Wilner: "Neither source believes UT will join the Pac 12. Ever."

[Jens1893]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...12-its-not-really-about-the-longhorn-network/

I’ve talked to two sources in the past 36 hours who have a keen understanding of the realignment puzzle in general and the University of Texas culture in particular … and neither believes UT will join the Pac-12. Ever.

Yes, football pride and power are part of the equation:

Texas is used to being the big boy on the block. In the Pac-16, it would have the same revenue cut and the same voting power as Texas Tech (and Washington State, for that matter).

If anything, the Longhorns would be in the minority, an outsider — the power center of the league being … as it has always been … in California.

And UT would have to fold The Longhorn Network (four years of work) into the Pac-12′s regional network structure, allowing plenty of Texas Tech programming on the airwaves.

None of that seems desirable for the Longhorns.

But sources believe there are larger issues at play that will keep Texas out of the Pac.

“It has a different culture,” one source said.

Another suggested UT’s future conference affiliation is more about state political aims than football revenue. And the Lone Star State’s true power-brokers have always looked east — to the halls of Washington in particular.

This is the state that produced LBJ and the Bushes … and now has another presidential candidate, Gov. Rick Perry.

The university, which has one of the nation’s finest law schools, considers itself the academic equal of the Ivies, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins.

(Not that Stanford and Cal aren’t academic powerhouses, the source added. It’s just that they aren’t east coast academic powerhouses.)

Would the state’s power brokers — and that includes Perry — really allow the state university to move its center of gravity to the west coast?

That, not The Longhorn Network, could be what keeps Texas out of the Pac-12.

One source believes UT will do whatever it takes to keep the Big 12 breathing, even if that means making fiscal and Longhorn Network concessions to Oklahoma.

And in the event of departures by Texas A&M and Missouri and the Oklahoma schools?

The Longhorns — with the aid of ESPN, which wants the Big 12 to survive — would attempt to reconstitute the conference with Texas Tech, Baylor, Kansas and Kansas State, Iowa State and a handful of newcomers (Houston? SMU? Pittsburgh? Louisville?) before throwing in the towel.

And then? Then they’d pack up their bags and head down the road to football independence, perhaps placing their Olympic sports in the ACC, and maneuver to gain the same Bowl Championship Series access as Notre Dame.

They’d do all that, the sources believe, before they’d cast their athletic, academic, cultural and political lot with a conference on the “other” coast …

… Anyhow, just something to consider as we watch the future of college football unfold over these next few weeks.

 

[InTheBuff]

I have XM/Sirius Radio- channel 91 is 'College Sports Radio'
On the way to work this morning they had a 'Texas guy' being interviewed... I missed the name but I believe
he's an 'insider' to the program. Any way this is what I got out of the interview-

IF A&M goes SEC you will see OU & Okie St to the PAC 12 in days...not weeks
Texass and TT most likely to follow 2-3 weeks later, however ....

Texass wants to keep it's 'brand' .... sounds like they would be OK incorporating the LHN into the PAC 12
tv deal but they want to keep the name 'The Longhorn Network' ...

Texass & OU BOTH want to play in California at least once a year. I assume that this news would be a good
indicator that PODs could happen.


The 'insider' also said that the only way Texass ends up in the Big 10 is if OU & OSU are invited.
The problem here is that the Big 10 doesn't want OSU.

The insider said Texas going 'Indy' could happen but he really doubts it.

 

[CUBUFF80]

Here's the solution: PAC12 grabs OU and OSU (ugh) SEC takes aTm and Texas, Big 10 gets Mizzou. The rest of the Big 12 goes to Conference USA, MAC, MWC wherever they can make a deal.

 

[Darth Snow]

Wilner: Texas's aspirations/culture, not the LHN, means they will NEVER go to the PAC

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...12-its-not-really-about-the-longhorn-network/

Yes, football pride and power are part of the equation:Texas is used to being the big boy on the block. In the Pac-16, it would have the same revenue cut and the same voting power as Texas Tech (and Washington State, for that matter).
If anything, the Longhorns would be in the minority, an outsider — the power center of the league being … as it has always been … in California.
And UT would have to fold The Longhorn Network (four years of work) into the Pac-12′s regional network structure, allowing plenty of Texas Tech programming on the airwaves.

The university, which has one of the nation’s finest law schools, considers itself the academic equal of the Ivies, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins.(Not that Stanford and Cal aren’t academic powerhouses, the source added. It’s just that they aren’t east coast academic powerhouses.)
Would the state’s power brokers — and that includes Perry — really allow the state university to move its center of gravity to the west coast?
That, not The Longhorn Network, could be what keeps Texas out of the Pac-12.
One source believes UT will do whatever it takes to keep the Big 12 breathing, even if that means making fiscal and Longhorn Network concessions to Oklahoma.

:rofl: Full of themselves much?

 

[InTheBuff]

Here's the solution: PAC12 grabs OU and OSU (ugh) SEC takes aTm and Texas, Big 10 gets Mizzou. The rest of the Big 12 goes to Conference USA, MAC, MWC wherever they can make a deal.

but that only gets the conferences to 14 teams & I think it's either 16 or 12 (no go)

 

[Darian3Hagan]

Cool repost bro

 

[CUBUFF80]

but that only gets the conferences to 14 teams & I think it's either 16 or 12 (no go)

Understand, but it's a starting point. I did not take the time to think out which other 2 teams would join the PAC.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

The state of Texas does a lot of things well, like 72 oz steaks. Humility is not one of those things.

 

[dio]

http://www.allbuffs.com/showthread....-believes-UT-will-join-the-Pac-12.-Ever.-quot

 

[Darth Snow]

jens, faster on the trigger again. man does good work from Germania!

 

[CUBUFF80]

jens, faster on the trigger again. man does good work from Germania!

Now he needs to combine the threads

 

[Darian3Hagan]

jens, faster on the trigger again. man does good work from Germania!

You cant stop him you can only hope to contain him.

 

[DesertDawg526]

Tech brings absolutely zero to the equation. I have no idea why the Pac would consider them. When Texas bolts then we'd be stuck with Tech. I really don't see them getting an invite.

Texas is dreaming if they think their academics rival the best in the Pac (Stanford). I would place at least four Pac institutions higher than Texas in academics when considering undergrad and graduate level courses... Texas may be upper tier but they are certainly not the top... not even close.

Texas at a minimum has to hand over the LHN and give in to all Pac demands and be an "equal" conference member.

I really don't see how they would allow that, and IMO Texas brings nothing to the table. Their negative baggage far outweighs any benefits the conference would achieve...

I think Texas stays in the BigXII or goes Independent, and either way just found a tougher road to the MNC schedule wise...

They should stay far away from the Pac.

 

[Darian3Hagan]

Dont tease me WIlner.

 

[Jens1893]

I really don't see how they would allow that, and IMO Texas brings nothing to the table. Their negative baggage far outweighs any benefits the conference would achieve...

Texas brings money, a ****load of Texas TVs and direct access to one of the 3 most important recruiting grounds in the nation. Trust me, with those positives, some people who can actually influence this won´t want to hear the negatives.

 

[InTheBuff]

Some one just posted this on Texas Ags:

Dallas radio is reporting that t.u. is meeting today to discuss going indy in football and Big East in all other sports. Said they will NOT give up their network meaning PAC-12 is not an option for them.

 

[DeNiro]

Is it so far fetched to think Texas may bolt for the ACC?

 

[Dark Bohner]

Some one just posted this on Texas Ags:

Dallas radio is reporting that t.u. is meeting today to discuss going indy in football and Big East in all other sports. Said they will NOT give up their network meaning PAC-12 is not an option for them.

Hmm, maybe not completely far fetched, basically would be same as ND and even have a loose conference affiliation with ND meaning probably setting up an annual game which both would like.

 

[leftybuff]

I like the OP...:dance4::dance2::dance5::dance6::dance: in the street so long as Bevo keeps his **** in another conference, I have seen enough of the that turd factory.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Why not just add OU, OSU, and 2/3 of TCU, SMU, or Houston. The Pac gets 16 teams with exposure in Texas and UT is left to twist in the wind. Honestly I'd rather add ND than Texas at this point.

 

[Dark Bohner]

Why not just add OU, OSU, and 2/3 of TCU, SMU, or Houston. The Pac gets 16 teams with exposure in Texas and UT is left to twist in the wind. Honestly I'd rather add ND than Texas at this point.

wtf? How about we don't. IF OU and OSU have to come, so be it, but adding the dregs of Texas just to get to a magic number 16 would be pathetic.

 

[DesertDawg526]

Texas brings money, a ****load of Texas TVs and direct access to one of the 3 most important recruiting grounds in the nation. Trust me, with those positives, some people who can actually influence this won´t want to hear the negatives.

I understand they bring TVs and an active recruiting ground. I get it.

But they ruin every conference they join, I can't believe Larry Scott and the Pac ADs will simply beg Texas to join whatever their demands. Especially knowing how Texas is a conference killer (I would be surprised if our leaders were too stupid to simply overlook this).

I think it's the opposite. The Pac is right now a very strong conference. The negatives outweigh any positives for bringing in Texas. If Texas submits to all demands of the Pac then possibly it would work, but we all know Texas won't be happy for long. Therefore I see them bringing nothing to the table, because any benefit is very short lived and outweighed by the future death of the conference.

We can disagree that's fine, but I don't see Texas as bringing ANY benefit to the Pac. None whatsoever...

 

[DeNiro]

Why not just add OU, OSU, and 2/3 of TCU, SMU, or Houston. The Pac gets 16 teams with exposure in Texas and UT is left to twist in the wind. Honestly I'd rather add ND than Texas at this point.

In that scenario it would only be Houston. SMU & TCU are religious schools and the Pac is holding on not wanting them and TCU is committed to the Big East and it is still a conference. That leaves Rice and North Texas, I don't think we need to go there.

 

[Mick Ronson]

I think it's the opposite. The Pac is right now a very strong conference.

if the SEC is the working definition of strong, then with USC an unknown and UCLA scuffling i'd say it's far from it's potential. UO could be in trouble with the NCAA. Stanford is a long-term unknown. Cal seems to be on the downside of a solid 5-6 year run.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

I think it has been repeated multiple times and it appears that the commish is standing by his guns. Either turn over the network or go else where. Sounds fair to me. I honestly wouldn't mind OU and OSU but its who the other two will be that is confusing. There aren't too many big dogs out there that really add a whole bunch to the conference.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Some one just posted this on Texas Ags:

Dallas radio is reporting that t.u. is meeting today to discuss going indy in football and Big East in all other sports. Said they will NOT give up their network meaning PAC-12 is not an option for them.

They better be considering their options, I think they realize the writing is on the wall. Sounds like some posturing to gain leverage in negotiations with the Pac.

 

[Jens1893]

DD, that´s not MY opinion, I don´t want anything to do with them whatsoever and like the status quo just fine, but that´s what I think some people will think. This is about money and some people will overlook any negatives as long as they like the bottom line.

 

[DesertDawg526]

I hear you Jens, and I think we're probably in agreement.

On Dawgman last night I saw a lot of venom toward Texas (as in the bulk of the posters did not want to touch Texas with a 10 foot pole). I really think that our ADs and Larry Scott know of the damages that Texas is likely to bring. In other words, despite the potential "riches" Texas brings, I think intelligent heads will prevail and see the risk is not worth it.

In addressing Mick, I was not simply speaking of the Pac in terms of wins/losses. When I think of the great decade the SEC just had, a lot of it in my opinion was due to their at the time enormous TV contracts. The lowly SEC teams were getting $17 million per year while the Pac dithered away into obscurity. We've seen Vanderbilt, Kentucky and even Miss St field good teams since their new financial rewards kicked in. In other words money talks...

The Pac is now getting roughly $21-22 million per year per team from the new TV contracts. Add in another $10-15 million or who knows from the Pac network in a few years.... it would not surprise me to see a status quo Pac reap $35 million per year per team plus in TV and Pac network proceeds. That is roughly double what the SEC is getting today (although they will increase their contracts if the Aggies do indeed go there).

The Pac, with the new money, can simply afford to go toe to toe with any conference now and since money is no longer a pittance we should expect to see improvement in all teams. It happened in the SEC and it will happen in the Pac. Even WSU can afford a real coach now and they are likely to be competitive at some point this decade. They did afterall go to a Rose Bowl last decade...

So, perhaps this year may not be a strong year for the top tier teams and depth in the Pac. Maybe it will be, I don't know. But with the new monies coming in the Pac is well-positioned to be a dominant conference again. Especially once UW and CU are back to being perennial Top 10 caliber teams.

 

[ScottyBuff]

Some one just posted this on Texas Ags:

Dallas radio is reporting that t.u. is meeting today to discuss going indy in football and Big East in all other sports. Said they will NOT give up their network meaning PAC-12 is not an option for them.

That could be very interesting. The Big East could be the fall-back option for the Big 12 leftovers in all-sports if the SEC-ACC dominoes take members away from Big East.

Texas could follow in the footsteps of their hero Notre Dame. Doubtful that UT to ACC has any chance of happening.

 

[buffs04]

I am getting a chuckle out of this notion that I have now encountered for a second time that UT is somehow stronger academically -- or more prestigious -- than Stanford or Cal. Cal is undisputably the best public in the country and better than many prestigious privates. Stanford could be argued to be the second most elite academic institution in the country, right behind Harvard.

The people promoting this idea are completely out of their minds. UT is nowhere near Cal academically, much less Stanford.