Conference Realignment - What We Think We Know

I’ve tried to capture BU’s hypocriy the best I can. Here’s the link at FrogsoWar!

http://www.frogsowar.com/2011/9/8/2411954/sucks-to-b-u

I still find the Pac-10’s current posturing a bit odd. It is apparent that if they miss on either Texas or OU they consign themselves to no better than 2nd or 3rd place in the pecking order. They should just offer Texas and OU their third tier rights either unhindered or with some cap over which they share with the rest of the conference and just complete the coup d’etat. The will do no better and they win 2 of the only 3 pieces that are in the ‘must have’ category among the likely realignment free agents. Every other scenario just further pushes them down the pecking order. If Texas’s dream of a midwest superconference comes to fruition or if both OU and Texas choose a different dance partner they are beyond screwed and could literally be left with teams like Idaho, Wyoming, and Nevada.

HMMMM…Wonder how Dr. Tom O. would react to Texas in the Big Ten…

Superconferences seem really, really dumb from many angles. Revenues will increase for the current members of the eventual supers at the expense of teams who are left out. At what point does the Justice Department take action or Congress get involved?

Scip -

Wow. I’m at a loss for words. I can’t stop watching that over and over.

Not even a mention of independence? I actually think thats most likely for us, and not simply as a contingency plan. If our third tier rights with only a couple football games are worth $15 million per year, how much are the rights to ALL our football games worth? If you command the biggest fanbase/most TV revenue, any sharing of that revenue results in less $. Simple logic – if you’re worth the most, you make the most by not affiliating in a conference. If you’re on the lower end, you want to join with the big dogs.

And before the mentally challenged vag-rubbing starts over WHO WILL PLAY US IF WE GO INDEPENDENT?!?!?, we have a huge stadium and huge TV money — any opponent gets their piece of that. Most opponents would trip over eachother to play us.

Another advantage of independence is we get to wait and see if the super-conference experiment works, and I really don’t think it will. The pie gets split 16 ways, more difficult to win conference championships, unbalanced schedules, etc. When the super-conference implosion happens, we’ll clearly be in the driver’s seat.

The long term concern with independence, imo, is preserving what got us to this point — the passion of the fanbase that leads to revenue. That passion is fueled by regional rivalries. Need to keep playing OU, Tech, and I hate to say it, A&M.

“That passion is fueled by regional rivalries. Need to keep playing OU, Tech, and I hate to say it, A&M.”

You can expect to hear from Baylor’s attorneys shortly.

Big 10, huh? If so, would Texas be a Legend or a Leader?

Question: What would make 16 team conferences an inevitability? (I’m not making a rhetorical point; I’m legitimately curious. Someone enlighten me.)

Really only Notre Dame, Texas, and to a lesser extent, Oklahoma, bring significant value to a conference.

If the Big 10 could somehow land Texas and Notre Dame, they’re fine at 14. There aren’t two additional schools out there that would bring enough to the table to make up for the dilution in TV money. The Big 10 would probably also take ND +1 if they couldn’t grab Texas.

And the Pac-12 to me should be Texas or bust. Adding OU plus three more gets them one very strong football program in OU, and what else? Does Tech really give them the state of Texas in any meaningful sense?

Assuming that Texas and Notre Dame go Big Ten. Which two other schools follow? BYU, Syracuse ……

Not a chance we go independent, Texas would have no BCS bid. It would have to be a at large bid and that one is promised to the mid majors. Texas without a clear route to a BCS game is a non starter. Big 10 Makes perfect sense, same time zone, Top of the line schools and traditions.

The only problem with not taking Tech would be that it leaves an BCS AQ-quality team in Texas available for another conference to pick up and use as a base of operation for recruiting the state. Obviously the Pac 12 probably would take Tech if Texas went elsewhere just for lack of a better program in the region, but I suppose if the Pac 12 passed who else would take Tech considering the Big 10 has already expressed their deep disdain for them and the SEC seems to barely want A&M? I am sure the Big East would snap them up, but will a 16 team Big East even be considered a ’super’conference? Maybe the ACC would take them as well if they are struggling to remain relevant. No one takes Baylor.

Monty, what makes you think we wouldn’t work out an easier path like ND has now?

Don’t forget the ND BCS rule. If we would be top 10 as an independent we are a BCS LOCK. (If we get same treatment as ND)

Huck — Maybe I’m blowing it, but shouldn’t the Pac-12 target be Texas at any cost? OU would be to the Pac what Nebraska was to the BiG, except that Nebraska gave the Big Ten a CCG. OU has to make its way on distribution fees and media rights. I get the tradition and the record and all that, but if Texas perceives the Pac and BiG as equal, OU can’t bring them.

 I guess they are the best option, though, based on who would be out there.

Texastough — If all you care about is football, independence is probably OK. But if you care at all about basketball (as I do), and baseball, independence is a potential disaster. They’d have to find a conference home for these sports and there is no likely BCS option, as ND has. Best chance is the B12 leftovers if they haven’t been scattered to the winds, but even then, why take on Texas when they’ve walked away with their most valuable property?

Looks like this has been and will continue to be overthought. The Big 12’s(and I assume UT’s) actions and non-actions have resulted in open invitations for the SEC and Big East to come recruit Texas. That’s where we are headed.

We should be in a Texas-centric conference. It’s as simple as that. Suck it up, violate cosmic law and add TCU/UH to the Big 12, and be done with it. Threaten to add Memphis which would get the SEC to back off from aggy(and make for the biggest aggy joke of all time). Or fuck it, take Memphis and see how the SEC likes having us in the their backyard. As for overlapping TV markets, who cares? Are any of us fans going to have our lives adversely affected because of it? Would it possibly be nice to add a game in Fort Worth and Houston(a game that matters) every other year? Oh no, we already control those TV markets – God forbid! Cougar High, the universe might implode if we have to play them again!

We print money as it is, and now an extra $15 mil per year from LHN – Why the hell do we need a superconference that spans time zones and brings other BCS conferences into our recruiting territory? Seriously – the realignment discussion has reached absurd heights at this point. Where is the leadership and common sense?

Its all posturing, by Texas, OU and all of the conferences, kind of like a game of chicken, who is going to blink first, I think if Texas can hold out long enough all of the conferences will cave into there demands, or at least comprimise to get them, they are still the gem that everyone wants with or without the LHN. Show me another school that is in play with the tradition, population and fanbase texas has.

Additionally, the UT non rev sports can afford to travel to the Big 10 or East coast but the Pac 16 with an east division is like a refried B 12, that is the best option and keeps things fairly regional.

If Texas could design its own conference, what would it look like?

1) Texas plus one or two other big name programs – with at least one powerful rival to play on the last weekend of every college football season.

2) Five or six minor programs to serve as fodder for the two or three elite programs of the conference.

3) All programs should have nearby airports to reduce travel times.

4) All programs should have large endowments and/or access to state funding for the maintenance of facilities.

5) The six minor programs should be able to produce adequate game day attendance.

6) If any of the six programs are in recruiting hotbeds outside of Texas, that’s a plus.

7) If any of the six programs are in nice travel destinations, that’s a plus.

8) All of the programs would preferably be in the central and eastern time zones to reduce travel time and maximize TV exposure for conference members.

9) An eight team conference would be ideal – 7 conference games, plus OU ooc, plus 4 or 5 other ooc games that can be broadcast on LHN each season.

Texastough -

Scheduling as an independent is harder than you’d think. Sure, you’d find plenty mid-bottom tier schools willing to come to Austin for a paycheck and an ass-kicking, but it gets tricky after that.

Notre Dame still has a hard time scheduling and they have rivals and contracts with USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and Navy that have lasted decades.

Playing without a conference has plenty of advantages, but it isn’t as care free as some would lead you to believe.

It will probably be one of those scenarios that you mentioned as far as Texas is concerned when realignment comes to pass.

Or something entirely different.

Maybe just me, but the two most interesting pieces of the puzzle right now are how the PAC and Big 10 both look at their situations:

1) As you clearly laid out, without UT and OU, the PAC has no appealing options to get to 16. They have to make every effort to get both.

2) The Big 10 is interesting in that Delany’s current contract runs through 2013 and I am pretty sure his contract has him serving as a consultant to the conference after that date. He has made no secret of his desire to land the remaining “10’s” left out there, and he has said the conference is only interested in 10’s, not a bunch of 6’s or 7’s. Have to wonder if he realizes this is his last and best chance to make this happen.

Both conferences are driven by commissioner’s with huge ego’s, and, imo both Delany and Scott know that the current instability provides a great window to add UT.

It is interesting that the Big 10 rumors came out of the Big 10, not out of UT sources. If it was OB reporting it, I would think there is a strong chance that Deloss is leaking info to leverage our position with the PAC or create further panic in the Big 12 to try to get OU to recommit.

Not necessarily pertinent to this entirely, but interesting to note that the head of ESPN is on campus tonight with Deloss, and they both spoke to a class at the business school.

Bob – seems to me that Texas’ affiliation with a conference for nonrevenue sports would be as attractive with respect to those sports as football affilation would be with respect to football – boosts conference profile, added revenue, especially with those sports being televized on LHN and adding to the payday. Maybe I’m wrong.

ColoradoAg – you may be right, but a schedule that includes ND, BYU, OU, TTech, maybe A&M, and then some mid and lower tier opponents that need the payday and/or SOS boost like TCU, Baylor, seems easily doable and provides SOS not much different that the Big12 would provide. And I think you might be underestimating the payday from playing us when you consider the TV contract we would get as an independent + ticket sales.

Interview with T. Boone live on ESPN currently. Interesting stuff.

“A&M ain’t going nowhere shitbirds”. – T. Boone

Maybe ND and Texas as a package to the B1G is the only way the both have enough leverage to keep the LHN and ND’s network rights.

Was it ND or the B1G that was leaking info?

Please please please, tell me T. Boone said that on air.

And incidentally – I’ve written a ton about this in other threads but I’m calling my shot here:

OU ain’t going nowhere shitbirds.

I think Ken Starr made it pretty clear that no one else gets out alive. Or rather, your new conference will get threatened with lawsuits before you’ve even started packing. Should put a chill on things for awhile.

I agree that a B1G with Texas and ND probably would look pretty damn good at 14 teams, and looks pretty good in comparison to SEC, even SEC + 4. But, are we going to maintain ANY of our rivalries in that scenario? Would we (or OU, etc)!have the freedom to maintain those rivalries? Those games have value. PAC or B1G are equally attractive. Big XII redux is not.

Maybe that wasn’t an exact quote. But he knows more than the papers and this isn’t going to just linger. Pretty sure he wanted to call the dude interviewing him shitbird. He started talking about drilling dry holes and I switched back to NBC.

Dagga,
I remember 2015 being held out as the date when alignmaggeddon was most likely to happen. What happens in 2015 that makes it likely? Is that when the BCS is renegotiated? The Big 12 deal runs through 2021. Is 2015 still a date with destiny now that Starr’s Sword of Damocles hangs over all the big dog’s heads? I am guessing in 2021 anyone and everyone can leave after the TV contract expires since the money exposure would only be the buyout and the threat of litigation would be moot considering there is no longer a TV contract.

Here’s how I see it:

Plan A – Keep Big 12 alive, Probability of Success = 40%
Plan B – Bolt to the Big 10 (after dust settles in Aggieland), Probability of Success = 60
Plan C – Go Independent, Probability of Success = 40

If I’m the Big 10, I’m looking around thinking hmmm, how about we invite ND, UT, OU, and OSU?

What cable provider do I have to email 10,000 times to have UT bolt to the Big 10???

Anyone else find it amusing that the NCAA is not even an actor in this? Schools and conferences making decisions that will have massive financial impacts that are sure to significantly damage the losers in realignment and reshape the face of collegiate athletics, and the governing body is powerless and entirely silent.

I find it amusing that you refer to the NCAA as “the governing body” — the only way it exists is with the conferences’ and schools’ blessing. Even then, the NCAA is sort of like a neighborhood patrol/security guard looking for petty theft — it doesn’t even have the law behind it.

Ricky – I’d guess that 2015 is a popular date for speculation because that’s the next time one of the big conferences will be in the final year of its first-tier TV contract. The Big 10 contract with ABC/ESPN expires in 2016. I’d imagine that it’d be ideal for the Big 10 to go Mega then, when they could start a bidding war over the first super-con contract. If that happens the other conferences would be close behind. But personally I don’t see why it couldn’t happen sooner or later than that, if events intervene.

And I wouldn’t quite call Starr’s threats a Sword of Damocles. More like a rusty nail that could give you tetanus. Nice visual though.

I just read an article on ESPN sight that said people from at least two programs currently in the pac12 have said that they do not want to expand unless they get Texas.

Kansas and Kansas State could also be alternatives for the Pac-12 if it were to decide to expand to 16 without the two Texas schools. At least two Pac-12 sources told ESPN.com that they weren’t in favor of expanding beyond the current 12 members unless Texas were involved.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6944518/baylor-bears-budge-waiving-legal-rights-oklahoma-sooners-decide-future-source-says

This is turning into one big Mexican stand off. Baylor won’t budge until they know what ou is doing. Collies can’t do anything until Baylor decides what they are going to do. Ou is waiting to see whether or not the collies are going to leave. PAC 12 won’ t offer ou unless they can get Texas. Texas is sitting back waiting til the dust settles and won’t show their hand.Texas can’ t show high school games because collies cock blocked them on that. Kansas, Kansas State an d Missouri aren’t doing anything until ou moves. This may never end.

Texastough — who do you think would take on Texas non-football? It won’t be the Pac, Big Ten or SEC. The B12 leftovers probably would if Texas left them on good terms. But if they scatter, you’ll be left with the ACC. Possible, but doubtful, and expensive.

Now you’re talking CUSA as pretty much a last resort. That’s a horrible trade for football independence, IMO. I mean, you want nothing to do with UH and SMU for football (as Big 12 replacements), but you accept them in every other sport? That makes no sense.

I get that the NCAA is sort of United Nation-ish and has little actual authority outside of what schools and conferences grant it. However, what amazes me is that the number of schools that stand to lose in the realignment shuffle is at least equal to if not greater than those that will find desirable slots. It is surprising to me that you have not seen a movement by these schools at the NCAA level to get some sort of system in place for conference realignment that at least provided for more notice to the affected schools.

A lot of these schools should have seen the writing on the wall for some time now, just surprised that they have not tried to use the NCAA as one vehicle to fight the superconferences. I am sure many of them don’t want to burn their bridges and would rather keep their heads down and hope that they end up some place nice.

If we can’t make the Big 12 work, I vote for independence… In football only. As for other sports, just join Conference USA. Who cares what conference the other sports are in? The only thing that matters in those sports is getting to the NCAA Tournaments. (Pop quiz! what conference does BYU play in outside of football? I don’t know, and it doesn’t matter!)

As for football, we would almost have to negotiate a BCS tie-in similar to Notre Dame. As for bowls and scheduling, we could work a deal with a conference similar to BYU, where they play so many games a year against the WAC and are included in the WAC tie-in’s. This is a win-win as the conference gets better bowl tie-in’s by including the big-name independent, and the independent gets bowl tie-in’s.

Why wouldn’t those conferences take Texas nonfootball? You don’t think they’d love to have those sports televised more – exposure and dollars? Not to mention association with a national power like UT? I don’t think I’m being arrogant, it just makes sense to me that those conferences would love to have us for nonfootball for the same reasons they want us for football, albeit the added $ and exposure would be on a smaller scale .

And obviously the ACC is a great nonfootball conference. Travel wouldn’t be any worse than joining a superconference.

If the Big XII wants to survive, it will have to get aggressive both with its members and with expansion. A&M is gone, and we all know it. So we need to turn nine back into twelve. NOT TEN – TWELVE. It was idiotic to think a long-term reduction to ten teams would work. In order for the Big XII to survive beyond just a few more years, it must become stronger, not just bigger.

The conference needs to get Oklahoma and Texas to sign on for years, which will keep the pulse beating. Then they need to get BYU in as the tenth team quickly. The next team brought in needs to be TCU. No, they don’t make the footprint bigger, but their current level of respect will make it deeper. The conference can’t be seen as another Big East with just a couple valid programs. The SEC isn’t great because of the tailgating and traditions. It’s because they have so many strong programs every year. The teams the Big XII recruits need to bring us toward that model. And face it… you’re not going to get any teams currently in the Pac-12, Big-10 or SEC to come our way. Even the ACC would be too tough a sell.

So after adding BYU and TCU, there still needs to be one more GOOD program added. Seeing as there are absolutely none in the immediate vicinity of the conference, the final team to fill the Big XII roster should be either Pitt, WVU or (I can’t believe I’m about to type this) Boise State. Louisville hasn’t done anything since Petrino left, and any ACC schools will either be happy to stay where they are, or they will hold out, hoping for SEC expansion.

Having a Big XII made up of four from Texas, six of the old Big 8 and BYU and Pitt/WVU/BSU would not only be perceived to be strong, but would also prove it on the field. The divisions should then be the old Big 8 teams vs. the Texas + 2 teams. Similar to the current Big 10 schedule, each team in the conference would have one team from the other division that they would play every year, keeping alive the Texas/OU annual game, while creating the possibility those same two teams could meet in the conference championship.

Thoughts???

Great synopsis written up top. On a thread here a week or so ago, I questioned if it was wrong for me to want OU to get its own network up and running as a way of furthering the interests of Texas. Based on where things stand today and where they point in the future, I think this happening is a key piece of the puzzle. To the extent that OU becomes more like Texas with its own network, it expands and strengthens our own future options.

For one, OU TV enhances the potential for longer term stability of the Big12 (after Aggy fights itself out of the wet paper bag) with 2 majors wanting to protect what they have while mutually dispersing the beam of Klieg lights. Outside of a Big12 future, it enhances our bargaining position with the PAC if OU is involved. Having a mature LHN would help with any jump to the BiG with ND, but wrt to OU, here’s the rub: if we help promote the viability and success of OU TV now, future reciprocity could involve TX/OU remainIng intact even if we end up in different conferences.

Right now, Texas and OU are the sweepstakes and our geography make each of us coveted by more than one potential Super: PAC/BiG and PAC /SEC respectively. Contingencies up the ante, and at the very least the BiG scenario serves this purpose, but the common denominator in all contingencies is for Texas to have at least one other school with a successful brand network to pair.

Austin, you’re thinking is strong… I’m just having trouble picturing any decent program signing on to the Big XII. BYU and TCU I can see… But is anyone else going to sign on when super conferences are around the proverbial corner? Why burn a bridge you might need later?

Texastough, you’re not thinking it through. Every BCS league can get its conference basketball games on TV somewhere. They don’t need Texas. Texas needs them.

Like your mama always told you, you get what you pay for.
 
If yo mama told you that, she was WRONG.

Longtex’s Second Law is “You DON’T get what you DON’T pay for.”

AustinEmpire: TCU adds nothing. You’re buying high. Same with Boise. Neither one fills the stadium it has, and both are considerably smaller than the smallest stadium in the B12.

Only way this works is if everyone agrees that it’s a short-term fix. That is counterproductive.

Slight change: Boise does sell out, but the stadium seats less than 35,000.

Boise State? You have lost your freaking mind. The number of TV sets in all of Idaho is approximately equal to east Austin.

Colorado State is a much much better, option, replace one aggie with another that isn’’t near as weird and hooked on fake tradition.

As to why it’s worth the SEC to endure a law suit to bring in ATM, then they get to renegotiate their TV deal. After the PAC 12, got the richest deal of anyone, the SEC must be thinking they are getting screwed. The settlement to Baylor will be chump change. This thing never gets to court. EVER.

I don’t see TCU bringing any new markets. not worth the trouble.

Aside from BYU, I’m curious who you think are better grabs than TCU, Boise, Air Force, NM, or their attractive MWC friends. It’s easy to complain about small stadiums and meh tradition, but no one THAT amazing is going to come to the Big XII. You’re not going to snag a quality SEC, ACC, Big Ten, or Pac-12 school. Their conferences are too stable.

It’s too late to get the knockout who will probably leave you in 2 years anyway. You need to pick the homely girlfriend who will do anything for you.

I’ve given this some thought and this is a conferance I would like to see. Div. 1(notre dame, purdue, iowa st, missouri,) Div. 2 (ku, k-state, ou, oklahoma st.) Div. 3(smu, tcu, texas tech, and north texas, they’re actually a big school) Div. 4. (texas, houston, baylor, rice) Each team would play 3 games within their division, thus 24 games that would be split equally with every team in the conferance, Div 1 champ plays Div. 2 champ @ neutral site anywhere from KC to Indy, Div 3 champ plays Div 4 champ in houston san antonio etc. north plays south at highest bid in America. Also these teams could schedule teams from other divisions within conference and split money as independants but these win losses would not reflect as conferance play, thus teams in different divisions such as texas ou could keep rivalry alive without affecting this 16 team playoff. Now every team has a road to the BCS and a little more independance.

Bob – thats kind of the point, a lot of BCS conference nonfootball sports aren’t on TV that much. Even basketball. UT brings both all of our fans which will watch the existing televized games thereby increasing the value of those broadcasts, and also the LHN which will broadcast a lot more games creating revenue that wasn’t there before.

Tex Long, My mom told me to not make fun of those less furtunate than myself. I replied “So no more aggie jokes?”

superconferences are inevitable, and 16 is the majik number. collecting playoff system revenue seems to be the endgame in all of this and it doesn’t work with a 10 team confererence, a 15 team conference etc.

conferance independants independance furtunate “Momma. Am I an aggie?”

Why has no one mentioned Tulane? A new Orleans road trip every other year! New Orleans and Southern Louisiana TV sets and Recruiting. Take the fight to one of the SEC’s most fertile recruiting grounds. What am I missing?

I call total BS on the whole “not enough TV sets” and “no new market” arguments against adding certain schools to the B12. This is not the NFL. By this “TV market” logic, Miss St, Vandy, Auburn, Purdue, Mich St, KSU, Baylor, OSU, Wazzu. Oregon St., Stanford, UCLA and so on have no right to be in a BCS conference. They should be eliminated from any superconference talk because they are redundant in their respective markets. Does anyone not see the absurdity in this TV market argument which is accepted without question on this board(til now)? It goes hand in hand with the “we have nothing to gain by playing them” argument which is also heard so often re:scheduling.

I think Boise is a bad idea for the B12 too, but not due to TV sets – rather because they’re in freaking Idaho 2000 miles from here!

It might be different if there were several untapped top 30 markets near the current B12 footprint to choose from. What is ignored is how a TCU or UH would add juice to the DFW/Houston local markets for the B12, as well as giving Texas fans in those areas an easy game to attend in person. Playing those teams in NFL stadiums(akin to a neutral site or better) wouldn’t suck either. I guess I’m way out on a limb here.

Trkhorn, I totally agree. Rivals are meant to be in state or cross a single border. Yes, a annual California vs Texas will have tvs from California and Texas tuned in, the two biggest states, wow everyones watching. But reality is more people, yes mostly in Texas, but still more people, are going to watch a Texas vs Texas A&M game.

And they’re going to watch it in a party atmosphere such as viewing the Super Bowl that tv ratings are slightly skewed.

PAC whatever is the ultimate destination. From their point of view there is no better endgame than adding the 4 of OU, OSU, UT, and TT. They will wait until that scenario is gone before they move on. No way they add BYU or Boise or whoever and fill out while those other 4 are still out there.

From OU or UT’s point of view, that expanded version of the PAC represents the easiest path to the BCS. You’re essentially taking the Big 12 south and replacing the Big 12 north with the old Pac 8 (no offense to the AZ schools or Utah). It’s also more regionally oriented and would provide good homes for the non-football sports as well. Thinking of football glory (because remember, as Cowherd said, UT makes more money on a fall weekend than Duke basketball makes all year), that represents the path of least resistance. Joining the SEC or B1G would put more substantial obstacles in the way of football success. In the enlarged PAC, you would have UT and OU anchoring their division with OSU and TT, which are a huge part of what has made the Big 12 south one of the better divisions in all of college football, and Utah. You would have USC and Oregon anchoring the other division. So basically it wouldn’t be much different than the earlier version of the Big 12, except Utah replaces ATM, and the other division would be more competitive (You know, like the Big 12 north was supposed to be all along).

UT and OU essentially ensure the viability and competitiveness of the PAC in a superconference landscape. Without UT and OU, the PAC misses out on it’s biggest shot at population centers for TV revenue and quality teams to both produce a quality product and not be reduced to competing with the ACC/Big East remnants for third best conference. That’s incredible bargaining power for OU and UT. Might be what gets an established university network the ok. Just need to establish it first. I think flirtations with other conferences are just to further strengthen their bargaining position.

My guess is there will be some attempt to prolong the status quo for a bit perhaps by adding BYU or Boise, there will be an attempt to get the best terms possible from other conferences while establishing the LHN and OU’s potential network, and then UT and OU will lay out their position and demands to the PAC.

trkhorn, have you been paying attention?

The whole reason the Big 12 is falling apart is because the better programs can get more money elsewhere. The Big 12 footprint is a ghost town. Adding more teams that are already in the same footprint or are in a footprint that has no population only means the same meager pool of money just gets split up even more and that was with the better programs getting a bigger take. Adding TCU doesn’t give the conference more juice in DFW, that TV market is secured. It just means everyone else now has to split their money with TCU who actually didn’t bring a dime into the coffers. Texas (and likely OU) doesn’t care at this point because the 1st and 2nd tier TV money is now just a drop in the bucket, especially if the LHN takes off. But for teams like Nebraska, Colorado, A&M, Mizzou, OSU, and Tech a guaranteed, equal slice of big (and growing) TV money in a stable situation has some real appeal and actually matters in their bottom line.

Good post, Huck, but I disagree on a couple of fronts-

I think OU’s preferred destination is the PAC-12/-14/-16. They would get to recruit Texas and California, significant for a school in a small population state with national championship aspirations. Also, OSU could come along. If OU were in the SEC, they would merely be Tennessee writ large- the school with ambitions larger than its talent base, always encroaching others’ recruiting territory.

Side note- I think the reason the SWC and Big 12 have always had more internecine animosity than other conferences is the nature of the overlapping recruiting territories. In conferences where there are clear understandings of schools’ home bases (understanding that there will always be a few recruits that just want to go out of state) teams can be competitive without being hostile. In Texas, there are no territories respected by other schools. Rivals on the field in the Fall are also rivals the rest of the year as well, constantly knocking heads over recruits.
Another thing OU wants is for the LHN to go away. They see it as it is- a wonderful marketing tool for UT athletics. If they could flick a switch and make it go away, they would. Boren’s comments last Friday night were an attempt to do so- strongarm Texas into the PAC-16, forcing us to drop the LHN at the same time.

Can I say something for the Big 12? It has been one of the best leagues for NCAA compliance going. From the beginning, its top teams (NU, Texas, TAMU, and post-Blake OU) have been good about compliance. Yes, OU had the Big Red scandal, and basketball is basketball, but this league overall is probably only surpassed by the Big 10 (which has had its scandals) in terms of recruiting compliance. It is no coincidence that UT football has thrived in a clean league. I believe it would be a disaster for UT to leave the Big 12 for a non-compliant league. It would be the ‘80s again.

TAMU will join the SEC. Perspective. This idea was initially driven by a regent (now off the board) – Gene Stallings. The SEC has crooked recruiting. To succeed, TAMU will have to recruit well. Gene Stallings, by all accounts, is a wonderful man, a protégé of Landry and Bryant, a champion for Down Syndrome families. He is also a coach who won a MNC at Alabama, understands how dirty SEC recruiting is, and even was penalized for NCAA violations under his watch at Bama. He has no illusions about the path forward, and probably feels no ethics challenges in SEC-style recruiting. This will be ugly, and the state animosity will increase.

If forced to choose between the PAC and the Big 10 for Texas right now, I would choose the Big 10. Any time before 2002, I would have chosen the PAC, but not now. The PAC is a dirty conference. Their best team is dirty as hell, and the best team before them was dirty. When you look at their coaches (Kelly, Kiffin, Neuheisel, Erickson), you realize that Mike Stoops is in the "Classy" group. The PAC has some wonderful academic institutions that seem to be disinterested in reining in their ADs as long as the bills are paid. Two more things- the original schools are dead set on maintaining control over newcomers, and the league commissioner (Larry Scott) focused entirely on TV revenue maximization. In 10 years, the PAC may again be the superior destination, but right now it isn’t, especially if the Texas recruiting is about to get dirty.

I would be OK with rolling the LHN into a conference network if it was the right conference. The PAC isn’t it.

The Texas Gambit is that the Longhorn Network becomes successful and obviously so to the point that other big time programs realize that they need their own network as well. My thoughts are known on this subject; revenue generation from third tier rights is not nearly as important as the exposure and branding that the network provides. Will other schools realize this moving forward or will conferences hold on to third tier network control?

I may have said this before, but I’ll say it again: universities are going to want to control their cable channel for the same reason they want to control their website today. And, by the time that the children who are being born today check into Jester for their freshman year, they’ll need an older person to explain what I just wrote, because they won’t know what “cable” means.

Over a quarter-million subscribers ditched cable for internet-only content in the last quarter alone. Consumers are surprisingly happy watching things on smaller screens that fit in their pockets. If it’s in your hand, its apparent size is more or less the same to you. (WARNING: this does not mean your johnson is 67" diagonally). Internet-to-TV boxes, furthermore, are going through their cola wars while you are reading this sentence. Consumers are also spoiled by the scheduling convenience of on-demand content. Right now, the student next to you on the shuttle bus isn’t really “there,” because they’re texting to people all over the planet. Eventually, “when” will matter as little as “where.”

This may seem like a gradual change to you, if you were born before 1980. But because this is a generational change, it will hit an inflection point in the near future, after which change will be rapid and only marginally predictable. And when The Revolution comes, you’ll want to own every last pixel of your own content, because technological changes of this sort have, in recent history, turned a lot of people’s monetization schemes into a total fuckscape. Consider: if cable TV died tomorrow, collegiate and professional sports would collapse. Start building your Ark, Noah.

It’s nothing short of poetic that Verizon was LHN’s first ‘big’ (I know) pickup.

Cable TV as we know it can still generate a lot of money between now and The End. While cable lies dying, the distinction between cable content and online content will continue to blur until they are so indistinguishable, no one will notice when cable dies, any more than you noticed when your everyday phone use stopped involving a wire sticking out of the thing in your hand. By the time you buy your next plasma, you won’t be able to find one that doesn’t connect to the internet and that doesn’t have its own browser.

LHN Short Term: a metric fucktonne of money from cable.

LHN Long Term: a university’s channel is part of their brand, and the cable companies are about to become as important as an American semiconductor assembly line worker. Will universities be comfortable with allowing an athletic conference manage their brand? I think not.

Preferences as a fan of college football.
1) Big-12: comfortable and known, least travel, established rivalries.
2) SEC: travel not too bad, exciting rivalries like A&M, LSU, Arky, Bama, Fla., GA, etc.
3) Pac-12: Long travel, 2 time zones, distant and non emotionally involved rivals.
4) Big-10: Long travel, distant rivals, cold weather.
5) Independent: unknown and possibly difficult travel, rivalries, time zones, scheduling.

I just think the SEC + OU and Okey State would be the best games every year.

If we join the Big 10:

1. We have to play games in S. Bend, Iowa City, Columbus, Ann Arbor, Lincoln…these are all venues with open stadiums; it could get quite cold in certain months. We’d have to contend with Ohio State fans.

2. Nebraska will have a cow; Osborne might give birth.

F D SEC

nevets – sing with me: to dream the impossible dream – now, come on

otherwise:

i’ve spent a little time on texags (gags) and some there are catching an inkling of their situation, and a few are realizing the sec has not been their friend.

i’m still seeing a lot of ‘bow-tie this’ and ‘bow-tie that’. most are still seeing him as an amalgam of james bond and gandalf in einstein garb while the rest of humanity sees him as a morph of mr rogers and inspector clouseau cast in a roger rabbit outfit. that light will begin to come on for them in a few days, i imagine, when they realize what a mess they are in, and it won’t be pretty.

you guys ever going to color in utah?

2. Nebraska will have a cow; Osborne might give birth.

Isn’t that reason enough to go for it? ;)

What Spider said.
and what Texastough said.
Hook em.

Once other big time programs see how valuable it is to control your own branded channel, they will follow.
Once they follow, all conferences will amend their rules to allow for 3rd tier rights to be kept
Once this happens, the incentive structure will push for more 3rd tier game rights, which will weaken the push for huge superconferences.
Once we get a playoff system like march Madness, conferences wont really matter as much anyway.
So in the end, The University will end up independent, as it should, with games scheduled with like-minded programs also in control of their 3rd tier rights. I agree that currently this list is short, but even today we can easily put together 5 solid games, with OU, A&M, BYU, Texas Tech, and Notre Dame. Thats already as good as our current weak Big 12 schedule. And the future will offer many better options. just wait.

Reading your site as a neutral observer and just wanted to share my thoughts…

Notre Dame to the Big 12?!?

(laughing)

You’re serious?!?

(laughing harder)

Notre Dame isn’t going to the Big 12. If they did, Jack Swarbrick would be run out of South Bend on a rail. If they do join a conference, they would either go all in with the Big East or join the Big 10. But this will be on their timetable not yours.

Top college programs having their own networks? Not likely. BYU TV works because it’s the Mormon Channel. The sports is just gravy. The problem LHN faces is finding an audience. Yes, you want to watch it but do non-Texas fans want to? If LHN does get carried by the big cable companies, there’s no guarantee that the local companies in say Minneapolis, NYC, Miami or LA would pick it up.

Independent: UT could go indy in football. You would play your share of directional schools but BYU and ND would be available as well. UT may have to swallow their pride and play A&M again to. What UT would need to find is a place for every other sport. BYU has the West Conference and ND has the Big East. The question is will a football conference allow UT a Notre Dame deal?

Last thought: if UT goes to another conference, they would be forced to give up the LHN. Big 10 isn’t going to let you keep it. Pac-12 would make you share it with Tech. If UT keeps it, they may be on an island.

UT stays put in the Big 12 as long as a BCS bid is connected.

JoeBigRed – Huckleberry didn’t attach odds to anything, he just listed outcomes in order of preference. ND to the Big 12 ain’t gonna happen unless the Big 12 gets a radical makeover that I can’t even fathom. We’d have to find a way to replace the rural lightweights with quality schools first. But it’s the ideal outcome.

I think the rest of your points are solid and well-argued. Gotta disagree on the LHN dissing, though. Everything is negotiable, no matter what people say, and UT has too much tied up in it to let it go.

The more I think about it, the Big 10 is seeming like a more and more likely destination as long as we can hold on to the Big 12 until 2015 or so when the Big 10 starts the bidding war for their next first-tier TV contract. That’s when UT would have the most leverage. UT can commit as much quality content to the B10 network as any other school and still have plenty of content for LHN. The channel presumably would be hosting 16 teams by that point so UT’s commitment would be roughly, oh, maybe two-three hours of prime time a week. We’ll have 28 hours already running.

Frankly the Pac 12 Network is a better model to maximize revenue for a large conference; several regional channels = more audience targeting = better overall ad bucks. Plus the schools get vanity time to show their non-revenue sports and academic stuff. If the LHN or Pac 12 business models prove to be superior, other B1G schools (especially ND, assuming they’d join at the same time as UT) might want to follow that lead instead of the first-gen B1G model. And if they go the regional sub-network route, considering that no one else in the B1G would be geographically in UT’s neighborhood they might be willing to leave the LHN completely as-is.

And everyone – you need to read spider’s soliloquy about eight comments above this one. And then read it again. The LHN is a good idea…just give it time.

Eeuuch. Eight comments or twenty or somewhere in between. Not a math guy.

You’re being too kind, Dagga Roosta. It’s not just that I didn’t attach odds, it’s that I explicitly said that Notre Dame joining the Big 12 isn’t likely.

Hey where’s Gay? Where’s Charley Atkins?

Interesting, I saw a commercial for the Big12 during the ISU/Iowa game and unless I missed it they showed a clip of every team in the conference…except A&M.

Spider is all over it. It’s all about owning and controlling the content. The technology moves at an exponential rate. Don’t get married to a medium. You don’t want the NCAA or a conference diluting the product. I’m here to see, read, hear and talk about Texas unfiltered and straight up. I hope ND can see this too. A Texas and ND together pitch to the BIg 10 could be enough leverage to cause the conference to let those school keep their content control. If ND goes anywhere, it will be the Big 10. If we can’t take a deal that compromises that control of content. Word.

Er, we can’t take a deal that compromises that control of content. Word.

Very great post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wanted to mention that I have really enjoyed surfing around your blog posts. After all I?ll be subscribing for your rss feed and I am hoping you write once more very soon!