WVU's Gee: going to 12 is most likely

[UConn Dan]

http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20160118/GZ02/160119481

Some interesting comments from author/insider about Connecticut too

Can't copy and paste on my phone for some reason.

 

[Stinger92860]

It seems the writer is not happy with Boren for speaking out, yet gives the impression its fait accompli for Texas to run the league.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The writer points out that Texas could be made whole through a B12 Network. That idea has to be coming from Gee or Boren. It really puts pressure on Texas now, because if the Big 12 is willing to keep Texas whole financially on merging the LHN into a B12N, then further resistance by Texas would seem to be purely out of spite.

edit: The ACC has the most to lose from UConn going to the Big 12. The ACC Network would not be dead, but they would be #3 in NYC, a city they desperately need to get the ACCN off the ground. I am guessing that the ACC is saving its 16th spot for Texas, but a lot can happen in 10 years so that would be a level of patience that is probably not warranted. I don't see the ACC moving before February 4, if at all.

Ideally, there would be some public or leaked statement from Texas that sounded pro-expansion that could activate the Tobacco Road crew to push for UConn again. I don't know if FSU or Clemson would object this time around given their recent success in football.

 

[Dooley]

"Let’s face it, membership in the Big 12 is tough on Mountaineer fans that want to see their team outside of home games. Adding Cincinnati would be a terrific help to Gee, athletic director Shane Lyons and WVU.

There are many other expansion candidates out there, but let’s examine a few. First, Houston sounds sexy these days, yet the Big 12 gains nothing by adding the Cougars. The league already owns Texas. BYU and Salt Lake City is over 1,000 miles just from Texas. Colorado State is, well, Colorado State.

And then there are the schools located more toward WVU. The last thing the Big 12 needs is more schools in the Southwest or in the Rocky Mountains. If Boren and the others in the league truly want to be more of a national conference, a la the Big Ten, they need to look at markets like New York (Connecticut) or Orlando (Central Florida). Memphis would be a nice fit geographically and would help WVU as well.

Yet let’s move to Boren’s other desire: a Big 12 network. If the league wants to start such a network it would have to do so in what one television insider called “the least cabled environment” among the conferences. The old Big East was wired with cities like Baltimore, Washington, New York, Philadelphia, etc. The Big 12 would be helped by moving into, say, New York via Connecticut. The Huskies, according to the insider, draw more television numbers, at least in basketball, than Rutgers for the Big Ten.

You might think it would be impossible to talk Texas into ditching the Longhorn Network. It just screams “stumbling block.” That, though, is not the case. The Longhorn Network has never worked. It’s lost money from Day 1. ESPN would give it back tomorrow. Those in the know say dissolution of that could be negotiated in a day. The Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn within the Big 12 Network structure.

So the “comprehensive plan” Boren has proposed isn’t far-fetched at all. In fact, it could help not only the league but WVU. The Mountaineers could have travel partners. Their fans could get to more games. The Big 12 could become more of a national brand. And a Big 12 Network could be more wired to more homes.

Sounds like a win, win, win, win to me."

 

[CAHUSKY]

It sure sounds like expansion is going to actually happen. Please, please, please don't leave us behind again.

 

[noeynox]

It sure sounds like expansion is going to actually happen. Please, please, please don't leave us behind again.

LOL, was going to post the same thing. Please let it be us, please let it be us, please just this one time, let it be us.

 

[Rico444]

"You might think it would be impossible to talk Texas into ditching the Longhorn Network. It just screams “stumbling block.” That, though, is not the case. The Longhorn Network has never worked. It’s lost money from Day 1. ESPN would give it back tomorrow. Those in the know say dissolution of that could be negotiated in a day. The Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn within the Big 12 Network structure."

That right there jumped out at me. Starting to sound like this is inevitable, which of course means we're being set up for an incredibly devastating setback.

 

[NYUConn]

"You might think it would be impossible to talk Texas into ditching the Longhorn Network. It just screams “stumbling block.” That, though, is not the case. The Longhorn Network has never worked. It’s lost money from Day 1. ESPN would give it back tomorrow. Those in the know say dissolution of that could be negotiated in a day. The Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn within the Big 12 Network structure."

That right there jumped out at me. Starting to sound like this is inevitable, which of course means we're being set up for an incredibly devastating setback.

Ehhhh, this is a very West Virginia-centric view of things.

Sure ESPN would restructure the LHN to a Big 12 network instantly, but where is the incentive for Texas to give up such a prestigious money-maker? You can't just say, "the Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn." That helps financially, but the exposure UT gets from having it's own network can't be rivaled by anything a Big 12 Network would provide.

 

[sportsart]

My hope is that with all this Big 12 expansion talk, with UConn being mentioned, it causes the B1G (less likely) or ACC (more likely) to pull the trigger, and give us an invite.

While I like the thought of seeing Texas and Oklahoma at the Rent, I am just not that excited for everyone else. While I'd take a Big 12 invite in a nano second, I really hope one of the other 2 options become available first.

 

[Sportsman5]

Ehhhh, this is a very West Virginia-centric view of things.

Sure ESPN would restructure the LHN to a Big 12 network instantly, but where is the incentive for Texas to give up such a prestigious money-maker? You can't just say, "the Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn." That helps financially, but the exposure UT gets from having it's own network can't be rivaled by anything a Big 12 Network would provide.

The advantage would be exposure in the midwest and northeast with the additions of Cincinnati and UConn. Therefore, if Texas can continue to make as much money plus get exposure to these recruiting areas for football recruits and general students, then that would be a win for Texas.

 

[NYUConn]

The advantage would be exposure in the midwest and northeast with the additions of Cincinnati and UConn. Therefore, if Texas can continue to make as much money plus get exposure to these recruiting areas for football recruits and general students, then that would be a win for Texas.

Right but in a Big 12 network every member gets that. In the LHN, it's their show.

 

[businesslawyer]

Ehhhh, this is a very West Virginia-centric view of things.

Sure ESPN would restructure the LHN to a Big 12 network instantly, but where is the incentive for Texas to give up such a prestigious money-maker? You can't just say, "the Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn." That helps financially, but the exposure UT gets from having it's own network can't be rivaled by anything a Big 12 Network would provide.

Texas, by virtue of its fan base, is still going to dominate the content on a Big XII network. If the money is covered, the answer to "why" will be because the Longhorns want to stay in the Big XII and this is the only way to do it.

 

[Sportsman5]

Right but in a Big 12 network every member gets that. In the LHN, it's their show.

It's still a net positive for U of Texas. The goal of Texas is to do what is best for them and not what keeps the biggest distance between them and a few other schools near them. There may be a few boosters that like it the way it is, but the university president and the vast majority of alumni will want what is overall best for the University IMO.

 

[NYUConn]

Texas, by virtue of its fan base, is still going to dominate the content on a Big XII network. If the money is covered, the answer to "why" will be because the Longhorns want to stay in the Big XII and this is the only way to do it.

Yep, 100% agree on that point. I just don't think that we can take the word of a Charleston, WV reporter that dissolution of the LHN is a piece of cake or a slam dunk.

I think that's wishful thinking out of Morgantown.

 

[UConn Dan]

Yep, 100% agree on that point. I just don't think that we can take the word of a Charleston, WV reporter that dissolution of the LHN is a piece of cake or a slam dunk.

I think that's wishful thinking out of Morgantown.

Kirk Bohls (Austin American-Statesman) also mentioned in his article this weekend that the LHN could be folded into a big 12 network per his source (but not likely). So it's not just coming from WV - it's out there coming from Texas.

 

[NYUConn]

Kirk Bohls (Austin American-Statesman) also mentioned in his article this weekend that the LHN could be folded into a big 12 network per his source (but not likely). So it's not just coming from WV - it's out there coming from Texas.

Well fingers crossed. That's our meal ticket.

 

[businesslawyer]

Yep, 100% agree on that point. I just don't think that we can take the word of a Charleston, WV reporter that dissolution of the LHN is a piece of cake or a slam dunk.

I think that's wishful thinking out of Morgantown.

As I've made clear, I don't believe any of this crap at this point. But it would be rational for Texas to agree to roll the LHN into a Big XII Network if they are guarantied their current take for the length of the existing LHN arrangement.

 

[NYUConn]

As I've made clear, I don't believe any of this crap at this point. But it would be rational for Texas to agree to roll the LHN into a Big XII Network if they are guarantied their current take for the length of the existing LHN arrangement.

Agreed. I'll believe it when the ink is dry.

 

[hardcorehusky]

Part of the Longhorn Network thinking (other than $$$) was it would put UT ahead of A &M, Oklahoma, et al in terms of Longhorn exposure - something none of the other schools could have. There was pushback from the conference when the Network wanted to broadcast High School games. I have a feeling a few million more a year could take care of this problem for Texas.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Ehhhh, this is a very West Virginia-centric view of things.

Sure ESPN would restructure the LHN to a Big 12 network instantly, but where is the incentive for Texas to give up such a prestigious money-maker? You can't just say, "the Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn." That helps financially, but the exposure UT gets from having it's own network can't be rivaled by anything a Big 12 Network would provide.

How much exposure is Texas really getting out of the LHN now? I know ESPN is still paying UT, but hasn't ESPN basically abandoned it from a marketing and product support perspective?

 

[NYUConn]

How much exposure is Texas really getting out of the LHN now? I know ESPN is still paying UT, but hasn't ESPN basically abandoned it from a marketing and product support perspective?

Great question. Personally, I haven't seen anything promoting LHN whether it was a TV commercial, online ad or anything in years.

 

[Dooley]

I don't have LHN on my subscription and I get just about every single sports network imaginable. That's not to say it isn't on somewhere here in the northeast. But I doubt I'm the only one who doesn't get it on our package. And honestly, even if I did get it, I would NEVER watch it...unless UConn was playing Texas. If they become conference mates, maybe I would watch it.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I don't have LHN on my subscription and I get just about every single sports network imaginable. That's not to say it isn't on somewhere here in the northeast. But I doubt I'm the only one who doesn't get it on our package. And honestly, even if I did get it, I would NEVER watch it...unless UConn was playing Texas. If they become conference mates, maybe I would watch it.

It's not about watching it, it's about paying to have it. But even that concept in the current media world is changing rapidly.

What's most important for UCONN - is for us to survive and advance and build and maintain the biggest and largest market presence in the state of CT and beyond into the major metropolitan area that is New York City and into Boston.

Whatever happens nationally with media broadcasting, the demand for live broadcasting of athletics does not seem to be changing, although the bullsh--t system that is the college football national championship playoff appears to be doing everything it can to drive interest down.

But we can't control that.

Sooner or later, we'll either get back to being in control of our own media contracts on our own and maximize it that way, or somebody smart will realize that the ACC presidents, were idiots for not including UCONN into their poaching of the Big East conference and desire to build into the Northeast corridor of the USA, and a conference that makes a lot of money for it's membership, will include UCONN, to make even more money for their conference.

 

[Adios]

West Virginians taking over Hartford County on game days doesn't sound enticing.

 

[don356]

A little unclear how texas can be made whole if the things is bleeding money. I guess the added volume of games would subsidize it.