Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Maxer, Aug 8, 2011.
The comments are very telling, and not at all surprising. To paraphrase: "It's all an aggie conspiracy. UT doesn't owe anybody else anything, why wouldn't they do this".
SOOOO glad we're not in that conference anymore. Every day that passes brings a new reason to pity the poor souls left in that wasteland.
burnt orange scorched earth policy TV.
As if the old reasons are enough. Notice the fist pump by the ref after the TD.
The issue of an unbiased broadcasting team on the Longhorn Network is also laughable. The broadcast booth has been polishing the knob of Texas forever.
Ron Franklin who otherwise did a nice job in an increasingly sh%t TV announcer world before getting canned, was a complete UT homer. he lives in Austin.
and Musberger's mancrush on Chris Simms was borderline porn. you half-expected Brent to blurt out...."folks, that is a GREAT ass on Chris! and I do know man ass".
The further the texas 10 gets in our rearview mirror the better off CU will be. Those poor jealous bastards at ISU, KU, K-State and even Okie Lite will regret this devil's bargain .
In all honesty, I think every one of the other nine are pretty pissed off right now. Even OU. We know A&M is pissed - this is, after all, a giant Aggie conspiracy.
On the plus side, it's a damn near certainty that UT will NEVER be in the Pac 12. Ever. And for that, I'm extremely pleased.
Exactly. Of course it's going to be biased - it is the Longhorn network, not the NCAA Athletics Network. Just like YES and NESN are biased towards their teams, and school's radio networks are biased - the Longhorn network will be, and should be biased.
Dont watch it if you dont like it - if you're not a Texas fan, then it's not for you.
And the rest of the conference has nothing to be upset about, right?
As long as they don't watch, if I follow the logic correctly.
Maybe they can have Texas field two teams and they can play themselves each week.
The article did bring up something that has crossed my mind which is the possibility of UT going independent in football, but remaining in a conference for other sports. If that goes down, do the little nine allow UT to be in the conference for basketball, baseball, track, etc? I sure as hell wouldn't if I were them. I'd go get Houston, TCU and Memphis and I'd tell everybody in the conference that they are restricted from scheduling UT in any sport. Yes, even OU.
I think the majority of the members of the "little nine" bless their lucky stars that they still have Texas IN the conference - because without Texas and OU in the conference, the television dollars for the conference completely disappear, and Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, etc. go from $15 million per year in television revenue to $2 million per year in television revenue.
You don't bite the hand that feeds you.
I understand why they are upset - Texas has the resources to make it happen and they don't.
I also would have liked to spend the last 5 years in grad school, travel Europe for several months, play golf on the weekdays, and work 6 figure jobs for my dad's companys like many of my friends do...
However, instead of doing the above, I do not have the resources to make this happen, and I've worked ever since graduating college.
Some people just have the resources for cool stuff, others don't.
Oh man do they have the others by the balls. If I were any of the other conference partners that have a standing invite from any BCS conference, I would pull a Colorado and preempt any action taken by other conference members and accept that invite now. Not after breakfast, not later this morning. Now!
They have the right to do whatever they want, but their actions are very telling. A conference is built on mutual respect and trust by the member schools and UT treats the other members like garbage because they know they can. If UT had the foresight that a stronger conference long term will be for their benefit they would make different decisions. The best part is under the new Pac 12 regional networks Colorado basically has its own longhorn network and didn't have to sell it's soul to get it. I guarantee this will bite UT in the ass someday. Karma is a bitch.
Except in Texas is in a cooperative (in theory) relationship to work with other teams to put the best product on the field. And I'm not talking about Texas' team, when I say "best product" but rather, the best game. Sure, we all want our teams to win games, but good games are in the best interest of the sport, and playing by a different set of rules is contrary to that ethic.
My biggest issue involves ESPN's interest in controlling the game of football, rather than covering it, though. I hope it goes as badly for ESPN as the Notre Dame contract did for NBC. Remember when it was inconceivable that Notre Dame could have a bad season?
I have to give credit where credit is due. Among UT's brash arrogance, at least they are being honest with themselves. This is "The Longhorn Network" that is transparent in it's mission of piping money and texas high school standouts directly to Austin. UT is swinging their dicks around for the whole world to see with this shameless power grab. It is much less disingenuous than hiding their hubris behind "neutral" networks and Dan Beebe's conference structure.
It's a lot more fun watching UT overplay their hand from the outside.
Whenever I wonder how far UT will go in this brash power grab, I look to UT president Bill Powers. This is a man who just so happened to be on the board of bankrupt energy juggernaut called Enron when it blew up and took Arthur Anderson down with it. Mr Powers is no stranger to extreme heights and depths.
From that standpoint, the SEC, PAC 12 and BigTeleven12 couldn't ask for anyone more capable of running the Longhorn brand into the ground in some spectacular fashion by the existing UT administration.
Members of the other power conferences would be insane to put Texas on the schedule for out of conference play. No proud alumni base would put up with some big game showing up on some piece of crap TLN broadcast. And viewership will suffer when the Texas programming is just one body-bag game after another.
Its got to be painful for the remaining 9 dwarfs in the Big teXIIs, though. God bless 'em all.
The scheduling during the latter part of the season if UT goes independent will be interesting. All the good teams will be locked in to their conference schedules after the first few weeks (for instance, the pac12 doesn't allow OOC after the first 4 weeks of the season), or won't be interested in playing a difficult OOC game during the conference schedule (see, SEC), so UT won't be able to play anyone but cupcakes. Maybe that is what they want though. Less chances for actual competition or even, gasp, a loss.
The conference being a co-op thing is total BS. People at UT see the other 9 members as 9 opponents to beat on the way to a national title. 9 teams that they don't have to directly pay to play them, and can't ever cancel - unlike OOC teams. They are perfectly happy to milk Tech, Baylor, A&M, etc... for wins and $$$.
This is not quite a mutual relationship, however it's not completely a parasitic relationship either. Texas feasts off of the bottom dwellers, however many of them couldn't survive in their current form without UT.
they play with themselves much better than they play with others.
if you look up "longhorn" in the dictionary, you'll see "syn. jerkoff"...
If you truly believe that then you are a moron. Teams are valued by what conference they play in. Go to a game against and SEC team and you might here the conference chant. The stronger the conference the stronger the interest and thus the bigger the dollars.
I'm praying for another decade of longwhorn sucktitude. The attitude change would be hilarious. This high and mighty **** turns my stomach.
And as for the conference co-op thing being total BS, please tell the teams in the SEC, big 10, or pac 12 that. The big 12-2 is the only major conference with that attitude, and really, its only UT in that conference with that attitude. Which is why they are toxic conference killing assholes. :smile2:
Thank you for this outstanding summary of why we are so ****ing glad to not share a conference with these burnt orange assholes anymore....
I'm not sure that's correct. USC/ND and Stanford/ND are both played pretty late in the season, IIRC. Maybe they have exemptions for those two games in particular.
When given the choice between $2MM and $15MM, they of course take the $15MM. At the same time, they're all looking around at the deals that every other conference is getting. They're seeing the screw job they're getting from their so-called conference brothers in Austin, and they're angry. Every school in the B12 is available to any conference that wants them. KU will drop KSU like 3rd period French if the Pac, B?, SEC or Big East comes calling. Mizzou never stopped looking for someplace else to go. A&M isn't even pretending to be friends with UT anymore. ISU, KSU, Baylor, OSU and Tech are all fully and completely screwed. So, while that $15MM/Year does sound a whole lot better than $2MM, it's a far cry from the $30MM+ that CU and the rest of the Pac 12 will be getting, and there's no hope that they'll ever catch up so long as UT is pulling their chain.
I'm sure you're right. They look and see what Boise State is getting from the MWC. They look and see what Tulsa is getting from Conference USA. Those are just two schools who are in lesser conferences, and receive significantly smaller payouts - but have been much more competitive on the college football landscape over the past ten years.
You know this for a fact? Or is this just more talking by virtue of Buff-colored glasses? I expect that the presidents and athletic directors of Iowa State and Kansas State have a much better grasp on their role in college football than most of us do. Iowa State knows that nobody wants them in their conference. They are the whipping boy. They are never going to play for a championship. But they would much rather be the whipping boy to the tune of $15 million than take the $2 million that would come with a MWC membership.
I am completely confident that IF someone came calling for Mizzou or KU - they would GO. Mizzou made that abundantly clear last year. But the problem is -- nobody has come forward and actually said they want KU or Mizzou. Nobody has ever indicated any interest in Iowa State, or Kansas State or Baylor or Oklahoma State or Texas Tech. So when choosing between two evils, I suspect that those schools will take the $15 million evil instead of the $2 million evil!
I don't think there's any hope of them ever catching up, period. Do you expect ISU to get an invitation to the Pac 12? Baylor? KSU? Texas Tech? I, personally, do not foresee that - not even when the next round of expansion occurs. Those schools are STUCK. End of story. Without Texas they have MWC/Conference USA and that is about it.
Yeah, I don't think they're looking at the deals the MWC and CUSA are getting. They're looking at the deals the Big?, ACC, SEC and Pac 12 are getting. They're wondering why their own conference can't do the same for them. Oh, yeah, it's because UT is a soul crushing conference killer. What's the difference between Iowa State and Washington State? If I'm ISU, I'm pissed because they're no worse of a program than WSU is, but they're getting hosed by their own conference. They're not comparing themselves to Boise State. Why would they?
There are no television markets in the Big 12 outside of Texas. The Pac 12 deal is huge because of the markets it encompasses. Same with the SEC and Big 10 deals. They are located in great markets. The Big 12 market sucks, outside of Texas. Oklahoma State's football market = peanuts. Iowa State football market = terrible. They have absolutely nothing to bring to the table from an economic standpoint, which is all the television companies care about.
Separate names with a comma.