Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayor's Cup (Missouri–South Carolina)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. The Wordsmith Talk to me 22:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Mayor's Cup (Missouri–South Carolina)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

See Articles for deletion/Missouri–South Carolina football rivalry. Not enough has changed since then to establish this match-up as a notable rivalry. Speedy was declined. funplussmart (talk) 20:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football, Missouri,  and South Carolina. funplussmart (talk) 20:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. I voted to delete back in 2014, and I still think that was the right outcome. The programs have played several more games since 2014, but the new "hook" in trying to establish notability is that "both school campuses are located in cities named Columbia". While this tidbit apparently led the mayors to create a cup, the existence of a cup doesn't necessarily make it notable. My searches turned up passing references to the "cup" in game coverage (e.g., here, here, here, here) but did not find deep coverage of a rivalry. Also, some question whether this is even a rivalry. See here ("Is this a rivalry or not? ... Despite being division foes, the Gamecocks and Tigers have no geographical reason to be bitter rivals, but the powers that be have been trying to make it happen with the 'Mayor's Cup,'").  Finally, the lack of significant history (only two games were played  prior to 2012) and the absence of marquee matchups (zero top 10 matchups and only one where both were ranked at all) also weigh against a finding of stand-alone notability. Cbl62 (talk) 23:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: This rivalry has had some occasional passing coverage over the years, but there just isn't enough WP:SIGCOV here. User:Let'srun 03:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Reaffirming my !vote here. Not enough independent coverage for this one to meet the WP:NRIVALRY. Let&#39;srun (talk) 00:24, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete The references are either non-independent or routine passing mentions. No in depth coverage of the two teams as rivals largely because no rivalry exists.  Two schools being in the same conference and having a traveling trophy does not automatically make a series a notable rivalry.  Frank   Anchor  13:13, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: per forementioned reasons above. Tumbuka Arch (talk) 11:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Coverage by national media mentioning the Mayor's Cup here here, by the teams here here, talk about the rivalry from 2017 from 2019 from 2019 from 2023. Esb5415 (talk) 13:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * , are those sources that are independent of the schools and their athletic programs? If so, do they give the rivalry or trophy more than a couple sentences mention? Routine or non-independent coverage doesn't count. funplussmart (talk) 21:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Ope, good point. The last four sources from my previous response are independent of the schools and athletic programs. In 2017, the Post and Courier has half an article on the Mayor's cup trophy and what it represents. In 2019, Rock M Nation (a news website with beat writers) talks about how South Carolina is more of a rival than Arkansas. In 2019, a site talks about the rivalry - I'm not too familiar with the site. In 2023, the Missouri Rivals site makes a case for South Carolina to be a permanent rival for Missouri.
 * Some others: in 2018, The State interviewed the starting quarterback for Missouri where he revers to this as a rivalry (I see someone else say that Wil Muschamp isn't an independent source, which would lead to the conclusion this isn't independent either. I don't understand, they aren't the university - could someone explain how that is/link to consensus or policy?). In 2018, the Fulton Sun (newspaper) talks about how the rivalry is growing. In 2022, the Columbia Daily Tribune ran a piece with the headline "Mizzou has its main SEC rival". In 2020, the Post and Courier ran a piece that opened with "Rivalry wasn’t created by a hastily made trophy. Rivalry is created by great, classic games. In that sense, South Carolina-Missouri has become one. Nothing like the grudge matches the Gamecocks annually hold with Clemson (and to an extent, Georgia), but a rivalry." Esb5415 (talk) 13:34, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Some more sources:
 * In 2019, Saturday Down South reported Missouri players called the rivalry a "'grown man' rivalry" (may not be independent since it's players). In 2023, the Post and Courier wrote another article on the history of "the SEC’s weirdest rivalry", detailing the 2022, 2018, 2023, and 2005 games. In 2022, SI talks about how the Missouri game could be considered a bellwether for South Carolina's seasons. Esb5415 (talk) 14:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Another one, cited in the lead: Columbia Missourian in 2022 Buffaloe wants Mayor's Cup to stay in Missouri Esb5415 (talk) 18:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The first two make no mention of the teams being rivals and only have a passing mention of the trophy ❌, the next two are non-independent and therefore can not contribute to WP:GNG (and even if that wasn't the case, both are also passing mentions in routine pre-game coverage) ❌. The Post and Courier source's only mention of a rivalry come from Wil Muschamp, an employee of South Carolina, so non-independent ❌.  The last three are Missouri fan blogs ❌.  Definitely not enough here for a GNG pass.  Frank   Anchor  13:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Power Mizzou (an affiliate of Rivals.com) and Rock M Nation (an affiliate of SB Nation) are not fan blogs, they're legit news sites dedicated to covering Missouri athletics.
 * SB Nation is a sports blogging network and not remotely close to a legit news site. Maybe "fan blog" wasn't the best of words but it is a blog nonetheless and not nearly as reliable as an article produced by a regular media outlet.  I'll give you the Rock M Nation one a I overlooked it is from Rivals,, but looking into that reference further, it makes the case for south carolina as one potential option of a permanent rivalry if the SEC were to adopt a 3-6 format for future scheduled (which it did not), but gives just as much reasons that the two should not be rivals as it does that they should. Still a hard no from me.  Frank   Anchor  14:50, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Rock M Nation one a I overlooked it is from Rivals Power Mizzou is Rivals, Rock M Nation is SB Nation. it is a blog nonetheless and not nearly as reliable as an article produced by a regular media outlet SB Nation is a regular media outlet, I don't see how it wouldn't pass WP:NEWSORG. 3-6 format for future scheduled (which it did not) Only for 2024 (source), but that isn't relevant - it is a source talking about the rivalry. gives just as much reasons that the two should not be rivals as it does that they should I don't read the article that way, but I understand why you say that. I read the article as establishing what "normally" makes rivalries, saying Missouri - South Carolina doesn't have those "traditional ingredients", but still making the case as to a rivalry through "competitive games", "position in the division", and "city pride". Esb5415 (talk) 15:15, 1 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Can you explain how an employee (or athlete) is non-independent? They aren't paid to say what is/isn't a rivalry - they're being interviewed by a journalist, so I'm confused as to how that isn't independent. Esb5415 (talk) 13:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * They are paid by the university making them directly affiliated with the university and therefore can not be independent.  Frank  Anchor  14:50, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The Post and Courier source's only mention of a rivalry come from Wil Muschamp, an employee of South Carolina, so non-independent
 * This is not true; the trophy is featured in in almost the entire article in editorial voice: The winner also gets the cup, the “Mayor’s Cup” that was created in 2012, the year Missouri joined the SEC. Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin thought it was a neat idea to battle for something, since the two colleges are each located in Columbia.
 * A reliable independent newspaper source getting some color quotes and background information from the mayor of the city is not the same as "non-independent" coverage. This is clearly a full article independent coverage of the trophy.
 * PK-WIKI (talk) 16:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * And that's not mentioning the rivalry. It's mentioning that a trophy exists (having a traveling trophy does not automatically make a series a notable rivalry). And it's mentioning that one mayor thinks its neat that two cities have the same name.  Frank   Anchor  17:50, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It certainly is non-independent coverage when the mayor of the city is also the person who purchased the trophy, making him directly involved.  Frank  Anchor  18:06, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting as it looks like No consensus right now. As an aside, by its title, it seems like the subject of the article should be the trophy or the games played that resulted in awarding of the trophy. If it is actually about a rivalry, then if the article is Kept, perhaps a rename is in order. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: Meets GNG from the significant coverage in the independent, reliable sources below:
 * The Post and Courier 2017 "USC battles Missouri for the Mayor’s Cup and much more"
 * Columbia Missourian 2022 "Buffaloe wants Mayor's Cup to stay in Missouri"
 * Columbia Daily Tribune 2022 "Mizzou has its main SEC rival. 10 thoughts from Mizzou's upset win over South Carolina"
 * The rivalry and trophy are covered in depth in editorial voice in the articles. Any argument that these don't count because they got quotes from the mayor of Columbia and they are therefor not "independent coverage" is ridiculous; they're full newspaper articles written about the rivalry that include quotes from an elected official who contributed to the rivalry by creating the trophy. That's still independent coverage.
 * PK-WIKI (talk) 17:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You are correct, normally a mayor of a city is not directly affiliated with either university. However, the article explains Columbia, SC Stephen Benjamin purchased the trophy to be passed around, making him directly involved in the rivalry and not independent. Even if that wasn't the case, the extent of the his input is “It seemed to be a perfect time to start a new rivalry, and I called the [Columbia, MO] mayor and he told us it was pretty cool, so it’s something fun,” Benjamin said. Mayors of cities don't start rivalries, and the existence of a cup or the idea of a rivalry being cool or fun do not make it such.  Frank   Anchor  17:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually mayors of cities do start rivalries, as established by the significant coverage in reliable sources of these two mayors creating a traveling rivalry trophy and awarding it to the winner of the game.
 * The article's title is Mayor's Cup (Missouri–South Carolina), not "... rivalry". Tweak the lead if you insist the game is not a "rivalry", but the traveling trophy between the teams meets GNG. The second article, btw, directly states in editorial voice in the headline that "Mizzou has its main SEC rival" so I would be hard pressed not to call this a rivalry.
 * PK-WIKI (talk) 18:05, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep: Per PK-WIKI. glman (talk) 03:55, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete the references provided are either routine passing mentions or heavily based on persons directly involved in the rivalry (university employees or athletes, the mayor who purchased the trophy, etc). Also one editorial piece referring to South Carolina as Missouri's "main SEC rival" doesn't make it so. Carson Wentz (talk) 16:37, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't understand this discounting of significant coverage in reliable independent sources based on their diligent reporting.
 * If the New York Times were to write about a rivalry by getting quotes from the school's athletic director, head coach, star quarterback, cheerleading captain, alumni-club president, and trophy designer all saying that this is their most important and historic rivalry... that only ADDS TO the significance of the rivalry.
 * The newspaper articles are WP:INDEPENDENT coverage, full stop. This isn't the mayor's personal blog, it's a third party independently-published newspaper story about a rivalry that gets quotes from the people involved. The journalists all write about the rivalry too using editorial voice, not just quotes.
 * PK-WIKI (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails GNG. Agree with Cbl62 this seems manufactured for promo purposes. Not seeing any sources showing this meets guidelines. Sources only show routine mill booster coverage.  // Timothy :: talk  22:31, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete as I agree that the sources do not meet GNG, and support Frank Anchor's comment at 13:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC). Daniel (talk) 16:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.