Dodds doesn't step down until Aug 2014. Is Texas going to fire Brown and let Dodds pick his replacement or will he let the new AD make his own pick after 2014?
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!
Breaking: Texas AD Dodds stepping down
- Thread starter JimmyBuff
- Start date
Dodds doesn't step down until Aug 2014. Is Texas going to fire Brown and let Dodds pick his replacement or will he let the new AD make his own pick after 2014?
With SC making the move another couple embarassing outings may see Mack invited to clean out his office.
I doubt that Dodds would make the new hire or be allowed to. They would probably pick an interem guy for the rest of the season (Robinson?sp.)
JimmyBuff
Well-Known Member
Boosters or the President will pick the next coach.
10 years, $30M per year
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
All the teams in the Big 12 assigned away their tier 1 and tier 2 rights for the next 13 or something years. Texas is secure with the LHN for almost the same length of time. IE there is zero flexibility anywhere with any team in the Big 12 for the next decade+.
You seem to think ESPN is somehow going to be able to just drop the LHN and stop paying UT. Where do you get that idea from? ESPN is on the hook for the next decade for the LHN and UT is set to make serious bank as a result of it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
Find it nearly impossible to believe the GoR would hold up in court if the Texahoma 4 moved to the PAC 16. Almost as impossible to believe Texas and OU would lock themselves into the Big XII without believing they could get out of it. If the Texahoma 4 went to the PAC 16 and KU to the B1G, that is half the conference and why would TV pay for a bastardized Big XII with the orphan 5 + a collection of random non AQ programs. That is without even touching the possible move to the Division 4 or whatever is down the pike.
Over simplifying things? Of course, but just don't believe the GoR will stop Texas from doing what Texas wants. I am told Powers was very much in favor of the PAC 16. If he hires a like minded AD who can convince the boosters its the right move -- the GoR really going to stop them? Don't see it.
Over simplifying things? Of course, but just don't believe the GoR will stop Texas from doing what Texas wants. I am told Powers was very much in favor of the PAC 16. If he hires a like minded AD who can convince the boosters its the right move -- the GoR really going to stop them? Don't see it.
I have no doubt that UT will do everything necessary to hold ESPN to their payout for the full time unless they figure out something more lucrative which is highly unlikely.
In some ways both are stuck with the deal. ESPN is having a harder time than they thought they would selling the channel but UT isn't disposed to let them out of it. UT is stuck because the LHN deal along with the Big12 1st and 2nd tier deal is going to make it hard for them to take opportunities that might present themselves as re-alignment advances. Opportunities that may not be there in the future although with UT's ability to generate money they will still have opportunities, just maybe not as good as some they may have to pass up.
ESPN didn't get the carriage they or UT expected. The NCAA ruling on not being able to be the network for Texas HS Football was a big blow to their plans. Now, with carriers like Dish entering heated negotiations with ESPN you can be sure that Disney will protect its sacred cows by sacrificing Bevo in order to get the important deals.
Exactly what I was thinking.
Screw UT. We aren't letting them in even if they want to come.
Keep saying it over and over. It might make it true. ... Although I admit I hope your repeated mantra works, I am sorry to say that I am far too jaded to believe money won't trump all else.
You are absolutely right. Money trumps all else, and no Big 12 schools have any in TV revenue to offer the Pac 12 for a looooong time based on the GoR, so Sacky is right and UT ain't coming to the PAC 12 for at least a decade. Case closed. Fin.
There are very few deals of this size which do not contain termination provisions. If ESPN is not recouping their costs (with significant margin) I'd expect them to have a fairly straight-forward "out" in the contract. My sense is that there is a soak period for the channel to hit certain subscriber numbers, and if the channel does not meet those numbers either party can ace the deal.
Also, my guess is the $30M/year in UT revenue was based on the most favorable projections, not a straight commitment from ESPN.
EddieCrowder
Well-Known Member
With UT's brand making them in the neighborhood of 150 million per year and guys like Red McCombs, Joe Jamail and countless others standing by. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the Horn's would write checks to the outliers for the remainder of the tier 1 and tier 2 rights term and leave tomorrow If they thought it was in their best interests. Even if the contracts are iron clad MONEY solves any problem of this nature. As a wise old UT grad once told me, "everything is for sale" Point being the souls of Kst, KU, ISU,and the likes are for sale, they might not even know it, but they are. Which brings us to the big question will UT pay the asking price ?
Last edited:
http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2012/business-of-college-football.html
Texass is #1 when it comes to $$ ... that's why !
IF Texass wants to entertain 'bringing' OU, OSU and TT to the PAC you don't think Scott won't sit down and listen? Not saying it would happen but if Scott thinks Texass would bring more $$, a National brand and a highly recognized academic institution into his conference he will do it. Money is King and Texass has it.
so true- those two schools are national powers - Scott would bust a nut to have them in his conference
Don't want but IF they both today came to Scott with a plan it would get done.
I know you hate Texass. We all do, however the notion that Stanford laughs at Texass' academics is nonsense. Sure..Stanford is listed 5th best as we would expect but 52nd isn't a bad rating at all.
That rating is better than CU, Utah, Zona, ASU, Oregon, OSU and WSU. Washington is tied.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
If CU was ranked fifth in football, we would laugh at the team that was ranked 52nd. Texas is an outstanding academic institution, but it does not approach Stanford's standard.
Not even UT and OU are going to write checks of AT LEAST $200 Million a piece (~$20M per year over 10 years of GoR) to move conferences. It would be the dumbest idea of all time. Please people at least think of the actual merit of your argument before just throwing out "oh they have all the money, it won't be a problem" argument.
/end thread
No, we're in agreement there. Texas brings an academic and athletic reputation combined with tremendous monetary resouces and a nationally recognized brand that most conferences wouldn't turn down. However, based on statements following the last round of realignment negotiations, I feel as though Larry Scott might be a little gunshy where Austin politics are concerned.
Academics won't keep UT out of the PAC but at the same time there are a number of schools in the PAC that are not impressed with the UT ego either. There is a huge difference between schools like Stanford and SC that have big endowments, big reputations, and big egos as well and the bottom end schools in the B12 who know that UT is their meal ticket in both money and reputation. Adding UT to the PAC is not going to enhance the reputation or the finances of most of the PAC schools in any significant amounts. Yest UT may bring a bigger TV contract and if they can be convinced to share it more money to conference schools but the PAC schools aren't as desperate for it as UT's current conference "partners." Is an extra $5 million a year worth putting up with the UT attitude and their buddies they bring along. In my view enough PAC schools can comfortably say no that I think sacky is right. It's not something that is going to happen now.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
All this talk, I can't really tell if people want Texas in the Pac-12, or if they don't want Texas in the Pac-12. Put the shoe on the other foot - what on earth does the Pac-12 have to offer Texas, aside from academic prestige?
i can't believe some of you poor deluded people think academics are some kind of a barrier to entry for texass.
that's an absurdity. texass would be in the top 5 academically of the current p12. easily. and ahead of our Buffs.
some of you are grasping at phantom limbs to find a way to convince yourselves that the p12 would not be interested in texass. do i have to remind you all, again, that the p12 has invited texass to join at least TWICE already?
money, money, money... money!
that's an absurdity. texass would be in the top 5 academically of the current p12. easily. and ahead of our Buffs.
some of you are grasping at phantom limbs to find a way to convince yourselves that the p12 would not be interested in texass. do i have to remind you all, again, that the p12 has invited texass to join at least TWICE already?
money, money, money... money!
