(07-25-2016 03:29 PM)EarthBoundMisfit Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 01:34 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 01:18 PM)EarthBoundMisfit Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 11:41 AM)RandyMc Wrote:  The Big 12 is already operating under a GOR agreement...

thanks for that. Answers my question. I think if I were going to be accepted by the Big 12...that I'd want some kind of extension on that GOR...say 9 or 10 more years, just so I am not shopping for another conference in 2025.

What is your leverage to make them do so?

good question. They already have money and power. There isn't anything the incoming schools could do but ask "pretty please."

Was thinking out loud:
The other Big 12 schools should look at balancing the power in the conference between all the schools.
Texas is reluctant to give up their football network...because they get some good money from it, which is why other conferences might think twice before taking them.
The PAC's network money isn't much more than the Big 12's, would they let Texas have its OWN network? Nah.
The SEC wouldn't put up with it either. The Big 10 already has a network...so Texas will eventually have to give in on that...or stay put where they are.
KNOWING that Texas is power hungry as they are...would another conference cowtow to them?

True, no other conference would take UT's LHN to get them, but what if Texas went the independent route? They would then be like the golden domers with (essentially) their own network, and could schedule as they please. They could keep the Red River Rivalry with OU, and then play a national schedule if they wanted. I just have a hunch they are waiting to see the way the conference looks after expansion, and then will either hold the conference hostage for more money/power, or bolt to freedom from conference leadership that "holds them back with the unworthy".

(07-25-2016 09:33 PM)former guest Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 03:29 PM)EarthBoundMisfit Wrote:  good question. They already have money and power. There isn't anything the incoming schools could do but ask "pretty please."

Was thinking out loud:
The other Big 12 schools should look at balancing the power in the conference between all the schools.
Texas is reluctant to give up their football network...because they get some good money from it, which is why other conferences might think twice before taking them.
The PAC's network money isn't much more than the Big 12's, would they let Texas have its OWN network? Nah.
The SEC wouldn't put up with it either. The Big 10 already has a network...so Texas will eventually have to give in on that...or stay put where they are.
KNOWING that Texas is power hungry as they are...would another conference cowtow to them?

True, no other conference would take UT's LHN to get them, but what if Texas went the independent route? They would then be like the golden domers with (essentially) their own network, and could schedule as they please. They could keep the Red River Rivalry with OU, and then play a national schedule if they wanted. I just have a hunch they are waiting to see the way the conference looks after expansion, and then will either hold the conference hostage for more money/power, or bolt to freedom from conference leadership that "holds them back with the unworthy".

1. No, no other conference will cowtow to them in terms of the LHN. Texas is the goldmine of college football right now and the PAC 12 (who actually makes LESS money than the Big XII) is starting to fall behind in the TV money game, and yet that conference STILL wouldn't let UT in without leaving the LHN behind. If UT moved to any other conference there would have to be some major concessions in order for it to work.
2. Texas can't go independent until the GOR expires. Even then they will have a problem doing so - the LHN brings in $15M/year while the schools got on average $23M last year from the Big XII TV deal. At this point the LHN is not enough by itself to make up for a conference.

(07-26-2016 01:18 AM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 09:33 PM)former guest Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 03:29 PM)EarthBoundMisfit Wrote:  good question. They already have money and power. There isn't anything the incoming schools could do but ask "pretty please."

Was thinking out loud:
The other Big 12 schools should look at balancing the power in the conference between all the schools.
Texas is reluctant to give up their football network...because they get some good money from it, which is why other conferences might think twice before taking them.
The PAC's network money isn't much more than the Big 12's, would they let Texas have its OWN network? Nah.
The SEC wouldn't put up with it either. The Big 10 already has a network...so Texas will eventually have to give in on that...or stay put where they are.
KNOWING that Texas is power hungry as they are...would another conference cowtow to them?

True, no other conference would take UT's LHN to get them, but what if Texas went the independent route? They would then be like the golden domers with (essentially) their own network, and could schedule as they please. They could keep the Red River Rivalry with OU, and then play a national schedule if they wanted. I just have a hunch they are waiting to see the way the conference looks after expansion, and then will either hold the conference hostage for more money/power, or bolt to freedom from conference leadership that "holds them back with the unworthy".

1. No, no other conference will cowtow to them in terms of the LHN. Texas is the goldmine of college football right now and the PAC 12 (who actually makes LESS money than the Big XII) is starting to fall behind in the TV money game, and yet that conference STILL wouldn't let UT in without leaving the LHN behind. If UT moved to any other conference there would have to be some major concessions in order for it to work.
2. Texas can't go independent until the GOR expires. Even then they will have a problem doing so - the LHN brings in $15M/year while the schools got on average $23M last year from the Big XII TV deal. At this point the LHN is not enough by itself to make up for a conference.

But UT, as an independent would have a much different $$ arrangement on games picked up nationally by the networks. It would not just be the LHN revenue. UT would get a 50% min. direct share of the TV revenue, just like ND gets now for their games outside the ACC. There is no doubt UT could, at least in the near-term, demand a substantial price for its games. Just imagine a UT/ND game, a UT/AL game or a UT/OSU or Mich. game along with a UT/OU game & then the LHN network on top of those big revenue games. This is the leverage UT holds over the B12. The only requirement would be that UT remain nationally relevant & competitive. And that's the rub right now, UT is still living off their 2000-2009 run but a continued slide will erode their viability as a possible national independent.

Sounds like the networks caught wind of the Big12s plan for 16, this must be why they are now balking at expansion, the Big12 has been talking about 12 or 14 for a year, NOW they start complaining, Why now?