What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Something about the Longhorn network getting funded by ESPN and a GoR on top of disproportionate revenue share for OUT...

Google it

https://longhornswire.usatoday.com/2020/...onference/

(08-02-2022 09:52 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  Google it

https://longhornswire.usatoday.com/2020/...onference/

Not as bad as some reports that falsely claim it was all about the LHN.

"...According to Dodds, it came down to traveling and what it would have done to his student-athletes. Looking past football, the travel schedule for Olympic sports such as basketball, baseball, and softball would have been brutal. Having a midweek game in Seattle, Washington from Austin would have been a round trip of over 4,200 miles in just under two days...."

President Powers, AD Dodds and Women's AD Plonsky held a press conference the next day. Powers said they figured the Big 12 could get the same money (ESPN and Fox had given them an idea of what their renewal would be, which was pretty similar to the Pac--and Fox ended up paying an early bonus to the conference, effectively giving them a raise immediately) and they wouldn't have to do the travel. And as they worked with the Pac people to minimize travel, UT realized they could get a lot of the scheduling benefits out of conference. Texas has since scheduled USC, UCLA and Cal out of conference in football. So same money, similar schedule, less travel without moving.

The LHN deal was still expected to be pretty small and likely go to Fox in October 2010, 4 months after the Pac 16 fell apart in June.

Of course the article tells the lie that A&M left the next year because of the LHN when in fact, President Loftin himself said he decided in 2010, but was just waiting for the right time. And the reason he left was for school branding.

There are conflicting stories on 2011. Pac officials say they turned Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and Texas Tech down.
Oklahoma officials say they were just using the talks as leverage and they ended the talks.

(08-02-2022 09:46 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Something about the Longhorn network getting funded by ESPN and a GoR on top of disproportionate revenue share for OUT...

Another frequently repeated lie. When the Pac 16 deal fell apart, Texas and OU proposed switching to an equal revenue sharing model instead of one that was roughly 50% equal and 50% based on TV appearances.

The 5 who looked like they would be left behind DID offer Texas and OU guaranteed money, but they both refused, saying it wasn't a consideration in their decision and wasn't appropriate (the previous unequal model had to be earned and was not guaranteed). Texas A&M and Texas Tech whined and tried to insist on getting guaranteed money since they didn't go either, but got ignored.

Interestingly, in the new Pac 12 deal, USC and UCLA did get guaranteed money of $17 million. But as the contract was higher, it turned out to be a moot provision.

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

Tex wanted Baylor instead of Colorado
Pac invited Colo immediately, now there's room for 5
Tex A&M then went to SEC
ESPN made their move with LHN

(08-02-2022 11:50 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

Maybe that is why CU has been cursed since joining the PAC. The athletic department are a joke.

(08-02-2022 11:50 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

Facts.
Texas decided not to do the Pac 16 in June 2010.
LHN did not exist at that point.
In October 2010 there was media speculation that Fox was likely to get the LHN and pay in the vicinity of $3 million.
It wasn't until November 2010 that ESPN came in and big $15 million a year.
Fox and ESPN did promise that the Big 12 would get paid better in their next deal and Fox paid an up front bonus to the conference.

The only logical conclusion:
The LHN was not a significant factor in any of the realignment decisions.
And the Texas president and AD said it was about travel and the fact that it didn't make more money than the Big 12 deal would.

(08-02-2022 11:50 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

I have no idea whether Utah or Colorado opposed the Oklahoma move, but I would not be surprised if the strongest opposition came from the rest of the PAC because of the perceived inferior academics, the travel and destinations, and the disruption to scheduling, especially the less frequent California road games and opponents for legacy members.

(08-03-2022 01:35 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  Tex wanted Baylor instead of Colorado
Pac invited Colo immediately, now there's room for 5
Tex A&M then went to SEC
ESPN made their move with LHN

Texas didn't want Baylor. The Texas legislature was starting to talk about forcing Texas and Tech to take Baylor so Colorado jumped and went ahead and took the offer before the legislature could cause trouble. Doubtful it would have been any more of an issue than it was last summer when they stomped and paraded, but didn't do anything to impede Texas and OU moving to the SEC. But CU wasn't going to take the chance.

And when A&M decided they wanted to go to the SEC, the Pac went ahead and lined up Kansas next, not Baylor.

(08-02-2022 10:04 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:52 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  Google it

https://longhornswire.usatoday.com/2020/...onference/

Not as bad as some reports that falsely claim it was all about the LHN.

"...According to Dodds, it came down to traveling and what it would have done to his student-athletes. Looking past football, the travel schedule for Olympic sports such as basketball, baseball, and softball would have been brutal. Having a midweek game in Seattle, Washington from Austin would have been a round trip of over 4,200 miles in just under two days...."

President Powers, AD Dodds and Women's AD Plonsky held a press conference the next day. Powers said they figured the Big 12 could get the same money (ESPN and Fox had given them an idea of what their renewal would be, which was pretty similar to the Pac--and Fox ended up paying an early bonus to the conference, effectively giving them a raise immediately) and they wouldn't have to do the travel. And as they worked with the Pac people to minimize travel, UT realized they could get a lot of the scheduling benefits out of conference. Texas has since scheduled USC, UCLA and Cal out of conference in football. So same money, similar schedule, less travel without moving.

The LHN deal was still expected to be pretty small and likely go to Fox in October 2010, 4 months after the Pac 16 fell apart in June.

Of course the article tells the lie that A&M left the next year because of the LHN when in fact, President Loftin himself said he decided in 2010, but was just waiting for the right time. And the reason he left was for school branding.

I don’t know about 2010, but the LHN seemed to be the main reason the PAC 16 fell apart in 2011.


I think the PAC should have just tolerated the LHN. The LHN would have folded within 3 years anyway-the only reason why the LHN has survived so long is because ESPN greatly overpaid in order to keep the Big 12 alive.

(08-03-2022 11:36 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 11:50 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

I have no idea whether Utah or Colorado opposed the Oklahoma move, but I would not be surprised if the strongest opposition came from the rest of the PAC because of the perceived inferior academics, the travel and destinations, and the disruption to scheduling, especially the less frequent California road games and opponents for legacy members.

The way things went and how some in the PAC have been rumored to act toward such things, you'd swear all three of the Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech trio were equally unwanted by themselves, but "the cost of doing business" to get Texas.

(08-03-2022 11:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 11:50 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

Facts.
Texas decided not to do the Pac 16 in June 2010.
LHN did not exist at that point.
In October 2010 there was media speculation that Fox was likely to get the LHN and pay in the vicinity of $3 million.
It wasn't until November 2010 that ESPN came in and big $15 million a year.
Fox and ESPN did promise that the Big 12 would get paid better in their next deal and Fox paid an up front bonus to the conference.

The only logical conclusion:
The LHN was not a significant factor in any of the realignment decisions.
And the Texas president and AD said it was about travel and the fact that it didn't make more money than the Big 12 deal would.

Thank you for the breakdown.

There was a lot going on over a period of several years. And I've seen more than one article assess causes and/or draw conclusions on things which weren't necessarily even in the same time period.

One common mistake (I've made it myself in the past.) is to assign LHN causes to the first wave, when, as you note, is not possible. It was not an influence/cause until later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80...ealignment

(08-03-2022 11:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 11:50 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

Facts.
Texas decided not to do the Pac 16 in June 2010.
LHN did not exist at that point.
In October 2010 there was media speculation that Fox was likely to get the LHN and pay in the vicinity of $3 million.
It wasn't until November 2010 that ESPN came in and big $15 million a year.
Fox and ESPN did promise that the Big 12 would get paid better in their next deal and Fox paid an up front bonus to the conference.

The only logical conclusion:
The LHN was not a significant factor in any of the realignment decisions.
And the Texas president and AD said it was about travel and the fact that it didn't make more money than the Big 12 deal would.

Sorry, I might have conflated those 2 elements. But Texas didn't want to go West and wanted to stay in the much easier Big 12 that it dominated in the 2000s. Once 2010 came along the Texas program has done a complete 180.

So remove the part about the LHN but everything else is factual.

(08-03-2022 11:36 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 11:50 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  What is the story about why this fell apart in 2010 and especially 2011?

Replied to you on 7/30:

PAC made a shrewd attempt to get Texas, A&M, OK, OK St, Tex Tech, and Colorado in 2010. It would have been so awesome and been much better for CFB. Big 12 gone, leftovers were headed to Big East. Texas ultimately didn't want to move West and blackmailed ESPN to give them more money via LHN. A&M saw what Texas was doing and wanted to go to SEC. Kansas would have replaced Utah and A&M here.

In 2011, OK and OK State wanted out and proposed to join the PAC-12. Shockingly they were declined. I have a feeling at Colorado and Utah said no which IMO was ridiculous since Scott shouldn't have allowed them to vote for a couple of years on expansion matters. If true, you can probably blame those 2 schools for current situation.

I have no idea whether Utah or Colorado opposed the Oklahoma move, but I would not be surprised if the strongest opposition came from the rest of the PAC because of the perceived inferior academics, the travel and destinations, and the disruption to scheduling, especially the less frequent California road games and opponents for legacy members.

All those are valid points too. I think Utah and Colorado didn't want to lose games in California which may have happened by adding 2 more teams.

(08-03-2022 11:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 01:35 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  Tex wanted Baylor instead of Colorado
Pac invited Colo immediately, now there's room for 5
Tex A&M then went to SEC
ESPN made their move with LHN

Texas didn't want Baylor. The Texas legislature was starting to talk about forcing Texas and Tech to take Baylor so Colorado jumped and went ahead and took the offer before the legislature could cause trouble. Doubtful it would have been any more of an issue than it was last summer when they stomped and paraded, but didn't do anything to impede Texas and OU moving to the SEC. But CU wasn't going to take the chance.

And when A&M decided they wanted to go to the SEC, the Pac went ahead and lined up Kansas next, not Baylor.

Yeah Baylor had no chance of admittance.