(07-13-2022 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-12-2022 04:19 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  Sounds pretty useless considering the ESPN contract runs till 2025. It’s too little too late really.

PAC network was a colossal failure. Why attempt to launch a network that’s doomed from the start and potentially hurt the brand value before the media rights negotiations.

Actually, the LHN deal actually runs through 2031. I actually have always thought this was the one thing that could be the basis for an early exit offer for UT/OU. The Network already exists and is profitable. When it becomes the B12 network, it would be attractive to a whole new audience in far more areas of the nation since it would have more than JUST UT content. An additional long term income stream might be useful for a conference losing its top two king pins. If ESPN extends the B12 Network deal a decade or two---that might be better for the league long term than keeping those two schools around an extra year or two.

Interesting. Also, I see a lot of synergy for the B12 network if it were to reach into the #6 San Francisco, #11 Phoenix, #12 Seattle, and #16 Denver markets....and the Longhorn Network is owned by ESPN, correct? So, no new infrastructure or channel rights to acquire.

(07-13-2022 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-12-2022 04:19 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  Sounds pretty useless considering the ESPN contract runs till 2025. It’s too little too late really.

PAC network was a colossal failure. Why attempt to launch a network that’s doomed from the start and potentially hurt the brand value before the media rights negotiations.

Actually, the LHN deal actually runs through 2031. I actually have always thought this was the one thing that could be the basis for an early exit offer for UT/OU. The Network already exists and is profitable. When it becomes the B12 network, it would be attractive to a whole new audience in far more areas of the nation since it would have more than JUST UT content. An additional long term income stream might be useful for a conference losing its top two king pins. If ESPN extends the B12 Network deal a decade or two---that might be better for the league long term than keeping those two schools around an extra year or two.

Along those lines I'm more supportive of retaining the network as a bargaining chip. It's all about maximizing income and capturing eyeballs/building the brand. B12 basketball is going to remain strong despite the loss of Texas/OU. That could be another content plus for the network. One thing's for certain based on today's remarks, incoming Commish Yormark will leave no stone unturned to benefit the conference moving forward. He mentioned a "win-win" as a possible outcome with Texas/OU.

(07-13-2022 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-12-2022 04:19 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  Sounds pretty useless considering the ESPN contract runs till 2025. It’s too little too late really.

PAC network was a colossal failure. Why attempt to launch a network that’s doomed from the start and potentially hurt the brand value before the media rights negotiations.

Actually, the LHN deal actually runs through 2031. I actually have always thought this was the one thing that could be the basis for an early exit offer for UT/OU. The Network already exists and is profitable. When it becomes the B12 network, it would be attractive to a whole new audience in far more areas of the nation since it would have more than JUST UT content. An additional long term income stream might be useful for a conference losing its top two king pins. If ESPN extends the B12 Network deal a decade or two---that might be better for the league long term than keeping those two schools around an extra year or two.

this is an excellent idea if the goal is to immediately become a G5 conference and remain there for about forever

this is studio gangster arresto thinking at it's finest......get ONE BILLION DOLLARS!!! and tell everyone ONE BILLION DOLLARS while ignoring that it is for TWELVE LONG YEARS

ask the ACC how that is working out for them......no one cares they have a conference network......no one sees the ACC as "stable" right now because they have a conference network......even their own fans have come to realize they were clowned by a conference commissioner that was more interested in being "that sly swo" and locking in bad deals for decades instead of seeing what was happening in the future and working to have long term competitiveness especially financially

in addition there cannot be any negotiated early exit for Texas and OU unless the Big 12 is willing to make a GOR essentially worthless for the conference as long as the Big 12 exist

the entire premise of the GOR is there is no early exit, no buy out, no way to leave without media rights, only a long uncertain court battle with highly unknown outcomes and cost

going out there and tossing that uncertainty in the trash for a negotiated exit simply sets a legal precedent that in the future any other team looking to get out from the GOR can point to the past and show it has been done before thus there is a reason it can be done again......that is a completely ridiculous way to destabilize a conference especially for a stupid conference network

not to mention ESPN is a horrible partner and outside of the SEC SEC SEC they have shown no propensity to help other conferences put themselves in the best place to remain financially competitive for the long term instead they have shown a propensity to clown conferences and stupid conference administrators that have a vision of the future that looks to the past and clings to failed ideas and futures that everyone knows are not coming and lock them into terrible long term deals that will leave them left further and further behind in terms of finances and exposure, but hey CoNfErEnCe neTwOrk!!!!......StAbIlItY!!!!.....oh wait until other conferences are earning 2X more than you and will for another decade at least and members are looking at all options to GTFO

^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

It also doesn't have to be "all or nothing" in the negotiations. Again, we're just spitballin' without knowing financial specifics but the network could be leverage for a reduced exit fee or letting Texas/OU out one year early for example. I'm not suggesting this is what should happen but it should be considered along with ALL options. The new Commish said as much. That's good business and doing your due diligence.

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

You are a negative Nancy/glass-half-empty guy. You have that right so have at it. You also don't speak for all Okie State or Baylor fans so I'll take that with a grain of salt. I get that's it's not all rainbows and puppy dog tails but damn it's not the 3rd plane of Hades either.

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

Idk why you have such a hard on for the new teams but it’s reality.

(07-13-2022 07:06 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

Idk why you have such a hard on for the new teams but it’s reality.

of course....it's also reality that the landscape of college football is *very* fast changing and there is going to be a lot more shakeup in the next decade.

So if we were set to play UCF and Houston and Cincy for the next 30 years, I'd be worried. Fortunately they aren't even in the conference yet and by the time they do enter hopefully it won't be long after that until we are in another...(another conference which may not even exist now)

letting Texas and OU out of the GOR for any reason is a mistake......it will simply set a precedent for the GOR to not be enforceable in the future at least for the Big 12

you are not going to get in a position to allow the negotiation out of a contract with no exit in it at all what so ever and then tell yourself that because that exit was "negotiated" any future similar contract still has no exit and no way to negotiate out of it......that is a horribly idiotic legal position to put a conference in especially when it appears it would be only for a year or two early exit for Texas and OU

and while "every conference" (well every P5 conference except the Big 12) has a conference network the success of those is not all the same.....the PAC12n was a massive failure

the BTN has been successful, but all indications are that it has flat-lined or even decreased in payouts and it was formed back when the ability to cram channels on cable and sat MSOs was a given.....it is a given now those times have passed along with growth in pay TV numbers

the SECn has never really shown what the actual payout was for it.....people ignore that at the same time the SECn was created the SEC SEC SEC also extended their existing tier 2 TV deal with ESPN.....that has always been glossed over and ignored......what has also been ignored was the predictions of $20 million per team in just SECn money.....that seems to have never happened nor has it seemed to come close to happening

plus of course the SECn happened right at a time that ESPN and Disney channels were all coming up for negotiations with cable and sat MSOs and ESPN was able to cram the SECn on them because of the leverage for their other content

that was not possible for the ACCn which is why it has had slower penetration.....and as of now two years after launch the ACC still makes less money than the Big 12 does......again they COULD get additional/better money for the ACCn, but that is not going to last into 2036 and will probably not last even for a few more years as pay TV subs drop off and cable and sat MSOs start resisting cramming of channels

the only thing that is a given is that pay TV subs were down 4.7 million in 2021 and that always seems to decline faster each year (and faster than predicted as well)

that is not something that indicates the Big 12 needs to be focused on a stand alone network heading into a market that is moving away from that model rapidly and specifically because of all the secondary and tertiary channels being crammed in pay TV bills that subscribers simply do not want

ignoring that reality, the mass failure of the PAC 12, the flat-line of the BTN, the lack of real money produced so far by the ACCn and the protracted negotiations to get it carried is not an indicator that the Big 12 needs to have a conference network as anything to focus on

all while ignoring the reason that the Big 10 and SEC SEC SEC are getting paid is because they had first tier and second tier (non conference network content) available to sell to the market and their large bumps in revenue were from that.......while the ACC lags well behind the Big 12 and own with the PAC 12 in conference payouts and is tied up until 2036......in order to get that coveted "conference network"

any discussion of a conference network to the Big 12 should be met with "lets put that aside for now and lets concentrate on getting carriage on the major networks you have available and the guaranteed money available for that and the length of contract you are interested in and after that we can talk about what to do with any other available content".......including possibly taking that content to a streaming company or online company not affiliated with any TV network

the Big 12 needs national exposure on top networks and guaranteed payments for what content they can sell on those networks.....they need to let any potential media partner know that dealing with that content is apart from the dealings on any content they might not really want

the Big 12 needs to play a longer game.....it is clear now that at least one major conference if not two are going to falter

the two with the most questions both have those questions in large part BECAUSE of conference networks and the foolish focus on them to "be like the rest"

the total and complete failure of the PAC12n and the long term completely noncompetitive media deal the ACC is on because they signed it to get the ACCn

the Big 12 100% did not lose Texas and OU because of the lack of a conference network in fact Texas was of course making massively more money with the LHN than any other team in any conference and OU was doing very well also in spite of the bs that drool cup boren spewed before he faded into pervy obscurity....a conference network would have done nothing to prevent Texas and OU from leaving and in fact with equal revenue sharing from one it probably would have made them want to leave that much sooner

it is really pretty simple for the Big 12 if the media partners continually circle back around to "third tier content" and "a network" what that means is they really want that content, but they want to use it to chump the Big 12 into an ACC/AAC like long term deal that is a horrible idea in a time of rapid change

if the media partners do not care about that content and shrug and say "keep it" then then reality is the market has spoken and that content has little value and the Big 12 needs to focus on getting the best exposure for the content that is wanted for a good price and a relatively SHORT TERM deal and then the Big 12 needs to focus on the field and court......and refuse to toss lifelines to cast offs from the PAC 12 or the ACC if available while also refusing to deal with their "better programs" of those programs are trying to drive the conference and bring their little brothers and dead weight along

take the risk, sigh a shorter deal, leave Oregon and UW stuck with Oregon State, Cal, WSU, Colorado and the overrated arrogance of Stanford to continue to falter and fade to obscurity

and when that happens take the media rights back to market in a much stronger position in 5 or 6 years at the longest and go from there

with NIL, two other P5 conferences under attack, a massively changing media landscape, declining pay TV subs, and so much content up for bid around the same time period the Big 12 does not need to go with the clearly FAILED idea of "stability" of a long term contract especially to get an idiotic conference network and they especially do not need to blow apart the worth of the GOR to take over the LHN with the worst possible media partner in terms of doing what is best for a conference overall and one that has clearly already picked their favorite

(07-13-2022 07:04 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

You are a negative Nancy/glass-half-empty guy. You have that right so have at it. You also don't speak for all Okie State or Baylor fans so I'll take that with a grain of salt. I get that's it's not all rainbows and puppy dog tails but damn it's not the 3rd plane of Hades either.

My above post isn't even particularly negative. Or controversial. OkState and Baylor fans most certainly don't care about what's happening with programs like UCF or Cincy. That *doesn't* speak ill of those programs....there is just no reason we would want to follow what's going on there. Even when they actually join the conference that will be the case. I doubt they want to follow us either as we are not huge national names, not anywhere close to them, have no history with them, etc....

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

Is that you quo??

(07-13-2022 01:06 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 11:45 AM)Endless Purple Wrote:  Yes, we should forgo the 10-20 years of cable income because "cable is dying" and just use streaming which has little proof of success in keeping or growing a fan base. (sarcasm)

I support a cable channel for the Big 12. At some point it can always be dropped to a streaming channel when cable does actually die and not just be a mantra shouted out. Also nothing says, you can't have subscribers able to stream said channel and get both crowds.

learn to read

I stated to get the most coverage on the major networks IE ESPN, ESPN II, ABC or Fox and FS1 or CBS

and get paid guaranteed income for it before worrying about a stupid network

the ACC is in the terrible long term poor financially competitive position now because of being stupid and getting chumped on a "conference network" that in a few years will probably be back to paying them nothing at all and subjecting them to poor viewership

their media deal was to end in 2026-27, but now it goes another 9 years and by that time cable subscriber rates will be horrible and the network will mos likely pay them nothing and ESPN will still be free from the obligation to place a large number of ACC games on their major networks where they will at least have the most viewers

and yes you can "always have streaming", but anyone that lives on planet earth knows that Disney/ESPN is the world wide leader in horrible streaming quality and bootleg streams of their events and shows are light years better in quality

a conference network as a major component of a Big 12 media deal is stupid and counter productive and it should only be included for content that has no other available outlet and it should not come with long contract lengths otherwise it is an anchor on the conference and a drag on income and exposure

For starters, I did not quote you. I did not even read most of the novel you wrote. So ramble on.. But I did go back to glance over.

You have a major flaw, in that Tier 1 and 2 rights don't go on the conference channel. The top games are still in the networks and major channels. The Big 12 only has 1 tier 3 game per school each year, the rest are tier 1 and 2 - ie FOX and ESPN contracts. A conference channel does not remove exposure. I have no problem seeing SEC and B1G games and I do not have their channels.

So you are working off a flawed description by saying the network would remove exposure, and no I am not going to read a whole book on your responses.

(07-13-2022 09:34 PM)Endless Purple Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 01:06 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 11:45 AM)Endless Purple Wrote:  Yes, we should forgo the 10-20 years of cable income because "cable is dying" and just use streaming which has little proof of success in keeping or growing a fan base. (sarcasm)

I support a cable channel for the Big 12. At some point it can always be dropped to a streaming channel when cable does actually die and not just be a mantra shouted out. Also nothing says, you can't have subscribers able to stream said channel and get both crowds.

learn to read

I stated to get the most coverage on the major networks IE ESPN, ESPN II, ABC or Fox and FS1 or CBS

and get paid guaranteed income for it before worrying about a stupid network

the ACC is in the terrible long term poor financially competitive position now because of being stupid and getting chumped on a "conference network" that in a few years will probably be back to paying them nothing at all and subjecting them to poor viewership

their media deal was to end in 2026-27, but now it goes another 9 years and by that time cable subscriber rates will be horrible and the network will mos likely pay them nothing and ESPN will still be free from the obligation to place a large number of ACC games on their major networks where they will at least have the most viewers

and yes you can "always have streaming", but anyone that lives on planet earth knows that Disney/ESPN is the world wide leader in horrible streaming quality and bootleg streams of their events and shows are light years better in quality

a conference network as a major component of a Big 12 media deal is stupid and counter productive and it should only be included for content that has no other available outlet and it should not come with long contract lengths otherwise it is an anchor on the conference and a drag on income and exposure

For starters, I did not quote you. I did not even read most of the novel you wrote. So ramble on.. But I did go back to glance over.

You have a major flaw, in that Tier 1 and 2 rights don't go on the conference channel. The top games are still in the networks and major channels. The Big 12 only has 1 tier 3 game per school each year, the rest are tier 1 and 2 - ie FOX and ESPN contracts. A conference channel does not remove exposure. I have no problem seeing SEC and B1G games and I do not have their channels.

So you are working off a flawed description by saying the network would remove exposure, and no I am not going to read a whole book on your responses.

well yes thats how the sec and bigten do it. But the sec can get away with putting a south carolina-arkansas type game as a sec network game.

Sure the big12 *could* take the bigten and sec approach and make sure all their tier 1 and 2 games are protected.....but by doing that it's not going to be as attractive and not as likely to make coin.

Remember that the sec and bigten are the only ones that have done it successfully. A big 12 *with* texas and Oklahoma wasnt close to the sec or bigten. A big12 without those two programs that define the conference? umm yeah......

(07-13-2022 07:12 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 07:06 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

Idk why you have such a hard on for the new teams but it’s reality.

of course....it's also reality that the landscape of college football is *very* fast changing and there is going to be a lot more shakeup in the next decade.

So if we were set to play UCF and Houston and Cincy for the next 30 years, I'd be worried. Fortunately they aren't even in the conference yet and by the time they do enter hopefully it won't be long after that until we are in another...(another conference which may not even exist now)

Enjoy the mwc

(07-13-2022 11:13 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 07:12 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 07:06 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

Idk why you have such a hard on for the new teams but it’s reality.

of course....it's also reality that the landscape of college football is *very* fast changing and there is going to be a lot more shakeup in the next decade.

So if we were set to play UCF and Houston and Cincy for the next 30 years, I'd be worried. Fortunately they aren't even in the conference yet and by the time they do enter hopefully it won't be long after that until we are in another...(another conference which may not even exist now)

Enjoy the mwc

you and I both have no idea what changes will happen over the next decade. By all indications there is going to be a lot of change, though, and the deck is far from shuffled yet.

So no, we won't be in the mwc. We may very well be in a conference that doesn't even have a name yet, but it won't be the mwc.

Oklahoma State is second fiddle, in a state with less population than Kentucky. In all seriousness, why do you think OSU is so valuable? I mean I like Oklahoma State, and it's quirky head coach, but I've never considered it anything more than the teams you are beating up on.

(07-13-2022 07:15 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  My above post isn't even particularly negative. Or controversial. OkState and Baylor fans most certainly don't care about what's happening with programs like UCF or Cincy. That *doesn't* speak ill of those programs....there is just no reason we would want to follow what's going on there. Even when they actually join the conference that will be the case. I doubt they want to follow us either as we are not huge national names, not anywhere close to them, have no history with them, etc....

LOL! (Anyone else noted that this poster sounds EXACTLY like a certain OU poster? Seems obvious he picked an OSU name to troll)

Every Baylor fan knows about UCF and if you mentioned UCF to them...they will immediately think of this:

(07-12-2022 08:25 PM)splitstud Wrote:  

(07-12-2022 06:58 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Maybe an indication ESPN locks up BIG12 rights after 2025

I think we're done with ESPN. My bet would be CBS taking tier 1 and Fox taking a piece.

I truly hope not. I do not object to Fox as a partner but CBS is a disaster. Also I am one of those who favors ESPN.

(07-13-2022 10:31 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 09:34 PM)Endless Purple Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 01:06 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 11:45 AM)Endless Purple Wrote:  Yes, we should forgo the 10-20 years of cable income because "cable is dying" and just use streaming which has little proof of success in keeping or growing a fan base. (sarcasm)

I support a cable channel for the Big 12. At some point it can always be dropped to a streaming channel when cable does actually die and not just be a mantra shouted out. Also nothing says, you can't have subscribers able to stream said channel and get both crowds.

learn to read

I stated to get the most coverage on the major networks IE ESPN, ESPN II, ABC or Fox and FS1 or CBS

and get paid guaranteed income for it before worrying about a stupid network

the ACC is in the terrible long term poor financially competitive position now because of being stupid and getting chumped on a "conference network" that in a few years will probably be back to paying them nothing at all and subjecting them to poor viewership

their media deal was to end in 2026-27, but now it goes another 9 years and by that time cable subscriber rates will be horrible and the network will mos likely pay them nothing and ESPN will still be free from the obligation to place a large number of ACC games on their major networks where they will at least have the most viewers

and yes you can "always have streaming", but anyone that lives on planet earth knows that Disney/ESPN is the world wide leader in horrible streaming quality and bootleg streams of their events and shows are light years better in quality

a conference network as a major component of a Big 12 media deal is stupid and counter productive and it should only be included for content that has no other available outlet and it should not come with long contract lengths otherwise it is an anchor on the conference and a drag on income and exposure

For starters, I did not quote you. I did not even read most of the novel you wrote. So ramble on.. But I did go back to glance over.

You have a major flaw, in that Tier 1 and 2 rights don't go on the conference channel. The top games are still in the networks and major channels. The Big 12 only has 1 tier 3 game per school each year, the rest are tier 1 and 2 - ie FOX and ESPN contracts. A conference channel does not remove exposure. I have no problem seeing SEC and B1G games and I do not have their channels.

So you are working off a flawed description by saying the network would remove exposure, and no I am not going to read a whole book on your responses.

well yes thats how the sec and bigten do it. But the sec can get away with putting a south carolina-arkansas type game as a sec network game.

Sure the big12 *could* take the bigten and sec approach and make sure all their tier 1 and 2 games are protected.....but by doing that it's not going to be as attractive and not as likely to make coin.

Remember that the sec and bigten are the only ones that have done it successfully. A big 12 *with* texas and Oklahoma wasnt close to the sec or bigten. A big12 without those two programs that define the conference? umm yeah......

Yes they could and probably would. Makes more coin than no channel but not as much as the B1G and SEC.

(07-14-2022 10:13 AM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 07:12 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 07:06 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:44 PM)okiestate1979 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 06:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  ^^^^
It's not about stability as much as revenue streams. Nothing should be ruled out at this point if it helps the conference financially and makes us as/more competitive than the other conferences not named the B1G/SEC. If these conference networks are so bad then why does every conference have one?

because they looked at the bigten/sec and said "hey look at that money". Of course they aren't the bigten/sec so that money never came about or won't come about. And that very much applies to the big12s case as well.

Another point about the bigten and sec is that these two conferences have tight connections within their conferences. It truly is a connected conference feeling, which really boosts the chance of a network like those. In other words, a UGA fan in the atlanta suburbs very much cares about what is going on at Florida, Auburn, Bama, etc....

In this conference that is obviously not the case. I can guarantee you an oklahoma State fan in Oklahoma City or a Baylor fan in Houston doesn't give two craps about what is going on with UCF or Cincy or West virginia even. Well actually there are two programs in the current big 12 they may care a little about......Wanna take a guess at who those would be :)

Idk why you have such a hard on for the new teams but it’s reality.

of course....it's also reality that the landscape of college football is *very* fast changing and there is going to be a lot more shakeup in the next decade.

So if we were set to play UCF and Houston and Cincy for the next 30 years, I'd be worried. Fortunately they aren't even in the conference yet and by the time they do enter hopefully it won't be long after that until we are in another...(another conference which may not even exist now)

I wish you and your school the best of luck in getting accepted into the unicorn conference.