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.
- 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. 
Hybrid Mode
