Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleazar
Is it better to be the smallest house in a great neighborhood, or the biggest house in a run down neighborhood?
I mean, even if we haven't been nationally competitive recently there's still the possibility that we could build up to it in the future and being in the SEC makes that possible, long-term.
If we had stayed in the Big 12 we might have ended up in the B1G eventually, but we could also have ended up in a mid major conference like KSU or ISU probably will, and that would have been fatal to any aspirations of being a national champion one day, or even just a program with a national profile.
I don't think there is any argument that it was the right move, that has been pretty much settled with the Big 12 breaking up in mid-air
|
They were almost never the biggest house in the rundown neighborhood (unless you mean if they were still there when OU and Texas leave), but besides that I actually said as much 10 years ago.
A decade later, perhaps the B1G would have been a better fit into terms of competitiveness (had they come calling), but the SEC realignment might help and of course it's better to pull the trigger when the SEC comes calling than wait it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearcat
That's the worst option... they used to get pushed all over the field against a team like OU, and they've made big strides and can now at least hang with them. How would going back to ISU, KU, etc; and playing OU once every other year help? At least now, without divisions, they would be facing Texas, OU and OSU every year. Sure, MU will take a step or two back if they go to the SEC, but the best option for any team wanting to be the best is to play against the best.
|