And for the record, the revenue sharing that Texas isn't interested in sharing are revenues related to Tier 3 TV rights, rights which are most closely associated with its own branding, and rights that any other program in the Big XII had the right to turn into their own network as well. In fact Texas approached A&M years ago with a proposal for a joint network that A&M balked at. Texas approached the entire Big XII with a proposal for a Big XII Network which also was not embraced. So they venture out on their own and now all of a sudden it's a big deal. The whining about this is silly, especially proportional to how little anyone knows about it.
Texas gets $15 million a year from the LHN, 17% of which it owes a production partner, and $5 million of which goes back to the academic side of the school. That's right, Texas manages its own house so well that, not only do public funds not go to support Texas athletics, but it gives millions back to the University (and that was true before the LHN). Why should it have to support less popular and less visionary schools?
Oh wait, here's the punchline: Texas DOES support less popular and less visionary schools. It has long supported equal revenue sharing related to Tier 1 and 2 TV deals with the Big XII, despite the obvious fact that Texas, and not Baylor or Iowa State, is driving the big bucks ESPN and Fox are shelling out to broadcast the league.
So it's already a collegial, somewhat socialistic system, but rather than putting their necks out and innovating on their own and creating their own brand extentions, the big babies want to whine about the LHN and/or leach the profitability thereof. Ain't gonna happen. Want proof? Look how disinterested the PAC came in Ok State, Texas Tech, and even OU, once Texas wouldn't budge past a certain point.