What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Wilner Tweet: Momentum in Big 12 turning .....

Jens1893

Club Member
Club Member
Junta Member
Heard momentum turning in Big 12. League has chance to survive. OU may be backing down. Good source but ONLY ONE SOURCE. Still digging.

Isn´t this Groundhog Day? Didn´t the same happen last year also?

Maybe we can finally focus on some football soon ....
 
Isn´t this Groundhog Day? Didn´t the same happen last year also?

Maybe we can finally focus on some football soon ....

Are you kidding? I can still focus on football while taking a back seat and watching the Big 12-3 turn on each other.
 
Are you kidding? I can still focus on football while taking a back seat and watching the Big 12-3 turn on each other.

Nope, from an entertainment standpoint this is terrible timing. Ok, this offseason had some entertainment value as it seems like there was a new scandal discovered every 2 weeks, but please, can´t they just pace this **** a little in the future so we don´t get hit with it all at once while there´s barely anything going on in other months?
 
Nope, from an entertainment standpoint this is terrible timing. Ok, this offseason had some entertainment value as it seems like there was a new scandal discovered every 2 weeks, but please, can´t they just pace this **** a little in the future so we don´t get hit with it all at once while there´s barely anything going on in other months?
:nod:. A&m ****s everything up.
 
I'm loving this. Got some B12 peeps in my office and their productivity has been ruined the past few days as new rumors pop up every hour or so
 
The funny thing is UT could give a rat's ass about moving that final 25% of TV revenue to equal sharing as long as they get to keep their precious LHN which is FAR more valuable, and will likely continue to drive the rest of the conference nuts. That money is what maybe a $1-1.5 million for the bottom 5 teams? It's a drop in the bucket for them and is actually a more onerous concession for OU since they don't have their own network to make up the gap. Particularly when OU could have a regional network dropped in Oklahoma next year when the PAC 12 Net goes live. UT knows no one else is going to take the LHN without serious concessions so they'll throw the league a bone that would have been a big deal a couple of years ago but doesn't really mean anything now that they've moved the goal posts.

Sure everyone else has the same right to their own "network" but they sure as hell aren't going to get one managed and produced by ESPN, they're going to get something that looks more like the internet PPV stream KSU just set up. So the bottom half of the league gets an extra million, the top half loses money, and UT gets $20 - 40 million (once the 70% of net profit provision kicks in). Gotta love Bevo math for "equal" revenue sharing, and I'm not surprised Boren at OU is having to be coaxed into the deal.

The league better get an ironclad agreement on exactly what UT and ESPN are going to do with the LHN, because it seems like it is a far more destabilizing element compared to the revenue share.
 
Last edited:
OU must be getting something big in the deal. There's no way they'd come back this quickly.

Although, I've always thought that what OU really wanted was concessions from UT. They don't want to move from a TX/OK centered conference to one they are on the fringe of any more than UT does.

Although a Sooner friend of mine told me that Stoops already has a "footprint" in CA and Las Vegas, and would start cleaning up in there as soon as the switch occurred. :lol:
 
OU must be getting something big in the deal. There's no way they'd come back this quickly.

Although, I've always thought that what OU really wanted was concessions from UT. They don't want to move from a TX/OK centered conference to one they are on the fringe of any more than UT does.

Although a Sooner friend of mine told me that Stoops already has a "footprint" in CA and Las Vegas, and would start cleaning up in there as soon as the switch occurred. :lol:


Okie has their whole team built on TX recruits and there is no way they would willingly leave that base. Okie cleaning up in Cali is not happening.
 
as i've posted before, the people running OU and the OU AD are pretty smart these days. it was premature by many on this board to post they were just rolling over for UT. see, the opposite scenarios of Baylor and MU....squeal like spoiled babies when UT moves into the spotlight like fat Vegas Elvis.....and take yourself off the bargaining table. OU kept their powder dry until UT over-reached (inevitable, OU has been dealing with UT's "psychology" for a long time). OU is in a "boom" period, of sorts, with competent leadership. i think they just wanted to redress UT's ****-strutting a bit and move into the new thing closer to equals. i think they've earned that as a historical program with a lot of success, despite some considerable structural disadvantages compared to Texas and UT.

Now, OU may have some tasty choices to make. i think they'd rather stay at home for the reasons people have mentioned....traditional recruiting base in north Texas (closer to Norman than Austin or College Station in a lot of those blue chip areas)...and it lets them win the PR battle at home, around the state, and with legislators (who are half Pokes) by staying connected to OSU.

and if the Big XII/New SWC stays together, the better for us. though, i'd rather have OU, OSU, KU, MU than 4 ad hoc San Diego State/MWC/Boise type teams moving forward....if it's got to be 14/16. i admit that may be the old Big 8 fan in me, though.
 
Last edited:
Okie has their whole team built on TX recruits and there is no way they would willingly leave that base. Okie cleaning up in Cali is not happening.

OU built their team on the backs of Texas recruiting since Christ was a corporal... That won't change just because of conference affiliation. I also don't understand all of the doom and gloom over the Big 12 demise with regard to the OU-UT game. Only, what 10 of the 111 games they played were during Big 12 days. If they played Big 8 - SWC, they can certainly play as they represent different conferences in the future.
 
Last edited:
as i've posted before, the people running OU and the OU AD are pretty smart these days. it was premature by many on this board to post they were just rolling over for UT. see, the opposite scenarios of Baylor and MU....squeal like spoiled babies when UT moves into the spotlight like fat Vegas Elvis.....and take yourself off the bargaining table. OU kept their powder dry until UT over-reached (inevitable). OU is in a "boom" period, of sorts, with competent leadership. i think they just wanted to redress UT's ****-strutting a bit and move into the new thing closer to equals. i think they've earned that as a historical program with a lot of success, despite some considerable structural disadvantages compared to Texas and UT.

Now, OU may have some tasty choices to make. i think they'd rather stay at home for the reasons people have mentioned....traditional recruiting base in north Texas (closer to Norman than Austin or College Station in a lot of those blue chip areas)...and it lets them win the PR battle at home, around the state, and with legislators (who are half Pokes) by staying connected to OSU.

and if the Big XII/New SWC stays together, the better for us. though, i'd rather have OU, OSU, KU, MU than 4 ad hoc San Diego State/MWC/Boise type teams moving forward....if it's got to be 14/16. i admit that may be the old Big 8 fan in me, though.

The beauty of it is that we won't need to expand if Big XX stays together, so we won't need crappy members. It is pretty much hand pick Big XX members or stay happy and fat as we are. Hoping for 2nd scenario.
 
if everyone goes to 16 teams, i'd take ou/osu/ku/mu and go to an eastern division. it wouldn't be my first choice, but we'd have very good chance to be very, very competitive in that division over time. and, it wouldn't be any worse than the old big 8 and it would be much better than the old big 12. i prefer our current situation, but if things start to move, well, you have to be flexible.
 
if everyone goes to 16 teams, i'd take ou/osu/ku/mu and go to an eastern division. it wouldn't be my first choice, but we'd have very good chance to be very, very competitive in that division over time. and, it wouldn't be any worse than the old big 8 and it would be much better than the old big 12. i prefer our current situation, but if things start to move, well, you have to be flexible.

Flexible? Sure. Stupid, shortsighted, overreactionary? No. There hasn't been one person who has given a reasonable explanation as to why, even if everybody else goes to 14 or 16 teams, that we must do the same. Where is it written in blood that if the SEC has 14 teams, that the Pac must follow suit or be "left behind"? I don't get that. We're the only show in town in two time zones. Why do we need to expand at all?
 
if everyone goes to 16 teams, i'd take ou/osu/ku/mu and go to an eastern division. it wouldn't be my first choice, but we'd have very good chance to be very, very competitive in that division over time. and, it wouldn't be any worse than the old big 8 and it would be much better than the old big 12. i prefer our current situation, but if things start to move, well, you have to be flexible.

Probably an easier path than the old Big 8. During the Big 8 era, as much as I hate to admit it, pretty much nobody was going to finish ahead of both Oklahoma and Nebraska in a given year. That was like being in the same basketball conference as the "Showtime" Lakers and the Jordan Bulls (only with a lot more chaw).
 
Suppose OU, OSU, KU, and MU go to the Pac-12, we could have a Big 8-esque division and you have to wonder if Husker fan will be jealous of that setup.
 
Okie has their whole team built on TX recruits and there is no way they would willingly leave that base. Okie cleaning up in Cali is not happening.

Correct. There is no way OU would clean up in Callie the way they did N Texas. Some kid from Denton or Abilene might think that Norman looks great. The average HS player who grew up in SoCal or NoCal is surrounded by lots of entertainment, beautiful scenery, and attractive girls. Norman is the antithises of all that. Look at their roster, they've built their program our of pulling kids out of armpit towns like Texarkana.
 
We're the only show in town in two time zones. ?

sort of. as long as there are zombies who watch whatever ESPN tells them....doesn't matter where they live....they'll be humping the SEC along with everyone else. geography doesn't mean as much in our brave new multi-media world.....and, when it does, the West has low enough pop density that at least the MTN time zone will never be a big player in ad revenue as the networks sell audiences to advertisers.
 
Correct. There is no way OU would clean up in Callie the way they did N Texas. Some kid from Denton or Abilene might think that Norman looks great. The average HS player who grew up in SoCal or NoCal is surrounded by lots of entertainment, beautiful scenery, and attractive girls. Norman is the antithises of all that. Look at their roster, they've built their program our of pulling kids out of armpit towns like Texarkana.

Which is why OU needs to at least keep UT on the schedule, to keep that Texas recruiting pipeline going.
 
Bohls has balls:



Texas does not want to be an independent.
Texas does not want to be an independent.
Texas does not want to be an independent.
I think DeLoss Dodds is still writing that on the blackboard.
Maybe if the Longhorns say that loud enough and often enough, others will believe them. Maybe.
Dodds has said it every time I've asked the Texas athletic director for the last 10 years, and I believe him.
It's true they don't want to be an independent, even if every action they take seems as if they do. Certainly Texas acts like an independent. If it smells like an independent, talks like an independent, acts like an independent, I'm guessing deep down it's an independent.
I'm hoping I'm wrong on this, because I think going independent would be a colossal mistake as we rocket toward super conferences. Texas, though, may be painting itself into that corner without any other option, because the Big 12 appears too fractured to survive.
If so, the Pac-12 would be the Longhorns' best bet.
At this point, independence is looking like the end result. Why?
Ego and power.
Texas does not want to concede either. It doesn't want to give up its precious Longhorn Network, nor does it want its clout diminished by joining another established conference where it won't have as big a say.
By clinging to their new toy — a valuable one, at that — and flaunting it, and insisting on uneven revenue sharing, the Longhorns have alienated the rest of the conference, created unrest and acrimony, and thrown their weight around so much that schools in their own league see them as a bully.
Yes, they are the Joneses.
But if this keeps up, how long is it before Texas becomes the most hated school in America?
Does President William Powers really want that image? Does business partner ESPN want that? Has ESPN's image taken a blow because it has cozied up to one school so much and become a major factor in the breakup of an entire conference?
When I asked a Texas administrator its preference on Thursday, spokesman Nick Voinis said, "Big 12, Big 12, Big 12. The Big 12's our priority."
Of course, it is. But how can it attract any strong replacement for Texas A&M to this collection of dysfunctional misfits? I don't blame Baylor for trying to sue — because it stands to lose everything — but it can't threaten litigation against A&M and the SEC, and also endorse a raid of other conferences to serve the Big 12's needs, without being a hypocrite.
Brigham Young, in its first year as an independent, is the Big 12's biggest target, but it represents only a Band-Aid. Houston remains a strong possibility. I've even seen San Diego State's name bandied about.
This all started with Texas and could end with Texas, although the Longhorns did overplay their hand. They've lost much leverage because their two biggest rivals — A&M and Oklahoma — are considering going elsewhere without them. Reports that the ACC and Big Ten are courting Texas are unsubstantiated. That could amount to posturing, because Texas could be bluffing and trying to force the Pac-12 to accept Texas and allow the Longhorn Network as is. That won't happen.
All Texas needed to do — and should still do, although it's probably too late — was announce in the summer of 2010 after Nebraska and Colorado bolted that it had agreed to equal revenue sharing, and not flaunted its Longhorn Network, threatening to telecast high school football games. Had Texas done that, all this might have been resolved.
What now?
Going independent is fraught with peril and problems. There are risks at every turn, although BYU's eight-year deal with ESPN guarantees the broadcast of four football games every year — 10 this year — and BYUtv will show 120 live games in 21 sports. It wanted more exposure for its university and its athletes. Doesn't Texas already get that?
Without membership in a BCS conference, Texas would lose its shot at an automatic BCS berth and all that money.
Without membership in a conference, Texas forfeits its share of any league revenue. It's projected to receive at least $20 million in the Big 12 this year.
Without being in a conference, Texas' Olympic and all non-revenue sports would be severely marginalized. No conference, no built-in scheduling.
Every sport would have to scramble for competition, including football, which would have severe difficulty finding games in October and November when league play is in full swing. Should Oklahoma join the Pac-12, the Texas-OU series could be finished or be moved to September and perhaps become a home-and-home series, killing one of the best traditions in all of sports.
If Texas finally did go independent, an even bigger question looms:
Who the heck would it have to boss around?
kbohls@statesman.com; 445-3772
 
Bohls has balls:

far out. Bohls has been a loyal foot-soldier for Texas for as long as i can remember. not nearly the sycophant that Chipster and Geoff Ketchum have been (but, they are a recent internet phenom). Bohls has toed the line for a long time. kinda reminds me, to a lesser but local extent, when Ringo finally turned the corner on Hawkins....something flipped the switch and he was not only off the Hawk Love Bandwagon (unlike his Camera-mate Woelk)....but WAY WAY off.

not saying bohls has gone that far, but given the time into humping UT in the AAS, this is some off-road stuff for Kirk.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top