The pragmatic thing to do would be to scrap this KU-Mizzou rivalry.
However, pragmatism doesn’t show up often on the game plan of college athletics. For instance, the universities of Kansas and Missouri in fiscal year ’24-’25 spent a combined $339 million to provide the educational opportunity of athletic competition to 1,086 students. You have to contort mightily to fit that into the definition of pragmatic.
So, I’m not saying the KU-Missouri rivalry absolutely should be cancelled, but I am saying it should be an open question. Others appear to be saying it as well. After Missouri’s victory on Friday, MU coach Eli Drinkwitz said: “I don’t really care if it continues or not.” From my seat in the stands, it also appeared that plenty of seats were filled with Missouri fans. In a stadium that already has significantly reduced capacity due to construction, that seems to be a sign several KU fans are ambivalent, at best.
Chad Lawhorn
Editor & Publisher
Have your own take? Send 250 words or less to letters@ljworld.com.
Have a column idea or a tip for Chad to investigate?
Send a message to clawhorn@ljworld.com.
I wouldn’t say I’m ambivalent, but rather conflicted. There are two unique aspects of the KU-Missouri rivalry, and both may argue for its discontinuance. No. 1, the rivalry is rooted in an actual war. Civil War-era rape, murder, and human bondage are the foundation of the animosity. Look up the history of the Michigan-Ohio State rivalry. It is not that.
The second big difference is Kansas City. The KC metro, in one regard, is the most unique in America. No metro area in the U.S. is so significantly divided by a state line like KC. The economic output of the metro is almost equally divided between Missouri and Kansas. (Approximately 51% Missouri and 49% Kansas, according to a 2020 study by The Brookings Institute.) The prosperity of Kansas City is vitally important to both Kansas and Missouri.
In short, the economic success of Kansas and Missouri is somewhat dependent on Kansas and Missouri working together to make Kansas City the best it can be.
You have to wonder whether a game that is going to remind both fan bases — and in some years the entire sports nation — of rape, murder and human bondage is the best way to promote such a partnership.
Listen, Missouri does not support or defend slavery today. It should never be stated or implied that it does, no matter how heated the moment becomes. But make no mistake, the fact that Missouri did support slavery and burned Lawrence and killed its citizens will be recalled anytime these two teams meet in a rivalry game.
To think — as Coach Drinkwitz seems to — that such “bull crap” will never be mentioned is naive. It is the sign of a man who stands on a sideline instead of sits in the stands. As someone who has sat in the stands of KU football for the last 35 years, I can assure you the topic will come up. It also won’t rank as the most impolite topic of the day. Being in the stands of a KU-Mizzou game is one of the most unenjoyable sports moments I ever experience. Decency does not buy a ticket to those games.
Lest you say that is just the nature of a rivalry, I would argue the animosity at a KU-K-State game feels much different. A conflict over bragging rights — or even the undertones of snobs versus hicks that comes with that rivalry — is a different flavor of tension.
It brings us back to the question: Is this KU-Mizzou rivalry worth keeping?
On the one hand, there is no saving the Lawrence-Missouri relationship. The Missouri raid led by William Quantrill that killed more than 150 Lawrence men and boys is part of this city’s DNA. It is part of the family history of some residents.
Perhaps it is fine to keep spreading that animosity outside of Lawrence proper and to all of Jayhawk nation through this rivalry. Maybe Kansas shouldn’t cooperate but rather conquer Kansas City. You could argue — go Chiefs — that Kansas would have the upper hand in any such contest currently.
If so, recognize it is a high risk strategy, including for KU itself. The KU Medical Center in Kansas City, Kan., is vitally important to the overall health of KU. It would be on the front lines of any such battle.
KU and Missouri aren’t scheduled to play a football game again until 2031. The two men’s basketball teams will meet on Dec. 6, and currently don’t have other contests scheduled.
In other words, we are going to have some time to think this over. It would be worthwhile to think about the facts of this rivalry and ponder what they mean. Missouri and Kansas were at the heart of the U.S. Civil War. Tragedies and atrocities occurred on both sides of the state line. Slavery was the root of the war. One side was for it. One side was against it.
There is no question which side is on the right side of history. The question now is whether we should play a game each year that recalls it?
Nick Krug/Journal-World
