So the Longhorns apparently talked to the B1G, Pac 12 & ACC...The Big XII goes as long as UT-Austin goes...Now a year and a half later....

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...acceptance

(03-15-2013 08:14 AM)Maize Wrote:  A year and a half later....

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...acceptance

Dodds, in the video posted here said the flirtation with the ACC was a ploy to keep the Pac from taking OU & OSU without Texas. I don't completely get his point but he starts talking about it around the 19:30 mark.

Look, the moment Mizzou started publicly begging for a Big 10 invite, EVERYONE in the Big 12 started looking at all of their options. Texas talked to everyone and was only looking out for the best interests of Texas.....which is the way it should be.

Now to this point:

"Just like Texas will have you believe that everyone in the Big 12 knew of the inner workings of the Longhorn Network, so why in the world is everyone so upset about it now?"

Here are the facts:

- Texas tried to get a Big 12 network started. It was rejected by the other Big 12 members who didn't think it would work and who wanted to hold on to their own Tier 3 rights.

- Texas then went to A&M with the idea of starting a Lone Star Network with just the 2 schoools. A&M said no.

- Texas had talked for the better part of a decade about the possibility of starting its own network. No one had a problem with it......until ESPN surprised everyone, including Texas, with a $15M/year offer. Would any school have turned that down?

- Every single Big 12 school, including Texas A&M, Mizzou, Colorado and Nebraska, voted to allow teams to retain their 3rd tier rights and to be able to start their own networks.

- Lots of people got mad when ESPN, who owns 100% of the LHN, tried to show high school sports highlights. No one was more angry about this than Mizzou head coach Gary Pinkel. By the way, only one university in the country has its own NBC affiliate on campus. Know who that is? It is Mizzou......and their NBC channel shows high school football highlights.

- Funny thing, A&M and Mizzou moved to a league with the exact same tier 3 rules as the Big 12. In fact, Florida gets around $10M/year it doesn't share from its Tier 3 deal with the Sunshine Network. Also, the Sunshine Network has special shows about prospective Florida recruits & it shows high school football highlights.

Moral of the story, nobody can trust Texas. They are the crazy babe who happens to be dam good looking, deal with it at your own risk.

(03-15-2013 08:49 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Moral of the story, nobody can trust Texas. They are the crazy babe who happens to be dam good looking, deal with it at your own risk.

?????

What makes you say this? Because Texas evaluated all of its options before its signed the Big 12 GOR? What is wrong with that?

(03-15-2013 08:49 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Moral of the story, nobody can trust Texas. They are the crazy babe who happens to be dam good looking, deal with it at your own risk.

That plus in this "game" you have no absolute certains...everything can change on a dime.

Well sounds like the only reason texas talked to the acc was to stop OU from going to the pac 10? so they weren't interested in the acc, just a ploy to stop OU/pac 10 from happening. Of course, there is a lot of bluffing going, see big 10 trying to cause a panic and get certain school's to jump. I think texas should have changed their attitude post nebraska and colorado leaving and got the big 12 on lockdown. I would never have allowed texas a&m to join the sec, if that meant a joint network, so be it.

(03-15-2013 08:54 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 08:49 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Moral of the story, nobody can trust Texas. They are the crazy babe who happens to be dam good looking, deal with it at your own risk.

That plus in this "game" you have no absolute certains...everything can change on a dime.

Dimes are worthless these days. If it ain't paper money, nothing turns any longer...

(03-15-2013 09:12 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 08:54 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 08:49 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Moral of the story, nobody can trust Texas. They are the crazy babe who happens to be dam good looking, deal with it at your own risk.

That plus in this "game" you have no absolute certains...everything can change on a dime.

Dimes are worthless these days. If it ain't paper money, nothing turns any longer...

5 Years ago would would have thought that Missouri & Texas A&M would be in the SEC, WVU & TCU-(2 stunners) would be in the Big XII & the biggest stunner of them all Louisville would be in the ACC...

The crazy would of college athletics...

Quote:- Lots of people got mad when ESPN, who owns 100% of the LHN, tried to show high school sports highlights. No one was more angry about this than Mizzou head coach Gary Pinkel. By the way, only one university in the country has its own NBC affiliate on campus. Know who that is? It is Mizzou......and their NBC channel shows high school football highlights.

This is the one that pissed everyone off.

Personally, I have a hard time believing the idea that ESPN was 100% in control with absolutely no input from UT.

I think UT absolutely wanted and encouraged ESPN to go ahead with high school sports because of the huge recruiting advantage it represented because for the first time, you had a situation where it might be possible to have a Booster who could legally violate the NCAA rules on recruit contact and recruit appearances in the media for you while you still got all the benefits without penalty.

Imagine UT recruits having their biggest games available only on LHN with UT logos in all the corners and nothing but UT recruiting commercials in between. Then, after the game, having the recruit brought into LHN studios, conveniently located on campus in Austin and interviewed with a burnt orange microphone on live television.

That is what was intended and honestly it would have given them a near unstoppable advantage, especially in the minor sports where kids usually don't get that kind of attention.

Would Baylor have gotten their star player Brittany Grinner and the NCs she led Baylor to if UT had been able to broadcast her games and bring her in for live interviews? Probably not.

So while eventually it was ruled that what they were trying to do would in fact be against the NCAA rules, the overwhelming feeling at A&M was that 1) we can't trust them not to try and get away with something this big next year or the year after so 2) why stay here and keep fighting them year after year from using their new found importance in the B12 to gain an advantage on everyone when can get our OWN advantage by picking up the phone and calling Mike Slive about that standing invite.

(03-15-2013 10:28 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

Quote:- Lots of people got mad when ESPN, who owns 100% of the LHN, tried to show high school sports highlights. No one was more angry about this than Mizzou head coach Gary Pinkel. By the way, only one university in the country has its own NBC affiliate on campus. Know who that is? It is Mizzou......and their NBC channel shows high school football highlights.

This is the one that pissed everyone off.

Personally, I have a hard time believing the idea that ESPN was 100% in control with absolutely no input from UT.
...

Read the contract. ESPN has the control.

The idea that the NCAA can legislate what content a 100% owned & operated ESPN network can show is beyond bizarre......but we'll probably have to agree to disagree on that one. We could go back & forth for years and never convince the other.

10thMountain, my question for you is this, where is your outrage over the University of Missouri owned & operated KOMU NBC affiliate that shows high school football highlights and the outrage over the $10Million/year deal UF has with Sun Sports that shows high school highlights and high school games?

....and before you say that Sun Sports doesn't show only UF games, remember, the LHN doesn't show only Texas games.

"Look, the moment Mizzou started publicly begging for a Big 10 invite, EVERYONE in the Big 12 started looking at all of their options. Texas talked to everyone and was only looking out for the best interests of Texas.....which is the way it should be."

Well now this comment really intrigues me...

We were, along with many other Big XII schools, called the little sisters, and tag-a-longs...by Texas, OU, and Nebraska. Imagine that. Missouri had all that power all the time and a Longhorn fan has admitted it publicly. The B1G - Mizzou issue was a two-way street, by the way... The Cornhuskers just had a sexier skirt, and tighter lips... Do you seriously think Nebraska didn't have an active dialogue with the B!G?

The real story is this: When the Aggies made their intentions public ( and good for them), The Texhoma four set the wheels in motion to blow up the Big XII, but the lilly pads they jumped on sank. Oops. time to go home and make amends. Remember when Mizzou got serious about the SEC? It was precisely when this all happened on a Friday in Norman, while Missouri's Prez was heading a committee to find a replacement for A&M.

(03-15-2013 11:50 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  "Look, the moment Mizzou started publicly begging for a Big 10 invite, EVERYONE in the Big 12 started looking at all of their options. Texas talked to everyone and was only looking out for the best interests of Texas.....which is the way it should be."

Well, no one is disputing that Missouri's governor was an idiot. They have the right to check out their options like everyone else, but the guy was clumsy (and that's putting it kindly).

It did set things in motion, though, FWIW. CU's athletic director said that he reached out to his contacts in the Pac-10 right after reading what the Missouri governor said, and that got the Pac to get moving on its Pac-16 idea, to take the vote of Pac CEOs and start talking to the Big 12 schools.

But, Dodds is being disingenuous if he claims that UT only started talking about moving after Mizzou's flirtation with the Big Ten. It started well before that. Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Vince Young won.

(03-15-2013 08:52 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 08:49 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Moral of the story, nobody can trust Texas. They are the crazy babe who happens to be dam good looking, deal with it at your own risk.

?????

What makes you say this? Because Texas evaluated all of its options before its signed the Big 12 GOR? What is wrong with that?

There is a general perception in the college football fan universe that the University of Texas looks after their own best interests at any cost over the best interests of the conference. I'm not suggesting it is fair or accurate, but it is what it is. Texas had to do something to get that reputation, and you cannot blame it all on being the prettiest girl in the room .

(03-15-2013 11:29 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  The idea that the NCAA can legislate what content a 100% owned & operated ESPN network can show is beyond bizarre......but we'll probably have to agree to disagree on that one. We could go back & forth for years and never convince the other.

10thMountain, my question for you is this, where is your outrage over the University of Missouri owned & operated KOMU NBC affiliate that shows high school football highlights and the outrage over the $10Million/year deal UF has with Sun Sports that shows high school highlights and high school games?

....and before you say that Sun Sports doesn't show only UF games, remember, the LHN doesn't show only Texas games.

An affiliate is not the same thing as LHN.

LHN is a one university, UT branded network. That is not the same as an affiliate like Mizzou or even Sunshine that are general sports channels that agree to special content deals with universities to go along with all their other general professional and HS content. OU's new deal is similar to both of these as well.

In all cases, when they are showing general HS content they are not doing so for the benefit of one school with the intent to recruit for them.

LHN was specifically trying to target UT recruits to give UT an advantage in the recruiting process. Which is why the NCAA ruled against it. UT thought the argument of "Its not illegal to use ESPN to recruit for us because we aren't ESPN" would fly. The NCAA disagreed.

LHN Vice President of Programming David Brown specifically admitted on a radio interview and said this with their intention with showing games featuring UT recruit Jonathan Gray and even said they'd consider showing HS games from outside Texas if a UT recruit was involved. (Can you honestly say that was all ESPN's idea? C'mon)

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/wr...index.html

Quote:At the schools that had other options, coaches must have bristled when they heard Longhorn Network vice president of programming Dave Brown on Austin radio station KZNX-AM. During an interview about the network's planned programming, Brown got very specific about the plans to broadcast at least 18 high school games this season. "Certainly, we're going to follow the great players in the state," Brown said. "Obviously, a kid like Jonathan Gray from Aledo. I know people are going to want to see Jonathan Gray. I can't wait to see Jonathan Gray. The feedback we got from our audience is they just want to see Jonathan Gray run. Whether it's 45-0 or not, they want to see more Jonathan Gray. So we're going to do our best to accommodate them and follow the kids that are being recruited by a lot of the Division I schools -- certainly some of the kids Texas has recruited, is recruiting and everyone else in the Big 12 is recruiting."

Remember, Brown isn't a Texas employee. He isn't bound by NCAA rules against publicizing recruits. But the financial partnership between Texas and ESPN blurs those lines considerably. Essentially, someone with a huge financial stake in the success of the Texas athletic program got on the radio and promised coverage of the most coveted recruit in the state of Texas in the class of 2012. It doesn't matter that Gray committed to the Longhorns in June. The NCAA doesn't recognize verbal commitments, only signed letters-of-intent. Gray is a recruitable player.

What Brown said next probably made coaches' blood run cold in the Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC. "I know there is a kid Connor Brewer from Chaparral High School in [Scottsdale] Arizona," Brown told KZNX. "We may try to get one or two of their games on, as well, so people can see an incoming quarterback that'll be part of the scene here in Austin." Brewer, another member of the class of 2012, also is committed to Texas. But what about the players in future recruiting classes? Essentially, Brown admitted The Longhorn Network will highlight the players Texas wants -- no matter where they live.

If Mizzou or OU or UF was doing that with their affiliates you know everyone around them would be crying foul and justly so.

(03-15-2013 12:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 11:50 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  "Look, the moment Mizzou started publicly begging for a Big 10 invite, EVERYONE in the Big 12 started looking at all of their options. Texas talked to everyone and was only looking out for the best interests of Texas.....which is the way it should be."

Well, no one is disputing that Missouri's governor was an idiot. They have the right to check out their options like everyone else, but the guy was clumsy (and that's putting it kindly).

It did set things in motion, though, FWIW. CU's athletic director said that he reached out to his contacts in the Pac-10 right after reading what the Missouri governor said, and that got the Pac to get moving on its Pac-16 idea, to take the vote of Pac CEOs and start talking to the Big 12 schools.

But, Dodds is being disingenuous if he claims that UT only started talking about moving after Mizzou's flirtation with the Big Ten. It started well before that. Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Vince Young won.

You are wrong. Scott wasn't even working for the PAC in 2005!

Your quote is ALMOST there. Here is the corrected version of your quote:

Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Alabama won when Colt McCoy got hurt. This Rose Bowl was AFTER the Missouri Governor opened his mouth in December 2009.

(03-15-2013 12:20 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 12:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 11:50 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  "Look, the moment Mizzou started publicly begging for a Big 10 invite, EVERYONE in the Big 12 started looking at all of their options. Texas talked to everyone and was only looking out for the best interests of Texas.....which is the way it should be."

Well, no one is disputing that Missouri's governor was an idiot. They have the right to check out their options like everyone else, but the guy was clumsy (and that's putting it kindly).

It did set things in motion, though, FWIW. CU's athletic director said that he reached out to his contacts in the Pac-10 right after reading what the Missouri governor said, and that got the Pac to get moving on its Pac-16 idea, to take the vote of Pac CEOs and start talking to the Big 12 schools.

But, Dodds is being disingenuous if he claims that UT only started talking about moving after Mizzou's flirtation with the Big Ten. It started well before that. Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Vince Young won.

You are wrong. Scott wasn't even working for the PAC in 2005!

Your quote is ALMOST there. Here is the corrected version of your quote:

Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Alabama won when Colt McCoy got hurt. This Rose Bowl was AFTER the Missouri Governor opened his mouth in December 2009.

Whoops, you're right. The VY game was really that long ago. Time flies.

(03-15-2013 12:20 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 12:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 11:50 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  "Look, the moment Mizzou started publicly begging for a Big 10 invite, EVERYONE in the Big 12 started looking at all of their options. Texas talked to everyone and was only looking out for the best interests of Texas.....which is the way it should be."

Well, no one is disputing that Missouri's governor was an idiot. They have the right to check out their options like everyone else, but the guy was clumsy (and that's putting it kindly).

It did set things in motion, though, FWIW. CU's athletic director said that he reached out to his contacts in the Pac-10 right after reading what the Missouri governor said, and that got the Pac to get moving on its Pac-16 idea, to take the vote of Pac CEOs and start talking to the Big 12 schools.

But, Dodds is being disingenuous if he claims that UT only started talking about moving after Mizzou's flirtation with the Big Ten. It started well before that. Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Vince Young won.

You are wrong. Scott wasn't even working for the PAC in 2005!

Your quote is ALMOST there. Here is the corrected version of your quote:

Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Alabama won when Colt McCoy got hurt. This Rose Bowl was AFTER the Missouri Governor opened his mouth in December 2009.

Again, I had no idea Missouri wielded that much power. Wow...

(03-15-2013 12:34 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 12:20 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 12:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 11:50 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  "Look, the moment Mizzou started publicly begging for a Big 10 invite, EVERYONE in the Big 12 started looking at all of their options. Texas talked to everyone and was only looking out for the best interests of Texas.....which is the way it should be."

Well, no one is disputing that Missouri's governor was an idiot. They have the right to check out their options like everyone else, but the guy was clumsy (and that's putting it kindly).

It did set things in motion, though, FWIW. CU's athletic director said that he reached out to his contacts in the Pac-10 right after reading what the Missouri governor said, and that got the Pac to get moving on its Pac-16 idea, to take the vote of Pac CEOs and start talking to the Big 12 schools.

But, Dodds is being disingenuous if he claims that UT only started talking about moving after Mizzou's flirtation with the Big Ten. It started well before that. Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Vince Young won.

You are wrong. Scott wasn't even working for the PAC in 2005!

Your quote is ALMOST there. Here is the corrected version of your quote:

Dodds first talked to Larry Scott about the Pac-16 idea when they played golf during the Horns' trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl game that Alabama won when Colt McCoy got hurt. This Rose Bowl was AFTER the Missouri Governor opened his mouth in December 2009.

Again, I had no idea Missouri wielded that much power. Wow...

Jim Delaney does. They said we are going to expand. Missouri said we're interested and everyone started talking to everyone.

Had the Big 10 done it quietly, there might not have been as much disruption.

Missouri's governor had nothing to do with it.

This all started with the B1G announcing they were going to 12 or more which caused everyone to start looking at options.

You know Larry Scott had ambitions for CTZ teams and wanted to grab them before Delaney potentially did