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!

UT BoR meeting on Monday

Posts on Shaggybevo are saying OU, Okie Lite, Texas, and Texas Tech. to the PAC.

If that's the case, they better be backing up a money train to CU's Dal Ward offices and making them come in as exactly the same as everyone else.

My guess is that UT might have gotten its extra by forcing TTU to take a haircut on its distribution from the LHN/Pac-12 regional network.

Kind of hoping this isn't true, though.
 
woudn't it be awesome if basically every decent program suddenly found a home except texass?

mizzery, ku, atm, ou, and osu all find bcs homes... and then there is texass sitting there, with tech, baylor, kjuco state, and isu. that would be so ****ing perfect. justice would be done. i know it won't happen like that, but it is nice to dream.
 
I've heard chatter that UT, Baylor, K-state and ISU are joining the Big East..
k2ntja.gif
 
There are good reasons why the ACC would welcome Texas and why the Longhorns would consider joining the ACC.

What's in it for the ACC:

Attendance: Assuming in-league football schedules remain at the current eight games, four ACC teams would get visits from the Longhorns each season. For those four, the gate take would be a regular windfall.

Television revenue: Although Texas would keep its Longhorn Network ($15 million per year through the 2031-32 school year), the ACC would be able to use the addition of the school as leverage for getting more money from ESPN, which already has a 12-year deal with the league, reportedly worth $1.86 billion.

Bowl loot: The odds are solidly against the ACC landing a second big postseason bowl purse each season with its current lineup, but Texas would change that. At 10-2 - even 9-3 in some seasons - the Longhorns would be a popular choice for the top-dollar games.

Basketball: Not that the folks making decisions care a great deal, but Texas basketball is a long shot better than Miami, Boston College and Virginia Tech, the past three ACC annexations.

Buzz: Texas football is always a hot topic. That was even the case last season, when Mack Brown's team finished with the school's first losing season since 1997.


Why Texas might want the ACC:

Image: For all of its missteps of late, the ACC still has a reasonably clean public image and would be an attractive academic partner for Texas.

TV markets: At least in theory, the ACC has direct access to television markets in Boston, Baltimore-D.C., Atlanta, Miami, Orlando, Tampa-St. Petersburg and all of north Florida in addition to the Carolinas and Virginia.

Location: If it comes down to a decision between the ACC or the Pac-12 for Texas, the travel distances would essentially be a push. At one extreme, there's a potential flight to Boston but at the other, there's Seattle and Pullman, Wash.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/09/16/1492219/texas-acc-a-good-fit.html
 
Texas would not be "giving up" the LHN. ESPN owns the LHN. I don't see ESPN "giving up" the LHN. They paid UT for the rights to broadcast the content, but UT does not own or control the entity. They certainly have input into the programming but ESPN paid dearly for the rights and they won't simply allow Texas to get out of it cheaply.

The Pac-12 owns all their networks directly. The Pac would have to buy out ESPN's contract in order to "roll it in" to their regional network model.
 
Why are you citing a post from 10 days ago?

I have no inside knowledge..... But I can deduce from all that has happened that the following are a near certainty:

1). Texas and ND can not dictate their own terms to the Big 10. If they could, they would have announced that a long time ago.

2). Texas can't dictate it's own terms to the PAC, because Larry Scott said so.

3). Texas thinks they own college football becaue Chip Brown tweeted it.
 
Why are you citing a post from 10 days ago?

I have no inside knowledge..... But I can deduce from all that has happened that the following are a near certainty:

1). Texas and ND can not dictate their own terms to the Big 10. If they could, they would have announced that a long time ago.

2). Texas can't dictate it's own terms to the PAC, because Larry Scott said so.

3). Texas thinks they own college football becaue Chip Brown tweeted it.

?

Who is this directed to? Pretty sure this thread was started today.
 
The Pac-12 offers top notch academics and quality athletic competition. You all knew this when you joined and honestly, it has been a long time coming Buffs. You always belonged in the PAC. Texas likes to believe they are God’s gift to both. I’ll give them that. They’re not bad in either category but they’re like a repackaged Christmas gift in a birthday bag. However, the PAC is and has always been, all about equal revenue sharing. I am not certain Texas sees this as a positive or strength in the conference. (I’m also not sure Larry Scott wants to entertain the idea of granting them any exclusive privileges with OK and OK Light already on the table). He could have gone for this last year if he loved them so much and wanted the headaches in exchange for the cash. Now, we are in a stronger position with our current television contract and membership. The internal strength and loyalty which exists within this conference is not often advertised nor discussed but it exists nonetheless. Why listen to any Texas expansion to the PAC now? Oh yeah…money and prestige.

Is Texas is willing to commit to the collectiveness and overall good of the Pac-12? No.

Do we need the money? No. Although it would be nice….it doesn’t seem worth the hassle.

Do we all want to deal with the LHN? No.

Do any of us really give a flying f*ck about Texas? No.

This could go on ad nauseum….

As a Cal alumnus, PAC 12 defender and fan of college football in general, UT should only be accepted under equal terms in the existing structure. I think this will be discussed again and again by all within the conference and mandated by the PAC 12. I'm pretty sure the end result will be that Texas refuses these terms, at which point, the rest of our concerns; regional match-up problems, conference alignments, travel, cancer to the system, etc. will fall to the wayside. We’ll figure something out beneficial to any new members. Don’t let the zipper and pod fanatics ruin your week.

I also believe that in the end, if the O-homas are accepted, we’ll be left with the question: which of the two teams remaining will make up the PAC 16? IF that occurs, that’s another concern for another time and another day but rest assured Buffs, the PAC listens to it members- even if they are new members. We always have and always will. Lastly, we always, always, always share our cash with our brothers.

Pacific 12 Conference…the Conference of Champions
 
Last edited:
The Pac-12 offers top notch academics and quality athletic competition. You all knew this when you joined and honestly, it has been a long time coming Buffs. You always belonged in the PAC. Texas likes to believe they are God’s gift to both. I’ll give them that. They’re not bad in either category but they’re like a repackaged Christmas gift in a birthday bag. However, the PAC is and has always been, all about equal revenue sharing. I am not certain Texas sees this as a positive or strength in the conference. (I’m also not sure Larry Scott wants to entertain the idea of granting them any exclusive privileges with OK and OK Light already on the table). He could have gone for this last year if he loved them so much and wanted the headaches in exchange for the cash. Now, we are in a stronger position with our current television contract and membership. The internal strength and loyalty which exists within this conference is not often advertised nor discussed but it exists nonetheless. Why listen to any Texas expansion to the PAC now? Oh yeah…money and prestige.

Is Texas is willing to commit to the collectiveness and overall good of the Pac-12? No.

Do we need the money? No. Although it would be nice….it doesn’t seem worth the hassle.

Do we all want to deal with the LHN? No.

Do any of us really give a flying f*ck about Texas? No.

This could go on ad nauseum….

As a Cal alumnus, PAC 12 defender and fan of college football in general, UT should only be accepted under equal terms in the existing structure. I think this will be discussed again and again by all within the conference and mandated by the PAC 12. I think the end result will be that Texas refuses these terms, at which point, the rest of our concerns; regional match-up problems, conference alignments, travel, cancer to the system, etc. will fall to the wayside. We’ll figure something out beneficial to any new members. Don’t let the zipper and pod fanatics ruin your week.

I think in the end, if the O-homas are accepted, we’ll be left with the question: which of the two teams remaining will make up the PAC 16? IF that occurs, that’s another concern for another time and another day but rest assured Buffs, the PAC listens to it members- even if they are new members. We always have and always will. Lastly, we always, always, always share our cash with our brothers.

Pacific 12 Conference…the Conference of Champions

Now that is a welcome wagon.... Nice to do business with you. Forgive us if we are conditioned on being skeptical of a conference foe.....
 
Back
Top