look at the schools that the Big Ten has an eye on (allegedly):
Missouri (Columbia/Jefferson City): 137
Notre Dame (South Bend/Elkhart): 91
Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh): 23
Rutgers (New York City): 1
Syracuse (Syracuse): 83
Texas (Austin): 48
Now it looks interesting, doesn't it?
If the Big Ten wants to pull in a new market, why not try and tap into the largest market that is still out there in New York City?
Michigan and Penn State have huge alumni bases in the city already, and New York is the unconquered final frontier as far as college football goes.
And if the NFL locks out its players for the 2011 season (and if Rutgers can find the magic of the 2006 season again....)
In this round, we will look at the television markets that are currently being utilized and what a newcomer would have to offer.
Now, when talking markets, we are going to refer to the specific regional markets for these teams. The market sizes are done based off of data from Nielsen Media Research.
As with the Pac-10 television markets exercise, note that some markets may contain more than one city. With the Big Ten, the largest market may not necessarily be the city where the school is actually located (see Penn State):
Illinois (Champaign-Urbana/Springfield/Decatur): 84
Indiana (Indianapolis): 25
Iowa (Cedar Rapids): 88
Michigan (Detroit): 11
Michigan State (Lansing/Jackson): 115
Minnesota (Minneapolis/St. Paul): 15
Northwestern (Chicago): 3
Ohio State (Columbus): 34
Penn State (Altoona/Johnstown): 101
Purdue (Lafayette): 191
Wisconsin (Madison): 85
Not a lot of large markets. At least, not as many as the Pac-10. But that's also because of the nature of where the campuses are located and how the conferences evolved.
So let's look at the schools that the Big Ten has an eye on (allegedly):
Missouri (Columbia/Jefferson City): 137
Notre Dame (South Bend/Elkhart): 91
Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh): 23
Rutgers (New York City): 1
Syracuse (Syracuse): 83
Texas (Austin): 48
Now it looks interesting, doesn't it?
If the Big Ten wants to pull in a new market, why not try and tap into the largest market that is still out there in New York City?
Michigan and Penn State have huge alumni bases in the city already, and New York is the unconquered final frontier as far as college football goes.
And if the NFL locks out its players for the 2011 season (and if Rutgers can find the magic of the 2006 season again....)
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Big Ten Expansion Round 1: Academics
Since I had so much fun doing it for the Pac-10, let's run the same drill with the Big Ten.
Parameters are the same as for the Pac-10. Only thing that's changed are the schools involved. For the Big Ten, while there have been a few names tossed about, let's focus in on the six likeliest candidates: Missouri, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Syracuse and Texas.
That's right; Texas.
On with the show. First, the current residents of the Big Ten (11):
Illinois:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 39 (highest ranking number assigned—128)
Enrollment: 40,687
Indiana:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 37,821
Iowa:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 28,442
Michigan:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 27
Enrollment: 39,533
Michigan State:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 44,836
Minnesota:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 61
Enrollment: 50,954
Northwestern:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 12
Enrollment: 17,747
Ohio State:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 53
Enrollment: 50,995
Penn State:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 47
Enrollment: 41,289
Purdue:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 61
Enrollment: 40,108
Wisconsin:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 39
Enrollment: 40, 455
Average ranking for the Big Ten: 50.1
Average enrollment: 39, 352
And now, on to the contenders for that coveted one spot:
Missouri:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 102
Enrollment: 27,003
Pittsburgh:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 56
Enrollment: 26,731
Notre Dame:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 20
Enrollment: 11,479
Syracuse:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/High Research Activity (RU/H)
US News National Ranking: 58
Enrollment: 18, 247
Rutgers:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 66
Enrollment: 34,696
Texas:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 47
Enrollment: 50,377
Interesting, no?
It would seem that Texas is a good fit after all academically. Out of the group, Missouri would appear to be the weak link in the chain, as their US News ranking is significantly higher than anyone else on this list.
Academically, while not part of the AAU, Notre Dame has exemplary academics.
But as I've said before, there is more to this than just academics.
Parameters are the same as for the Pac-10. Only thing that's changed are the schools involved. For the Big Ten, while there have been a few names tossed about, let's focus in on the six likeliest candidates: Missouri, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Syracuse and Texas.
That's right; Texas.
On with the show. First, the current residents of the Big Ten (11):
Illinois:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 39 (highest ranking number assigned—128)
Enrollment: 40,687
Indiana:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 37,821
Iowa:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 28,442
Michigan:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 27
Enrollment: 39,533
Michigan State:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 44,836
Minnesota:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 61
Enrollment: 50,954
Northwestern:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 12
Enrollment: 17,747
Ohio State:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 53
Enrollment: 50,995
Penn State:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 47
Enrollment: 41,289
Purdue:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 61
Enrollment: 40,108
Wisconsin:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 39
Enrollment: 40, 455
Average ranking for the Big Ten: 50.1
Average enrollment: 39, 352
And now, on to the contenders for that coveted one spot:
Missouri:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 102
Enrollment: 27,003
Pittsburgh:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 56
Enrollment: 26,731
Notre Dame:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 20
Enrollment: 11,479
Syracuse:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/High Research Activity (RU/H)
US News National Ranking: 58
Enrollment: 18, 247
Rutgers:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 66
Enrollment: 34,696
Texas:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 47
Enrollment: 50,377
Interesting, no?
It would seem that Texas is a good fit after all academically. Out of the group, Missouri would appear to be the weak link in the chain, as their US News ranking is significantly higher than anyone else on this list.
Academically, while not part of the AAU, Notre Dame has exemplary academics.
But as I've said before, there is more to this than just academics.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Mizzou Cuts Ties With Promising Frosh QB
Having spent a good deal of time drinking in Columbia, MO (much of it underage), I consider myself fortunate to have had the common sense to not get caught.
Then again, I wasn't a freshman vying for the backup QB spot.
After Blaine Dalton's second arrest on Friday morning, head coach Gary Pinkel swiftly dropped the hammer, booting Dalton from the team.
Again, Dalton was suspended after the first incident in April, where he managed to avoid being charged with drug possession because of 10 Hydrocodone pills that were found in his car.
Dalton was forced to surrender his driver's license as part of his sentence for the minor in possession he was charged with.
So, you're a freshman QB. You've had your license suspended and been suspended from the team for a minor in possession and traffic violations.
Why would you think that it's a good idea to get behind the wheel (after having had a few drinks) and think you can drive home?
Especially when you don't have a license!
It's simply inconceivable.
Then again, I wasn't a freshman vying for the backup QB spot.
After Blaine Dalton's second arrest on Friday morning, head coach Gary Pinkel swiftly dropped the hammer, booting Dalton from the team.
Again, Dalton was suspended after the first incident in April, where he managed to avoid being charged with drug possession because of 10 Hydrocodone pills that were found in his car.
Dalton was forced to surrender his driver's license as part of his sentence for the minor in possession he was charged with.
So, you're a freshman QB. You've had your license suspended and been suspended from the team for a minor in possession and traffic violations.
Why would you think that it's a good idea to get behind the wheel (after having had a few drinks) and think you can drive home?
Especially when you don't have a license!
It's simply inconceivable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)