MU ****The official NEW new conference realignment thread.**** - Page 218

**Saul Good** · 01-31-2012, 02:52 PM

the second thread has been pronounced dead.

**DeezNutz** · 06-01-2012, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

I have no idea what you're saying here. If the SEC wanted to have the tournament in KC, the tournament would be in KC. There is no situation under which they would refuse that sort of influx of money.

There is absolutely no way that an arena and major metropolitan area located in an SEC state would want or allow an SEC tournament to use the facilities and fans to spend enormous amounts of tourist dollars.

**Saul Good** · 06-01-2012, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

I have no idea what you're saying here. If the SEC wanted to have the tournament in KC, the tournament would be in KC. There is no situation under which they would refuse that sort of influx of money.

Maybe the SEC will hold the tournament in Wichita. They just built a new arena that isn't being used for anything like this.

**DeezNutz** · 06-01-2012, 02:13 PM

"The first part of the city's name is Kansas."

.

See you at Kemper, Chuck.

Bambi · 06-01-2012, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

I have no idea what you're saying here. If the SEC wanted to have the tournament in KC, the tournament would be in KC. There is no situation under which they would refuse that sort of influx of money.

They've already said no. They've granted the rights of refusal to the Big 12.

Bambi · 06-01-2012, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

There is absolutely no way that an arena and major metropolitan area located in an SEC state would want or allow an SEC tournament to use the facilities and fans to spend enormous amounts of tourist dollars.

Maybe Missouri shoulda listened to it's constituents before making the move.

Ebolapox · 06-01-2012, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wickedson

They've already said no. They've granted the rights of refusal to the Big 12.

link?

**DeezNutz** · 06-01-2012, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wickedson

They've already said no. They've granted the rights of refusal to the Big 12.

You see the disconnect in logic here?

**DeezNutz** · 06-01-2012, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wickedson

Maybe Missouri shoulda listened to it's constituents before making the move.

They did, thankfully.

Bambi · 06-01-2012, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by h5n1

link?

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/06/01...tay-in-kc.html

Codered · 06-01-2012, 02:21 PM

That's because the SEC doesn't commit to one city year-after-year. It's smart for the city of Kansas City to attempt to work out a deal with the Big 12 if they can land an ongoing thing.

I know you like to pretend otherwise, but this doesn't mean that KC prefers any conference over the other.

mnchiefsguy · 06-01-2012, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wickedson

They've already said no. They've granted the rights of refusal to the Big 12.

That is not saying what you think it does, you idiot. Kansas City wants the Big XII tournament first and foremost, as it should, based on the number of successful years the tournament has been here.

A first refusal for the Big XII is the city telling the Big XII that it has to commit or the city will field other offers.

If the Big XII leaves KC twisting in the wind, then the city can field other tournament offers. If the Big XII invokes its right of first refusal, then the city is guaranteed to host the Big XII tourney.

Either way, it is a win-win for the city of Kansas City. The Big XII committing its bball tourney to KC in no way, shape, or form, hurts SEC bball at all. You really need to learn how to connect your dots properly.

Then again, you are Hypocritson.

**Saul Good** · 06-01-2012, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wickedson

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/06/01...tay-in-kc.html

How about a link to something that actually supports your statement?

Ebolapox · 06-01-2012, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wickedson

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/06/01...tay-in-kc.html

I did a control+F to see where it said 'first refusal' (to keep it simple), but it came up 0/0 (no results)

aka, your link doesn't support your statement.

ChiefsCountry · 06-01-2012, 02:26 PM

Without MU it makes more teams out of town into hotel rooms which the majority of the MU fans lived in the metro, that is a bigger win for Kansas City. MU gets a better conference and KC gets more out of town guests for the Big 12 tournament. Major win for the state of Missouri.

**DeezNutz** · 06-01-2012, 02:36 PM

Since the tournament will be in Dallas this year, Big 12, may we have your permission to allow the SEC to come over to play?

No.

"Right of first refusal."

01-31-2012, 02:52 PM
Saul Good Quit your bullshit Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bored of winning Casino cash: $10052799	**The official NEW new conference realignment thread.** the second thread has been pronounced dead.
Posts: 41,870

06-01-2012, 02:21 PM	#3265
Codered Starter Join Date: Dec 2003 Casino cash: $8888190	That's because the SEC doesn't commit to one city year-after-year. It's smart for the city of Kansas City to attempt to work out a deal with the Big 12 if they can land an ongoing thing. I know you like to pretend otherwise, but this doesn't mean that KC prefers any conference over the other.
Posts: 761

06-01-2012, 02:26 PM	#3269
ChiefsCountry The Insider Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Lake of the Ozarks Casino cash: $2358752	Without MU it makes more teams out of town into hotel rooms which the majority of the MU fans lived in the metro, that is a bigger win for Kansas City. MU gets a better conference and KC gets more out of town guests for the Big 12 tournament. Major win for the state of Missouri.
Posts: 49,569