If Nebraska had not left for the Big Ten due to issues of football performance in the old North Division and the creation of Texas LHN, Colorado and Missouri would not have left as well.
Sigh...if you're going to claim superior objectivity you should read this before making statements like this again.http://longhornnetworkanddelusion.tumblr.com
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In the sprit of being objective and willing to accept new ideas and stand corrected, what does this article have to do with the discussion of how stable the new Big 12 compares to the Big Ten and the other P5 leagues. My comment on being objective, was based on the many comments on this board and how many are not being objective on comparing the new Big 12 stability to the other Power 5 leagues. I am all ears and will stand corrected if this article has anything to with the stability of the new Big 12. Help me out here!
The article would actually convince me the Big 12 is more stable that ever and why would another conference want to take on the baggage of the U of Texas. It most likely has a lot to do with why the Pac 16 idea failed. With Texas appearing to be in the conference that will put up with its demands, the Big 12 is not going anywhere for the long term future would be what this article is implying.
What is your point?
The point was simply to highlight the ridiculous statement that Nebraska (or anyone really) left the Big12 due to the LHN. Nebraska left because it was tired of failing in fb and had fundamental disagreements with the rest of the conference (they lost most votes 11-1) but vilified Texas simply because we beat them in football all but 1 time. That was the main point I was making.
Now as far as Texas appearing in a conference that will put up with its demands...that's revisionist history again. The Big12Network was voted down 11-1 back before the BTN. After which Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Kansas decided to look into creating their own channels. Only Texas succeeded where the others were only able to get added to an existing network. The complaints come from a sense of unfairness and jealously, but as the article clearly points out, schools like KU, OSU, and Neb were pulling in lots of 3rd tier money (which was not shared with the conference) while Texas and OU were not. This helped balance out funds within the conference as prior to 2010 no tier 3 content was allotted to schools and the conference could sell all of your games to ESPN/FOX. This meant that UT/OU had little/no 3rd tier rights to sell therefor they were compensated with a bigger revenue distribution from the main TV deal, while KU/OSU's games were not picked up for broadcast as often so they were able to sell more 3rd tier rights and make extra money on the side which they kept to themselves. If the system had been equal distribution of tier 1/2 without allotted tier 3 games, a school like OSU or TxTech would have made more money off TV than OU/UT did.
People are also overlooking that Texas has been for YEARS, investing/developing its own studio, broadcasting booths, HD wiring and transmitting stations for most of its facilities (fb/bb/vb/soccer/bsb/sb)(they literally dug up the interstate to lay those cables back in 2008) and didn't want to delay its network plans for a B12N or P16N where many of its members were asking for funding and development time to process there upgrades. Then ESPN came in and sweet talked DeLoss telling him they'd get it available on every TV in America with the power of Mickey Mouse and company. That is what saved the Big12 and that is what stopped the P16. It wasn't greed, it was simply ESPN realizing what UT had been working towards for 5+ years and making it happen.
UT's 3rd tier content is available in more houses than the P12N.
UT's 3rd tier content is available in more houses than the rest of the Big 12's combined.
Yes, its not the BTN, nor the SECN, but its was never projected to be equal to an entire conference.
The LHN was simply a way for UT to monetize its 3rd party rights which it was rarely able to.
The payout from the LHN (if DirectTV picks it up) could disburse more money to UT than ND receives from its NBCfb contract.
That being said, I think this was just a complex way for UT to judge its value. Now that its value has nearly been realized (pending DirectTV) they can now research their conference options in 2025 with accurate information. If the P12 can sell UT on scrapping the LHN for the P12 network, and illustrate that they will receive more value than they would in the Big12 w/ the LHN, then I see that happening. But the PAC12N has a long way to go before they get there and UT correctly judged that ESPN was a better partner than FOX for rolling out a network. The P12 would just have to maintain UT's value (as they would bring in OU/OSU/TT) but the B1G would have to increase it for UT to be interested. The SEC is the wildcard here, if A&M doesn't fall into obscurity after Johnny Football and they keep getting exposure and recruits then I could see the new coach, AD, President, and Chancellor deciding that a more travel friendly conference with A&M, Arky, LSU, Ole Miss along with OU is better than the status quo, West or Midwest.
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...