Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by BlackNGold, Feb 14, 2013.
The Network no one wants to watch.
What a weak commissioner will do for your conference.
Awesome find B&G! I wouldn't be all that surprised to hear someday that they abandon that network. Hilarious in the way that Dodds is trying to save face with the excuses he's using. Because of the bad ratings, I wonder if any of the other B12 schools stand to lose a little TV $$$ too? I kind of doubt when Alabama plays Tex-ass this year that the donghorn network will be able to trump any of the big networks that want to cover the game. That might cost them even more $$$. And if ATM is anywhere on their schedule over the next two years, they better hope Johnny Football is on crutches. I'm thinking Larry Scott is having a good laugh right about now.
They didn't touch upon the fact their HC has to spend ~20 hrs a week dealing with the LHN. When Mack retires, his replacement certainly won't be thrilled with that kind of distraction and time commitment.
Dodd and UT made the mistake of believing their own bluster. They thought that everyone else thought as much of UT and Texas as they do.
It's a great school. It's in a great market. It's in a recruiting hotbed. It has as much going for it as anyone.
But that doesn't change the fact that no one except their core fanbase is at all interested in watching UT play games that aren't nationally relevant or even nationally-relevant games in sports other than football and basketball. Televising those assets only make sense within the scope of a conference network. And regarding their core fanbase, it's not as big as Dodd and UT thought it was. There is a huge gap between those who will wear a UT hat or t-shirt and those who will fork over extra dollars to get a television network that broadcasts UT swimming & diving.
On the right terms, the discussion of a Pac-16 with UT and OU as the lead additions could still happen.
Texas, they ought to put UT as a synonym for hubris. UT is a conference killer.
We need Mack to win 9 games next season. It will protect him and Dodds.
People don't adore UT?
Truly, it would be awful to have a $300 million payday.
I could have written this article a year ago--or whenever the LHN was introduced.
In college football you have to leverage the hate.
I hate USC. If USC had their own network and my cable carrier was trying to push it on me, I'd fight tooth and nail. No way I would want to pay my money to USC.
However, if you make it a network deal, we all make money, and I don't resent USC their share. Leverage the hate in College Football. That's where the money is.
Texans think everything in Texas is better. That's fine. However, when the rest of the nation doesn't agree, I hope you didn't bet the farm...
I know. :lol:
I'm fine with the discussion of a Pac-16 happening.
If an actual Pac-16 happens, I am going to have Nik deported.
We should turn up the pressure by going to the Pac-14 through Kansas and Oklahoma. Move Utah to the North and see how those chips fall.
Revenue sharing is the key. The Big 10, SEC, and PAC 12 have have equal revenue sharing from their Television contracts similar to the NFL. Of course some programs make more money because of bigger stadiums and more donations but sharing of the TV revenues helps booster the lower end of the conference which in the long run benefits everyone. Dodd lacked the vision to see that self-dealing on the part of Texas was going to hurt in the long run. A weak leader in Dan Beebe also enabled this to happen. The Big 12 Brand has diminished because of Texas...with A&M, Colorado, Nebraska and Missouri leaving it really leaves the conference with less marquee matchups.
Living in the heart of Big 12 country, I don't think the Big 12 frontrunners have any real interest in leaving the conference. In fact, I think the league is pretty happy with it's current makeup. 10 teams makes the money go further.
While it's not a glamorous conference, two years in a row a Big 12 team has been one loss away from the BCS title game.
OSU's loss at Iowa State in 2011 cost them a shot at the BCS title game.
KSU's loss at Baylor in 2012 cost them a shot at the BCS title game.
Not that they would have won the BCS championship either year - but they would have been in the game, at least.
Add that to the fact that either OU or Texas have played in five (5) of the last ten (10) BCS championship games, and OU and Texas are still in the conference, it's still a good conference. Not the premier conference, but still a very good one.
Bigger issue is that it is losing (has lost?) its regional identity and domination.
:nod: Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. Three states. West Virginia doesn't really fit well. It's the SWC all over again, as many predicted.
Aren't the Clowns still in the conference?
It's really just a two state conference - Oklahoma and Texas.
WVU is an odd fit, for sure.
If next year plays out like this year did, with A&M killing it and Texas and OU not doing anything exciting by their standards, I think they should worry a bit.
That's just a bad trend. Texas has been king of the state for so long, and OU was always able to take some of the tier 1 talent Texas didn't take, they seemed to have a pretty good system going. A&M being the cool school in Texas just throws everything out of balance. Plus, Mack's probably just hanging on at this point, and Stoops might be getting stale in Norman--they're not really in shape to challenge A&M's rise. And KSU and Okie State can't be expected to carry the conference's water every year, they're still programs that need to rebuild occasionally. The conference goes where UT & OU go, and those programs don't look to be trending upward right now.
Both teams have stepped back, there's no question about that.
The beauty of Texas is that they are a living, breathing moral story. This is what happens when you become so caught up in your own power, success and pride that you use it as a weapon to get what you want while ultimately undermining your own future by creating enemies.
Shut the hell up.
Let's say that expansion is inevitable, just to play the hypothetical.
For those of you who want to avoid the Big 12, especially UT, coming into the Pac...
Would you prefer focusing on Western/Pacific cultural fits even if the money was less?
As an example, going to 14 through New Mexico and UNLV. That would make the basketball fans ecstatic, but would it dilute football too much?
There's no doubt it would dilute football. Those aren't BCS-caliber programs.
When the Pac-12 expands (and it's a matter of when, not if), the only path is thru Texas and Oklahoma.
If you focus on football and ignore the "new markets" aspect while keeping things in the west, that could put San Diego State and Boise State into play. What say you, haters of all things burnt orange?
Yeah it would. It'd just add a couple more bcs teams to split the talent in Cali with.
I've always thought it'd be funny to just add UT-San Antonio, Texas State, Rice, or whoever just to get a foothold in Texas recruiting markets and give a middle finger to the Longhorns.
Houston makes a lot of sense if we were going to 16 and UT was part of that. 3rd largest university in the state and has a bunch of championships in a lot of sports plus a Heisman winner, the Phi Slamma Jamma hoops history, and some major facilities projects in the works. UT might love that since it would screw with aTm in their own backyard.
IMO, It's not about the $$$. It's about maintaining the integrity of the P-12 conference. I can't think of one school that logistically and academically, would bring any added value to the P-12. NM & UNLV are more suited to the MWC. To add those schools would dilute the P-12
Separate names with a comma.