Personally, I have a deep hatred for Tennessee, Arkansas and Georgia because of their mouth-breathing fans.
Mizzou fans: Who would you say our biggest SEC rival is so far?
- Thread starter NikeFootball59
- Start date
Don't care, not pulling for Mizzou until the current protesters, I mean players filter out. Yes, I'm still pissed.
That is left to be determined for me because Pinkel's inconsistent showing in the past four years makes it difficult to know how we fit in.
I don't think Arkansas is yet. Just because the conference wants it to be doesn't mean it is. I think it takes more than a couple of contests between two teams for that to become a reality. Proximity makes for a good match, but time will tell. Just because a couple of SW Mo rednecks lust for it doesn't make it so either.
I agree... it was almost as if he was walking on eggshells as far as SEC competition was concerned. As I recall, he really would have preferred to have stayed in the Big 12.
Webb City......no I mean Kearney!
Don't take this the wrong way. As a lifelong SEC fan, I can say no one considers Mizzou a rival. In fact most of the SEC fanbase doesn't want Mizzou in the conference because of the geography. Not me, because I am glad to go see SEC games in Columbia instead of traveling 8 hours. Its way too soon for Mizzou to have a rival. I remember when Arkansas and USCjr came into the league. Over last 10 -15 years, Arkansas has developed a rivalry with LSU but it didn't happen over night. USCjr probably considers UGA their rival, but its not reciprocated as UGA considers Auburn and Florida their rival.
Arkansas' rivalry with LSU goes much farther back than 10 or 15 years. They started playing in 1901 and have played each other every year since 1992. They have played over 60 times. They now play every year for the Golden Boot. Like Hanny said you don't all of a sudden say two teams are going to be rivals. It would be a fun one though.
"SW Mo rednecks"
Guilty as charged. I have been to games at Fayetteville (90 minute drive) exponentially more times than Columbia. In-laws went to school there. The pig sooie crap gets old quick.
Guilty as charged. I have been to games at Fayetteville (90 minute drive) exponentially more times than Columbia. In-laws went to school there. The pig sooie crap gets old quick.
Not sure we lust for it, but I have never liked hawg fans even back when Mizzou never played them or was in the same conference with them. Because living in SWMissouri, yes that is right we are in Missouri not arKANSAS, and having to see all those stupid hawg fans who by the way are pretty arrogant, and strut around here wearing all that hawg gear or drive around with those stupid licence plates on their cars just makes me sick. They just cannot root for their team most of the ones I know always putting down Mizzou way before we joined the SEC...just a bunch of arrogant fans for sure. And I still blame arKANSAS for the downfall of Monett football in the 80's...By the way I would say if you are a SWMO redneck you are probable an arKANSAS fan not Mizzou.
Why is Arkansas to blame for the downfall of Monett football in the 80's?
If the football team never goes to an arKANSAS the team nor town never gets divided.
Cute on the arKANSAS deal. If memory serves me correct, didn't you go nuts on a poster for using the term MONEXICO in referring to Monett?? Same difference.
LOL nuts...I would say hardly, I might have chastised them, but it really does not bother me overall. I think it would bother the actual town from Missouri that is named Mexico more, as they might think you are mistaking us for them.
Plus it is one in the same...
Two state names, Arkansas and Kansas, share all but two letters in the exactly the same order. So why do we pronounce them differently?
We can thank the French. Arkansas was named for the French plural of a Native American tribe, while Kansas is the English spelling of a similar one. Since the letter "s" at the end of French words is usually silent, we pronounce Bill Clinton's home state "Arkansaw."
Arkansas probably. Nebraska fans without the titles.
Yes, that inconsistent 2 division titles in the first 3 years in the conference was just horrible. Especially when all of the experts on this board said that Mizzou would never be able to compete in the SEC.
I vote Arkansas.
Geography? Columbia, Missouri (38.95) is on almost the same latitude line as Lexington, Kentucky (38.03). It borders 3 SEC states. It is one of the stars on the Dixie Flag that you all love so much.
And I agree it is too soon to actually have a rival, but I also believe that proximity, along with people living in communities with split allegiance will impact rivalries. That is why I think it will be Arkansas. People in Southern Missouri already get into it. Plus, my in-laws live in Little Rock. They have already made it one in our family. So to say 'no one' considers Mizzou a rival is not accurate, many people I have talked to down there are already buying into it. And it is during Rivalry Week, along with recent bowl history.
First of all they have played in the SEC FOUR years.
2012 5-7 (2-6)
2013 12-2 (7-1)
2014. 11-3 (7-1)
2015 5-7 (1-7)
Bad, Great, Very good, Horrendous.
I believe that is the definition of inconsistent.
You are corrected.
No duh, I said first three years. I didn't lie. Plus, winning the title 50% of the time I will take forever.
It took 100 years for Missouri - Kansas rivalry to reach it level. none of us will be around to see an SEC rivalry match it.
Kentucky because it might be the only team Mizzou can beat. Might being the key word!
If you count winning the weak division as WINNING THE TITLE you hAve low expectations.
Postliterally makes no sense. At least not as much as post literally. P.S. Just having fun.
Postliterally makes no sense. At least not as much as post literally. P.S. Just having fun.
Should I give you credit for my excellent board grammar?
I have big thumbs.Postliterally makes no sense. At least not as much as post literally. P.S. Just having fun.
Read above moron. I was talking division titles. you guys can spin it any way you want, if it makes you feel better. My point was a simple one, we were told we couldn't compete in the SEC, and then won two DIVISIONAL titles in the first three years. I would say that is competing. And even if it is the "weak" division of the SEC, it is still a better move than staying in the Big 12.
You're nuts. I am over 50, and the first thing my grandpappy taught me was to hate the Chickenhawks. I am a third generation season ticket holder, and there has never been a time that MU-ku wasn't a rival. At least not until Bill Self killed the rivalry. But you are right, it probably won't be matched, unless it is with Arkansas (at least in my opinion).
Does the big 12 count Boomers win over 8-4 weak division 2nd placeTenn as their best OOC win?
Or 7-5 arky losing to TT?
Nothing actually. I stated in another post as well that I would take 50% of all East titles for the rest of my life, like has happened to this point. I guess I have to constantly spell out my point to some of you. That the Tigers had no problem competing in the SEC when everyone said they wouldn't.
I guess some of you only count the most recent year in sports when comparing stuff like this.
