Conference Realignment: Texas, Its Strengths, and the Long Play
by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2011 2:48 AM CDT
in Texas Longhorns Football
Email
PrintJudging from the initial reaction to my earlier post on the threat being floated that Texas A&M and OU would consider bolting for the SEC if some of their concerns related to the LHN persist, we might benefit from a fresh round of discussion about Texas and its position with respect to realignment.
First, there's no question that Texas is in a position of tremendous strength, a fact that was on full display throughout last summer's events. That much everyone understands, but there is an accompanying point that seems to be widely overlooked -- namely, that the objective is to maximize the value you extract from those advantages. Put another way: the value is not in the advantages themselves, but in their potential to facilitate value creation.
Understanding that point is essential to understanding why it is insufficient to point to Texas's viability in any number of realignment scenarios as a basis for acting cavalierly, or with relative indifference, towards those various outcomes. Think of it this way: There are a number of ways that realignment could play out, each with a different end position for Texas. Although we might be able to conclude that all of the possibilities would be acceptable, among those endgames, not only would some would be decidedly better than others but the range between the best- and worst-case scenarios for Texas would be substantial. That is, the best-case scenario would be a lot better than the worst.
That, really, is why Texas fans should be careful not to flippantly blow off today's story with bravado. No, Texas doesn't "need" Texas A&M and/or OU, and yes, Texas's position of strength means that there a number of quality options involving partnerships with one, both, or neither of those schools. But returning to that range of realignment outcomes for Texas, the event defining the far end of the worst-case scenario side of the spectrum arguably is: Texas A&M and Oklahoma bolt for the SEC, and do so on an accelerated timeline (in the next 1-2 years).
Of all the ways realignment could play out, that's the worst case scenario for Texas, and even if it doesn't mean Texas can't land on its feet -- in a relatively good position, even -- that scenario: (1) neuters a host of Texas's advantages, and just as importantly, (2) knocks Texas out of the driver's seat and onto its heels. There is an enormous difference to Texas between that situation and the best case scenario, which would involve (generally speaking) Texas methodically lining up all its pieces and strategically crafting the most advantageous, nurturing environment for itself. Moreover, for those clamoring that Texas flip everyone the bird and go it alone, independence is least viable for UT in a landscape where A&M and OU bolt to anchor the formation of an SEC super-conference.
The Value Of Bluffing
I haven't been shy about chastising Aggies for injudiciously evaluating their options, but Texas's being in a stronger position in this realignment game does not make us immune from, or any less foolhardy for, handicapping ourselves with myopic bravado. Teasing our rivals with arrogance is great fun, but limiting our own opportunities is serious business.
And that's why it is no less imprudent for Texas fans to urge Deloss Dodds to embrace a reckless "Bring 'em on!" attitude than it is for Aggie fans to urge their administration to bolt unilaterally for the SEC. Quite the opposite, we should hope that our administration proceeds in a way that maximizes our advantages and, by extension, the potential value we might draw from them. The good news, as far as I'm concerned, is that our administration understands this exceptionally well, which is why I expect we will see Texas tap the brakes a bit with the Longhorn Network, and to be as cooperative as they can be while still forging ahead with the long-term advantage/value optimization plans.
That's also why it will be interesting to see what Texas A&M and Oklahoma take from this episode. For all we know, today's rumor came from a source without any official affiliation with either of the universities -- some other interested party, such as a politician or well-connected booster -- and though the reality of Texas A&M and Oklahoma's ability/interest/willingness to bolt prematurely for the SEC may be every bit as suspect as it was before today, there was real value in getting the threat of an accelerated tandem departure into the conversation.
For one, it got the media involved, which will have the effect of disallowing Texas from getting everything it could possibly want from the LHN with quiet incrementalism -- call it the boiling frog strategy, which is out now that Texas has to proceed with media spotlights on. Second, the threat revolves around the single most dangerous outcome to Texas, which however unlikely actually to occur is nonetheless just dangerous enough to get Texas to react. And third, even if it is nothing more than an empty threat, there's very real value to A&M and OU just in getting to evaluate Texas's reaction to the bluff. If UT ignores their demands, they know something valuable about where they stand, which helps inform an analysis of how best to proceed. And if UT backs down, then they've gotten something they wanted.
Eyes on the Prize
What about Texas's perpsective, though? Are fans mistaken for confidently concluding that the threat is a bluff? Based on the facts and realities -- both present and as existed a year ago when Big 12-2 was formed -- I hardly think so. But that's not the real issue; the important question is whether Texas should call it. And it's here that I diverge with those who would have Texas call our opponents' hands.
Why? Ironically, for the very same reasons that make it so likely that A&M and OU are bluffing in the first place: the facts and realities both present and as existed a year ago when Big 12-2 was formed. As a placeholder for Texas as it develops its advantages and thinks through/begins developing its long-term strategy, the Big 12-2 was and is tremendously valuable. Whether or not our long-term, best-case scenario involves a conference with A&M, OU, both, or neither, the present configuration serves Texas exceptionally well -- providing sufficient present value while giving Texas time and opportunity to develop and retain maximal control over its long-term plans.
In that light, calling this bluff fails Texas because: (1) all the downside is in the actions being threatened, (2) all the upside is in the long-term value of preserving the present arrangement (at least for a while), and (3) the price to be paid for folding is minimal and limited entirely to the short-term.
Taking everything in this post together, then, Texas fans need to be as realistic and focused on the long-term strategy as do A&M fans. Just as they would stand to gain the most by developing a strategy that optimizes the strengths of their own position (i.e. rising up with UT, and to the exclusion of as many others as possible, to maximize the enormous value of the state's advantages/resources), so too does Texas need to forge ahead with its focus on nurturing and growing its advantages. Texas's priority should be maximizing its control over how future events unfold, and the timeline on which they occur.
That, ultimately, is why Texas should and will play it safe and conciliatory in a showdown such as this -- to minimize the risk of having to deal with a situation that detracts from Texas's advantages and greatly diminishes its control over realignment and its timeline. In that context, this episode is more of a win-win than it might seem. It is a win for Texas A&M and Oklahoma as a positive step in strengthening their present position, and an opportunity to develop the relationship among these parties in a competitive, but mutually beneficial manner. And it is a win for Texas, by allowing it to pay a very modest, entirely acceptable, cost to preserve an arrangement that serves both its short- and long-term interests.
We may not need A&M and Oklahoma, but they can absolutely help us (and themselves), if we allow a workable present partnership to enable us to develop an ideal long-term position... And they can very much hurt us, by blowing everything up with a near-future defection -- forcing us to develop our next position on their terms and their timeline, before we're fully, optimally ready.
Keep your eyes on the prize, Longhorns fans. Keep your eyes on the prize.
272 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If OU and A&M leave after the 2011 season
and texas goes independent, who will you play in football? These schedules are worked out years in advance, so who would texas have lined up? The posters screaming for independence haven’t looked at the practical logistics of such a move.
As an independent, who would you play in basketball? Baseball? All other non-revenue sports?
A&M and Oklahoma have all the leverage here, because if they leave, texas is left with the option to support the Snow White and Seven Dwarfs Conference, or go independent, neither option of which the school or athletic department is currently prepared for.
Read closer
A&M and Oklahoma have all the leverage here, because if they leave, texas is left with the option to support the Snow White and Seven Dwarfs Conference, or go independent, neither option of which the school or athletic department is currently prepared for.
That’s not accurate, and misses the point in the exact same way, but on the other side of the coin from, Texas fans clamoring to jump to independence.
A&M and OU do not have all the leverage here, because: (1) it would take a dramatic change in the contextual reality for A&M and OU both to be free and clear to bolt to the SEC, sans OSU or Texas or anyone else; (2) the power of the potential threat is in OU and Texas A&M leaving together (A&M leaving unilaterally would be a huge mistake for the Aggies, and not disrupt Texas); and (3) OU and A&M are better off working with UT than bolting to punish it.
In reality, A&M and OU have leverage to the extent they use the nuclear option to keep Texas in check and collaborative in working to develop a partnership that provides meaningful benefits to A&M and OU. Unless and until something in the facts limiting who is allowed to move where, and when, and with whom, OU and A&M can’t hold UT hostage with a threat to leave in fact — but it can use the controversy of the threat to force Texas to work more co-equally.
Huge difference, and the entire point of the post.
You ain't hurt...
To put it another way
The threat is — at least as things presently stand, all things considered — more or less an empty threat, but… it is not made in a vacuum.
That is, while Texas may not have to worry much about the threat itself, if properly played by A&M and OU, the controversy such posturing creates very much will be real. Meaning that Texas, even as it knew the actual threat is minimal, would be forced to react to an environment that is treating it as though it might be.
The real value to A&M and OU is not that it can force UT to capitulate with an (unrealistic) threat of a tandem defection, but in the opportunity to leverage the (quite real) controversy created by threats and discord in order to pressure Texas into being a more willing and collaborative partner.
I’m sure there is little-to-no chance Aggies are going to embrace such a nuanced, tempered viewpoint of their optimal strategy — particularly when it doesn’t involve stuffing it to UT — but fortunately, I’m not writing to Aggies. I’m writing to Texas fans, who I hope will synthesize all the factors in play here and arrive at a similar conclusion about how this best plays out for both sides.
As explained in the post, this can be a win-win for all involved. At the very least, I know what Texas is going to act in service of its best long-term interests. And I’m actually quite confident that OU is on the same page. With the Aggies… who knows.
You ain't hurt...
Beergut knows (even though he denies it) that OU has the leverage here. if A&M leaves so what who gives damn. if OU leaves we lose a big name team and our biggest rival although im sure we’d keep OU as a OOC game as long as the Sooners wanted to play us and i assume they would continue to want to. beergut just did a post about how Texas needs A&M and OU more than we know. (he still wont obey easy english rules and capitalize the T in Texas.) i think he should rename his post “Texas needs OU”
to be honest Peter this whole thing with the aggies crying for weeks and now this ultimatum situation has completely soured the rivalry for me at this point they dont wanna be associated with us (and their fanbase away from SB has made that very clear) and quite frankly after all this i dont want to be associated with them either i think im finally ready to let this rivalry die
formerly "Horns102591"
Don't Be So Sure About A OOC Game
If the SEC expanded to 16 teams taking Oklahoma and A&M then your looking at 11 conference games a season in what would unquestionably be the best football conference in the nation. No way the Red River Rivalry or your Turkey Day showdown with A&M survives that.
OU played us and Nebraska during the 90s
no reason they still wouldnt want to to. as for the Aggies to hell with them i dont care if we never play them again im sick of their whining
formerly "Horns102591"
That's not very realistic
If OU joins an SEC superconference, presumably part of the west division, they add games like LSU, Alabama, Arkansas, and Auburn every year in addition to probably keeping Oklahoma State since OU will likely be forced to take them along. If that is what the Oklahoma schedule of the future looks like, not only will they not need the Red River, they won’t want it. Adding a cupcake OOC game will be an obvious practical necessity.
by leatherneck1061 on Jul 22, 2011 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Leaving aside the fact
that the do-nothing Legislature of Texas would never let A&M go anywhere without Texas going along… Let’s attempt to answer Beergut’s question about scheduling, though.
Let’s assume that the Ags, in a fit of pique, decide that they’re not going to schedule us any more. After a period of mourning by Horns fans across the world — about as long as it would take to finish a beer — we’d move on. (Some of us old-time fans miss Arkansas, but we’re not broken up about it.) The big losers would be the players, who know each other and enjoy playing against each other, and, I’d argue, the Aggies. They’ll miss us a lot more than we’ll miss them.
What about the RRR? Texas – OU isn’t going away, I don’t care if the Sooners move to the Sun Belt conference, that game will always be played and hopefully will stay in Dallas.
In football, an independent Texas will have as much problem filling up its schedule as Notre Dame does: not much.
Basketball would be a little more difficult but not impossible. Rick Barnes has made sure his teams have had home-and-homes with powerhouse programs every year and that would not change. In fact, we might see more of it. And the rivalry with Kansas would likely continue as well, only stripped of its conference implications.
Which brings us to non-revenue sports. Let’s look at Notre Dame, a school I’m very familiar with because I grew up in South Bend in the years before their Big East affiliation. Who did they play in non-revenue sports? I know this may come as a shocking concept to Aggie bridge-burners, but they played schools from Indiana and the surrounding states that — gasp! — belonged to other conferences. ND had good facilities, was centrally located in its region, was surrounded by Div-1 universities, had an outstanding athletic department and a supportive nationwide fan base, and was an opponent that student-athletes looked forward to playing against even if the games had no impact on conference standings. Guess what, Texas is all of those things. Oh and Texas now has its own network, which will broadcast those games. So if I’m a volleyball coach and I know the only chance my team has to be on television at all in a given season is if we schedule Texas… then I’m gonna schedule Texas.
Could we come to regret an independent Texas? Yes, we very well could. But it won’t be because nobody wants to play us anymore.
Simplicity is always the secret, to a profound truth, to doing things, to writing, to painting. Life is profound in its simplicity. - Charles Bukowski
by windycityhorn on Jul 21, 2011 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions
Indy schedule...
2 “big name” games (USC/Cal/Maryland/Ole Miss) like we’ve been doing
4 rivalries (OU/A&M/Tech/Arkansas<since they A&M won’t be an OOC game anymore)
2 nat’l indys (BYU/ND)
3 scrubs (UNT/Rice/ULL/UTSA/TX St)
1 service academy (Army/Navy)
Is that a bad schedule???
Service academy
Does A&M count?
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
They just cant go to the SEC
The SEC would also have to add 2 more teams to make it a 16 team conference with 8 in each division. Its not as simple as just switching. Two teams moving from one conference to another is goin to involve a lot more than those two teams. And if the SEC goes to 16 teams dont you think other will follow suit and someone WILL pick up Texas even if they still have the LHN.
"Stability is a factor in teams that win the championship. But if you stabilize on a team that's going to end up short of that, then all you're doing is spinning your wheels in the 45-win range."-----Daryl Morey
by fanoflosingteams on Jul 21, 2011 8:39 AM CDT up reply actions
14 teams would work just fine...
just have a cross division rival and it works fine, 6 division game, 1 cross division rivalry game, and 2 cross divisional games…
Exactly
In what I believe is a completely theoretical discussion we’re having now, yes, there would be no necessity to get to 16.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 21, 2011 9:16 AM CDT up reply actions
THEORETICAL?!?!?!?!?
HH this is happening RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!! If we don’t do something we’ll be ostrasized and left out in the cold and be forced to join the WAC…
SEC would rather
Take schools from ACC … FSU, Miami, Clemson, GA Tech all seem to be good fits … plus they all would have in-state rivals.
A&M wants SEC way more than SEC wants A&M … that said, wouldn’t surprise me if they did want A&M solely for Houston, Dallas, San Antonio TV markets and fertile recruiting grounds
"Excuse me while I whip this out."
those teams open up very few markets
Gators almost own Florida, not too many people outside of ATL are Tech fans. Clemson could bring something, because for some reason it seem like South Carolina (state as a whole) is pretty much 50/50 between Clemson and USC. Taking those teams, to a slightly greater extent, is like the Big XII adding Houston and TCU. It doesnt bring in THAT much more money, just more mouths to feed
"Stability is a factor in teams that win the championship. But if you stabilize on a team that's going to end up short of that, then all you're doing is spinning your wheels in the 45-win range."-----Daryl Morey
by fanoflosingteams on Jul 21, 2011 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
"Eyes on the Prize," Wow.
I’ve heard about Texas arrogance before but to hear it straight from the horse’s mouth is another thing entire.
…Waiting to get the hell out of this sham of a conference..
Seriously???
You’ve never seen our arrogance before? Only heard rumors of it? Wow… and yet I assume they have access to the internet in your world…
but hey, we all feel you on the getting out of this ‘sham of a conference’ thing. We’ll get our ducks all in a row and do that someday soon enough.
Yup, The internet is a big place.
don’t frequent this blog, so yeah news to me. It is odd though. I am a native Texan and I live in Texas currently, the longhorns I know personally aren’t this arrogant, or at least never show it. I suppose it’s easier to do when one is cloaked in anonymity..
I don't know about you guys...
…but I feel a little ashamed to wear my UT shirt right about now. What happened to us? It’s like our athletic department has made us all Randian Objectivists the way Bo Pelini made Nebraska fans into a bunch of spitting, vitriolic maniacs. I think after the smoke clears we need to think about replacing Deloss Dodds. Or maybe not. Maybe things just spun out of his control. Some of his quotes make me think this is the case. ESPN is calling the shots now and when have they ever been paragons of good taste. They helped destroy LeBron James’ image with The Decision. Let’s just hope they don’t do the same with us. We have to be careful about avoiding overexposure. We’re in the news too much right now. I don’t like it. It’s unflattering. I just want people to ignore us for a while. ESPN doesn’t care about the Texas athletic program. They just care about getting their money’s worth. I care deeply about the Big 12 Conference. I doubt ESPN does. I suspect they are conspiring to drive us into independence for their own gain. We can’t let them screw us like that.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
by LookinForIt on Jul 21, 2011 4:50 AM CDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
I'm all for taking our Talents to South Beach
Just as long as we can make an hour long special out the decision to move
You're a bit late on this take
The train has left the station. We are King of the Heap. What we have to do is a great job of managing the position while others do the posturing. Teaser statements in a game of liars poker is risky in light of the fact the network has yet to launch. But worthy in that Dodds et al were able to smoke out the limits of acceptable programming options vis-a-vis select HS games on the LHN. We’re talking about a long-term contract. Better to know where your competitors align in the beginning than to learn along the path. And the LHN is not a vehicle about any other entity beside UT. ESPN has a vested interest in offering the best programming that returns the highest audience. It’s called ratings and without them a network is limited in what it can charge advertisers and sponsors. This cannot be ignored or stressed enough. ESPN is IN THIS GAME TO MAKE MONEY!
OU and A&M need us as much as we need them. There is much capital in tradition and would be extremely difficult to replace. The petrie dish that is Nebraska will be evidence to this fact. But left jabs are part of rivalries. Call me naive, but I don’t see an OU or A&M jumping ship. Too expensive. I do see them driving the rest of conference toward a Big12-2 network. This is a more viable option than abandoning the conference, imo.
No, we must consider ourselves first and foremost. And we must obtain all the leverage we can moving forward. But we must do so carefully. The 24-hour news cycle on this topic is about to expire and this story will blow over…until the LHN broadcasts Corona Del Sol v. Marcos De Niza (Do you hear me Andrus Peat?).
Burnt Orange Nation
Follow Along on Twitter @TXStampede
Agreed
The “maximizing our advantages” argument seems to boil down to how much money we make for an already-megarich program. It’s early in the PR battle — and touchee, OU and A&M, for your latest play — but Texas is not looking good as I read the coverage and this blog this morning.
I’m all for Texas being a strong program and a profitable brand, but I am just as concerned about maintaining our dignity and integrity. Is televising HS games that important? Let it go — I thought the idea behind LHN was to promote Texas Longhorn athletics, not Texas high schools. Let it go.
All this blather about going independent is so much swagger and hot air. Texas will be in a stronger position when it’s in a strong conference — and I hope we are positioning ourselves for that, whether it’s Pac-16, Big 10 + 6, or some miraculous resuscitation of the Big 12.
by NYCHorn on Jul 21, 2011 6:39 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Is your shirt a T-shirt?
You need to STFU and get over it.
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
I need to shut the fuck up, you say?
That’s borderline inappropriate for this blog, I think.
Yes, my shirt is a t-shirt. If it wasn’t, it still wouldn’t be okay to not be ashamed of the Texas athletic department and/or ESPN. If Chris Kluwe were here, he’d be calling us d-bags.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
by LookinForIt on Jul 21, 2011 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions
You're a Liberal Arts major, right?
I actually said STFU – what YOU said is inappropriate!
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
I'm not in the camp that believes we go independent if OU & A&M bolts
If the SEC were to entertain the idea of bringing in OU, there has got to be some consideration given to OSU. That sets off a whole bunch of realignment dominoes. IMO once the SEC expands other conferences are going to do their best to equalize with some other teams as well, and Texas is going to be a hot commodity for any conference looking to gain some strength. Last summer should have been a much bigger shake up. I think the end result of last year is just going to end up delaying the inevitable.
Interesting that we keep talking independent
Do you not think any conference in the country would want us – INCLUDING the SEC?
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
well
there are only so many BCS conferences.
2 of which demand, an all in policy when it comes to media rights (the BIG and the Pac12), which with the Longhorn Network, would be a problem (one most Longhorn fans seem to think because they are texas, that everyone will just ignore)
That leaves you with The Big Least, the ACC and SEC. If OU and A&M join the SEC to get away from Texas, I’m not sure how UT joining the SEC would happen.
Now you are down to the Big Least and the ACC. I don’t see the ACC taking UT. The Big Least might as having TCU as a traveling partner my be conceivable.
I would guess the MWC, CUSA, and what’s left of the WAC would love UT, but I’m guessing that’s not what you mean.
True - it's possible that no one will want us now.
It’s all baseless speculation at this point though.
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions
Still trying to figure out
How this is a win for Tx. If you don’t show and HS or conference football games on your network then it is a win for A&M and OU. What does Tx gain?
Maybe I give Dodds too much credit. I honestly think you really want to go independent but for some reason you are terrified to take the PR hit of breaking up the conference. Dodds knew that if he pushed the envelope with his network that A&M would move to the SEC, forcing the breakup of the conference and allowing your independence. Maybe your abortion of a football season last year put everything on hold and u now want to keep this conference together while you rebuild. I have a hard time seeing ESPN making all the plays here while Dodds is sitting on the sideline holding his helmet.
by miketag on Jul 21, 2011 6:18 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
you would do that without acquiescing to our wishes
still fail to see how doing what we want, equals a win for you
and miketag
is right
And just “Making more money than you” isn’t necessarily a good thing. There is a point of having “too much of competitive advantage”. If you are the one holding it everything seems roses…not so much for others.
Here's my take
I’m not sure it’s that devastating a loss for Texas if it turns out the LHN isn’t able to broadcast high school games. (Even as a Texas fan, I’m shocked that something like that could fly by the NCAA, but as we’ve seen over the years, power schools and ESPN can essentially do whatever they wish.) If it doesn’t happen, then it wasn’t meant to be, and it further sets the precedent that whichever school starts the next network — and there will be another school that tries — won’t be able to broadcast high school games, either.
But yes, such a decision would be a win for the rest of the conference. No doubt about that.
Dodds is, to quote Peter, making the long play. He wanted the LHN badly, so much so that he was willing to sacrifice a possible move to the Pac-10 for it. And he knows what’s becoming increasingly evident: that the current conference system cannot hold for long and the future will be one of a few megaconferences, many independents, or a combination of those two. So Texas is set up well either way: Any new megaconference will have to accept the LHN as part of having Texas (or will have to pay handsomely to make it go away); And an independent Texas would have access to a revenue stream that’s independent of conference cash.
And if, in this whole process, he’s pissing off the Aggies? That’s just gravy.
Simplicity is always the secret, to a profound truth, to doing things, to writing, to painting. Life is profound in its simplicity. - Charles Bukowski
by windycityhorn on Jul 21, 2011 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions
So essentially, it's "let's keep A&M and OU around and placated until we are
good and proper prepared to screw ’em, if necessary"?
Conference member of the Century award to the Longhorns.
If you can’t see that other members (A&M, maybe OU) perceive this strategy as inherently unstable, then there’s really not much to talk about.
by jagvocate on Jul 21, 2011 6:19 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
No, that's not how I feel.
I’m not in favor of ever screwing you guys and I know a lot (if not the vast majority) of Texas fans feel the same. I’m just not sure you guys feel the same way. How much of this SEC-BS is out of vengeful spite?
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
how is it spiteful
to want to go to a conference where you would make more money, get more exposure, and play better games on every Saturday in the fall?
aTm is having problem
with the game they’re playing now. When was the last time they played in a conference championship? And all that is going to change when they get to the SEC? They’d have to play Bama, LSU, and Arkansas (to a lesser extent, but Arkansas has a 40-24 W-L) every year. They would be replacing Texas & OU with Bama & LSU. All aTm stands to gain from this is money
"Stability is a factor in teams that win the championship. But if you stabilize on a team that's going to end up short of that, then all you're doing is spinning your wheels in the 45-win range."-----Daryl Morey
by fanoflosingteams on Jul 21, 2011 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions
I didn't say it was.
I said how much of this SEC-BS is out of vengeful spite? You gave reasons why you think this SEC-BS is going on. But I don’t think those are the only reason. You just have pent-up animosity towards Texas and the Big 12.
You haven’t had much success in the Big 12 of late. With that knowledge, it amazes me that you think it wouldn’t be much worse in the SEC. You joining the SEC would be like Mizzouri joining the Big Ten. You’d squander every advantage you have in college football and become a bottom-feeder. The Big 12 is very beneficial to both you and Missouri.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
if we want to win a national title in football
we are going to have to beat SEC teams anyways. I am of the opinion that if you want to be the best then you have to beat the best. It is not very “Texan” to try to back away from the toughest challenge and always take the easy road. To each their own I guess. It is simple to me. If we move to the SEC we will sell 90,000 tickets to home games because SEC fans travel The extra $1 million in revenue from every home game (ticket sales alone) can help improve the athletic department across the board. It is gravy that the fans will see better games/better tailgate experiences. Even if we were to struggle in the SEC (not a given IMO) I am confident that we would adjust and raise our level of play. That does not take into account that football is not the only sport, and we are nationally competitive in every sport right now other than football. Refraining from switching conferences because of anxiety about the performance on one sport is pretty dumb IMO.
Hilariously, Vanderbilt highest attendance last year was for the Northwestern game.
They also played LSU, Florida, and Tennessee at home.
You are something else, Miketag.
if we want to win a national title in football we are going to have to beat SEC teams anyways.
Assuming you are IN the nat’l title game, and you haven’t been since the ’30’s, then you only have to win ONE game against a possible SEC team – as opposed to 8.
The extra $1 million in revenue from every home game (ticket sales alone) can help improve the athletic department across the board. It is gravy that the fans will see better games/better tailgate experiences.
How many SEC teams trave to see their team play Vanderbuilt – the equivalent program to yours?
I am of the opinion that if you want to be the best then you have to beat the best. It is not very "Texan" to try to back away from the toughest challenge and always take the easy road.
Can I even believe you have said this? Give me an example of AtM taking the challenge in this scenario? You want to bolt, my friend, where is the toughness there?
Even if we were to struggle in the SEC (not a given IMO) I am confident that we would adjust and raise our level of play.
You are willing to adjust to their MO for recruiting? Taking semi-literates that can run and jump? Dumbing down your academic requirements for your recruits?
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
you took Edorian McCullough
Marco Martin and Jamaal Charles. Do you really have room to talk about dumb athletes? Ricky Williams finished his 4 year in Austin 60 hours short of a degree. He got a 0.00 GPA while he was winning the heisman.
As for bolting, you biggest argument for staying is that this is a much easier conference to win. How does it make anyone better to consistently play weak competition? Like I said, football is not the only sport.
I live in SEC country...
And people here think The Aggie wetdream of joining the SEC is a joke. They don’t need another Vandy on the schedule. I’m a Texas alumi and die hard Horns fan. It’s a different world down here. OU, Texas and A&M would have a hard time fitting in.
by Dawnpatrol on Jul 21, 2011 6:57 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
The Aggie comment is real...not just saying this because I'm a Longhorn...they laugh.
Actually most don’t even know who A&M is.
"Nobody wants A&M"
That’s what a senior hard-core fan at UF told me. He did say they would take Texas in a heartbeat. Maybe he was being nice. Maybe it’s his perception of the ags. It would sure open up a nice Florida recruiting pipeline though. But from what I’ve been reading on other sites, the SEC wants two teams badly so this may come to fruition. Doesn’t really make sense for OU though. I’ve been hearing Clemson may be one. I’m blabbering.
Hook Em Horns!
well if a senior hard core fan said it, it must be...
wait what? :-/
"I want to see if I can hurt some more people. To me, I don't think I'm out there hurting enough people. I should hurt a lot more people than I do. I'd like to hurt someone on every play." The Boz
Though it pains me to say this
There’s only one team from the Big 12 that could survive in the SEC and it’s not Texas: It’s OU.
They’ve shown the ability, even the inclination, to get down and dirty when it’s needed so they can play that SEC game. As for recruiting, they already know how to recruit the state of Texas but they also make it a priority to win the Plains (Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri) while cherry-picking guys they want from Arizona, California, and Florida. So, yes, the SEC would become a bigger player in the state of Texas, but they’re not likely to horn in on OU’s turf north of the Red River.
And, schematically, I think they can play SEC-style football better than anyone else in the conference right now.
Simplicity is always the secret, to a profound truth, to doing things, to writing, to painting. Life is profound in its simplicity. - Charles Bukowski
by windycityhorn on Jul 21, 2011 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions
And why do you think AtM wouldn't get down and dirty?
They have never been shy about it in the past.
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
Good Grief!
I go to bed and all is well with the world and I wake up and there is this? HeavenLord. What I am picturing right now is our neighbors to the north hastily packing the Sooner Schooner and hitching every car on the lot to the bumper because even they know that the Sooner Wagon won’t make it out of Oklahoma. Further south our agricultural cult members are running in tightywhitey circles, rattling their sabers and screaming ’WE WON" and not having a clue that they only defeated one of the advance scouting party. The real war is about to sneak up behind them and bite,,HARD. All the while Mr. Dodds is at home in his silk smoking jacket, sipping his tea and rearranging his piles of money,,and grinning.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
by OnMySignal on Jul 21, 2011 8:15 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
okay
what is the real war? Like I said, maybe I am giving Dodds more credit than he deserves. I have thought all along that he wants us to break up the conference. It is why I do not understand the move of giving in to our wishes. Does not make any sense to me.
The Real war is Reality.
You can’t have your Texas and run away from them at the same time. You need us. Possibly more than we need you. It is impossible to give Mr. Dodds more credit than he deserves. He didn’t get the job he has by accident. He’s good. Very good. And for the record,,no one is giving in to your “wishes”. They were never “wishes” to begin with. They were petulant demands.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
A couple of points
First, what hasn’t been emphasized nearly enough in either of these threads is just how incredibly unlikely this is from a political standpoint. Everything I’ve read about the OU-OSU relationship is that they’re tied together closer even more than any two Texas schools you want to name.
More importantly, in neither of the two realignment battles we’ve been through (1994 and 2010) has UT truly elected to exercise its true power in Austin. We’ve been content, more or less, to have Baylor and Tech tag along with us along the way. We never really fought against this in Austin. If Texas decided that preserving the Big 12 was really in the school’s best interest … well, we’ve seen what the pro-Baylor forces can accomplish in the Legislature. Is there any chance in the world A&M could leave its fellow Texas schools for the SEC if the pro-Texas forces (not to mention the pro-Baylor and pro-Tech forces) decided to mobilize against such a move? I highly doubt it.
Given this, I’m very much going to be one of those Texas fans Peter is writing about who is going to cavalierly dismiss these “concerns” of OU and A&M. They knew what the score was when the conference was saved. They knew we were planning this network. They knew that showing high school sports would almost certainly be a part of these plans. There is nothing new here. As such, and since I think the chances of OU and A&M bolting (or, more precisely, being permitted to bolt) are somewhere between slim and none, I think we can and should continue on as we have. And even if “slim” happens, I’m much more confident in our ability to thrive in whatever conference (or non-conference) we wind up in.
THIS
A&M and OU knew the jist of what was happening but underestimated the ability of UT to get a successful network off the ground, they thought it was a pipedream but now that its here they are freaking out because they got outplayed and want the NCAA, Big 12, or SEC to fix everything…its very childish if you ask me
well
yes and no
I’m sure every knew about Bevo-TV. But when it’s closer to reality, perspective of it certainly changes. Like when you have dentist appointment, it’s not big thing….the morning of…it’s a different story.
The thing that I think has happened, is neither the Sooner Network, nor the Big 12-UT Network has come about. I think everyone on the other side, thought they would do well enough with those to be a counter balance to the Longhorn Network, and I’m thinking they are finding that might not happen, or happen big enough, that the Longhorn Network is a bigger threat then once thought it would be…….It also doesn’t help to have UT officials in national interviews gloating about how great it UT has it when it comes to recruiting because of Bevo-TV
OU and OSU relationship is pretty tight, both politically and culturally, BUT if push came to shove it could be split…it’s just a fight that know one wants to actually do. (the President of OU’s wife has a degree from OSU, OSU’s Pres went to OU Law, OSU’s vet school is named after OU’s President)
the difference is....
that A&M pines for the SEC and I think OU is just posturing, they know what Texas knows, the Big 12-2 is the best thing for now and the money is good, OU’s beef is with the HS games and I get that, but I don’t see them wanting to take on that battle in the legislature in order to split from Okie St (unlike A&M who has a false sense of security with an Aggie in the governor’s mansion).
well, I think OU wants the Big 12-2 to work
but, I think the LHN Is now really being seen as a bigger advantage for UT then anyone thought it would, mostly due to the lack of a Sooner Network/Big12-UT network.
It doesn’t make a conference stable to have one school SO far out in front of the others.
"It also doesn’t help to have UT officials in national interviews gloating about how great it UT has it when it comes to recruiting because of Bevo-TV"
Which UT officials were gloating about it’s effect on recruiting in national interviews?
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
ESPN official
sorry
though….with the set up of the Longhorn Network, it could be argued an ESPN official is a University rep.
He never said anything about "how great it UT has it when it comes to recruiting beacuse of Bevo-TV."
All he said was that they were going to play UT recruits games because that is what their audience wants. He didn’t discuss the effect it would have on UT recruiting.
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
we are talking semantics here
the guy made a tremendous blunder and I highly doubt whether he will have the same job on August 26th when your network is supposed to launch
Just in from ESPN.com....
“Texas A&M regents are expected to discuss the network with Reveille in a closed-door meeting on Thursday.”
lol
tell me you are joking about the dog being in the meeting cause i really wouldnt find it that hard to believe if they just sit in a room with the dog at the head of the table and ask it “what should we do?”
formerly "Horns102591"
Right now everyone is playing Texas Hold 'Em
And nobody is ready to go all in. Look at the SEC’s response to this.
At their media day, commissioner Mike Slive made it clear that the SEC was very comfortable at it’s present makeup.
The he says, "I could go to 16 (teams) in 15 minutes "
No one is really sure how the LHN will work. There is no template for a single school network. We and ESPN have a pretty good idea, but it remains to be seen how it really functions.
I agree with Peter. Having a conference anchor makes sense. And it also makes sense for OU & A&M to work with “The Devil They Know’” rather than rush off to take on a new pool of sharks.
by srr50 on Jul 21, 2011 9:37 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
A&M Alum Here...
And while I’m as biased as the next guy in regards to his or her home team, I think this is a very well written article explaining both benefits and costs associated to A&M leaving the conference. Its definitely nice to read articles that are written impartially as opposed to immediate degradation of rivals without merit.
by flogmat on Jul 21, 2011 9:49 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Remember the politics
If OU would want to leave then they would need to take OSU with them. There is no way that the politicians in Oklahoma would allow OU to hang OSU out to dry on any move. I can see the SEC taking OSU along for the ride just to get OU. It’s not like they are bringing in a weakling with OSU and would be a very viable option if they intend to expand to 14 or 16 teams.
The situation becomes even more complicated with A&M. The Texas politicos would be up in arms because Tech and Baylor would be seriously hurt if the B12 folds.
I doubt that UT is concerned with A&M. I believe the conversation with the regents will be in keeping OU in check. The talk of a OU network is only talk. Too small a state. Too small a fan base to make a paid option outside of Oklahoma a viable option. They would make the most revenue with a move to the SEC.
OK, let's play theoreticals...
….since I’m convinced this is all we’re doing right now. :)
Put yourself in the shoes of the SEC. Let’s say that my hunch about A&M not being able to leave as easily as it thinks it would be is correct, and A&M is therefore not available to move to the SEC.
Would the SEC want to expand west if it couldn’t pick up a school in Texas, with all of its major media markets?
And if the answer to that is “yes” and the SEC would pick up OU even without A&M, would the SEC still do so if that meant having to pick up OSU as well?
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 21, 2011 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions
Possibly
and I think the key there is the SEC’s TV contracts and what happens if they expanded. If that means the old contract is torn up, and they get to negotiate a new one, with the ever spiraling TV contracts it might be worth them, just to get to have a new TV deal.
OU and OSU combined, I’m not sure is worth it on their own…with out the TV contract bidding wars factored in….even if you concede having OU gets the SEC the Dallas Market.
Slive made it seem like the TV deal could be upped regardless of whether they expanded or not.
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
ESPN sees is slightly differently.
Apparently there are periodic look-ins where they can reconsider the contract to some extent in light of recent events around college football.
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
I still maintain
that would be an odd “contract” Usually you need a trigger to nullify a contract. Just “because we don’t like anymore” usually isn’t enough though it is an agreement between 2 or more parties..and if all agree
The trigger would be the huge Pac 12 contract.
That’s a bigger trigger than adding any schools.
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions
There's an obvious problem for the SEC by picking up OU and OSU.
Wouldn’t that pretty much kill the Big XII? Is the Big XII really going to stick it out with 8 teams, having lost one of their bell cows in addition to a decent program?
The SEC taking OU and OSU would likely lead the Big XII to collapse. Perhaps that means Texas, A&M, Tech, and Baylor all dead to the Pac 16.
Would the SEC really want to start the dominos that could lead to the Texas schools joining another mega-conference?
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Very good points
The main reason for the SEC to expand west would be to get access to the fertile Texas recruiting grounds. But the idea of gaining OU and ripping up their current media contracts still must be considered by the SEC. This is much more complicated an issue than just two teams moving conferences.
No. The main reason for the SEC to expand west
would be the number of TV viewers in Texas.
This state has three of the 10 largest cities in the U.S., and six of the largest 20. If the SEC takes in just A&M (maybe balancing with Miami or Clemson), the SEC’s TV potential goes through the roof. The Aggies would win at the bottom line — whether they could compete on the field, on the courts, as an SEC member is another issue.
bad press is still good press, right?
So now all of the SEC will want the LHN, right? Right? At least its getting us exposure where we didn’t have it before.
Thank you, Peter
Simply, an outstanding, objective, well-reasoned presentation of the situation. It points to the fact that you often share mutual interests with people you may not like, that knee-jerk opposition is often counter-productive, and often you can get alot by giving a little. I am a Rotarian and often find Rotary’s “4-Way Test” helpful:
1. It is the truth?
2. Is it fair to all concerned?
3. Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
4. Will it build good will and better friendships?
"Only angry people win football games." --DKR
Good grief Peter
Quit trying to be all rationale and logical and stuff. OU and A&M can suck it.
Seriousy, in the worst case scenario, we end up King of a small kingdom of the Big XII-vi (if mizzou joins the “leavers,” but they aren’t joining the academics likes of the $EC in my opinion).
While not ideal and not timely, the truth is we need to put up or shut up. Is Texas planning to do the LHN and if we are, then we need to be upfront and truthful – if the network will carry games of our beloved Texas high school football players, including the top players in the state (which I’m sure it will) then let’s play our cards. Just like the debt ceilinig debate, we can deal with it now or deal with it next year. It doesn’t really matter that much since the train has left the station. When we signed the deal, we pulled out of the station. I disagree with you and think we should deal with it now and not drag it along.
So, if they don’t leave, fine, we play them. I am starting to see the advantage of not playing them. It helps them more than us.
That leaves Beebe Texas, Mizzou, Tech, Baylor, K-State, Kansas, Iowa State to find some more playmates. Schools like TCU, SMU, Rice, and UH would jump at it. We would also be attractive for the BYU’s of the world. Notre Dame may even consider it since we wouldn’t object to them having their own channel. They could basically play it the same as us.
We would be in a strong position as a huge football favorite to win the conference. We would have a straight shot to the BCS and MNC and would get lots of television exposure, although voters would surely punish us in the polls regardless of our unbeaten record.
If $EC does go mega-conference, the BIg 10+2 and Pac 12+2 are going too. We could also take the best of our little 7 or 6 team party to the Big 10 or Pac 12 provided we keep our network. I don’t think the Big 10 or Pac 12 folks will be as worried about Texas recruiting within Texas. I prefer Big 10 for academic reasons and I never liked Pac 12 because we would be grouped with AU and ASU and I don’t care about them. Plus the travel out west messes up the time and is too hard on athletes.
So, while you are presenting a rationale, well reasoned position. I simply disagree that we should quietly “cave” to the demands if we have no intention of honoring them. If we want Texas high school football played on the LHN, let’s say so and deal with it now. Waiting another year to go through the same drama isn’t ideal. Let’s be honest and if we intend to do it, tell them we aren’t backing down and let the cards fall where they may. I will not support our administration’s position if we truly intend to play the high school games in the end. Let’s be honest now.
Don't be such a baby.
by Wrangler86 on Jul 21, 2011 10:48 AM CDT reply actions 2 recs
Is broadcasting high school football games that imperative?
To justify everything you acknowledge might well come with it?
You ain't hurt...
by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2011 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hmmmmm
Good point, and that is a question for the Administration to decide. I think the big mistake is that ESPN talked about only Texas recruits being shown and that isn’t what I want on the network anyway. I prefer the LHN to show games that include highschool games of all top 100 recruits, not just Texas kids and UT targets.
I watched Julio Jones play on TV over the holidays his senior year when I was in Birmingham visiting my in-laws. He was dominant. And I definitely recall watching a game with Marcus Lattimore in it.
So, the truth is that I would probably watch televised high school football games of any of the top 100 recruits (not just Texas recruits). Maybe that is better for ESPN in any regards. Then LHN could replay previous televised games that would include all the recruits and it takes away any Texas recruiting angle.
However, the idea of OU and A&M threatening us everytime they get jealous has to be stopped and stopped now. And, I don’t see a huge downside to calling the threat out, and standing our ground, and going forward with our planned network. If that causes aggie and OU leave so be it.
I just want to deal with it now and settle it. The way Aggie and OU are acting is like negotiating with a terrorist, and you can’t do that. Last year we all made a deal that included the LHN, and now they want to renegotiate the deal. I say no, let’s enforce the deal we made last year. If they keep moving the line I refuse to keep jumping it for them.
Why do you think it will be better to have this same scenario play out next year vs. this year?
Don't be such a baby.
HS games were filler
Attractive filler, but still filler. Dodds’s view of the LHN did not include seeing the thing end up on the rocks over HS football.
And HS games on the LHN would not be the recruiting vehicles that everyone says they fear. Dave Brown talked about getting Connor Brewer’s games because he knew Longhorn fans would watch, not because they planned to reach out to all the HS football players in Arizona.
by BobInHouston on Jul 22, 2011 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions
independent
Not going to happen. #1 Texas will go to the Pac before it is independent. Osu, OU and TTU will follow. Just makes more sense. Keeps tradition intact (outside AM). Much better academics than sad sack SEC or Big 12. Better chance at research grants. For football it opens a world of opportunity, Texas and Co gain caalifornia and basically take on one serious competitor (historically), USC. Think about it. Do you want to fight USC and gain cali or LSU, Bama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, and Tenn and get the Southeast. So this a bluff, but if things started moving and looked to be done. I would bet on a last minute Pac deal.rumors were Texas and OU were very close ti inking that already that was after 2 beers. This will be 3 beers and 2 shots later
by codaxx on Jul 21, 2011 11:28 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
Thank you.
Ive been thinking that we,and ou would head for the pac before going independent. I think a pac 16 would be great.
by texasfighthkm on Jul 21, 2011 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions
Consider the precedent
If the LHN backs down from broadcasting high school games and a Big 12 conference game, Aggie and OU win. I don’t care how it’s spun, they win. Whenever Texas wants to do something that OU and Aggie disagree with, they will band together and force Texas to back down. It’s a dangerous precedent.
How ironic is that a university that prides itself as a conservative institution that boasts a military tradition and the George H.W. Bush Library is fighting AGAINST capitalism and a free market? What would H. W. say? Aggies and Sooners don’t like the LHN, have some courage, some balls really, and create your own network to compete. They’d rather be gutless and run to the SEC.
I love the Sooners. We’ve heard for a year now that OU is going to create their own network, but then when they study it and realize they aren’t a national brand, they put the network on hold. Better to run to the SEC than to take a risk right?
Texas should call Aggie and OU’s bluff because last time I checked, both are public schools that report to state legislatures. Good luck jettisoning Oklahoma State OU. Best of luck leaving the Big 12 Aggie with opposition from Tech, Baylor and Texas legislators in the Texas Congress. Hell there were enough Baylor politicians to throw a serious monkey wrench into the Pac 16 move. I’d remind Aggies and Sooners when dealing with state legislatures, nothing is done easily or quickly. Both will face SERIOUS uphill political battles if they choose to the leave Big 12.
DeLoss is a Shark. I have complete confidence in his ability to negotiate to get everything he wants and make the best possible deal for Texas. I honestly believe the recent holds placed on the LHN are simply a PR move to calm everybody’s fears. Once this situation cools down, and the NCAA clears it, the LHN will move forward according to plan.
billfromlaketravis (Austin Pace)
Please follow me on Twitter @BFLT_at_BON
by billfromlaketravis on Jul 21, 2011 11:37 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
And, I am going to stop dramatizing it like aggie and ou want. They are taking great pride ruffling our feathers and I won’t do it.
The national media are looking at this and remarking that the Texas fan sites are spinning on all cylinders over this nonsense. Truth is, I’m tired of the threats and so the aggies need to shit or get off the pot.
I have no problem with our “status quo and evaluate” position for now because we do need the NCAA’s blessing on chartering these new grounds. Once we have the NCAA’s blessing, I say go forward and let the cards fall where they may. I prefer our conference to stay together. I like the rivalries with OU and A&M, but I am not afraid of change either. It will work out fine for us as long as we put a good team on the field, and that I’m sure of.
Don't be such a baby.
we are not fighting a free market
as your football proved last year, having the most money does not guarantee success on the field or even competent play. We are fighting the opportunity to directly pay high school coaches to send their kids to play for Tx. The extra $15 million you are going to get this year is not going to keep Baylor from running it down your throat again.
you have no proof that says Texas would do that. we dont have to cheat to get the best recruits as it is why would we open ourselves to sanctions from the NCAA by starting to cheat now?
formerly "Horns102591"
wow dude
been saving that? need i remind you of YOUR history over at A&M yea i thought so shut up.
you know damn well im talking about the here and now. you know the Mack Brown years? the guy who has accomplished in 13 years what it has taken A&M over 100 to do
formerly "Horns102591"
texas has been on probation for major violations in the last decade
A&M has not.
In the here and now, A&M is one of only two Big 12 schools to not go on probation for major violations since 1996 when the Big 12 was formed. texas can’t make that claim. In there ‘here and now’, during the Mack Brown tenure, texas’ athletic department has been on NCAA probation, A&M has not.
LOL
are you a moron how does Texas baseball getting into trouble have anything to do with Mack Brown? my God dude you are so moronic its just beyond belief.
listen here little brother. Mack Brown runs a clean program he’s not connected to anything shady and everyone in the nation recognizes that he’s one of the classiest coaches and that he’s one coach who prides himself on running a clean program.
and one more thing little brother. when you rank up their with Alabama and Auburn in terms of major violations you have no room to talk about anyone getting in trouble. A&M lecturing another program about cheating is like a prostitute teaching a abstinence class
formerly "Horns102591"
So how would leaving the conference disrupt that advantage?
I still haven’t heard a response to this issue. Playing your games in the SEC, working with the premise that A&M leaves because Texas is showing HS games on LSN, will not stop Texas from showing HS games on LSN. Both schools would still be after the same recruits, Texas would still have the advantage.
You say this isn’t a spiteful move (which, clearly, it is), and that you are leaving for greener pastures, but then you concede that the catalyst for this move is our unfair advantage, despite the likelihood that moving to the SEC leaves our unfair advantage still intact. Which is it?
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 21, 2011 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions
5 yrs from now....
Dear 5star recruit from DeSoto,
Option A ) Play for Independent Texas. Yes, they do have the LHN.. but what does that do for you? Now your family and friends are just going to have to add a subscription channel to their cable bill for 19.95 a month in order to watch you. Your competition, Sure, Texas does schedule some good games.. Looks like they got USC, ND, and Wisoconsin this yr. Oh, but look.. they are still beating up on Rice and Alcorn St too. Who else.. New Mexico? Indiana ? Georgia Tech ? Guess being Independent doesn’t fill your plate with must-see TV every week, huh ? Yeah.. I’d be pretty pissed if I had to pay extra to watch my son play against Indiana too, ma’am.
Option B) Play for A&M in the SEC. All our conference games will be on CBS. RIght, kid.. the one your folks and friends get for free. Competition? Well. We got Arky, Auburn, Bama, LSU, the 2 schools from Mississippi. This yr we’re also playing Tenn and Florida from the SEC East.
Just sign right here, kid. ___________________________
Wow
they swear to me that A&M is a real university. But my observations indicate a daycare center that mistakenly unleashes its children far before they’re prepared to accept the realities of the real world..
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 22, 2011 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions
I smell your fear...
Seriously.
I keep reading that when Texas goes independent, they’ll be able to schedule any great team they want. Problem is.. you can only fit so many great teams per year.. they all have their own complex schedules. Go look at ND’s schedule for the past decade. THey get USC every year. They’ve gotten Michigan the last several. They average about 3 games a yr against Top25 competition or big name schools. Then they play the Perdues, South Floridas, and Northwesterns of Div I. Why would Texas be different ? From a consistent level of quality competition standpoint, A&M in the SEC is a much better argument to a recruit than Ind Texas.
And this retort that Aggies instead of running should just man up and start their own network. I can see from a money standpoint why this LHN is good for Texas. But where’s that $300 million coming from ? You Texas fans, that’s who.
Lots of fans, especially the closer to college aged.. you think they wanna start adding subscription channels and have to pay to watch their team ?
If the choice for Aggie fans are – Start your own network, your school gets 15M a yr, and it comes from the pockets of Aggie subscribers. vs. Join the SEC. School gets 15M a yr, and fans get to watch all the games on CBS for free. No brainer choice.
The advantage of the LSN
isn’t in the televising of every Texas game. That happens already. But coming from a school that has relatively few of its games televised and even fewer nationally televised (perhaps it has something to do with those 20,000 empty seats), I can see from whence your mindset and assumptions come.
The advantage of televising events will affect the non-revenue sports mostly, while football will benefit from the revenue generated, allowing a program with superior facilities and deep pockets for staff salaries to widen its advantages even further. Additionally, the players will be indoctrinated into an environment of prolific media coverage (appearing regularly in interviews and features on LSN throughout the week), allowing them better to adapt to holding a public persona with a routine relationship with media, a point which can be sold to recruits who harbor aspirations of playing in the NFL and want to learn how to handle media and to market themselves.
And as TexasWahoo noted below, the network will cost very little (in almost every case a given recruit’s parents will likely already have the network with their basic cable packages), meanwhile A&M, as an SEC bottom-dweller, will still be lucky to have 6 or 7 of its games broadcast widely throughout the region.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 22, 2011 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions
every SEC game is televised
no one watches the non-revenue sports. that is not going to change because it is on your network
As someone who is quite familiar with ND's schedule
They have played Michigan every year but four for the last 40 years, and many games before that. They’re huge rivals. ND hasn’t just “gotten them the last several.” Plus, Michigan is a big name school but has been bad to mediocre the last several years.
Also, Purdue is a state school with a mediocre Division I football program. Perdue produces chicken, or is the feminine version of the French word for “lost.”
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
I just don't understand.
Once you get past the " OOO000ooo, we are Independant , We’re Special." and “OOO000ooo, we have our own Netowork, We are really special” , I don’t see how either of those are good news for your average UT football fan.
There's so much information in this comment...
The LHN will not be a 19.95 subscription service in DeSoto (or anywhere for that matter). It will likely be on the basic cable tier (with ESPN2 in Texas) or at the very worst a sports tier (with ESPNU).
All of A&M’s conference games are going to be on CBS? You know that CBS generally televises one SEC game a week, right? Do you think they will alwys pick A&M’s game?
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 22, 2011 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions
LHN will be free ?
Wait.. If the LHN isn’t subscription, then where is this money coming from ?
ESPN is just going to throw the LHN up on basic cable and feed it to every household in America ? The $300M has to come from somewhere.
If ESPN doesn’t intend to charge extra for access to the LHN, then my lord you longhorns came out of this like effin bandits. I just don’t think that’s the case.
Wait.. If the LHN isn’t subscription, then where is this money coming from ?
ESPN is just going to throw the LHN up on basic cable and feed it to every household in America ? The $300M has to come from somewhere.
If ESPN doesn’t intend to charge extra for access to the LHN, then my lord you longhorns came out of this like effin bandits. I just don’t think that’s the case.Course not. Well I thought CBS did the regional thing like ABC/ESPN.. but perhaps I’m wrong. So 1, maybe 2 games. Still.. that’s all Texas and the LHN are gonna have until they do become independent.
You seem to be confused about how cable TV works.
It is only free if you have cable. ESPN will charge cable companies X cents per subscriber to be allowed to have the LHN on their lineup. No one will be paying extra to get it (there are only a few channels that work that way, and they are mostly movie channels like HBO and Showtime).
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 22, 2011 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions
LHN on Basic Cable ?
Basic cable comes with ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU in most places…
You have to get upgraded sports packages for a whole range of things – MLB On Demand, ESPN Game Plan, NHL Center Ice, NBA League Pass. If you want beyond the standard ESPN channels, you pay for it.
http://www.mostlivesports.com/sportspackages/
Does anyone actually know for sure how LHN will be offered or are our biases gonna leave us at a stalemate ?
I don’t see how ESPN makes money off this unless they make basic cable subscribers upgrade to one of their sports packages in order to get LHN.
It's possible that DeSoto won't get LHN on basic cable (I'm guessing it will).
But either way, no one is going to be paying 19.95 for a subscription to it.
We'll see.
MLB on Demand costs 4 payments of 34.75. That’s $139. If that’s per 7 month long MBL season, that would be $19.85 per month.
Your LHN won’t be free.
Seriously man, get a clue
We’ve given you plenty, now put it together.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 22, 2011 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions
MLB on demand is a season long package that includes all out of market MLB games.
The MLB network, on the other hand, is on my basic cable package.
We won't know for sure until it comes out
but history and speculation tells us that if you get ESPNU, you will likely get ESPNLonghorn (at least in this region). Most subscribers to those packages will simply see a 40 cent-ish rise in their monthly cable bills, and probably won’t even notice it.
You don’t seem to understand that the LSN isn’t selling to individual consumers, they are pitching to DirecTV, Time Warner Cable, etc., to carry the network. Those companies will simply pass the cost along to you.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 22, 2011 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions
LSN is supposed to add
something like 40 cents to the average satellite subscriber’s monthly bill. Multiply that by millions of subscribers in the region, and then multiply that my several decades. I know they don’t teach math at A&M, but jeez.
And as its becoming clearer that you have no idea either what’s going on or about what you’re talking, allow me to be the one that breaks this to you. You will likely have the LSN on your cable package, and you will thus be financially supporting the widening advantage the University of Texas has.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 22, 2011 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions
you are forgetting about the millions
who will change their cable package so they won’t be supporting your school. 35 days left and still no cable provider has picked up your channel
Millions?
Really? I would love to see your support for this figure.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
As apart of the
basic cable package as it will be and the millions of people who are locked into contracts with their cable provider and aren’t delirious enough to lose money on switching providers in order to not have a channel I believe I have more than sufficient proof.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
An assumption is not proof
You are assuming it will be added to a basic cable package, which is proof of nothing.
That is not assumption
that is everything that has been reported. Try not to be so obtuse.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
Kind of like how you're assuming...
…that Texas A&M has an actual, standing invitation from the SEC?
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Jul 24, 2011 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions
You do realize
that Georgia Tech has been at the top of the ACC every year for the past 3 years now, right?
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
At the top
didn’t indicate who was conference champion. Just that they have been among the top teams.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
you are all about semantics
most would assume the top meant the #1 team, but I guess you do not. are you an English teacher also?
Nope. Social Studies
You could assume one way or another. I wrote it with the caveat being the top 3 years. It is rare for a team to be the #1 team in the conference for 3 years running. However, it is not rare for a team to be at the top of the conference as far as winning percentage and bowl appearances are concerned.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
being the only school
in the state that produces the most D1 talent in the country, playing in the top football conference in the country would be attractive to a lot of recruits.
Your network is going to fail without HS and extra college games on it.
guys we better listen to Miketag
the aggies know ALL about failure
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Jul 22, 2011 11:43 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
This is an outright lie
We are fighting the opportunity to directly pay high school coaches to send their kids to play for Tx.
I already addressed this on another thread. You are being deliberately dishonest. That makes you worse than just stupid, which was the opinion I already held of you.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
Please tell me you aren't surprised at this?
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
You know
I was, at first. I was surprised that someone could be that stupid in such a perpetual fashion. Now, it’s kind of like death and taxes.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
Even taxes can be optional.
Avoiding them can be illegal but they remain an option. Death,,a little trickier to hide from. aggy,,impossible.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
how is this a lie?
how many head coaches in the state are also athletic directors at their schools? if they have recruits that go to Tx, their games get televised, which means they get paid for the rights to televise those games. Do I need to spell it out for you?
You are saying they get directly paid
that would mean the coach or athletic director is getting a bag of cash or a check written to them. Either would not only be unethical but also illegal. Since ESPN will not be directly and even indirectly paying a head coach or athletic director for the right to broadcast their school’s game you are either very stupid or a liar. Which would you prefer?
Oh, and I have already explained the small sums involved in broadcasting high school games as well as where that money would go. If you would like further explanation I can break out the crayons and really try and help you.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
missed your explanation
so an AD/coach gets an extra 5K paid into his general fund that then ends up in his and his assistants pocket. excuse me, INDIRECTLY paid. Like the semantics matter. Like every coach in this state is ethical and would refuse a bribe. Obviously you have never coached in the DISD. Where are you coaching these days anyways?
Are you deliberately dense?
A coach would not be able to access that money without a huge paper trail that would not only cause him to lose his job but on the wrong end of misappropriation of public funds that would likely with a guilty decision. On top of that, if the money wasn’t put into the athletic budget which is the most likely scenario, the SI would be the one who would control it, or even more likely, the school board. Seriously, miketag, grow up. You have no idea what you are talking about.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
Now wait a minute
You’re afraid of Texas paying HS coaches, but the response is to threaten to take off for the most cutthroat recruiting territory in the nation?
by BobInHouston on Jul 22, 2011 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Logic doesn't work
with this guy.
"I want to be remembered as the guy who gave his all whenever he was on the field."
-Walter Payton
Since it's ESPN's best interest ....
….for the Big XII-II to stay together.
And since numerous longhorn replies have consisted of “Free market, OU and A&M could start their own network.”.. knowing full well that neither school could garner the interest or get the deal that Texas got.
Why shouldn’t the Aggies and OU should go right after ESPN. Instead of aiming the Nuclear threat at Texas, direct it right at ESPN. " You want this Big Xii family to stay together for a few more years? Give us the same network deal each, or we pull out".
Lord knows, ESPN could afford it.
Neither school may be able to garner the national attention that Texas does.. but screw it, make that ESPN’s problem, not theirs. Demand the same deal and compensation, or pull out.
That actually makes a lot of sense
Almost too much sense. Hell, I’d bet OU and A&M would jump at half of what UT got.
That would require effort on the part of aggy
and a rational, reasonable presentation to the professionals at ESPN. How likely do you think that is?
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
that depends
if i speak to a certain aggie fan i know he’ll say its a great idea but if you speak to the small but vocal minority (beergut/miketag) they will say no its robbery
formerly "Horns102591"
Of course if they push too hard, ESPN might call their bluff.
ESPN could start pushing the idea that ESPN is trying to keep the Big XII together but OU is trying to leave for the SEC, leaving Oklahoma State without a conference.
I don't care much what they do with OSU
but if OU goes to the SEC and leaves aggy here,,I will be highly irritated.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
Now you're getting the hang of it
We call that “thinking.” Now go spread the disease to the rest of your brethren..
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 25, 2011 10:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Discretion is the better part of valor.
I think some power people in several places got ahead of themselves in regards to showing Texas high school football games on the LHN. I think this moratorium is good for Texas, the LHN, and the conference. The LHN hasn’t even broadcast for pete’s sake. And remember there will be issues this first year. The Big 10 Network worked through a lot of bugs its first year. I would rather wait and work through the issues and revisit this issue in a year or two.
Who are you?!
I'm Kick Ass!
I don't think the big12-2 is the long term answer here
I think the most realistic option that would make all parties involved happy would be for UT, aTm, OU, and OSU to join the SEC and create a 16 team superconference. Slive has alluded to being open to having 16 teams. The SEC would get all of Texas and Oklahoma media markets and the roughly combined 30 million people living in them. They would also receive an improved TV contract because of the expansion. aTm and OU would have the benefit of knowing that UT would not be able to hold as many chips in the SEC because there are already established powers such as Florida, LSU, Bama and Georgia. The SEC also gets the benefit of adding 4 programs that are competive in both revenue and non-revenue sports.
Texas gets the benefit of playing stronger opponents, increasing its brand throughout a region that makes up the hotbed of college football and would probably be allowed to keep the LHN and receive a better TV deal than the one they have with Fox. I know the SEC doesn’t have great academic standards and if they were really concerned about than then I would fully support a PAC 16 with these 4 as well. But the Big 12 hasn’t exactly been the ivy league either. There is UT, Mizzou, Baylor and aTm to some extent. Other than that the Big 12 academically isn’t that good.
The Big 12-2 is not the long term answer. These threats whether real or not show the problems that this conference make up has and sooner or later something is going to happen.
The Problem with the Big 12 and it's instablity
IS Texas
1) The Big 12 wouldn’t get much TV dollars with out Texas and couldn’t financially survive at the level it is now with out UT
2) Texas knows this…and is taking full advantage to maximize this….to the point that they are so far ahead of the others in budget, revenue, and now exposure, that it’s to the point where it’s hurting the conference and the other member schools…..which of course by reading this board no UT fan gives a flying flip about….
3) It’s that attitude, which makes UT not that great of a conference partner….and why OU and A&M are looking to go to a conference without UT…not with them…but as bad as conference partner UT is…with out them the Big 12 dies..
And that’s the instability of the league
which is why i argued that we go to the SEC.
the Big 12 never had competitive enough programs (except OU) to keep UT in check and Texas was able to flex their muscles because of this. In a very competitive SEC, the ags and sooners know that UT will not be able to get whatever they want which is why i thought that the scenario could work.
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions
I think UT
becomes the New York Yankees to any conference…and the rest automatically become the Baltimore Orioles…UT is the 900lb gorilla
If any conference has the tradition and competitiveness to pull it off though it is the SEC
You really don’t think that Florida, Georgia, Alabama, LSU, Tennessee and more recently Auburn and Arkansas has the power to keep UT in check. I know we all rip the SEC and call them cheaters but all those schools have alot of tradition and prestige and a game on a saturday afternoon between Texas and Florida in the swamp or UT and Bama at DKR sounds a million times more enjoyable than UT and Iowa State. Texas should want to play against the best and beat the best and I think there are a lot of positives for all parties if this realignment were to shake out this way.
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions
no I don't think UT, it's fans or administrators
will ever see themselves in a conference of equals..as they don’t see anyone as being their equal, and no one is worthy of their respect (besides maybe Notre Dame). If I were ‘bama, LSU, etc…I wouldn’t want to have to continually fight that fight, especially if they wouldn’t have to.
I don't think any conference actually sees themselves as equals.
It’s not like Alabama is offering Mississippi the same number of national games. Sure, they share the TV money equally, but they keep the 3rd tier rights and the ticket sales and merchandise sales to themselves.
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions
but the difference is
Bama isn’t so far ahead of Ole Miss on 3rd tier rights that the money isn’t a competitive advantage, that can’t be made up. Also, Bama from what I can tell isn’t telling the rest of the SEC to “sit down, shut up, fng take it cause we are ’Bama”
Neither is Texas. Maybe a few fans are, but I'm guessing there are plenty of Alabama fans who feel that way as well.
The difference in revenue between Florida and Vanderbilt is probably not that much smaller than the difference between Texas and Iowa State.
so are you saying that the only scenario for UT then is to go independent?
I think that could work but it definitely should’t be the first option for Texas, atleast not for a couple of years so the LHN can get up and running. I ultimately see Texas in a conference and the best option are the SEC or the PAC (insert number here) with the Big 12-2 being the third and last conference option long term if they can somehow hold the conference together.
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
with the LHN
as it’s currently set up..yes Independence maybe the only option.
If they scrapped it, or shared money from it, or used it as part of a larger conference network…which the other schools made money too…then it’s a different story.
What school or conference would want a program that make 2x the money the average member currently makes…if that advantage isn’t shared?
exactly, the playing field is never going to be totally equal
the best programs deserve to make more money because they are the reason behind the success of the contracts. In a 16 team conference with new upgraded TV deals for the whole conference the smaller programs would still be able to make plenty of money.
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions
but the difference is
they at least try to make it as close as possible in the Big10 by sharing most of the 3rd tier rights.
In the SEC the difference of income isn’t as great as it is in the Big 12vTexas…yet. and I don’t think it ever will as no one has the population base, alumni that UT does (maybe Florida…maybe)
In the Big 12 it’s huge advantage Texas and F everyone else…which if you’re UT is fine for everyone else, not so much
But the differences aren't that drastic.
For instance, in 2007-08, the difference was $6 million.
tOSU = 120 / Northwestern 42
Texas = 118 / Iowa State 38
Does that really put Iowa State in a much worse position than Northwestern?
well if you are going to look up numbers and facts
then we are done sir! GOOD DAY!
actually I was thinking not so much on the TOTAL budget of which there will be great differences, but of the parts that can be shared such as 3rd Tier costs.
I mean…we all know tOSU gets more in donations and ticket sales than NW would…but they get far closer to the same in the 3rd tier rights. The point being is if they were both in the Big 12…that spread would be worse.
I just think it's funny that teams get upset about revenue sharing of TV dollars, when it is such a small percentage of the total difference in revenue.
There’s an $80 million dollar gap, and teams get upset because it might grow by a few million? It’s kind of hilarious.
But that's sort of the point...
…from the small-school perspective. A few million dollars won’t come close to closing the gap with the big earners, but a few million dollars to a Northwestern (or K-State or Iowa State) goes a long way. Or at least a longer way than it does for a Texas or OU.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Jul 22, 2011 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions
No way
Texas will never join the $EC because of their lack of academics. You are only considering football for conference alignment. We have absolutely no interest in the $EC.
Don't be such a baby.
is the big 12 really that good?
there are basically 3 or 4 schools worth going to academically in the big 12 and if those 4 schools from the big 12 joined it would be a similiar number in the sec
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions
The Big XII still has 5 AAU members - the SEC currently has 2.
by Texas Wahoo on Jul 21, 2011 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions
If you add Texas and aTm to the sec than it becomes 4.
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions
It is interesting to consider in football terms
But it is a non-starter for academic and philosophical reasons. We will never join the $EC.
Don't be such a baby.
Right - but then we'd be locked into a 16 team conference with 4 AAU schools.
As it is now, we’re in a conference that has half its membership in the AAU. Once we move, we’re likely not going to move again anytime soon.
Personally – I think is has more to do with the perceived priorities of the schools than the academic rankings. In the SEC, it often seems that football is the most important part of the University.
That is true and i agree
I suggested the SEC because of the benefit it would have athletically. The PAC 16 (my other suggestion longterm) currently has 8 AAU members and adding Texas and aTm would make that 10 out of 16 which is pretty impressive.
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions
You might be right
I don’t think I have spent enough time in the southern US to make that call but it seems like the state of Texas has it’s own unique culture.
I was thinking SEC because geographically the conference would make sense and the entire south cares a lot about college football which is why I thought it would be good for UT.
by CanadianHorn on Jul 21, 2011 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions
It's only ranked slightly below A&M and is still in the top 100 in the USNWR, actually.
So in comparison to some of the other schools, which include third tier unranked schools, it fits.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
it is still paying an ivy league tuition for an inferior education
to what you will get at a public university
Cost is a different discussion
And FWIW, they are very generous with their scholarships. Relatively few people pay full tuition there. I once dated a guy who had transferred to Baylor from Mizzou. It was actually significantly cheaper for him to go to Baylor than to pay in-state tuition at Mizzou. I agree that there are public schools that are a way better value than many private schools, but you have to compare what it is actually costing people. And if Baylor is ranked much higher than many public schools, which it is, then it is not categorically an inferior education to one from a public school.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
From the way i see it
If showing hs games is against ncaa rules then we need to stop. If its fine and legal, then screw atm. Leave. Have fun with vandy at the bottom. I hope ou is smarter.
Hear, hear
http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/07/20/3235499/aggievision-has-a-nice-ring-to.html
billfromlaketravis (Austin Pace)
Please follow me on Twitter @BFLT_at_BON
by billfromlaketravis on Jul 21, 2011 12:04 PM CDT reply actions
'Assa rec
"Disco?" He shakes his head. "What a dark time for our country."
by Burrito Electrico on Jul 21, 2011 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions
I love Greg Hill but he is wrong
ESPN made a bad business deal by overpaying for your network. They will lose money on it, but it is still a financial boon for your AD and kudos to you for that. The issue is not about the money. The issue is that Tx can basically buy recruits through this network. The author of the article is an idiot. If a network was so easy to sustain, Bevo-D would have had more than 38,000 subscribers.
With PB 100%
When you are in the Cat-Bird seat, you do not blow all your clout by reacting emotionally or with bravado when those beneath you make threats. As all smart political figures, you tolerate dissent to a certain degree and even incorporate some of their ideas/thoughts (throw them a bone) to get them to settle down.
Point being Texas has a huge advantage hear and the big play by ATM and OU is to try to scare Texas into making a mistake to ceed that advantage. If Deloss, plays this like he does everything else UT will be fine.
At face value, ATM & OU have some good points about us showing HS football games on the network.
But I think down the road, UT can use THAT argument against them to the UIL by saying something like:
We are working hard to showcase Texas HS football, not just for ourselves, but for the State but OU and ATM are standing in the way of letting you guys shine and have the spotlight.
In the end, this is easier said than done for OU & ATM, but there is value in Texas turning an ear to them to consolidate power and keep the reigns on future realignment.
I think this is classic "boiling frog" strategy. We'll back off on showing high school games completely... well for a year or so
Plenty of time to get clearance from the NCAA and encourage OU to start the groundwork for their own network…
Then, after a year or so, maybe we just offer to show the 5A championship on TV, which may coincidentally be played in DKR stadium?
Then maybe a special on the ESPN150…. or a few 5A Playoff games…
If it’s all above board with the NCAA, they won’t be able to stop us. We just need to ease into it.
For all we know, today’s rumor came from a source without any official affiliation with either of the universities — some other interested party, such as a politician or well-connected booster — and though the reality of Texas A&M and Oklahoma’s ability/interest/willingness to bolt prematurely for the SEC may be every bit as suspect as it was before today, there was real value in getting the threat of an accelerated tandem departure into the conversation.
I thought of this too, but when Dan Beebe and DeLoss came out with statements specifically addressing the issues in the rumors, you have to believe that there is at least a little talk going on in Norman and College Station.
In the deed, the glory.
Corn Nation!
by Aaron Musfeldt on Jul 21, 2011 12:33 PM CDT reply actions
My favorite silly quote of the day
Came from the Dallas Morning News, who managed a remarkably high score on the Twaddle-Meter in a mere 11 words:
Unconfirmed rumors suggested A&M and Oklahoma were eyeing the Southeastern Conference.
"Disco?" He shakes his head. "What a dark time for our country."
by Burrito Electrico on Jul 21, 2011 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions
state legislatures will not allow aggies and sooners to leave the big 12
lost among all the talk is the fact that the texas and oklahoma state legislatures would not allow the aggies and sooners leave for the sec due to the harm it would cause to the remaining state schools. the states control the purse strings and therefore have all the power. if ou leaves the big 12, then ok. st. is left in the cold, and the oklahome state legislature would not permit this move.
similarly, if the aggies (and ou) leave for the sec, then the longhorns would sure leave the big 12 as well. that would leave texas tech and baylor in the lurch and their are too many west texas and baylor lawmakers to allow this to happen. FORGET ABOUT IT!
Agreed
But, let’s also consider that those same legislatures may be getting calls from the schools and their sports fans saying that Texas has stepped the line with the “televising their football recruits and the NCAA won’t stop them” messages. And, it does us know good to move this fight to the legislature if that is part of the discussion.
As stupid as it sounds, I atually can see the TX Leg. stopping a $300M deal to a state school over petty jealousy. Stranger things have happened.
Don't be such a baby.
They've held up a lot more money than that for a much less valid reason.
With the budget discussions running the way they did this term I think it wise to not even mention the words “potential revenue” in their vicinity.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
Oklahoma's set up is not like Texas
Both the University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State have several schools in the two organizations…any move does not go through the legislature just both systems have at the head the same guy…the State Governor
I live in OK
and cannot find a single sourse within this state that says that OU is doing ANYTHING, so I think that A&M is just blowing more smoke to add to their position (tey know they dont have enough to leave alone). OU knows it but realizes its best to keep mum.
The Tulsa World has one article (online at least)
and Guerin Emig does not really by that OU is that serious about leaving. He also does not say that he has heard from any of his sourses, only that the sporting news is reporting it. If it was that serious, every TV outlet (which is what I checked yesterday) would have story after story but they have NOTHING.
by RQ on Jul 22, 2011 9:10 AM CDT up reply actions
Also,
the SEC has quite a huge contract with ESPN as well. The network may have some influence in whether the SEC agrees to take in two new schools to spite the new network they are just launching.
Or more likely
the SEC has control over adding members and thus reopening the contract for a new deal, which ESPN desperately does not want for obvious reasons and as such will willingly back down from this threat by A&M and OU because they don’t want to pay for a new deal.
I will gladly trade ou and AtM for Arky and LSU!
Cut ‘em a deal for mega $ and they will come – as far as ou and AtM – don’t let the door hit ’em in the ass!
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
Where do the Mega $ come from?
It’s not like you add big TV markets with those two, and you lose a large portion of Texas TVs when sooner and aggie fans tune into CBS.
You certainly lose some with A&M.
I’m not convinced that OU – LSU is that big a difference in Texas. You’re basically trading dallas households for Houston households.
Let's assume for a minute
that’s it is completely revenue neutral, something I’m dubious of mind you, then the money has to come from UT or the rest of the conference. Arkansas and LSU stand to gain just as much as A&M and OU from a renegotiated SEC contract which means more money.
Now assume it’s revenue positive, something I don’t believe for a second, adding those tvs and subtracting the others could not possibly add more dollars than the SEC stands to gain from just adding those two.
You're getting way to detailed for something that has a 0% chance of happening.
Have conferences ever traded schools? Adding Louisiana would be interesting though.
Well it wasn't my idea
and I don’t have any way of knowing how sarcastic snide was being, and clearly below he believes at least some part of this idea.
Re-negotiated Big 12 contract
ESPN would do it to keep both conferences intact
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
In addition
You don’t think Louisiana is a big TV market? And you don’t think Arkansas is a bigger market than what AtM can bring to the table?
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
No I do not
Seriously, and I’ll stop after this, but adding Little Rock (56), Fayetteville (100), Baton Rouge (95) and NOLA (53) will not equate to the TVs lost in Dallas (5), Houston (10), San Antonio (37), Austin (49), OKC (45) and Tulsa (61). It won’t even be close.
Really?
No I hadn’t considered that. Seriously? Do you think I think every tv will all of a sudden tune into CBS every Saturday?
My point was, although it was clearly lost on you, that adding up all the tvs that are more likely to watch A&M and OU in those markets will most likely exceed the tvs added in those very small markets. However, you will still get quite a few tvs tuning into watch UT just in the hopes that UT will lose. So yes, there will still be plenty of tvs for the Big 12. Just not near enough for Arkansas and LSU to get some “mega $” to leave the SEC. It’s laughable.
It is beyond me how conceive how large the markets for ou and AtM are.
The pitiful little state of Oklahoma markets are split between ou, Okie lite and Tulsa. The state of Arkansas has one team – Arkansas!
The state of Louisiana basically has one – LSU (they don’t know where Tulane is).
AtM’s followers are but a singular group inbedded in a state with FIVE different teams of which UT is the most popular!
So there we are – two ENTIRE states following one team each.
As far as the cities of Texas? The fans will follow their own teams, sure. However, the FOOTBALL fans of the Big 12 will follow those teams playing for the big twelve.
I good guage of the popularity of each respective team is the amount of merchandise bought (By-the-way, UT is #1 in the nation for colleges).
So, I suggest you re-think your damned condescending attitude a little and get off your high horse!
"you can't be a great defense in a casual manner!" Manny Diaz
I'm sorry
Didn’t I already put you in the corner? Pipe down before you get the hose.
Chalk up a victory for this guy; he's obviously got what he wanted.
He got you to use an exclamation point. C’mon dude you’re better than that. Now you gave him the opportunity to threaten you with the “hose” if you don’t “pipe down”. Just be on watch
As an Oregon Ducks fan, I have my own problems with UT right now, but
I don’t get what A&M and Oklahoma have their panties in a bunch about. A&M and OU had their chance to make Texas play second fiddle last offseason when Super Conferences were knocking on the door. And what did they choose? They ran knocking on Beebe and Dodds’ door asking for help to save the conference. So UT seized control of the power and concessions being offered and voila we have the LHN.
What did they think was going to happen? I know Beergut thought they were going to be showing reruns of basketball and football games. But you’re telling me when offered the chance to play in the SEC, get paid more money than what the Big 12 was offering, and have all those other luxuries, you didn’t once think, “if we let Texas set up their own Network, they might use it to, I don’t know, BENEFIT FREAKING TEXAS?” Either your school is totally naive or stupid. Either way, I don’t feel very sorry for the fact that now that Texas is trying to take advantage of every opportunity YOU afforded it, you don’t like the position you’re in. The horse jockey doesn’t get to challenge the boxer to a fight and then get to complain about the fact that he’s just a horse jockey. Especially when he could have easily gotten on his horse and rode away.
You made this bed, I’m sorry it’s not as comfortable as you hoped it would be.
"the putz from that UO blog, Matt Daddy" - Steve Tannen
The Daily Faberian
Huh?
As an Oregon Ducks fan, I have my own problems with UT right now
Are you somehow insinuating that we’re somehow to blame for your current predicament?
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 22, 2011 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
The agreement was for them to show third tier media rights
and one football game
Not a conference football game and high school football games of their recruits, which is an NCAA violation.
If you’re going to go off half-cocked, you might want to actually know the facts.
"Eyes on the Prize," Wow.
I’ve heard about Texas arrogance before but to hear it straight from the horse’s mouth is another thing entire.
…Waiting to get the hell out of this sham of a conference..
oh please
nobody wants Missouri the “M” on your helmets stand for Meg (family guy reference)
formerly "Horns102591"
M-I-Z-E-R-Y
loves company so who you going to keep around…KU, KSU, and ISU for you
by RQ on Jul 22, 2011 9:13 AM CDT up reply actions
Watch out for miketag and beergut
Chip Brown posted this on Orangebloods.com last night or this morning on the aggie BOR meeting on the LHN:
LATEST FROM A&M REGENTS MEETING: I was just told by a source locked in at the highest level of Texas A&M that the regents meeting on Thursday which included discussion of the Big 12, Texas and the Longhorn Network “was not as heated as you might think.” I was basically told that the A&M regents are not at the point of no return on this situation – not even close. So for fans of the Big 12 as it is currently constructed, that’s probably good news. It doesn’t sound like A&M is actively seeking a dialogue with the SEC at this time. Stay tuned.
After all the speculation about Texas A&M and OU possibly looking for a new home (SEC) to get away from Texas’ money generated by the Longhorn Network, my sources tell me OU is in no hurry to talk to the SEC.
Who are you?!
I'm Kick Ass!
Wait. You mean aggy lied? No way that could happen.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
Brown is an idiot who gets his info directly from Dodds
He says what Dodds wants to be disseminated. Not like we are going to announce our intention to leave before the football season. Why would it be heated if everyone was in agreement on leaving?
Big Ten guy here
that’s watching this with a lot of interest. Maybe I’ve missed it in the comments, but the thing that’s bugging OU and TAMU (along with the recruiting advantage, which I think the NCAA will address and make it illegal for you guys to broadcast HS games anyway) is the revenue disparity the LHN will bring Texas.
When you add the extra cash that network will bring to Texas, and you look at the income disparity that will inevitably bring, why wouldn’t Okalhoma/TAMU look to the SEC? Oklahoma and TAMU are bringing in arounf $10 mil/yr from B XII football revenue, and yes, that will go up a bit now that Nebraska and Colorado are gone, but it still falls well short of what Texas will be bringing in.
I’m not smart enough to know anything about the inner workings of Texas/Oklahoma politics, but at the end of the day, if TAMU and OK can essentially double their money by going to the SEC (each team makes app $20 mil/yr from football TV revenue), it’s in their best interest to bolt if the revenue disparity remains.
And Wrangler86 had a comment that was greened where he mentioned that if Super Conference Armageddon hits Texas will just take the “best of our little 7 or 6 team party to the Big 10 or Pac 12 provided we keep our network.”
I don’t see that happening. The B1G already has a very successful network, and I doubt you get to keep yours and join unless you split the revenue equally among all the teams in the conference. Unless Texas agrees to be an equal partner, you can forget about becoming a member of the Big Ten.
Because as great as an addition Texas would be to the conference, the Big Ten doesn’t need you.
"Lord I pray for the eyes of an eagle, the heart of a lion and the balls of a combat helicopter pilot."
we will make
$20 million this year in the Big 12. We would make more in the SEC. Not worried about the money as Tx made more money than anyone last year and still went 5-7. What are they going to do with the extra $15 million per year? Pay Mack Brown more money to lose to A&M and OU? Give their women’s basketball coach another hundred grand a year to get owned by A&M and BU? The opportunity for quid pro quo for HS recruits is the only thing that bothered me about the network. No one is overly worried about the network as I think everyone knows that 3rd tier rights to one school is not going to bring ratings.
i love this guy
he acts like A&M is all high and mighty and then he keeps bringing up last year. like we are seriously gonna never get back up on our feet and like we are doomed to wander the wilderness like SMU did. and then he talks about getting owned by Baylor did you not watch the Aggies in 2008? you lost to Baylor too and you have had losing seasons as early as 2009. and on another article awhile back when someone said we’d be back he had the balls to say we will never be back to winning 10 games in back to back years.
formerly "Horns102591"
Let him have his moment;
A&M can rationally stick it to Texas once, maybe twice, in a lifetime. He’s making the most of what is patently ephemeral.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 23, 2011 2:27 AM CDT up reply actions
lets see...
in 2008 you visited Waco and got beat 41-21 (and dont talk about how you werent at home Baylor has no home field advantage at all) and as for 2008 as a whole you went 4-8 you sucked worse than we did in 2010
formerly "Horns102591"
Takeaway from this thread...
If anyone had any doubts about how obsessed with Big Brother certain members of the Aggie community are…
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 23, 2011 9:26 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
The solution seems pretty easy to me
The other 9 schools in the Big 12 need to scare up enough votes to expel the University of Texas from the conference. Once you know the votes are there contact Deloss Dodds & give him this ultimatum: Either you re-brand the Longhorn Network as the Big 12 Network & turn over management of it to the conference or you are no longer a member of the Big 12 Conference. If UT wants to baby step their way to independence, why not kick them out of the nest now? At least then the Big 12 could get started creating a Big 12 Network so their teams can compete financially with the Pac 12, Big 10 and SEC teams whose conferences either have or are starting conference cable networks.Beebe hasn’t said a word about starting a conference network. He seems terrified of offending his liege & Lord Deloss Dodds. The other nine teams need to stop letting the tail wag the dog & just cut out the cancer that is killing the conference (sometimes you just have to mix your metaphors).
If you're talking to Coach Rainman, whatever you do don't bring up the subject of weather.
OMG! This is the best solution EVER!
So much win contained in these few words, I can hardly contain myself.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 23, 2011 9:42 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Food for thought
I know this would most likely never happen but what if UT basicly remade the southwestern conference. It could be something like UT, Texas Tech, aTm, TCU, OSU, OU , Arkansas, Mizz, plus someone else to make it an even ten.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
Get Smart
The trolls think Nebraska and Colorado were very wise after all. Too bad that Tx legacy will be that Texas became ESPN’s whore and destroyed the Big 12.
The ever increasing revenue of college football
One assumption upon which all these arguments are predicated is that The PAC12 media deal was the beginning of ever increasing revenues for college FB TV contracts. I guess we didn’t learn anything from the tech bubble or housing bubble. Texas is a very important brand within college football, but it is still subject to larger trends that affect CFB as a whole. With increasingly prominent scandals, superconferences that will exclude most teams from ever winning a championship, and the perception that greed trumps sport, the CFB brand is in danger of losing its luster.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
