Well Kentucky is in the SEC lol no one mentions them in realignment talk because they're securely in the best conference in the country.enigmaax;907150 wrote:I'm not addressing how the fanbase is split at all. I don't have any idea and don't care. It doesn't really matter as long as Missouri is going to be on TV in KC.
As for Kansas' national brand and the value of their basketball team, I fall somewhere in the middle of your and Jordo's opinions. Basketball isn't a driving force and that's where Kansas' national brand is built. They do incredible business from a basketball standpoint. However, there's astronomically less value in that to an entire conference than there is for football. And Kansas isn't a national brand for football. Their basketball team makes Kansas better off and if it came down to picking up scraps, that might give Kansas an edge over schools like Baylor and Iowa State. But for someone to actively pursue Kansas as a valuable addition? The major players aren't exactly going to salivate over the chance to have Kansas.
Kentucky has a similar brand in basketball. You never hear any conference talk about how much UK would enhance the conference. If the SEC started falling apart, nobody would be scrambling to get them even with two decent-sized markets and a stand-alone basketball program.
btw, i'm not arguing that Mizzou isn't a better option than KU. I'm not arguing that KU is a "big" grab for a conference. My stance has always been, when you NEED to add a team not named Texas, ND, etc.....KU is a good option. They have the brand, the market (KC), and a profitable athletic department. Don't forget they were in a BCS bowl 5 years ago. It's not like their fball program has been irrelevant for 30 years