|
» GC Stats |
Members: 332,830
Threads: 115,744
Posts: 2,208,476
|
| Welcome to our newest member, ajacksonmaarlyz |
|
 |

08-31-2011, 09:26 PM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,464
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AXOmom
No, every team in the Big XII could not get a $300 million television contract for their own football network through ESPN. To get a contract with a major tv network to run a network that exclusively shows your games, which is what Texas has, a team has to show they have the alum and fan base to make that commercially profitable. When you say Texas did it first because they have the resources and the national brand – that’s the ONLY reason they could do it – because they have the resources and the national brand. If you don’t then you can’t get an exclusive tv contract with ESPN or any other major network. This is why tv contracts are worked out with conferences, so that schools without those resource or national brand can still get some games on tv and things are reasonably fair. Schools that pull in big tv money split that with smaller schools that don’t pull in much. Oklahoma can look into it because they also have resources and a national brand. Who doesn’t have those kind of resources and a national brand is every other school in the Big XII (now that Nebraska is gone). Well, Oklahoma State probably has the resources, but not the brand…yet. If Oklahoma goes that route then guess who will get left out in the cold with a lousy tv conference deal – you, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Texas A &M.
|
My point was every school in the Big 12 has the opportunity to create their own network - that's not true for every conference out there. Are they all worth $300 million? No. Personally, I think ESPN was nuts to pay Texas that much, especially as they still haven't necessarily fulfilled the requirements of the contract (conference game is still up in the air). But that's what the market was, for better or worse, and Texas is now either tied to their ESPN deal if the Big 12 does implode or some other conference (Pac12/Big10) is going to have to rewrite their conference rules to allow school networks. (Unless Texas, ND and BYU create their own holy superconference in the next 5 years.) The LHN can't show any FB games that are already scheduled to air on another network, and even then both schools have to agree to it. It'll mostly be filler programming, replays and Olympic sports.
The SEC may not get to renegotiate their TV deal with the addition of aTm, so they may not be making more money, anyway, at least not for a while. They were guaranteed $20m starting next year in the Big 12, more if they sold their third tier rights for the right price (like Texas). Competition will definitely be stronger in the SEC. That doesn't mean aTm won't be able to rise to the occasion, but nothing is guaranteed. It may get them away from Texas, but it doesn't mean that they won't find there are other issues in a different conference.
It sucks being the little guy in this situation. But aTm was NOT the little guy. They (along with Nebraska) had numerous chances over the years to keep the monster that is Texas in check by voting for equal revenue, yet they didn't. They, along with Texas and OU, were the only three schools guaranteed to make at least $20m with the new tv deal. They also pledged to make a 10-team Big 12 work, but obviously that didn't mean anything as some have said the SEC deal has been in the works under the table since the whole realignment meltdown last year. So they may be "saving" themselves on that lifeboat, but they're also letting the little guy schools drown in the freezing water. Especially if the TV contract the Big 12 signed with Fox last summer is voided by aTm leaving.
__________________
It's gonna be a hootenanny.
Or maybe a jamboree.
Or possibly even a shindig or lollapalooza.
Perhaps it'll be a hootshinpaloozaree. I don't know.
Last edited by ISUKappa; 08-31-2011 at 10:16 PM.
|

09-01-2011, 12:39 AM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 472
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISUKappa
My point was every school in the Big 12 has the opportunity to create their own network - that's not true for every conference out there. Are they all worth $300 million? No. Personally, I think ESPN was nuts to pay Texas that much, especially as they still haven't necessarily fulfilled the requirements of the contract (conference game is still up in the air). But that's what the market was, for better or worse, and Texas is now either tied to their ESPN deal if the Big 12 does implode or some other conference (Pac12/Big10) is going to have to rewrite their conference rules to allow school networks. (Unless Texas, ND and BYU create their own holy superconference in the next 5 years.) The LHN can't show any FB games that are already scheduled to air on another network, and even then both schools have to agree to it. It'll mostly be filler programming, replays and Olympic sports.
The SEC may not get to renegotiate their TV deal with the addition of aTm, so they may not be making more money, anyway, at least not for a while. They were guaranteed $20m starting next year in the Big 12, more if they sold their third tier rights for the right price (like Texas). Competition will definitely be stronger in the SEC. That doesn't mean aTm won't be able to rise to the occasion, but nothing is guaranteed. It may get them away from Texas, but it doesn't mean that they won't find there are other issues in a different conference.
It sucks being the little guy in this situation. But aTm was NOT the little guy. They (along with Nebraska) had numerous chances over the years to keep the monster that is Texas in check by voting for equal revenue, yet they didn't. They, along with Texas and OU, were the only three schools guaranteed to make at least $20m with the new tv deal. They also pledged to make a 10-team Big 12 work, but obviously that didn't mean anything as some have said the SEC deal has been in the works under the table since the whole realignment meltdown last year. So they may be "saving" themselves on that lifeboat, but they're also letting the little guy schools drown in the freezing water. Especially if the TV contract the Big 12 signed with Fox last summer is voided by aTm leaving.
|
What a school has the opportunity to do and what they have the ability to do are two different things. You initially said that the Longhorn network wasn’t a reason for Texas A&M to leave because they could have done the same thing as Texas. Are they allowed to try and contract out with a national network for an independent sports network? Yes. Would that be realistic? No. And that would be the only way to do it and get any kind of national exposure. No major network will agree to do this for a school unless that school has, as you put it, resources and a national brand. You may be allowed to do it, just like a 24 year old senior transfer student from New Hampshire with no recs and a 2.8 gpa may be allowed to go through rush at Old Miss. Will she get a bid – probably no. And it's unlikely you or any other school in your conference outside of Texas and maybe Oklahoma (even they think they will probably need partner schools) will actually be able to get your own sports network – no matter what your conference says you are allowed to do. Texas A&M may have the opportunity to get their own network, but they know that’s not a realistic possibility for anyone in that conference but Texas (and yes, I agree, ESPN paid too much – but that’s their cross to bear).
I doubt the SEC will be able to renegotiate their deal either, but the contract they signed in 2009 is still better than the Big XII’s (in my opinion) when you consider television exposure added to monetary pay out. Actually even ours is better now than the Big XII deal. Thank you Larry Scott. And they had to worry about how long that television contract was going to last anyway since the conference was unstable. I think their concern was that even though they may be responsible for ending it - if it wasn't them it was going to be someone else, so it better be them. Yes, every conference has its issues. That won't change, but there are issues and then there are ISSUES. Currently the Big XII has the latter.
I agree – it does suck for schools like Iowa State and Kansas State, and I didn’t mean to imply Texas A&M was the little guy (just that they were sick of dealing with the big guy – Texas). You are stuck in a bad situation, but in all honesty it is a situation the entire conference should have seen coming clearly last year – that was one heck of an iceberg. At that point every AD in that conference should have been doing exactly what Texas A&M did – looking for other options. Should they have done something to stop Texas earlier? Probably, but that’s not an option now, and bottom line – they have to look out for their school first and foremost.
Truthfully I think at some point what almost happened last year will happen and a big chunk of these schools will bolt, in a group, to another conference. I think we'll eventually become regional super conferences with 2 divisions each and a playoff system of some kind (hopefully). In the meantime what the BigXII needs to do is start looking for some replacement schools. From the Oklahoma boards it sounds like they are thinking BYU who already has their own network and that's one of the partner ideas some of their fans are bandying about. I have no idea how the Big XII as a whole would feel about that. The Pac 12 nixed that quick because they are a religously affiliated school and, my understanding is, not an AAU research university (could be wrong on that last one), but strictly from a sports perspective and given the money they pull in - it would actually be a great trade off to get them in exchange for losing Texas A&M.
Shirley1929 – Apologize for the mistake in dates.
Last edited by AXOmom; 09-01-2011 at 12:07 PM.
|

09-01-2011, 12:15 PM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,464
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AXOmom
What a school has the opportunity to do and what they have the ability to do are two different things. You initially said that the Longhorn network wasn’t a reason for Texas A&M to leave because they could have done the same thing as Texas. Are they allowed to try and contract out with a national network for an independent sports network? Yes. Would that be realistic? No. And that would be the only way to do it and get any kind of national exposure. No major network will agree to do this for a school unless that school has, as you put it, resources and a national brand. You may be allowed to do it, just like a 24 year old senior transfer student from New Hampshire with no recs and a 2.8 gpa may be allowed to go through rush at Old Miss. Will she get a bid – probably no. And it's unlikely you or any other school in your conference outside of Texas and maybe Oklahoma (even they think they will probably need partner schools) will actually be able to get your own sports network – no matter what your conference says you are allowed to do. Texas A&M may have the opportunity to get their own network, but they know that’s not a realistic possibility for anyone in that conference but Texas (and yes, I agree, ESPN paid too much – but that’s their cross to bear).
I doubt the SEC will be able to renegotiate their deal, but the contract they signed in 2009 is still better than the Big XII’s (in my opinion) when you consider television exposure added to monetary pay out. Actually even ours is better now than the Big XII deal. Thank you Larry Scott. Yes, every conference has its issues. That won't change, but there are issues and then there are ISSUES. Currently the Big XII has the latter.
I agree – it does suck for schools like Iowa State and Kansas State, and I didn’t mean to imply Texas A&M was the little guy (just that they were sick of dealing with the big guy – Texas). You are stuck in a bad situation, but in all honesty it is a situation the entire conference should have seen coming clearly last year – that was one heck of an iceberg. At that point every AD in that conference should have been doing exactly what Texas A&M did – looking for other options. Should they have done something to stop Texas earlier? Probably, but that’s not an option now, and bottom line – they have to look out for their school first and foremost.
Shirley1929 – Apologize for the mistake in dates.
|
aTm HAS said the LHN wasn't their sole reason for looking elsewhere. Is that the honest truth? Probably not. Should Texas be blamed for taking advantage of the fact that they Can build their own network? It sure sounds like that's what a lot of people are doing. If Oregon had the opportunity and ability (current conference rules notwithstanding) to do the same thing Texas did with the LHN, do you think the school would say "Oh, sorry guys, it's not fair to schools like WSU, I think we'll pass." Or Ohio State or USC. Money talks in collegiate athletics. aTm had the chance to vote for a Big 12 network with the other schools, but they chose not to. And right now it's not even guaranteed that aTm has a place in the SEC. Is it 99% most likely? Yes, but they haven't been officially accepted yet.
There is fault EVERYWHERE in this conference, from the way it was formed in 1996, to how the Haves schools continually voted for unequal revenue sharing (which then came back to bite Nebraska and aTm in the ass) to how everything was dealt with last year. College FB is no longer about the schools or the athletes or even the sport itself. It's all about Money, which was obviously shown with realignment last year and in the increasing rumors of SuperConferences.
You say the other schools should be looking out for their best interests. Well, right now, sticking with Texas and OU and hoping to Jebus we can get a 10th member, possibly even go back to 12, is what's best for us right now. WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTIONS. Look what happened to Mizzou last year. They wanted out, but got effed over by the B1G in order to get Nebraska.
You're in a relatively stable, historical conference with a commissioner who has openly said he wants to go to a 16-team conference and has no qualms about destroying other conferences and rivalries to get there. If the Pac12 could get UT/OU/OSU/TTech in a package deal, Larry Scott would do whatever it takes to make it happen.
It's easy for someone outside the conference to look at a clusterf*ck like the Big 12 and say "you guys are doomed/it's all Texas' fault/every man for himself" but when it's your school and your athletics in the middle of the crossfire, it's a little more difficult. There are 100-year-old rivalries being broken and agreements signed to "uphold the conference" being voided.
I apologize if I'm a little emotional about this (hello pregnancy hormones!) but we just went through this same crap last year and I'm sick to death of all the rumors from "reporters" who are salivating at the thought of the end of the Big 12. And the idiot Hawk and Husker fans who would like nothing more than my school (a Tier-1, AAU research institution) relegated to a second-tier conference (Sorry RC, but there's a lot of Stupid coming out of Hawk fans' mouths).
Yes, BYU is one school that's been named quite often in replacing aTm. Everything I've read on various schools' message boards seems to indicate that pretty much every school in the conference would be satisfied with that addition, at least for now. Notre Dame and Pitt are two others, although those are Extremely long shots.
__________________
It's gonna be a hootenanny.
Or maybe a jamboree.
Or possibly even a shindig or lollapalooza.
Perhaps it'll be a hootshinpaloozaree. I don't know.
Last edited by ISUKappa; 09-01-2011 at 12:24 PM.
|

09-01-2011, 01:09 PM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Who you calling "boy"? The name's Hand Banana . . .
Posts: 6,984
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISUKappa
I apologize if I'm a little emotional about this (hello pregnancy hormones!) but we just went through this same crap last year and I'm sick to death of all the rumors from "reporters" who are salivating at the thought of the end of the Big 12. And the idiot Hawk and Husker fans who would like nothing more than my school (a Tier-1, AAU research institution) relegated to a second-tier conference (Sorry RC, but there's a lot of Stupid coming out of Hawk fans' mouths).
|
You need to hang out with cooler people  - nobody I know wishes CUSA or anything on ISU/Kansas/KState. Not that the reasons are necessarily "honorable" or whatever, but I think most understand that teams are kind of held hostage by UT (and lesser, OU) and can sympathize.
After all, everyone hates OSU.
Last edited by KSig RC; 09-01-2011 at 01:24 PM.
|

09-01-2011, 01:31 PM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,464
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
You need to hang out with cooler people - nobody I know wishes CUSA or anything on ISU/Kansas/KState.
Now, part of that might be because the Big East has said they'll 100% take the 'rest' if the conference dissolves. But it doesn't much matter. In my (admittedly not comprehensive) circle, everyone realizes the Big12 structure is set up to enrich Texas first, OU second, and everyone else 44th, and that kind of sucks but that's the way it is.
|
Well, you (and I'm assuming the people you know) have a college degree. Most of the people cackling over the demise of Iowa State are barely high school grads who are Hawk fans because they don't know any different. They are the definition of TavernHawk.
The thought on the ISU boards is that if there is an eventual trend towards SuperConferences, the Big East is going to get raided, anyway, so it's no more stable than the Big 12.
Yeah, it would be nice if we didn't have to rely on Texas to keep the conference together, but that's the way it is. At this time, we are better off with them in the conference than without.
__________________
It's gonna be a hootenanny.
Or maybe a jamboree.
Or possibly even a shindig or lollapalooza.
Perhaps it'll be a hootshinpaloozaree. I don't know.
Last edited by ISUKappa; 09-01-2011 at 01:34 PM.
|

09-01-2011, 02:29 PM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Who you calling "boy"? The name's Hand Banana . . .
Posts: 6,984
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISUKappa
Yeah, it would be nice if we didn't have to rely on Texas to keep the conference together, but that's the way it is. At this time, we are better off with them in the conference than without.
|
Yep, I think that's the bottom line for the rest of the B12, honestly.
|

09-01-2011, 09:18 PM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,949
|
|
|
It is really hard to feel anything for other conferences when your school plays in the WAC. You think your conference has problems? Not only are we in a precarious position, we're still having to deal with Boizzze drama and they left the conference (good riddance). They won't even play an out of conference rivalry game against us unless we agreed to only play in The City of Smug, and never come to Moscow.
Please Georgia, kick their jackasses like Reno did. Also please, please, if the WAC is no longer going to have football, let us move to a conference that doesn't have an egomaniac college president who runs his mouth and tries to run football, as well as firing their AD who put them on the map just before the season starts? Thanks!
(Full disclosure, the Kibbie Dome is the smallest DI facility, and though I have mad love for it we're going to have to borrow Martin from Wazzu to play big teams who have a good traveling fan base. Those cry baby Bronco Bandwagon fans are scared to come to Moscow because we're "nasty and inebriated" and we couldn't fill Martin playing them anyway.)
|

09-01-2011, 10:19 PM
|
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 3,416
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel
(Full disclosure, the Kibbie Dome is the smallest DI facility, and though I have mad love for it we're going to have to borrow Martin from Wazzu to play big teams who have a good traveling fan base.
|
Hey, hey, didn't you get the memo? You can't call it Wazzu anymore!
__________________
Gamma Phi Beta
Love. Labor. Learning. Loyalty.
|
 |
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|