Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Big 12 deal with ESPN
Author Message
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 38,163
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1259
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #181
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(01-06-2020 12:38 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-06-2020 11:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  But the current system is unsustainable. Sports fans are being subsidized by non-sports fans. They will find alternative ways to get entertainment and sports fans will pay more. That's only fair. But the total revenue is going to be less than under the current model. Otherwise, everyone would have been doing PPV instead of conference networks.

On the one hand, you're absolutely correct that sports fans are being subsidized by non-sports fans. I say this every time that I see a sports fan advocate for a la carte pricing. Too many sports fan mistakenly think that they're paying a lot for HGTV/TLC/Hallmark/etc., where the reality is that the HGTV/TLC/Hallmark viewers are the ones subsidizing sports fans' viewing habits on ESPN and regional sports networks. Virtually all sports fans would pay a LOT more in an a la carte environment with likely less content than they have available to them now.

On the other hand, non-sports fans are worth a whole lot less as viewers than sports fans... and that's increasingly being the case. That's evidenced in the other thread showing how sporting events now completely dominate the ratings and they're essentially the only type of programming that any network can consistently depend upon to draw a live audience.

Separately, I believe that we're going to get to the point where there's a limit to the desirability of (1) a la carte options and (2) the price difference between streaming versus bundled cable (and we might be already there). When Netflix was bringing in Disney, Comcast/Universal and Warner Bros. content all together in one place for one low price, that really did seem like a substitute for cable. However, with Disney now splitting off with its own streaming service and Comcast/Universal and Warner Bros. also doing the same, we're almost certainly going to get to the point where the average consumer doesn't want to manage so many different subscriptions and get back to a single point of payment... which means a reversion to the bundle. It might be a bundle of streaming services as opposed to cable channels, but it will be a bundle nonetheless.

Either way, sports programming will still be uniquely valuable in whatever environment that we end up in. That's why people have been predicting a sports rights fee bubble for decades (whether it was when network TV still dominated, or cable TV started rising, or now when streaming options are more prevalent) and they have been wrong every single time. There's an inherent value in sporting events because they are live and exclusive with a built-in fan base that isn't going anywhere. Even the greatest TV shows all eventually end, but a network can still bank on Cowboys, Yankees, Lakers and Alabama fans to exist 5, 10, 15 or 20 years down the road. They're TV shows that networks don't need to convince people to watch because the fan bases are already built in. There's nothing that even comes close to providing that consistent value, so that's why sports continue to receive a huge premium in rights fees.

I agree with you on the premium, but only on a relative basis. They have been moving things to cable networks to get subscription in addition to advertising revenue. That subscription revenue was from 90-95% of the people regardless of who was watching.

Now those subscriptions will be a little more expensive, but with only 10-30% of the people. It will be back to advertising for the bulk of the revenue. That won't be sufficient to make up for all those lost subscriptions. Sports will probably still be doing a lot better than regular TV, but it won't be as profitable as now.
01-06-2020 02:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,425
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 111
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #182
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(01-06-2020 02:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  They have been moving things to cable networks to get subscription in addition to advertising revenue.

I'm not so sure it was as robotic and efficient as that with CBS and the NCAA Tournament. It's still very experimental. Consider the decision to move the 2019 Selection Show off CBS and onto TBS, and changing it to a 2-hour show instead of 1. Yes, if you want it, you're going away from broadcast to get it. BUT, you weren't willing to devote two hours on CBS before?

The gamble failed. It drew a 1.6. It was 3.3 in 2018. However, a 3.3 on broadcast? I can see why you would want to try to move that. Yeah, you want to try new things...but, you don't fix what isn't broken, either.

It sounds like 2020 is going back to the old format.

My suspicion is, the decision to move it was very much like you project: chase advertisers and subscribers. However, you aren't charging advertisers CBS prices for TBS coverage. And, clearly, 3.3 for TBS was an overshot.
01-06-2020 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie4Skins Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,422
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 103
I Root For: Ed O'Bannon
Location:
Post: #183
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
Jesse Newell

@jessenewell
·
2h


Senator Shelley Capito (http://R-W.Va.) takes time during a Senate subcommittee meeting on potential student-athlete Name, Image, Likeness legislation to directly ask Big 12 commish Bob Bowlsby why Wednesday's KU-WVU basketball game is only on ESPN+ and not cable.
02-11-2020 03:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,128
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 77
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #184
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 08:54 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  How does Oklahoma and Texas continuously get away with screwing the rest of the Big 12? Get the hell out of that conference it’s the least level playing field I’ve ever seen.

Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.
02-12-2020 07:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 33,259
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 846
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #185
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 08:54 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  How does Oklahoma and Texas continuously get away with screwing the rest of the Big 12? Get the hell out of that conference it’s the least level playing field I’ve ever seen.

Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

I would say UT is the 900 pound gorilla of the Big 12 and OU is his 750 pound sidekick. The rest are 100 - 200 pounders.
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2020 01:19 PM by quo vadis.)
02-12-2020 09:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MAcFroggy Online
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 90
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 15
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #186
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-11-2020 03:55 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Jesse Newell

@jessenewell
·
2h


Senator Shelley Capito (http://R-W.Va.) takes time during a Senate subcommittee meeting on potential student-athlete Name, Image, Likeness legislation to directly ask Big 12 commish Bob Bowlsby why Wednesday's KU-WVU basketball game is only on ESPN+ and not cable.

I honestly thought Bowlsby's response was pretty good. He talked through the lack of population in some of the Big 12 states, so a linear channel would probably not work. As a league, they thought moving into streaming was the best thing. It kind of sucks for the league, but there are not really a ton of options right now. WVU agreed to sell their rights to ESPN+. If they liked their old agreement they should have stuck with it instead of joining up with the non OU and Texas Big 12 members.
Shelley should really be talking with the university president and the AD.
02-12-2020 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 33,259
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 846
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #187
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-12-2020 10:27 AM)MAcFroggy Wrote:  
(02-11-2020 03:55 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Jesse Newell

@jessenewell
·
2h


Senator Shelley Capito (http://R-W.Va.) takes time during a Senate subcommittee meeting on potential student-athlete Name, Image, Likeness legislation to directly ask Big 12 commish Bob Bowlsby why Wednesday's KU-WVU basketball game is only on ESPN+ and not cable.

I honestly thought Bowlsby's response was pretty good. He talked through the lack of population in some of the Big 12 states, so a linear channel would probably not work. As a league, they thought moving into streaming was the best thing. It kind of sucks for the league, but there are not really a ton of options right now. WVU agreed to sell their rights to ESPN+. If they liked their old agreement they should have stuck with it instead of joining up with the non OU and Texas Big 12 members.
Shelley should really be talking with the university president and the AD.

Bottom line is, it's not like cable is free either. You pay for cable and/or you pay for a stream like ESPN+, either way you pay so no reason to distinguish one from the other. And it's not like you can only watch ESPN+ on a phone or tablet. If you have a smart TV or something like Roku, you can watch ESPN+ games on your 65" HDTV as easily as an ESPN2 game.

Now if she had asked why the game wasn't on OTA, then that at least would have made some sense.
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2020 10:46 AM by quo vadis.)
02-12-2020 10:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie4Skins Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,422
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 103
I Root For: Ed O'Bannon
Location:
Post: #188
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
It isn't Bowlsby's job to fix the state of West Virginia's internet connectivity issues.
02-12-2020 11:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
texoma Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 110
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Collegefootball
Location:
Post: #189
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 08:54 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  How does Oklahoma and Texas continuously get away with screwing the rest of the Big 12? Get the hell out of that conference it’s the least level playing field I’ve ever seen.

Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

One UT alum you talked to thought OU needed UT too much, so nothing will happen. Got it.
02-12-2020 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
usffan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,688
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 395
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #190
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-12-2020 09:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 08:54 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  How does Oklahoma and Texas continuously get away with screwing the rest of the Big 12? Get the hell out of that conference it’s the least level playing field I’ve ever seen.

Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

I would say UT is the 900 pound gorilla of the Big 12 and OU is his 750 pound sidekick. The rest are 100 - 200 pound females.

Dude...

[Image: 51N1MV5V7PL._SY445_.jpg]

USFFan
02-12-2020 01:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 33,259
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 846
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #191
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-12-2020 01:00 PM)usffan Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 09:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 08:54 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  How does Oklahoma and Texas continuously get away with screwing the rest of the Big 12? Get the hell out of that conference it’s the least level playing field I’ve ever seen.

Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

I would say UT is the 900 pound gorilla of the Big 12 and OU is his 750 pound sidekick. The rest are 100 - 200 pound females.

Dude...

Alright, I fixed it for you. 04-cheers

But FWIW, my analogy wasn't meant to be shallow per se. In gorilla society, dominant males form harems of females, and IIRC the harems are stable enough to promote baby-rearing and survival because of the strength of the dominant male. A conference like the Big 12 is IMO analogous to that. It's the power of Texas and OU that enable the smaller/weaker members to thrive in a competitive environment. Here's a dominant male leading his harem through the jungle:

[Image: gorillia_2805479b.jpg]

Now, not every conference works on that model. E.g., the SEC has several dominant powers - Alabama, Georgia, TAMU, LSU, Florida, Auburn, and Tennessee - which gives them a different form of stability. In their case, there isn't likely to be as much grumbling from the 'harem' because there isn't a monopoly or duopoly of power like you have in the Big 12. The existence of so many alphas means they all kind of act like a check on each other.
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2020 02:28 PM by quo vadis.)
02-12-2020 01:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,128
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 77
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #192
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-12-2020 12:14 PM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 08:54 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  How does Oklahoma and Texas continuously get away with screwing the rest of the Big 12? Get the hell out of that conference it’s the least level playing field I’ve ever seen.

Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

One UT alum you talked to thought OU needed UT too much, so nothing will happen. Got it.

Yet UT has the LHN and OU has, oh wait, they don't.
02-13-2020 05:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ColumbusCard Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 151
Joined: Oct 2018
Reputation: 18
I Root For: U of L
Location:
Post: #193
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(04-10-2019 05:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 04:49 PM)whittx Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 04:34 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 03:34 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  It's the same because, well, it's ESPN+, putting content behind a paywall.

The only things on TV that are not "behind a paywall" are whatever is on over-the-air TV, and that's only if you watch exclusively via antenna.

$100/month to AT&T or Comcrap for "cable" is 20 times as much of a paywall as $5/month for ESPN+.

But if the$100 a month gets me everything while the $5 Only gets me the dollar menu (And a value version at that) and not have to deal with buffering issues, the $100 begins to sound a bit better if you can afford it.

The $100/month might get you "everything" but, if you're like me, you'll never watch 99% of it. No matter which cable/satellite/whatever package, there are very few channels I would *ever* watch. For me, cable is $100/month for sports channels plus a very small number of other shows. Just a really expensive paywall to get to the few things I want.

Also, if you're getting buffering with ESPN+ or any other streaming service, the issue is the poor speed and/or reliability of your ISP. I suppose if you have no options other than really crappy internet, then streaming services are not for you.

But how many people are like you? Also how many people buy cable for only one person's needs?
02-13-2020 09:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 33,259
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 846
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #194
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-13-2020 09:47 AM)ColumbusCard Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 05:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 04:49 PM)whittx Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 04:34 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 03:34 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  It's the same because, well, it's ESPN+, putting content behind a paywall.

The only things on TV that are not "behind a paywall" are whatever is on over-the-air TV, and that's only if you watch exclusively via antenna.

$100/month to AT&T or Comcrap for "cable" is 20 times as much of a paywall as $5/month for ESPN+.

But if the$100 a month gets me everything while the $5 Only gets me the dollar menu (And a value version at that) and not have to deal with buffering issues, the $100 begins to sound a bit better if you can afford it.

The $100/month might get you "everything" but, if you're like me, you'll never watch 99% of it. No matter which cable/satellite/whatever package, there are very few channels I would *ever* watch. For me, cable is $100/month for sports channels plus a very small number of other shows. Just a really expensive paywall to get to the few things I want.

Also, if you're getting buffering with ESPN+ or any other streaming service, the issue is the poor speed and/or reliability of your ISP. I suppose if you have no options other than really crappy internet, then streaming services are not for you.

But how many people are like you? Also how many people buy cable for only one person's needs?

Are those really relevant questions? I think what is good about the cable and streaming universe right now is that it has a plethora of options for people in different situations.

E.g., if i was 25 and single again, I'd probably have no cable, just stream Youtube TV, Netflix, and ESPN+ for about $70 a month. That would be all the TV I want.

But as a 55 year old with a family, I get a full cable package and Netflix and the Disney streaming bundle for about $160 a month because I have a household where different people want different things.

It's really the best time ever to watch TV, IMO.
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2020 09:57 AM by quo vadis.)
02-13-2020 09:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
texoma Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 110
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Collegefootball
Location:
Post: #195
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-13-2020 05:45 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 12:14 PM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 08:54 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  How does Oklahoma and Texas continuously get away with screwing the rest of the Big 12? Get the hell out of that conference it’s the least level playing field I’ve ever seen.

Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

One UT alum you talked to thought OU needed UT too much, so nothing will happen. Got it.

Yet UT has the LHN and OU has, oh wait, they don't.

I do not consider one UT alum as the gospel on what will happen.
02-13-2020 11:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
usffan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,688
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 395
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #196
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-12-2020 01:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 01:00 PM)usffan Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 09:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

I would say UT is the 900 pound gorilla of the Big 12 and OU is his 750 pound sidekick. The rest are 100 - 200 pound females.

Dude...

Alright, I fixed it for you. 04-cheers

But FWIW, my analogy wasn't meant to be shallow per se. In gorilla society, dominant males form harems of females, and IIRC the harems are stable enough to promote baby-rearing and survival because of the strength of the dominant male. A conference like the Big 12 is IMO analogous to that. It's the power of Texas and OU that enable the smaller/weaker members to thrive in a competitive environment. Here's a dominant male leading his harem through the jungle:

[Image: gorillia_2805479b.jpg]

Now, not every conference works on that model. E.g., the SEC has several dominant powers - Alabama, Georgia, TAMU, LSU, Florida, Auburn, and Tennessee - which gives them a different form of stability. In their case, there isn't likely to be as much grumbling from the 'harem' because there isn't a monopoly or duopoly of power like you have in the Big 12. The existence of so many alphas means they all kind of act like a check on each other.

FWIW, I was neither insulted nor did I think you were actually being shallow. Just saw "200 pound females" and immediately thought of that movie...

USFFan
02-13-2020 02:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,128
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 77
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #197
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-13-2020 11:53 AM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 05:45 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 12:14 PM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(04-10-2019 09:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Because where can *any* of them go, except the AAC or MWC? It's not like the SEC and B1G are fighting over Texas Tech, TCU, and Kansas, eh?

The Big 12, even with the favoritism that OU and TX get, is way better for any of them than anywhere else that wants them.

OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

One UT alum you talked to thought OU needed UT too much, so nothing will happen. Got it.

Yet UT has the LHN and OU has, oh wait, they don't.

I do not consider one UT alum as the gospel on what will happen.

You are right. I do not hang around any UT alums, but I here talk like this and see the advantages that UT has, I can see UT having the upper hand.
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2020 04:35 AM by sierrajip.)
02-14-2020 04:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
texoma Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 110
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Collegefootball
Location:
Post: #198
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-14-2020 04:34 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 11:53 AM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 05:45 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 12:14 PM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 07:51 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  OU talks big but UT is the main player. I talked to an owner of a sports bar that was a UT Alum and he thought nothing would happen because UO needed UT to much. I see this opinion has merit.

One UT alum you talked to thought OU needed UT too much, so nothing will happen. Got it.

Yet UT has the LHN and OU has, oh wait, they don't.

I do not consider one UT alum as the gospel on what will happen.

You are right. I do not hang around any UT alums, but I here talk like this and see the advantages that UT has, I can see UT having the upper hand.

UT makes more money than any college team and they may well have the best situation in all of college football. However, that does not mean they have the upper hand and that nothing will happen regarding realignment.

IMO OU is the team that will make the first move and the question will be, what does Texas do? If OU receives an invitation to the Big10 will Texas go with them? What if OU accepts an invitation to the SEC?

Texas needs OU in the Big12. If OU leaves, Texas will be forced to do something. So maybe Texas needs OU more than OU needs Texas. They played the RRR game for over 50 years when they were in different conferences. Neither team will end that game, because it means too much to both teams.
02-14-2020 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panite Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,074
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Owls-SC-RU-Navy
Location:
Post: #199
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-14-2020 10:42 AM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 04:34 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 11:53 AM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 05:45 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(02-12-2020 12:14 PM)texoma Wrote:  One UT alum you talked to thought OU needed UT too much, so nothing will happen. Got it.

Yet UT has the LHN and OU has, oh wait, they don't.

I do not consider one UT alum as the gospel on what will happen.

You are right. I do not hang around any UT alums, but I here talk like this and see the advantages that UT has, I can see UT having the upper hand.

UT makes more money than any college team and they may well have the best situation in all of college football. However, that does not mean they have the upper hand and that nothing will happen regarding realignment.

IMO OU is the team that will make the first move and the question will be, what does Texas do? If OU receives an invitation to the Big10 will Texas go with them? What if OU accepts an invitation to the SEC?

Texas needs OU in the Big12. If OU leaves, Texas will be forced to do something. So maybe Texas needs OU more than OU needs Texas. They played the RRR game for over 50 years when they were in different conferences. Neither team will end that game, because it means too much to both teams.

Both Texas and Oklahoma will remain in the B12 and keep it together. It still remains the easiest path to the play off and both are making good money while dominating and running the conference. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2020 10:59 AM by panite.)
02-14-2020 10:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 10,335
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #200
RE: Big 12 deal with ESPN
(02-14-2020 10:59 AM)panite Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:42 AM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 04:34 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 11:53 AM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 05:45 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  Yet UT has the LHN and OU has, oh wait, they don't.

I do not consider one UT alum as the gospel on what will happen.

You are right. I do not hang around any UT alums, but I here talk like this and see the advantages that UT has, I can see UT having the upper hand.

UT makes more money than any college team and they may well have the best situation in all of college football. However, that does not mean they have the upper hand and that nothing will happen regarding realignment.

IMO OU is the team that will make the first move and the question will be, what does Texas do? If OU receives an invitation to the Big10 will Texas go with them? What if OU accepts an invitation to the SEC?

Texas needs OU in the Big12. If OU leaves, Texas will be forced to do something. So maybe Texas needs OU more than OU needs Texas. They played the RRR game for over 50 years when they were in different conferences. Neither team will end that game, because it means too much to both teams.

Both Texas and Oklahoma will remain in the B12 and keep it together. It still remains the easiest path to the play off and both are making good money while dominating and running the conference. 07-coffee3

If they added 2 teams that could water It down further and play each other twice most years (CCG)
02-14-2020 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: quo vadis, 2 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.