Should KU & KSU join the MVC?

[MoValley John]

If anyone has cause instability, it is Oklahoma. Oklahoma took the lead in this whole fiasco and has taken the lead role of the conference away from Texas. When Oklahoma stated that they were looking, Bayor played their cards. Texas is hampered with the LHN problem. Texas needs the Big XII to keep their network in place. They could also go independent, but even they have stated that it really isn't feasable. Texas's strengths have marginalized them.

Everyone needs to keep their eye on Oklahoma, the aTm situation is a diversion, plus, Baylor's threat has tied the hands of every other conference that might want to accept OU. Does the PAC want the threat of a TI lawsuit? It's all a high stakes game of chicken. Eventually, somebody is going to flinch.

[MoValley John]

A lot of discussion has centered around having four 16-team super-conferences but it is really difficult to predict where this will all end up.

We might end up with six 16-team conferences (96 teams) or five 20-teams conferences (which really, after breaking these teams into divisions means ten - 10 teams conferences with perhaps some inter-division play in some sports). Maybe we end up with four 16-team conferences, one 20-team conference and two 10-team conferences (104 teams). Really difficult to say and this could take a few years to play out or maybe there will be a catalyst to cause this to all come together quckly.

KSU, ISU and Baylor definitely have the most to be concerned about amont Big XII teams but I think KSU probably will end up somewhere in this Top 100 conglomeration. I think Iowa State is definitely on the bubble here. One of the problems KSU has is their proximity to KU. They really don't deliver a whole lot in the way of TV markets that KU won't deliver on their own. Isn't that what is really driving all of this -- TV money and markets?

Not sure Iowa State delivers anything that Iowa doesn't pretty much deliver and Baylor surely doesn't deliver anything Texas and aTm aren't already pretty much delivering.

There are probably a number of Big East teams that are also on the bubble when it comes to the eventual shake out.

In any case, it is very interesting stuff to follow.

What is wrong with two, 64 team conferences?

You are right, this stuff is fun. That is, unless you are a fan of Kansas State.

[MoValley John]

Hey now MVJ, I think you are forgetting about KSU's 3 team equestrian national championships (along with 5 individual national championships).

I mean sure, only 18 schools compete in NCAA DI equestrian, but they still count right?

Crap!!!!! I was wrong!!!

Equestrian counts. Kansas State is..... Significant!

[MoValley John]

A must see!

http://youtu.be/BSm8p3V1X14

[MoValley John]

Recognition at the football game. The jumbotron in the background is huge!

http://youtu.be/25TNLZwF28E

[MoValley John]

K-State Greek system honored.

http://youtu.be/TheZV1-A3kc

And I thought Omega Moo was just made up for Revenge of the Nerds!

[MoValley John]

At Nebraska football games, I always make fun of the fat chicks on the flag team. One girl is so big she takes up two hash marks! That said, fat chicks and flag teams go together like peas and carrots.

Kansas State rolls out the fat chicks when they want to show off their sororities!

[GorHoops]

Good lord Mo whatever your name is, for someone who earlier said, "i really don't have anything against KSU, I feel sorry for them... blah blah blah," you sure have decided to trash on anything and everything that is KSU, I mean come on, cheerleaders, you are an absolute joke. KSU will be just fine, whether you think they are relevant or not, you are bringing the same tired crap every NUb and KU fan has brought for years. KSU is lucky to be in a BCS conference. Why are they lucky??? They entered the Big 6 90 years ago and that has grown to the Big 12, why is KSU lucky to be there? It was a regional conference of two Ok schools, two Kansas schools, Mizzou, etc. KSU has been a proud and quality member ever since. Yes, KSU sucked in football for years, nothing new there, not sure how that is relevant now. It just seems really amazing to me that basically you have decided to take a thread that was about KU and KSU to the MVC, and make it your personal pulpit to bash everything that is KSU. I guess I just don't understand why people come to a message board of a completely different school to bash another, makes no sense to me. I would bet MOST Shocker fans could care less what you believe about KSu.

[Ta town]

could care less what you believe about KSu.

It's couldn't not could. Sorry this drives me nutz. I don't think anybody ever it says it correctly. I'm no grammar guy either, I suck at it. However one should know that if you could care less then the amount you care is > than zero, which means you care.

[vtshocker]

[quote="MoValley John"]
Kansas State rolls out the fat chicks when they want to show off their

that reminds of the classic Joe College tshirt
KState girls chunky dunk and KU girls skinny dip

[GorHoops]

I apologize ta for my poor grammar, I got in a hurry. Listen, I am a KSU grad and a huge fan, but also am a big Shocker fan, have lived in Wichita for years and have many family ties to WSU. I just get frustrated when this Mo schmuck, a typical Fusker football fan, tries his best to minimalize KSU. Fusker fans have been doing that since Snyder started beating them back in the late 90's. It was just such a hard blow to their ego's that the almighty and wonderful Nebraska football program would lose to someone as irrelevant as KSU, so ever since, every Fusker fan has made it their personal mission to "put KSU in their place." Is pretty sad when doing so on a Shocker board. KSU doesn't deserve BCS status because they haven't won a Natl. Championship? So, every single BCS school has a national title???? KSU is what we thought they were, they have no fans outside of Kansas and no national brand? I can think of a minimum of 20-30 BCS schools that have no more of a national brand or a national following than KSU. We see what we want to see, simple as that. When this Mo schmuck says he has been around the country, he sees what he wants to see.

[The Mad Hatter]

I apologize ta for my poor grammar, I got in a hurry. Listen, I am a KSU grad and a huge fan, but also am a big Shocker fan, have lived in Wichita for years and have many family ties to WSU. I just get frustrated when this Mo schmuck, a typical Fusker football fan, tries his best to minimalize KSU. Fusker fans have been doing that since Snyder started beating them back in the late 90's. It was just such a hard blow to their ego's that the almighty and wonderful Nebraska football program would lose to someone as irrelevant as KSU, so ever since, every Fusker fan has made it their personal mission to "put KSU in their place." Is pretty sad when doing so on a Shocker board. KSU doesn't deserve BCS status because they haven't won a Natl. Championship? So, every single BCS school has a national title???? KSU is what we thought they were, they have no fans outside of Kansas and no national brand? I can think of a minimum of 20-30 BCS schools that have no more of a national brand or a national following than KSU. We see what we want to see, simple as that. When this Mo schmuck says he has been around the country, he sees what he wants to see.

Aside from anything MVJ says, the issue here is that there are two categories of schools in BCS conferences. Here are schools like Florida, Ohio State, Texas, USC, etc. that have huge histories of success, broad fan bases, and generate huge amounts of revenue. Then there are schools that get a piece of the shared profits these high profile schools generate, but don't generate a great deal of revenue themselves (KSU and many others fall into this category).

All of this would be fine, except that all too frequently the schools that fall into the latter BCS category (i.e. not huge revenue generators, but get a piece of the BCS pie) act as though they are better than their non-BCS counterparts, when mostly they are no different other than luck of conference affiliation.

Clearly not all fans of schools like KSU maintain this mindset, but enough do that it creates a humorous situation when those school face the prospect of losing their conference affiliation, since that was the only thing they had to justify their superiority complex.

The jokes are less directed at KSU than at that section of the KSU fan base that thinks their conference affiliation makes them a more significant program than they really are.

[GorHoops]

I understand this completely, and believe me, I know KSU is fortunate to be in a BCS conference, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve to be there. My biggest problem with this Mo schmuck was that I didn't really see anyone from KSU coming on to say how great KSU is or that we are better than mid majors, etc. I saw one who said "KU and KSU won't stoop to the MVC," but I took that as a joke, not as a legit fan trying to be an arrogant jerk. I saw another KSU guy talk about some KSU accomplishments, and that was about it, but this Mo guy decided to jump on his pedastal and post like 30 times about how KSU is nothing more than Manhattan Christian college if it wasn't for the BCS conference. My thing is, KSU has been in that conference for 80 years. They didn't jump in ten years ago or something, they were a part of it from essentially the beginning. Heck, had Fairmont College been founded a bit earlier, it is quite possible WU may have been added to the Big 6, who knows. KSU has been around what, like 65 years longer than WSU, so when the Big 6 was formed, there weren't many bigger universities in the midwest to choose from. I guess when I look at schools like OSU, TTech, Miss. State, Wash. State, etc. I see them about the same as KSU.

[1972Shocker]

KSU has been around what, like 65 years longer than WSU

Not that it is really relevant but I think KSU was founded 32 years earlier than WSU. William and Mary has been around 170 years longer than KSU. Again, not sure what the relevance of that is.

[GorHoops]

My only point was that, had WU been founded a bit earlier, then the shocks might have been in the Big 6, 7, 8, 12. My point was that KSU shouldn't be blasted for being "lucky to be in a BCS conference" when they have been in that conference since the beginning. In no way was I saying KSU is better than WSU because they were founded earlier, I was saying that, when the Big 6 was formed, there weren't a bunch of large universities to pick from, KSU was one, so they joined, and have been a part ever since.