RE: If that's true, then defund the program as much as possible

Posted on: April 6, 2025 at 07:39:50 CT

At what point does the SEC and ESPN expect members to try to help drive interest in the SECn and ESPN+? For example, I only get ESPN+ for Mizzou volleyball, WBB and softball access. All these sports are a backbone of yearly content. WBB already has access to solid facilities so trying in WBB seems like a no brainer to avoid Title 9 complaints that you are not trying to spend in women’s sports. You also seem to not recognize that women’s sports are a growing source of TV interest that drives dollars in negotiations.

Baseball to some degree too but I do question if spending big on a baseball is worth the diversion of limited funds at Mizzou where any baseball interest is easily supplanted by the Cardinals and Royals in mid-Missouri which has shown only mild interest in Mizzou baseball even when they won more. Then again, a new stadium and/or NIL dollars will only happen if boosters want it to happen and it’s their money, their choice. I’ve seen lil evidence of such boosters but I guess it’s always a possibility.

I mean I wish Alice Walton would spend money on something other than track and soccer facilities but , again, it’s her money. I could care less if Mizzou has a whole host of sports but it is what it is. I like volleyball, WBB and softball (which takes away from limited time to watch pathetic Mizzou baseball in the spring) so I won’t be advocating defunding them.