Mizzou to the Big 10: My Opposition.

I realize that very few of your care about this, but this is an issue I have a strong opinion upon and this is my forum to vocalize said opinion.

There has been talk recently that the Big 10 (11) plans/hopes/intends/wishes/sucks (oops, that last one fits, but not in this current sentence construction) to expand to a 12th team. That's right, a conference named the Big 10 already has 11 teams - and wants 12. Let's ignore the irony of that for the moment, and focus on said expansion. I've heard 4 schools at least mentioned as that "12th" team: Notre Dame, Missouri, Syracuse, and Rutgers.

Because of its football tradition and inappropriately large national profile, Notre Dame is the white whale to the Big 10 (11)'s Captain Ahab. Because they one several titles 20 years ago or more and dumped a shit-ton of money on a shitty, shitty, intemperate know-it-all of a jackass coach, Notre Dame remains a college football cash cow. However, I'm not the only one who thinks that it won't long survive as an Independent - non-conference affiliated - team. It's geographically located perfectly to fit in with the Big 10, and it already plays three Big 10 (11) teams every year: Michigan, Michigan St, and Purdue.

If the Big 10 (11) demands another team, Notre Dame makes perfect sense as that 12th team. As an dded bonus for me personally: it would give me even more reason to hate the Big 10. I hope it happens - but I don't think it will. Notre Dame is Notre Dame in attitude even if it's not legendary in its on-field performance - I think it will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into a conference after NBC is (eventually) allowed out of their ridiculous TV deal. What's more, adding Notre Dame assumes that the Big 10 (11) does things based upon logic and reason. This is where you can insert the all-too-predictable joke in which I compare the Big 10 (11)'s operation to that of General Motors.

If:
1. the Big 10 decides to expand
and
2. Notre Dame is not that 12th team
then
3. Commentators think that the next rational choice is the University of Missouri, known to her fans as "Mizzou."

After that long prelude, this is where I come in. I vehemently oppose a Mizzou move on 2 grounds:

A. Emotional. I hate the Big 10. I do no want my favorite BCS-level team playing in the Big 10. Big 10 commish Jim Delany is probably the most destructive force in college athletics. It is a conference that verily oozes entitlement and pretentiousness. These are schools that constantly tout their academic prowess - in discussions about athletics. These are schools that claim to do things "the right way." You remember 2003, when Ohio State won the national championship? You remember how they won that national championship? Maurice Clarett, that's how. Probably the most despicable college running back since Lawrence Phillips. But you can bet they won't be returning that trophy. Or just read the Wikipedia of Woody Hayes - quality individual, a worthy representative of a university whose sense of self is so bloated that it emphasizes the article "The" on the front of its name. And then there's Michigan, who perpetuated the legend of ole' Bo Shembechler by poaching Rich Rodriguez from WVU, the best coaching mercenary since Bobby Petrino. The point here is that behind it's entitlement and it's delusions of grandeur, the Big 10 does things like everybody else - except play basketball, as nobody has mastered boring, ugly basketball like they have.

B. Historical: 2/3 of the Big 12 conference schools are the teams from the old Big 8. As a founding member of that conference, Missouri had been a member of the big 8 (originally MVIAA) since 1907. Why should Mizzou abandon the conference affiliations they've held for over 100 years? Why is the Big 10 presumptuous enough to believe they would? Even if I concede that the Big 10 is "more academic," why should I give a fuck? Fuck academics - intercollegiate athletic conferences are not about academics.

B2: Rivalries: History breeds familiarity. Familiarity breeds contempt. Contempt = rivalries. Mizzou has no rivalries in the Big 10. Yes, a concerted effort over the years might create a rivalry between Mizzou and Iowa, or Mizzou and Illinois. In fact, somebody has been trying to build the latter rivalry for years - and they have failed. Mizzou has a longstanding and bitter rivalry with KU. These two teams are mortal enemies. In terms of Big 12 rivalries, only UT-OU can match this one for hatred.

C. Recruiting: The Big 10 would want Mizzou because of money: it would gain them the St. Louis and (to a lesser extent) KC television markets. Mizzou might grab increased eastward exposure, the "might" help from a recruiting and television market standpoint. However, in the bargain, Mizzou loses Texas - and goddammit you could field a national championship team out of 3-star rated players from Texas. It's fucking football shangri-la. With a few exceptions (Jeremy Maclin, for instance) much of Mizzou's football resurgence has been built upon players from Texas. So has that of Kansas. Texas is a national power built upon players from Texas. So is Oklahoma. Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are rising - with the bulk of their players from Texas. While Big 10'ers will no doubt hold up the flag of Terrell Pryor, recruiting in the Old Northwest (a kind euphemism for the "Rust Belt") is not Texas. Not even close.

So I'm tiring of this, and it's already 18 pages long - but I can't honestly see any good reason that Mizzou should leave the big 12 (which would ironically give the Big 12 ten teams and the Big 10 twelve of them). I personally believe that - from a sporting standpoint - Iowa State would be better served by a switch in conference affiliation. They already have Iowa, their biggest rival, in that conference. Minneapolis (home of Minnesota) is still closer to Ames than any Big 12 school. Yet the Big 10 will have no desire for Iowa State - a doormat in its own league and the 2nd school in its own (lightly populated) state.

The other two schools I've seen mentioned (and the choices of dinosaur Joe Paterno) are Rutgers and Syracuse. I'm sure Scott has an opinion on Rutgers, and someone out in the ether might care about Syracuse, but - in my opinion - were either of these schools to move, my response would be "Meh." I think Syracuse might help itself in basketball by getting out of the murderous Big East, but would a switch be a detriment to their all-world Lacrosse team? That I do not know.

I hate the Big 10.