The Southeastern Conference and its current commissioner, Mike Slive, have set the standard in college athletics for years now, whether it in regard to television contracts, limiting a school to 25 signees in football or a host of other areas. Hell, in 1992 the SEC became the first conference to receive permission from the NCAA to split into divisions and host a conference championship game. This proved to be so wildly profitable it has been emulated by almost every conference in the country.
However, the SEC’s decision to grab Missouri is not going to do much for the league. When it was announced in September Texas A&M University would be joining the SEC, the general consensus on SEC message boards and radio shows was A&M would be a great fit; people were actually excited about it joining the conference. I have yet to see any such sentiment toward Missouri’s decision to join the league.
On paper, Missouri brings the St. Louis and Kansas City television markets, and this was the main reason the school was invited to join the SEC. However, the question needs to be asked if it truly deliver these markets. Both cities are home to multiple professional sports franchises, and Missouri is always going to have to compete with the St. Louis Cardinals, Kansas City Chiefs, et cetera when it comes to fan support and loyalty. That isn’t to say Missouri’s athletic program is a slouch. Its basketball program will immediately become one of the best in the SEC, and Missouri head football coach Gary Pinkel has established a quality football program that has been a mainstay in the top 25 over the last few years.
With that said, there are other schools that are a much better “fit” in the SEC than the Tigers of Missouri. The SEC may have been unable to woo any ACC schools due to the conference’s recent expansion and increased exit fees, but there were multiple ACC schools that would have made more sense in the SEC East than Missouri, which is now one of the SEC’s western-most schools.
Clemson, which is the most “SEC-like” of any school not in the SEC, made the most sense to join the conference. South Carolina, Florida and Georgia would have never allowed the land grant institution to join, even if they wanted to, but it would have provided the SEC with a school that was a fit culturally and geographically. Besides, people would tune in to watch Clemson play South Carolina, Georgia, Auburn, Florida and other SEC teams. A game between Clemson and any of the aforementioned schools could easily have higher ratings than a game featuring Missouri and any current member of the SEC. An SEC game featuring Clemson vs. Florida would just make sense. The same can’t be said of Florida and Missouri.
When you get down to it, Missouri simply does not fit in the SEC. Sure, Missouri, like every Southern state, has great barbecue and a sordid past when it comes to issues of race, but it is not Southern in the traditional sense of the word. The South is arguably the most distinct region in America, and we Southerners are a strange lot. When I think of SEC football, I think of bourbon, attractive girls in sundresses, men with “Bama bangs,” elaborate tailgates and battle cries such as Roll Tide, War Eagle, Hotty Toddy and many others. Does Missouri remind anyone of anything?
I don’t have enough room in this column to attempt to explain the importance of SEC football to the South’s identity and culture (If such things interest you, read Tony Barnhart’s “Southern Fried Football”), but I can tell you Missouri just does not mesh with the rest of the SEC. Time will certainly change some of that, but Missouri will always be an outsider of sorts.
