Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

Longhorn Network Contract

Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
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.
Click to expand...

the only reason the Big XII even existed was that the Big 8 had no way to compete for TV's....low population density. the 8 had 3 national champs in it's last decade, played for it 3-4 other times....wasn't a problem with competition....just ad $$$. sad to see the sports world go this way.
 
GregInAustin said:
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.
Click to expand...

All true. And no one is saying that Texas CAN'T do it -- they did it. The argument that Iowa St and Kansas St and Baylor, etc etc should be happy to be there is immaterial as well -- of course they should. And are.

The Longhorn Network is an issue solely because of Oklahoma (and to a lesser extent, A&M). These are schools with better options. It doesn't matter what K-State does, but if Oklahoma and/or A&M leave, the Big-12 is finished. Texas can go independent, and of course they'll still be a huge brand (and will have the revenue from the Longhorn Network) but their road to winning national championships and scheduling good teams will be a lot harder.

I don't know what you do for a living, but I was taught that when you make a deal, you recognize your leverage and then you stop just short of maximizing all of it, to leave the other guy a little dignity (and so you can continue to make deals with him in the future). I guess Deloss Dodds isn't a believer in that.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
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.
Click to expand...

So your point is what, that the bottom tier of the conference has the best deal they can get in the Big-12, are happy to be there, and aren't going to leave? All true.

It doesn't matter what they do -- what matters here is Oklahoma and A&M. They have other options. If they leave, the Big-12 is done for and the teams will scatter. Texas will end up independent, which will be good for them in some ways, but a huge drag in others (they'll have to find a conference for all their other sports that aren't football (it might not be a good one), scheduling will be tough, and getting to national championship games will be harder).
 
Texas reminds me of those men (usually nebraskans) who marry a chubby girl with low self-esteem. Then they verbally/physically abuse them and treat them like **** knowing that their wife will never leave them.

**** you Texas!
 
Maxer said:
So your point is what, that the bottom tier of the conference has the best deal they can get in the Big-12, are happy to be there, and aren't going to leave? All true.

It doesn't matter what they do -- what matters here is Oklahoma and A&M. They have other options. If they leave, the Big-12 is done for and the teams will scatter. Texas will end up independent, which will be good for them in some ways, but a huge drag in others (they'll have to find a conference for all their other sports that aren't football (it might not be a good one), scheduling will be tough, and getting to national championship games will be harder).
Click to expand...


My point is the bottom tier of the conference would give Texas and OU anything and everything they asked for as long as the conference stays together. Iowa State, Kansas State, Baylor, etc. are absolutely terrified of what will happen to their athletic departments if the conference bowl money and conference television money go away. They might publicly decry what Texas says and does about the LHN - but behind closed doors they know where their bread is buttered.
 
GregInAustin said:
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.
Click to expand...
Just because Texas can doesn't mean they should. We (the U.S.) can nuke Afghanistan even further back into the stone age but we are not going to do that. Why? Because there would be significant negative repercussions the US would have to face down the road that could set the US back for decades. With their recent moves Texas is throwing the middle finger strait at the little 9 and indirectly at any future would be conference partners. If Texas thinks there won't be consequences for their actions then magnitude of their arrogance should get them diagnosed as mentally disabled.

If Texas wants to play it this way it's thier choice, but I am going to have ZERO patience for their whining when it comes back to bite them.
 
SJBuff said:
Just because Texas can doesn't mean they should. We (the U.S.) can nuke Afghanistan even further back into the stone age but we are not going to do that. Why? Because there would be significant negative repercussions the US would have to face down the road that could set the US back for decades. With their recent moves Texas is throwing the middle finger strait at the little 9 and indirectly at any future would be conference partners. If Texas thinks there won't be consequences for their actions then magnitude of their arrogance should get them diagnosed as mentally disabled.

If Texas wants to play it this way it's thier choice, but I am going to have ZERO patience for their whining when it comes back to bite them.
Click to expand...

Pretty skeptical regarding the bolded part.
 
UT was getting out of hand when there were 12 in the B12. Now that NU and CU have left UT is virtually unrestrained. It is readily apparent the other 9 co-dependents are sticking around, some because they believed Bevo's siren song (OU Okie Lite, aTm), some because they have no choice :)wave: ISU, KSU, Baylor, TT), and are going to get a good Bevo bitch slapping for a while. The LHN is Bevo's way of announcing, "I am fully prepared to swath you in Bevo ****, and I don't even feel bad about it".

Thank goodness CU is out of that mess of a conference. UT will kill another conference just as sure as the sun comes up in the east.
 
As far as my saying that the conference co-op idea is total BS, this was in reference to the "Big 12 - 2 = 9 + 1" conference. I understand that most conferences try to help each other out as much as possible, but in the case of the Big 12, Texas only sees the other teams for what they can do for Bevo.
 
GregInAustin said:
As far as my saying that the conference co-op idea is total BS, this was in reference to the "Big 12 - 2 = 9 + 1" conference. I understand that most conferences try to help each other out as much as possible, but in the case of the Big 12, Texas only sees the other teams for what they can do for Bevo.
Click to expand...

Well, thats why we call it the Big 12-2 = 9+1.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
My point is the bottom tier of the conference would give Texas and OU anything and everything they asked for as long as the conference stays together. Iowa State, Kansas State, Baylor, etc. are absolutely terrified of what will happen to their athletic departments if the conference bowl money and conference television money go away. They might publicly decry what Texas says and does about the LHN - but behind closed doors they know where their bread is buttered.
Click to expand...

Yes. I am not disputing that point -- it's true with just about all the schools OTHER than A&M and OU. But if UT presses those two, they will leave, and the conference will blow up. So it really doesn't matter at all what all the other schools you're speaking of do. Or say. But OU and (especially) A&M have been amongst the loudest detractors. And they do have options, that I would imagine they will exercise. Not this year, but soon, and then UT will find itself with a ton of money and a hard time finding teams to play them (and substandard programming for the Longhorn Network when their baseball team, Olympic sports, etc are competing in Conf USA or wherever they end up when Texas football goes independent).
 
I think when all the dust settles, it's going to be Missouri that kills the Big 12, not UT.
 
CUFan said:
Quote from Chip Brown?
Click to expand...

No. UT is perfectly happy keeping the status quo. So long as OU and A&M are getting paid, they'll play nice, too. Missouri, OTOH, is still actively looking to get the hell out of that conference. They are the only major school in a highly populated state with two major metropolitan areas. Geographically, they'd fit in both the SEC and the B10. UT acts as though it's their conference to do with as they please. OU and A&M are mostly OK with that, so long as they keep getting their checks. Missouri has options, and will exersize them when they can.
 
sackman said:
No. UT is perfectly happy keeping the status quo. So long as OU and A&M are getting paid, they'll play nice, too. Missouri, OTOH, is still actively looking to get the hell out of that conference. They are the only major school in a highly populated state with two major metropolitan areas. Geographically, they'd fit in both the SEC and the B10. UT acts as though it's their conference to do with as they please. OU and A&M are mostly OK with that, so long as they keep getting their checks. Missouri has options, and will exersize them when they can.
Click to expand...

I can't believe you didn't mention this as well. Mizzou is also not getting the checks that the "big 3" are getting. They have far less monetary incentive to stay than OU or TAMU.
 
sackman said:
No. UT is perfectly happy keeping the status quo. So long as OU and A&M are getting paid, they'll play nice, too. Missouri, OTOH, is still actively looking to get the hell out of that conference. They are the only major school in a highly populated state with two major metropolitan areas. Geographically, they'd fit in both the SEC and the B10. UT acts as though it's their conference to do with as they please. OU and A&M are mostly OK with that, so long as they keep getting their checks. Missouri has options, and will exersize them when they can.
Click to expand...

I understand your point. I was joking. Although I think you can argue that UT started it.
 
CUFan said:
I understand your point. I was joking. Although I think you can argue that UT started it.
Click to expand...

UT is the catalyst, no doubt about it. I don't think they'll take the step that kills the conference, though. When it comes down to it, I don't think A&M or OU will, either.
 
sackman said:
UT is the catalyst, no doubt about it. I don't think they'll take the step that kills the conference, though. When it comes down to it, I don't think A&M or OU will, either.
Click to expand...

That step has already been taken, in my opinion. It is the Longhorn Network. After a couple of years, Texas is going to start to REALLY get huge payouts from it and the playing field will tilt even further in their favor. I don't know that OU has the media markets to start their own network, and you can't really start a Big-12 Network without Texas. So the Longhorn Network precludes them from receiving additional tv monies. I think this will cause them to leave, sooner or later.
 
I don't think Mizzou has the clout. They were spurned by the Big 10whatever. Nebraska was chosen. Mizzou would be picked up by another lesser conference and dominate if the Big12 implodes. Whatever the argument, the conference is doomed as college football establishes another tier and conferences scramble to acquire enough quality schools to get on the top tier. Consolidation.
 
I think the B10 was ready to pick up Mizzou when Dr. Tom came calling. They wanted the national following that the nubs bring, so they took them instead. Missouri still has a lot going for them. I firmly believe that once ND's TV contract expires, they'll be talking to the B10 about coming into the conference. It'll make sense for the B10 to add two teams, not just one.

As for UT, the Longwhorn network doesn't kill the conference as far as they're concerned. They frankly don't give a damn what the other 9 schools think. That's pretty obvious. But there are some definite advantages to them to technically be part of a BCS conference. Not the least of which is scheduling. Right now, they have the best of both worlds. They're a de-facto independent with a built in group of bitches they can push around. UT won't kill the conference it built. They'll keep pushing and pushing until somebody leaves. I think that somebody will be Missouri.
 
This whole discussion shows why I am so happy that CU went to the PAC. We have a conference where all members share relatively similar cultures, goals, and interest. Some are certainly higher profile than others but each is a legitimate entity on its own and thus the conference is able run on a level of mutual respect.

The Big Texas on the other hand is a mishmash of schools stuck together by a lack of better options. ISU, KSU, Baylor, Tech, aren't going to get a sniff from any other major conference. For them it is a question of taking the abuse they get from the top of the Big Texas or being relegated to at best C-USA or MWC status. KU, Mizzou, OSU have some hope of maybe being picked up by another major conference but can't be sure of it and thus are in a hard position as well. OU and A&M do have likely options but as long as they can skim the cream off the top of the bucket and blame UT at the same time why should they look. UT is all about UT and nothing but UT but is willing to give just enough to the others to make sure they get what they see as their way. The result is that they make huge dollars, OU and aTm, get big slices of the pie to buy their loyalty, the rest get abused but have the choice, be abused and live in the mansion that Texas owns or stop the abuse and go live in the run down trailer with no running water that would be their next stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top