Manufactured or not, Missouri embraces rivalry with Arkansas

[Pork Twain]

Tod Palmer @todpalmer  ·  Jul 18
Are #Mizzou and Arkansas really rivals? Maybe not yet, but Tigers embrace chance to build something: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/campus-corner/article758326.html ...

There is a possibility that Mizzou will eventually land in the SEC West if the SEC expands its footprint into North Carolina and/or Virginia.

Growing up on the AR/MO border, I have always seent them as a rival, especially in basketball.  We want our rival to be Texass or LSU but they don't really see us that way.  MO is a much better fit for us both geographically, in stature and in the SEC.

[Locutus_of_Boar]

If we have to have one, A&M should be our rival, not Missouri. We have zero history with Missouri, it's just the SEC telling us to sit down, shut up, and go play in a corner with Missouri while they treat A&M like royalty.

The Beaten Ten - Most Losses to Arkansas all-time:

28 - Texas Tech
30 - Oklahoma State
31 - Ole Miss
35 - Baylor & Rice
37 - SMU
41 - A&M
43 - TCU
53 - Tulsa

[LittlePigMan]

I  guess living close to the border I should be more excited about this but somehow I'm just not. 

[jvanhorn]

Have to disagree with you there.  We are head and shoulders above programs like Missouri.  I am confident that Coach B will have us challenging Bama and LSU before too long.

All aboard for another trip down the River De Nile. 

[Keyser Sooieze]

Here's an idea I had when I first heard about the trade off of Mizzou for LSU on the post thanksgiving game.  The better television spectacle we make for this game, the more likely it will be renewed as a nationally televised game and improve our recruiting and brand--and in my opinion, obviously secondary in importance to having a great show on the field, these could be some interesting "side stories" that give the tv crews some filler material and be a bigger deal than just "Arkansas v. Missouri"  Yes, I've sent an email and tweet to Jeff Long proposing the idea. 

Here's my proposal to add some dramatic element to this game in order to generate some television interest:  It will be called "The Battle of the Ozarks."  Big ass flagpoles are erected at the highest points in the Ozarks in Arkansas and in Missouri.  Whoever wins the game flies the state flag of that state on both flagpoles, thereby symbolically "claiming the Ozarks" of both states. Since both of these points are fairly remote, this is really only a good television spectacle--which of course would be featured in pre-game television "run up" to the game, helicopter shots of the beautiful Ozarks, Missouri National guard raising the Arkansas flag in Missouri, etc.
To make it more visible, the opposing state flags could run every 5 miles how ever many miles long the Missiouri bootheel is (30 miles?) on hwy 71 and hwy 65 and I55.  (kinda paying homage to that little kerfuffle between our states)
Also, the losing governor delivers the finest moonshine the state has to offer to the opposing governor.  (Perhaps with some of the finest biscuits and apple butter or some kind of Ozark specialty.)  All this would make good television and "invent" some rivalry ala the Golden Boot trophy. 
Someday, when the Castle in the Ozarks is finished, perhaps the winning team's colors deck out the paraments on the castle and some medieval looking Razorback or Tiger would be the "coat of arms" or whatever featured on the decor there at the castle (the stronghold of the Ozarks, or something to that effect.) 

Maybe a rivalry with Missouri will bring up our APR scores......

[three hog night]

Traditionally, Arkansas rivalries have been with us and with the other team not necessarily thinking it was that big of a deal. Texas is an example, LSU is an example. That's because we pop up and ruin their season when no one thought we could. As fans we have loved doing that darn for decades. This will be different because these two teams are on equal levels or will be. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I agree and this is a true border war.  There is some bad blood between the 2 states and schools.  We will have 2 way hate.

[Hogwild]

I'm guessing you missed "over the last 10 years" because your comment saying "at this point" wouldn't make sense. Unless you think they have had a better program over the last 10 years.

I think it would be a fairly easy case to make over the last ten years.

[Hawgzinbowlz]

When we start winning more, all of our games will take on a better rivalry flavor.

A&M in "Jerry's World" is a rivalry, and we have a real history with A&M.
LSU is just easy to hate, no matter when we play them.
Alabama would be worth a large donation to beat.
Ole Miss has a certain level of rivalry.
Auburn just sucks.
Mississippi St. is MS.
Mizzou will evolve whether we want it to or not. Frank and Mike let their feet do their talking(The Columbia folks just can't wrap their head around the fact that we are a better location for coaches).

Winning will kind of make all our opponents mad.

Let's see some improvements in '14.

The Mizzou Tigers will be enjoyable to beat. Led by a helicoptering DUIer.

" GO HOGS "

[Dwight_K_Shrute]

Rivalry games are best when they are in the division, at the end of the year, and have the most on the line.

Before MU/ATM expansion every SEC West member played another SEC West member the last week of the year so almost every year one or more of the games determined who won the west. 

Now with the change we are the only SEC West team that does not play another West team the last game of the year.  UofA totally sucking wind the last 2 seasons made the switch much easier.  May have still happened with 10 win seasons the last 2 years but it would have been a much harder sell.

[Paul]

Mizzou/Kansas was a rivalry?

[popcornhog]

Mizzou/Kansas was a rivalry?

One of the biggest in the Big XII, although it was stronger in hoops.

[Keyser Sooieze]

Mizzou/Kansas was a rivalry?

One that literally gave rise to the Civil War, so yeah.  Do you know what a Jayhawk is? 

[NaturalStateReb]

I know it's hard for some to believe but this will be awesome in time.



We were not lsu's rival

I think it's got promise, too.  Geographical proximity, and both teams searching for a meaningful game.  The trouble with LSU was that LSU already had teams they considered rivals.  Arkansas hasn't had that in the SEC.  Like Arkansas, Missouri left behind its biggest rival upon moving to the SEC.  I think this series really has some potential.

[Big Papa Satan]

Mizzou/Kansas was a rivalry?

Good Lord, yes.





While nobody was poisoning trees and the like, the level of hate was/is up there with Alabama-Auburn.

[Cinco de Hogo]

I
Don't
Give
Two
Flips
About
Rivalry
Games

I never watch any of they other so called rivalry games so I don't put a lot of importance on Arkansas having one.  I hated Texas but I also hate Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Florida... Etc.  Just beat the next opponant, I don't care who it is!

[Inhogswetrust]

Mizzou/Kansas was a rivalry?

Are you kidding? You need to study history more.....................................

[Cinco de Hogo]

Are you kidding? You need to study history more.....................................

Yep he probably doesn't know about Northside/Southside either. LOL!

[fortsmithokie]

This I agree with and I'm pissed about it. I'm no fan of Mizzou and I really don't like Gary Pinkel, but I despise aTm and think that the SEC is treating them like some Golden Child. Manziel created more fuel to my hate fire for aTm and I'm disgusted by Slive's obvious love affair with them. Their rivalry with LSU has spanned over 100 years, but at a rate of 1 game every 2 years. Does anyone really think that LSU is going to look at aTm any differently than they do Arkansas? Alabama is probably their biggest modern rivalry with Florida a close second. I'll embrace this imposed rivalry between the Hogs and Mizzou, but only under protest as I've felt that Arkansas going toe to toe with LSU over the past 20 years on Black Friday has been an awesome series with some spectacular games and memories.

It's all about the $$$$$$$. LSU-aTm generates a much larger audience than Mizzou-Arkansas. They aren't concerned with how it plays with the fan base of Mizzou or Arkansas.
College football is largely an afterthought in Missouri, behind the Chiefs, Cardinals and Rams and if they're having a good year, the Blues. The KC TV market just isn't that big a deal in college football.

[HogFanatic]

Here's an idea I had when I first heard about the trade off of Mizzou for LSU on the post thanksgiving game.  The better television spectacle we make for this game, the more likely it will be renewed as a nationally televised game and improve our recruiting and brand--and in my opinion, obviously secondary in importance to having a great show on the field, these could be some interesting "side stories" that give the tv crews some filler material and be a bigger deal than just "Arkansas v. Missouri"  Yes, I've sent an email and tweet to Jeff Long proposing the idea.

I approve of this idea. I don't know what the highest point in the Ozarks is in Missouri, but here in Arkansas it is Buffalo Knob. Way the hell out on Cave Mountain Road in Newton County. There is a fire tower up there that I have climbed many times. You can see all the way to Branson from there. It would really be cool if something like that happened. If you had a telescope and knew where to look, you would be able to see the Arkansas State Flag flying in Missouri.

ETA: Although wherever it is in Missouri, I'm pretty sure that the highest point in all of the Ozarks is Buffalo Knob. So Missouri still plays little brother.

[Magic_Hogg]

hey that is cool.  I had never really thought what the highest point in the Ozarks was.  ha ha I guess for me it was the cross at Mt. Sequoyah!

[FIOG]

This I agree with and I'm pissed about it. I'm no fan of Mizzou and I really don't like Gary Pinkel, but I despise aTm and think that the SEC is treating them like some Golden Child. Manziel created more fuel to my hate fire for aTm and I'm disgusted by Slive's obvious love affair with them. Their rivalry with LSU has spanned over 100 years, but at a rate of 1 game every 2 years. Does anyone really think that LSU is going to look at aTm any differently than they do Arkansas? Alabama is probably their biggest modern rivalry with Florida a close second. I'll embrace this imposed rivalry between the Hogs and Mizzou, but only under protest as I've felt that Arkansas going toe to toe with LSU over the past 20 years on Black Friday has been an awesome series with some spectacular games and memories.

Getting beat 14 out of those 20 years is going toe to toe? You will probably fare better against Missouri.

[Inhogswetrust]

hey that is cool.  I had never really thought what the highest point in the Ozarks was.  ha ha I guess for me it was the cross at Mt. Sequoyah!

Here is some more detail:

The Ozarks consist of several physiographic sections:[9]:12[10]

the Boston Mountains and Cookson Hills of north Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma;
the Springfield Plain or Springfield Plateau of southwest Missouri, northeast Oklahoma and northwest Arkansas and including Springfield and Joplin in Missouri, Tahlequah in Oklahoma and Fayetteville and Harrison in Arkansas;
the White River Hills along the White River including Branson, Mountain Home to Batesville;
the Salem Plateau or Central Plateau which includes a broad band across south central Missouri and north central Arkansas including the Lebanon, Salem and West Plains areas;
the Courtois Hills of southeastern Missouri,
the Osage-Gasconade Hills around the Lake of the Ozarks;
the Saint Francois Mountains;
the Missouri River and Mississippi River border areas along the eastern and northeastern flanks.
Karst features such as springs,[11] losing streams, sinkholes and caves are common in the limestones of the Springfield Plateau and abundant in the dolostone bedrock of the Salem Plateau and Boston Mountains.[12] Missouri is known as "The Cave State" with over 6000 recorded caves; the majority of these caves are found in the Ozark counties.[12][13] The Ozark Plateaus aquifer system affects groundwater movement in all areas except the igneous core of the St. Francois Mountains.[10][14][15][16] Geographic features include limestone and dolomite glades, which are rocky, desert-like area on hilltops. Kept open by periodic fires that limit growth of grasses and forbs in shallow soil, glades are home to collared lizards, tarantulas, scorpions, cacti and other species more typical of the desert southwest.[17][18]

The Boston Mountains contain the highest elevations of the Ozarks with peaks over 2,500 feet (760 m)s and form the greatest relief of any formation between the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains. The Boston Mountains portion of the Ozarks extends north of the Arkansas River Valley 20 to 35 miles (32 to 56 km) and is approximately 200 miles (320 km)[19] and are bordered by the Springfield and Salem Plateau to the north of the White River. Summits can reach elevations of just over 2,560 feet (780 m) with valleys 500 to 1,550 feet (472 m) deep (150 m to 450 m). Turner Ward Knob is the highest named peak. Located in western Newton County, Arkansas, its elevation is 2,463 feet (751 m). Nearby, five unnamed peaks have elevations at or slightly above 2,560 feet (780 m). Drainage is primarily to the White River, with the exception of the Illinois River. Many Ozark waterways have their headwaters in the uplands of the Boston formation, including the Buffalo, King's, Mulberry, Little Red and White rivers.[20]

Topography is mostly gently rolling in the Springfield and Salem Plateaus, where the Saint Francois Mountains are more rugged. The Springfield formation's surface is primarily Mississippian limestone and chert, where the Salem Plateau is older Ordovician dolostones, limestones, and sandstones.[21] Both are rife with karst topography and form long, flat plains. The formations are separated by steep escarpments that dramatically interrupt the rolling hills. Although much of the Springfield Plateau has been denuded of the surface layers of the Boston Mountains, large remnants of these younger layers are present throughout the southern end of the formation, possibly suggesting a peneplain process.[22] The Springfield Plateau drains through wide, mature streams ultimately feeding the White River.[23]

[Inhogswetrust]

I approve of this idea. I don't know what the highest point in the Ozarks is in Missouri, but here in Arkansas it is Buffalo Knob. Way the hell out on Cave Mountain Road in Newton County. There is a fire tower up there that I have climbed many times. You can see all the way to Branson from there. It would really be cool if something like that happened. If you had a telescope and knew where to look, you would be able to see the Arkansas State Flag flying in Missouri.

ETA: Although wherever it is in Missouri, I'm pretty sure that the highest point in all of the Ozarks is Buffalo Knob. So Missouri still plays little brother.

Here you go:
While not as impressive at 1,772 feet (540 m) as other peaks, Taum Sauk and the St. Francois range are true mountains, being the result of a volcanic orogeny. Whereas vertical relief in the rest of the Ozarks region is the result of erosion of sedimentary strata, the St. Francois are an ancient Precambrian igneous uplift several times older than the Appalachians. Geologists believe that Taum Sauk and its neighbors may be among the few areas in the US never to have been submerged in ancient seas.[citation needed] The peaks of the St. Francois range existed as islands in the shallow seaway throughout most of the Paleozoic Era as the sandstones, limestones, and shales typical of the Ozarks were deposited. Weathering and erosion of these ancient peaks provided the clastic sediments of the surrounding rock layers.

Taum Sauk is said to be named for a Piankeshaw chief named Sauk-Ton-Qua.[4]


P.S. There is a MO State Park there.

[Inhogswetrust]

There was a thread on here before about what to call the "rivalry" game with Mizzou. Due to the states having a common border that is mostly a part of the Ozarks and some people relate the Ozarks as some sort of "hillbilly" frontier and when those people fight it is called feuding, I suggest it simply be called "The Feud".

[FelixJonesorDMAC?]

We need a true rival for sure and if Missouri can be out number one and we be there number one, I'm for it.  We were never anybody else's number one rival even though we hated them as such they didn't hate us as such. 

[Hogwild]

What if this game against Missouri is played on Thanksgiving night?  How would that effect your feelings about the game?

Would you be against playing Missouri on Thanksgiving night in either on campus or in Little Rock?

[Locutus_of_Boar]

Mizzou/Kansas was a rivalry?

From 1907 to 2012 both schools were in the same athletic conference and competed annually in all sports. Sports Illustrated described the rivalry as the oldest west of the Mississippi River in 2011

[Magic_Hogg]

I didn't know highest topographic features b/w Appalachian and Rockies.  I've always thought one of the prettiest, best kept secrets in the South.

I guess I can see a rivalry - in all fairness their fans seemed pretty classy a few years ago in the Cotton Bowl.  In true Arkansas fashion, we Arkansas fans were fighting amongst each other more than anyone else - that was the game where Herring was the coach b'c Nutt had just left and all that bad stuff was going on. 

I went with another AR fan and an OU fan, and some AR guys next to us got pretty loaded for an 11am game - or whenever it was.  They started heckling a good bit - heckling their own team anyway.  It was a pretty bad game - the kind where the better team loses.

[Sweet Feet]

Have to disagree with you there.  We are head and shoulders above programs like Missouri.  I am confident that Coach B will have us challenging Bama and LSU before too long.

Man really? Mizzou has almost, if not have done better than arkansas in the past 10 seasons. They both are equals pretty much

[Sweet Feet]

This is great really. Like pointed out, the proximity is there, the balance in success in the past 10 years is there. The teams have played twice in that time frame and split the series. There are the same tier. Both dont really have rivals with mizzou and ku not playing. This is perfect. Someone who actually starting to see ark as a rival

[Inhogswetrust]

We need a true rival for sure and if Missouri can be out number one and we be there number one, I'm for it.  We were never anybody else's number one rival even though we hated them as such they didn't hate us as such. 

Please explain WHY any team HAS to have a true rival for sure.....................

[BR]

Growing up on State line this will be a great rivalry.. It will take it a while to build into that as we are down in football right now and MU is up... Hopefully this year it can be a close game in Columbia...  Also Columbia is a great place to go and visit during football season, nice downtown with lots of good bars. 

[popcornhog]

What if this game against Missouri is played on Thanksgiving night?  How would that effect your feelings about the game?

Would you be against playing Missouri on Thanksgiving night in either on campus or in Little Rock?

I would hate it because it would force us all to chose between the game and family -- same for the team.

But I'd make the right decision and attend the game most years.

[chitwnhog]

Man really? Mizzou has almost, if not have done better than arkansas in the past 10 seasons. They both are equals pretty much

I thought the Arkansas and Missouri programs were probably close in success over the last 10 yrs as many have said in this thread...and then I looked. It's not even close.

One can argue difference in competition (UA 10yrs SEC v MO 2 yrs SEC) and many will but the difference I believe is consistency in coaching. Over the last 10 yrs Missouri has had one head coach, Arkansas...4.


Arkansas

5-6
4-7
10-4
8-5
5-7
8-5
10-3
11-2
4-8
3-9

68-56


Missouri

5-6
7-5
8-5
12-2
10-4
8-5
10-3
8-5
5-7
12-2

85-44

[Atlhogfan1]

Rivalries can't be manufactured.  They develop.  As already mentioned, it was bad for our program that not only were A&M and Mizzou added to the SEC but that the SEC is going out of its way to help A&M's brand.  Some other comments not necessarily in any order:

A&M and LSU do have a history and a dislike for each other.  It isn't Ole Miss-LSU but it will develop into a rivalry as it is close now.  Can't refute it.  It is extremely unfortunate for our program as the Friday game with LSU was great for our brand and visibility.  And yes, it was due partly to LSU's great success since 03.  Their brand of course helped tremendously.  The series has actually been full of upsets and great games going back before that.  But it was also due to the competitiveness of the series and what was on the line for both teams as far as the division, NC race and/or major bowl games.  While we haven't been on LSU's level, we have had those things on the line too multiple times when playing LSU.  The game brought national attention and people outside of our two states and fan bases actually cared to pay attention most seasons and some seasons very intently.  It wasn't a rivalry with LSU.  But it was a great series for us much more important than anything Mizzou will become even it does become a rivalry.  Playing LSU a few weeks earlier will not be close to the same. 

I don't understand our desire to want to have a rival especially one like Mizzou which will develop, if it does, more on how poorly each fan base behaves towards the other than their teams actually playing meaningful games.  Mizzou fans are some of the worst we have dealt with or will deal with in the future. 

Neither of our programs recruits well enough to make the series consistently relevant outside of our own fan bases and states.  Even if it does develop into a "rivalry" between players and fans, the only people paying attention will be us.  Not even the rest of the conference will give much of a look most seasons as most matchups won't have national or conference implications. 

As far as playing Thanksgiving, the series is already risky enough as far as thousands of empty seats given the two programs' history of inconsistency.  The home team had better be having at least a decent season or the visitors a great one.  Putting it on Thanksgiving night would leave more seats open.  Once hunting season begins in Arkansas, our team or at least opponent, has to give our fans a reason to leave the woods or couch and go to Fayetteville.  Will Mizzou's teams be able to do that when ours can't?  I have my doubts. 

I prefer to play South Carolina over Mizzou.  Again, it is about expanding our brand which is vital to our program who has to recruit outside of our state and even region.  Losing the SCar series for Mizzou locks us into what is almost a wasteland for SEC level recruiting.  Some of our fans are obsessed over us recruiting Texas and how we need more exposure there but our need to recruit Ga, Fl and the Carolinas for help is ignored.

I'm holding out hope that Texas will eventually renew their A&M series and KU-Mizzou will resume as well and these games end their seasons.  But there is probably as likely a possibility that major college football will break into a different division and new conferences of 8 or so teams.  Our series may not even get a long enough run to develop into a rivalry.  Or at least I can hope.  Being a rival with Mizzou, or for them us, would do nothing for us except to make our fan base angrier and more hateful towards something else. 

This leads me back to the beginning of the post.  Playing Mizzou to end the season and seeing LSU-A&M will be a reminder of how we fared in this latest expansion and the lack of respect our own conference has for us. 

[Pork Twain]

Have to disagree with you there.  We are head and shoulders above programs like Missouri.

Based on what?

[Atlhogfan1]

Based on what?

Perception based on history.  Right now, it isn't nor has it been since Pinkel rebuilt Missouri's program.  For those of us over 20, what we know of Mizzou football before Pinkel's rebuild was a horrible program who didn't even make a bowl game from 84-96 and only played in 2 from 97-02.  Mizzou had 18 losing seasons out of 21.  For our older fans, they probably remember Devine having a competitive program with some good seasons.  He didn't have Broyles' level success though.  There wasn't even a comparison between the two programs until 2007.  Sure since 2007 and the big Cotton win by Mizzou over the Hogs, our program hasn't been head and shoulders above Mizzou.  Pinkel has brought some consistency.  But that is a very short timeframe for someone to change their perception of a program. 

We should respect Mizzou's program for the consistency Pinkel has brought to what was a horrible program.  It is one like our own in that it is at a competitive disadvantage to its competition.  But Mizzou having 4 good seasons in the last 7 isn't going to immediately change the perception formed over the last 50+ years where Arkansas was head and shoulders above Mizzou.  It is more of a depressing reality of where our program maybe is falling to be on the level of Mizzou. 

[hoghiker]

Rivalries can't be manufactured.  They develop.  As already mentioned, it was bad for our program that not only were A&M and Mizzou added to the SEC but that the SEC is going out of its way to help A&M's brand.  Some other comments not necessarily in any order:

A&M and LSU do have a history and a dislike for each other.  It isn't Ole Miss-LSU but it will develop into a rivalry as it is close now.  Can't refute it.  It is extremely unfortunate for our program as the Friday game with LSU was great for our brand and visibility.  And yes, it was due partly to LSU's great success since 03.  Their brand of course helped tremendously.  The series has actually been full of upsets and great games going back before that.  But it was also due to the competitiveness of the series and what was on the line for both teams as far as the division, NC race and/or major bowl games.  While we haven't been on LSU's level, we have had those things on the line too multiple times when playing LSU.  The game brought national attention and people outside of our two states and fan bases actually cared to pay attention most seasons and some seasons very intently.  It wasn't a rivalry with LSU.  But it was a great series for us much more important than anything Mizzou will become even it does become a rivalry.  Playing LSU a few weeks earlier will not be close to the same. 

I don't understand our desire to want to have a rival especially one like Mizzou which will develop, if it does, more on how poorly each fan base behaves towards the other than their teams actually playing meaningful games.  Mizzou fans are some of the worst we have dealt with or will deal with in the future. 

Neither of our programs recruits well enough to make the series consistently relevant outside of our own fan bases and states.  Even if it does develop into a "rivalry" between players and fans, the only people paying attention will be us.  Not even the rest of the conference will give much of a look most seasons as most matchups won't have national or conference implications. 

As far as playing Thanksgiving, the series is already risky enough as far as thousands of empty seats given the two programs' history of inconsistency.  The home team had better be having at least a decent season or the visitors a great one.  Putting it on Thanksgiving night would leave more seats open.  Once hunting season begins in Arkansas, our team or at least opponent, has to give our fans a reason to leave the woods or couch and go to Fayetteville.  Will Mizzou's teams be able to do that when ours can't?  I have my doubts. 

I prefer to play South Carolina over Mizzou.  Again, it is about expanding our brand which is vital to our program who has to recruit outside of our state and even region.  Losing the SCar series for Mizzou locks us into what is almost a wasteland for SEC level recruiting.  Some of our fans are obsessed over us recruiting Texas and how we need more exposure there but our need to recruit Ga, Fl and the Carolinas for help is ignored.

I'm holding out hope that Texas will eventually renew their A&M series and KU-Mizzou will resume as well and these games end their seasons.  But there is probably as likely a possibility that major college football will break into a different division and new conferences of 8 or so teams.  Our series may not even get a long enough run to develop into a rivalry.  Or at least I can hope.  Being a rival with Mizzou, or for them us, would do nothing for us except to make our fan base angrier and more hateful towards something else. 

This leads me back to the beginning of the post.  Playing Mizzou to end the season and seeing LSU-A&M will be a reminder of how we fared in this latest expansion and the lack of respect our own conference has for us. 

Good points all around. SC game probably better for program. St Louis and KC gotta produce some D1 players, right?

[Magic_Hogg]

IDK how the numbers break down, but good points on where CF stands in MO.  Lower on the totem pole compared to AR.  I do think we need a rival though. 

[Sweet Feet]

Perception based on history.  Right now, it isn't nor has it been since Pinkel rebuilt Missouri's program.  For those of us over 20, what we know of Mizzou football before Pinkel's rebuild was a horrible program who didn't even make a bowl game from 84-96 and only played in 2 from 97-02.  Mizzou had 18 losing seasons out of 21.  For our older fans, they probably remember Devine having a competitive program with some good seasons.  He didn't have Broyles' level success though.  There wasn't even a comparison between the two programs until 2007.  Sure since 2007 and the big Cotton win by Mizzou over the Hogs, our program hasn't been head and shoulders above Mizzou.  Pinkel has brought some consistency.  But that is a very short timeframe for someone to change their perception of a program. 

We should respect Mizzou's program for the consistency Pinkel has brought to what was a horrible program.  It is one like our own in that it is at a competitive disadvantage to its competition.  But Mizzou having 4 good seasons in the last 7 isn't going to immediately change the perception formed over the last 50+ years where Arkansas was head and shoulders above Mizzou.  It is more of a depressing reality of where our program maybe is falling to be on the level of Mizzou.

All time, arkansas only has 40 more wins than mizzou. Thats not a huge gap. mizzou also has a pair of orange and sugar bowl wins just like arkansas. While arkansas has the national title and more prestgious bowl appearances (14 to mizzou 8 )mizzou still has more bowl wins. While i give the nod to arkansas, its not my a major margin at all. Even then It really doesnt matter about history at this point. Mizzou has done better in the past 10 years and are growing. They are going to be great. Nothing fully wrong about being on the level of mizzou. They have reached #1, had multiple 10 win seasons, made the sec title and a conf title game away from going to national title game in 2007 and 2013. This is great

[Pork Twain]

Perception based on history.  Right now, it isn't nor has it been since Pinkel rebuilt Missouri's program.  For those of us over 20, what we know of Mizzou football before Pinkel's rebuild was a horrible program who didn't even make a bowl game from 84-96 and only played in 2 from 97-02.  Mizzou had 18 losing seasons out of 21.  For our older fans, they probably remember Devine having a competitive program with some good seasons.  He didn't have Broyles' level success though.  There wasn't even a comparison between the two programs until 2007.  Sure since 2007 and the big Cotton win by Mizzou over the Hogs, our program hasn't been head and shoulders above Mizzou.  Pinkel has brought some consistency.  But that is a very short timeframe for someone to change their perception of a program. 

We should respect Mizzou's program for the consistency Pinkel has brought to what was a horrible program.  It is one like our own in that it is at a competitive disadvantage to its competition.  But Mizzou having 4 good seasons in the last 7 isn't going to immediately change the perception formed over the last 50+ years where Arkansas was head and shoulders above Mizzou.  It is more of a depressing reality of where our program maybe is falling to be on the level of Mizzou.

Based on their facilities, program success and future, I believe they our on pace with us.  We have not really done anything to thump your chest about in a very long time. 

The demographic that you speak of is becoming less and less relevant as we proceed.  We have not been consistently good since the 80's and have not done anything impressive since 64.  I am not sure why so many Arkansas fans act like we are so amazing and that our crap does not stink.  We are not on the level of LSU, Texass, or even A&M and it is about more than our recent record with them.

[Inhogswetrust]

I understand this reference and agree with you to an extent however I think this will probably be a more heated battle on both sides because of our proximity and the fact that we have no real rival that sees us as a rival and MO may actually see us as a rival.

But NO "real" rival is necessary for any team. Why is one specific "rival" necessary. We should want to stomp ALL opponents into the ground equally.

[Atlhogfan1]

All time, arkansas only has 40 more wins than mizzou. Thats not a huge gap. mizzou also has a pair of orange and sugar bowl wins just like arkansas. While arkansas has the national title and more prestgious bowl appearances (14 to mizzou still has more bowl wins. While i give the nod to arkansas, its not my a major margin at all. Even then It really doesnt matter about history at this point. Mizzou has done better in the past 10 years and are growing. They are going to be great. Nothing fully wrong about being on the level of mizzou. They have reached #1, had multiple 10 win seasons, made the sec title and a conf title game away from going to national title game in 2007 and 2013. This is great

Still trolling.  I'll participate today.

Arkansas has not had more than two losing seasons in a row since WWII(probably will break that streak this season).  Missouri had 13 straight losing seasons from 1984-96 with 4 or less wins from 88-95.  The Arkansas program has never come close to a stretch like that and it happened to Missouri during our lifetime.  Thirteen straight losing seasons in post-integration college football is going to take a lot to overcome when it comes to people's perceptions of a program.  History does matter.  There was a huge gap between the two programs.

Missouri football will not be great.  Arkansas football will not be great.  That is the reality we, not you, has to try and accept especially those of us born around 1980 or earlier. 

Much has changed since we joined the SEC.  Bama, Tenn and UGa were head and shoulders above us historically but the rest of the SEC including Florida wasn't.  LSU and AU were also to an extent.  Florida quickly passed us into the head and shoulders group.  LSU did when they hired Saban and finally reached their potential with having a huge demographics advantage.  AU did so with the 04 and 10 seasons.  We'll see if A&M will reach its potential now that it isn't the weird little ROTC school we once owned but now a somewhat weird large university.  We'll see if South Carolina can maintain what Spurrier has built.  They were as bad if not worse than Mizzou.  But like A&M, they have a recruiting advantage over us too.  Lots changed for us in 20+ seasons.  We left a conference where one university had a huge advantage to one where the majority of it does.

It's one thing to see programs with population and demographics advantages, and some financial advantages, be better or pass you. But when a program as bad as Mizzou's had been for so many years and without advantages to come up and now be shoved on you as a rival, that is difficult to accept even though Mizzou has a good football program right now. 

[Pork Twain]

But NO "real" rival is necessary for any team. Why is one specific "rival" necessary. We should want to stomp ALL opponents into the ground equally.

You are 100% correct and if we do that, a real rival will rise to the top.  Rivalries do sell tickets though.

[Atlhogfan1]

Based on their facilities, program success and future, I believe they our on pace with us.  We have not really done anything to thump your chest about in a very long time. 

The demographic that you speak of is becoming less and less relevant as we proceed.  We have not been consistently good since the 80's and have not done anything impressive since 64.  I am not sure why so many Arkansas fans act like we are so amazing and that our crap does not stink.  We are not on the level of LSU, Texass, or even A&M and it is about more than our recent record with them.

Not yet on facilities.  I have not disagreed they are on current program. 

The demographic and population disadvantage is the most relevant thing to our program. 

You are correct on our history.  I don't see where I said we have been amazing.  But as I pointed out, we have never in our history let alone recently been as horrific as Missouri has been for long stretches. 

Of course we aren't on LSU's or Texas' level.  It would take something unforeseen to happen to us and to either of them for that to ever happen now. 

[HF#1]

Arkansas vs Mizzou will not have the national implications that Arkansas vs LSU had.  It seemed like every year one team had something to play for.  The game was usually always competitive and some legendary games came from that matchup on the day after Thanksgiving. 

It may take 20 years for Arkansas/Mizzou to get where Arkansas/LSU was/is.

[Pork Twain]

Not yet on facilities.  I have not disagreed they are on current program. 

The demographic and population disadvantage is the most relevant thing to our program. 

You are correct on our history.  I don't see where I said we have been amazing.  But as I pointed out, we have never in our history let alone recently been as horrific as Missouri has been for long stretches. 

Of course we aren't on LSU's or Texas' level.  It would take something unforeseen to happen to us and to either of them for that to ever happen now.

The demographic I speak of is the older fans that actually remember when we were consistently good.  Those are quickly being replaced by those that remember Ford on and that is not impressive when comparing us to Mizzou

[twistitup]

Aluminum Manufactured Home Trophy replaces The Golden Boot?

[Pork Twain]

Arkansas vs Mizzou will not have the national implications that Arkansas vs LSU had.  It seemed like every year one team had something to play for.  The game was usually always competitive and some legendary games came from that matchup on the day after Thanksgiving. 

It may take 20 years for Arkansas/Mizzou to get where Arkansas/LSU was/is.

As long as we play aTm, Auburn, LSU, and Bama there will be several games that have national implications.

[HF#1]

As long as we play aTm, Auburn, LSU, and Bama there will be several games that have national implications.

But not in that time slot, on that day, every year.   I'm telling you, we'll see some sort of negative impact from letting LSU get out of playing us on the day after thanksgiving.  Playing Mizzou doesn't and own't have near the same hype or results.