Non-Key Discussion | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
News and Notes from Around the Big 12

9. Although rumors have been swirling for months, the Sports Business Journal dropped a bombshell about the Big Ten’s negotiations with Fox, which we should expect to be wrapped up by this summer. I will have an article on it on its own in a week or two, but the most important part of the rumor had to do with it only being six years long, ending right as the Pac 12 and Big 12 contracts end. Many have speculated this means the Big Ten is preparing for an expansion move, but I’ve heard a few things to indicate it may be looking at the college sports media game differently. It is generally assumed that for the Big Ten to gain more markets for its network that it has to expand with schools to join its conference. However, word out of Chicago is that fourteen is already a difficult number to handle and expanding even more threatens to make it worse. Instead there is talk of using the Big Ten Network’s infrastructure to envelop the Big 12 for Texas and possibly the Pac 12 for the West Coast utilizing a common connection through Fox. These would not be conference expansion/mergers, but instead a media expansion/merger, as if the Big Ten Network was the Pac 12 and Big 12’s Tier Three media partner. This would turn the channel from conference centric to college sports centric, much like ESPNU. Games would be mirrored so each areas games played in their local footprint, allow BTN to charge higher rates in more areas, and feature scheduled out of conference games between the partners. While this allows the Big Ten and other conferences to sell more content to broadcasters as well, the ultimate goal would be to contain the SEC. Stay tuned.
 
So the Big Ten Network is going to somehow broadcast games owned by other networks?

I guess the PAC 12 didn't sell their rights and they don't have a network?

The media entities that own the B12 T3 rights will just let another network televise?
 
So the Big Ten Network is going to somehow broadcast games owned by other networks?

I guess the PAC 12 didn't sell their rights and they don't have a network?

The media entities that own the B12 T3 rights will just let another network televise?

Texas goes from refusing to subsidize the B12 to subsidizing the B10! With none of the perks!
 
I can't be the only one who feels this way...

I was fairly optimistic when talks were hot before and we were getting decent buzz. However, I was pretty relieved when it seemed Big12 expansion died. As bad as being in this conference is its at least sustainable as long no one else bolts. Could you imagine being in this league without, let's say, Cincy and Temple? If the Big12 doesn't expand that can't happen. With word coming out the meetings that expansion is still very much on the table I just have a bad feeling.
 
If there's any resolution to this realignment I would want UConn in the ACC, play Ball So Hard U vs Duke, NC, State, Cuse, Ville, etc.. Instead, I read about football attendance and hoping the Big 12 come off its ass. I'm sorry that it played out the way it did but I had no control over the situation. Maybe there's still a slight chance, if the presidents can see the wisdom.
 
.-.
MSMoose has been tending towards expansion not happening, and he seems to know what he is talking about. Flugs goes the other direction.

The Texas AD's comments were clearly very negative.

The Big 10 TV Agreement was clearly an earthquake, but it may have affected different programs differently. I still don't see the end game for the Big 12 schools outside of Texas and maybe Oklahoma. Not expanding looks like a suicide mission.
 
I can't be the only one who feels this way...

I was fairly optimistic when talks were hot before and we were getting decent buzz. However, I was pretty relieved when it seemed Big12 expansion died. As bad as being in this conference is its at least sustainable as long no one else bolts. Could you imagine being in this league without, let's say, Cincy and Temple? If the Big12 doesn't expand that can't happen. With word coming out the meetings that expansion is still very much on the table I just have a bad feeling.

We just go around in circles. In another thread, we're back to discussing will the ACC really let the Big 12 take us. None of it makes sense.
 
The Texas AD's comments were clearly very negative.

Yes, they were, which surprised me. The new regime had been pretty quiet and I was hopeful they were much smarter and more agreeable than their brash predecessors, but maybe it's just more of the same detrimental hubris.

At this particular time, I suppose they can sit on their cherished LHN, refuse to make concessions and let the Big 12 crumble all around them. But that's extremely shortsighted, and as such it's a stubborn gamble they will ultimately lose.

Very disappointing.
 
Yes, they were, which surprised me. The new regime had been pretty quiet and I was hopeful they were much smarter and more agreeable than their brash predecessors, but maybe it's just more of the same detrimental hubris.

At this particular time, I suppose they can sit on their cherished LHN, refuse to make concessions and let the Big 12 crumble all around them. But that's extremely shortsighted, and as such it's a stubborn gamble they will ultimately lose.

Very disappointing.

What does UT really lose?

If the goal is to keep the B12 together than you're right, they will likely lose. But, that doesn't appear to be their incentive in all of this.

UT appears to only be concerned with their revenues and the fact that they will have a significant revenue advantage over their B12 rivals (i.e. Oklahoma) for as long as the B12 lasts. UT is certain that if/when the B12 blows up they will probably have a choice of new conference homes. They may even be able to make a deal with the ACC to join the conference and keep the LHN.

While folks outside of Austin all say how shortsighted UT is being, in reality, they are the only ones who truly control their own destiny.
 
What does UT really lose?

If the goal is to keep the B12 together than you're right, they will likely lose. But, that doesn't appear to be their incentive in all of this.

UT appears to only be concerned with their revenues and the fact that they will have a significant revenue advantage over their B12 rivals (i.e. Oklahoma) for as long as the B12 lasts. UT is certain that if/when the B12 blows up they will probably have a choice of new conference homes. They may even be able to make a deal with the ACC to join the conference and keep the LHN.

While folks outside of Austin all say how shortsighted UT is being, in reality, they are the only ones who truly control their own destiny.

Texas could lose its rivalry with Oklahoma.

Texas lost its rivalries with Arkansas in '91 and A&M in '12 but that tolerable was because neither of them was ever consistently competitive or interesting enough to fuel much passion.

Oklahoma is Texas' arch-nemesis, and as such, it plays a part in Texas' own identity.

Imagine the Red Sox without the Yankees, God without Satan, Good without Evil, Yin without Yang.

What's the point of competition without a hated albeit begrudgingly respected 100 year rival?

If Texas loses its rivalry with Oklahoma, the passion that is normally directed towards Oklahoma will be directed at the president, chancellor and athletic director who let it happen.

Texas could also lose its smaller rivalries with Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech and its budding rivalries against Kansas, K State, Oklahoma St, Iowa St and West Virginia.

Texas could lose the luxury of playing rivals in their own region,climate and time zone.

Waco and Lubbock may be hell holes, but does Texas really want to get in a position of having to fly its golf team and softball team to places like Pullman, Washington?

After refusing to make concession regarding the Longhorn Network to save the Big 12, will Texas really want to have to scrap the LHN to join another conference?

Or does Texas really imagine they can make it as an independent? I can see them cobbling together a football schedule but good luck with the non-revenue sports. What will we do with them? Join the Sun Belt conference? {sarcasm} Yeah, that's a big improvement {sarcasm}.

Some Texas fans are sycophants who will see the administration's point of view and echo the company line until hell freezes over.

But if Texas is really putting its current revenue streams ahead of the long term consequences, then Texas is playing a very shortsighted game and I find it hard to believe they can be so foolish.
 
It may be smart for the NCAA to gather to discuss big power conferences for the revenue sports, and regional conferences for the non-revenue sports.

Football & Basketball stay in current national power conferences, women's bball too. Other sports stay in regional conferences. Soccer & Baseball are perhaps the only two sports that might want to go national. Hockey is already regional.
 
.-.

Ernie has issue...http://www.inquisitr.com/3054386/emilia-clarke-reveals-her-hopes-for-character-on-game-of-thrones/
41584cf6afd7e497261ceba21763dfc0
 
Christopher Lambert ‏@theDudeofWV 4h4 hours ago


@Martina My wife is having a hard time with her derby team. She agitates for better training & practices.



ME: Maybe she'll have better luck in the Preakness...
 
Yes, they were, which surprised me. The new regime had been pretty quiet and I was hopeful they were much smarter and more agreeable than their brash predecessors, but maybe it's just more of the same detrimental hubris.

At this particular time, I suppose they can sit on their cherished LHN, refuse to make concessions and let the Big 12 crumble all around them. But that's extremely shortsighted, and as such it's a stubborn gamble they will ultimately lose.

Very disappointing.

I doubt very much Texas is gambling. They have options lined up. Very likely the B1G is available if they leave ESPN and if they stay with ESPN, football independence / all-sports union with the ACC and keeping the LHN but with more content drawn from what was the B12's T1 and T2 to make it profitable. Both options are superior to anything the B12 can offer.
 
.-.
NCAA / Realignment Discussion (Part V)

If you are looking for the blockbuster to the B1G , this is it:

ND, UT, OU, UVA, GT, FSU

Who may be out: UNC, KU

UT wants OU for several obvious reasons, tradition, rivalry, big time, & UT not left on a geographic island.

UNC has serious NCAA allegations right now........and B1G desires the other schools to go to 20.

KU is just not a football factor and not a populous state even though a very good AAU school.

ME: something tells me that when things finally get moving it won't be nearly as fantastical as these bucknuts think would happen. And why the diss on the Jayhawks when they're the school most like them? :D
 
NCAA / Realignment Discussion (Part V)

As posted many times, decisions are in-process being made by several universities -

change conferences or stay where you are........

Different scenarios.....another scenario such as:

OU & OSU to SEC

UT & TTech to PAC12

KU, ND, UVA, UNC, GT & FSU to B1G



ME: A little more closer to realism in that the surviving P3 get some value out of the rest instead of one conference hogging all the brands. Still, very fantastical.
 
Based on what he has posted at that board so far, seared sounds like another pseudo-insider to me:

CR Part ))XII((: Conference Hospice & Realignment Speculation - Page 52

Until the formation of Pod's are established

Big Ten East


Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Penn State
Indiana
Maryland
Rutgers
Purdue
Illinois

Big Ten West


Texas
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Iowa
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Kansas
Missouri
Northwestern

Six of the top ten schools in the nation for the most wins.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,346
Messages
4,566,228
Members
10,468
Latest member
ADD3LA


Top Bottom