Unassisted Trripleplay: Big 12 > Big 10 > Big Trouble

9 Reasons why moving to the Big Ten would not be good for Mizzou Baseball:

1. While the Big Ten seems to be having an up year in 2010 - while the Big 12 is having a mediocre year - over the long run, one thing holds true: Big Ten Baseball Sucks. For proof, see my earlier post with the historical numbers.
   
   
2. In a supposedly "up" year for the Big Ten, the highest ranked Big 10 team in the NCAA RPI listing (4/27) is Michigan, ranked 56th. In a universally acknowledge "down" year for the Big 12, there are seven Big 12 teams ranked higher than Michigan: Texas (4th), OU (25), A&M (32), KSU (40), TT (44), KU (52), BU (58)
   
   
3. The NCAA lists the Top 50 schools in 2009 attendance:
   

   Three Big Ten teams are on the list: Ohio State (35), Penn State (49), Michigan (50).
   
   The Big 12 has 8 teams in the Top 50: UT (6), A&M (9), NU (20), BU (21), TT (22), KSU (40), OSU (45), OU (47)

4. Total all-time Big Ten players in the Major Leagues: 370; Total all-time Big 12 players in the Major Leagues: 418 (Baseball-Reference.com)
   
   
5. Someone suggested to me that MU actually fits in better with the Big 10, considering that MU is more in the Big 10 neighborhood on most of the stats I just listed: Current RPI (89th), Annual attendance (23,848 in 2009), Major Leaguers (35). But the Tigers' numbers in all those areas has been on the way up recently. Do we really want to settle in with the Big Ten mediocrity?
   
   
6. I seriously doubt that MU would have the same recruiting success as they have enjoyed over the past decade if those potential Tigers knew they would be competing in the 2nd-tier Big Ten, rather than the Big 12, a known and respected 1st-tier Baseball Conference. Would the treasured succession of ace pitchers - Scherzer, Crow, Gibson, Tepesch, Anderson, Smith (and the two that were snagged by the draft - Elbert and Cosart) - would they have been as eager to sign with a Mizzou team in the Big Ten?
   
   
7. A frequent argument I hear: MU could dominate the Big Ten in baseball, like Wichita State does in the Missouri Valley. Well, perhaps the Tigers would have an edge for 2-3 years . . . until the recruiting started to drop off because of being in the Big Ten. And frankly, I'd rather Mizzou was in the MO Valley than the Big 10 when it comes to Baseball.
   
   
8. What about the MU-KU rivalry? Yes, we could still schedule the Jayhawks for a series every year, but eventually that sort of non-conference rivalry loses its luster. There's somewhat of a baseball rivalry between Mizzou and Missouri State, but it will never attain any level of intensity like the KU rivalry. And there is no historical rivalry with any Big 10 school. Illinois? I chortle.
   
   
9. If the competitiveness drops, if the recruiting drops, if the potential for ultimate success is lowered, do we start losing coaches? When schools in the top-tier conferences come calling to Jamieson, Pratte and Vitello, will they stay for the sake of Ol' Mizzou? Or will they go where they have a chance to really compete at the top levels of D-1 baseball?

I'm not fooling anyone. Everyone knows that if MU goes to the Big Ten and sinks into the Big 10 mediocrity, you'll still see me in Section E, Row 4, Seat 1. It's still baseball. And it would still meet my basic requirement of being entertaining. As I said in a manifesto last year, "Win, Lose, Draw, just show me a good time and I'll be happy."

But playing in the Big Ten would NOT be as entertaining as competing in the Big 12.

Links:

■ Mizzou to the Big Ten is NOT a "done deal" (RockMNation.com)

So this played on the original broadcast and was left out of the abridged “round table” podcast that featured Van Pelt, Rusillo, Feldman, and Forde. This comment is solely Van Pelt and occurs as he is returning from commercial after the round table. He reads an e-mail from a Mizzou fan in Columbia concerned that the Tigers aren’t getting mentioned enough as a perfect expansion candidate. He responds to this by saying that Feldman sent him an e-mail after a conversation he had with a prominent PAC 10 athletic director in which the AD told him that Mizzou to the Big 10 is a “done deal.”

■ Podcast: Expansion roundtable (ESPN.com)

■ A Big 12 breakup could hurt KU, K-State most (Kansas City Star)
Two separate reports put Missouri and Nebraska in the Big Ten last week, and while conversations between The Star and officials at both schools late last week disproved the reports, there is obviously movement behind the scenes.

At the moment, Missouri has leverage and the best immediate future of Kansas City’s three local Big 12 schools.

If invited, Mizzou could join the Big Ten and accept some $10 million more than it currently gets from the Big 12, as well as join a better academic conference. Or, perhaps, they could flip the Big Ten’s interest into a better situation in the Big 12.
. . .

■ AD talks about Big 10 rumors (KY3.com - Includes Video)

Alden denied rumors and erroneous reports in the national media that Missouri is being pursued to move to the Big 10. That conference has made public its intentions to look at expansion but Alden insisted, "We have not been contacted by anyone."

Alden did add, however, that the potential changing landscape in college football requires that "Missouri has to look at the things that we can do to strengthen us academically and athletically in the country, whatever they might be. We've got to look at those types of options but, right now, we don't know what those options are."

■ Powered up: A move would make sense (PowerMizzou.com)

Again, I don't know if it's going to happen. And if it doesn't, that's probably okay. I grew up with the Big Eight. There is a lot to like about the Big 12. I'm not going to pout if everything remains the same. But I'm running out of reasons to think the move doesn't make sense. If the invitation comes, a legitimate argument to say no doesn't really seem to exist.

■ Previous SimmonsField.com posts about the Big 12/Big 10 rumors