Every time I read this I get real life embarrassed for the one posting it. It's like reading TexAgs, the place where the kids play and act like pouting douches 24/7.
I was all for UT getting a network, more power to them, but I can't poke fun at the fact nobody will carry it right now? C'monnnnnnnn.
I don't see why it can't be both. At the simplest level, if it gets better content/distribution, it will be an advantage; if it doesn't, it will be a failure. But even beyond that, HS football games have very limited interest - but they are of interest to recruits and their families. So you could conceivably have a channel that UT football recruits & the most diehard fans watch, giving Texas an advantage, but still a failure in that it doesn't have any mass appeal to generate real revenues for ESPN. UT's best move in the whole deal was to shift the risk to ESPN rather than itself. But it will be interesting to see how UT and ESPN's interests will converge and diverge. There is now talk about putting the BYU vs. TX game on the LHN if K-State doesn't work out. If that happens, Texas would be moving what is currently a nationally televised game on ESPN2 to a network that will have limited regional distribution at best. That would certainly be in ESPN's interest, but it doesn't help UT if the goal was actually increasing exposure.
I think it's fair to say that anyone who thinks these other major programs will sit back and watch UT get a network (and more $$) without eventually trying to get their own really isn't thinking it all the way through. UT just opened the door is all....
The Big 12 allows for it. Other conferences don't. Lets get to step 1., a conference changing its rules, before we start throwing stuff like this out there. Don't forget -- the Pac 16 wasn't about to let UT get its own network...
I think it can qualify as a financial/commercial failure and a big success for UT at the same time. Either way, they've got their money and whatever exposure comes with the network is just gravy on top of that. Unfair gravy, to some. Especially based on how this network kills any notion of a Big 12 network (i.e. hurts other schools earning power and potential exposure), which seems to work so well in the best conferences (PAC12, SEC, Big10).
Do you have a link or something to show that other conferences, like the SEC, don't allow individual teams to have their own networks? Which conferences specifically don't allow this? I recall hearing that the Pac 16 wouldn't allow it. But besides USC, what team in their conference could even support one? I recall hearing the Big East saying the same because they have their own network. Has anyone from the SEC said this is not allowed?
Exactly. If you think Alabama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, etc. will just sit there while Texas, ND, OU, BYU, etc. are all rolling in the money from their own networks, then you are naive. Last month there were no rules against showing high school games explicitly, but all it took was a couple of teams to get together and change that. The exact same thing will happen when it becomes apparent that these personal networks are the future of college athletics. And they are.
I'm pretty sure the SEC, Pac 12, and Big 10 have some kind of rules about no individual networks/tv contracts for their member schools.
I'm not saying they don't. But there seems to be folks speaking from two different sides on this issue so I'm asking to get some concrete clarity. I mean I'm not saying provide a link to the SEC charter but if anyone is aware of someone from the SEC saying "our teams can't get a network deal", a major school like Bama being rumored to want to pursue a deal, etc.
In either case, this Big 12 is going to be a shining example of how individual TV contracts don't work within the context of a conference. Unless you want it to be that lopsided, like so many things around these parts are.
That's not necessarily true. The other major team seems to want their own network. Two of the teams they are seeking will want one as well if they came to the Big 12 (ND and BYU). I don't think they are coming but the appeal may actually show other teams how much $$ they are missing out on. The network isn't the issue for the Big 12. The fact that no other team in the conference can flex like UT can is the issue.
Its practically common knowledge and it comes up in the media every time someone talks about a team like Notre Dame joining a conference. The SEC already has a network contract in place. They cant break it. Someone will find a link soon enough. I'm not doing it. Why don't you go find the link that says the SEC can allow indie-networks.
Folks misinterpret or misreport what's "common knowledge" all the time. This thread is a perfect example of that. I've searched for links and couldn't find anything, hence me asking. If you don't wanna look or aren't aware of something then don't look or just say that.
You're assuming all these schools will be rolling in money from their own networks. The LHN is the first of its kind, and it may very well fail. At this point, no one except Verizon has agreed to carry it and it's unclear what type of content it will have. A year from now, ESPN could very well decide they overpaid for it, and any future network might not get nearly the deal that Texas got. But beyond that, the alternative to Alabama getting its own network is an SEC Network. That model is bringing in boatloads of money for the Big10 and soon to be the Pac12. If that alternative gets better distribution and better content, it may just make more sense to go with that. Not every school has the reach and alumni that Texas has, or the content to produce enough programming to make it worth having their own network.
I think the Network will be fine, but only if Texas goes independent AND can continue to create an excellent schedule. Obviously there are other problems with going Independent. ESPN is trying to sell the LHN to cable providers at $0.40. That is more than the freaking Big Ten network! Also almost as much as TBS and other major cable channels sell their channel for. I think the LHN can be successful, but not at that price, and they will need to have nearly all the games on that channel. This is why the LHN style of network will not spread because schools are not going to have access to their conference games or else conferences will cease to exist. That said, I don't think ESPN is stupid, and they realized they were not going to fully get their investment back. The LHN was a bribe for Texas to keep the Big XII together last year to try and prevent the Super Conferences that is going to cost ESPN a ton of money in re-negotiated TV deals. They didn't count on A&M potentially throwing a wrench in it and going SEC. We'll see how long it takes before Conference Armageddon is actually upon us. I've said all along. Congrats to Texas for getting what they can, but they can't have their cake (LHN with conference games and opting out of a Big XII Network) and eat it too (maintain a stable conference without defections from teams with better options).
the big 12 network is killed by the fact that nobody gives a **** how many tv sets there are in Ames, Lawrence, Manhattan (the little apple), Norman...etc. That's because Disney just booked a hugely profitable quarter based largely on ESPN & its add-ons (largely extra ESPN networks & PPV). The market for live sports content has been recalibrated.
