RE: Better breakdown of revenues
Posted on: June 15, 2023 at 12:06:50 CT
slamduncan KC
Posts:
22945
Member For:
23.98 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
I think the ultimate question is whether MU can build up interest, and therefore gain on this list much, being a 5 to 7 win football program on average? I think saying Pinkel did it is like comparing apples and oranges. Irrelevant as the situation has changed radically. About like pointing to the Devine era and saying that’s proof MU can be big time. World changed (e.g., a whole lot more integration of the sport).
The reason I believe the whole “we are so much better off than the B12 schools” is kind of irrelevant in terms of actual winning is that money doesn’t matter if you are a bottom dwelling, General and can’t really overcome the SEC brands. The chances of MU ascending in program status in the SEC is not great. They couldn’t even eat with the rich in the B8/12 outside of blips in time. How does MU ascend with the new scheduling model and the inclusion of 2 more huge football brands which, by my count, gives the SEC 9? And none of the other schools other than maybe Vandy live in fear of Mizzou. And they all are in better recruiting country. Add Clemson and Florida State and you now have 11 schools firmly in front of you.
It’s just not likely MU football becomes a big deal under these circumstances. So value noncon games with IL and ku, have fun with your home schedule, enjoying COMO and your tailgate and enjoy SEc travel venues if you can. To me, that’s the best thing about being in the SEC.
MU will make more money but it won’t likely change historical standing and results.