If TAMU & OU don't see the money they were promised I could envision TAMU whining about it. Is it a foregone conclusion that they will see that money now? Y'all are telling me this deal plays a substantial role in the Big 12 staying intact? I'm just not connecting the dots I guess. I think an OU, UT, TAMU combo channel would have made more sense but UT really has nothing to gain on that front.
Lol ... that certainly was the goal for Texas all along, but both A&M and OU have the ability to go elsewhere and may choose to do so. ESPN is not giving all this money to Texas to show Women's volleyball and the Florida Atlantic football game every year. They are doing this to create an in to the Big XII to try and force a TV deal towards their direction (they do not want Fox getting it after the success of CBS with the SEC), which will probably result in OU and A&M getting less than initially promised. OU seems to be going along with whatever Texas wants, but the A&M president has stated that the Aggies are going to do what is best for them and if they don't get what they were promised, it is they who would leave the conference. Texas wouldn't really care though because they would just go independent, which is still good for ESPN. It is not a level playing field and that is not good for the Big XII or any team in it other than Texas. Yes, Texas has the right to get what it can, but A&M also has the right to leave to the SEC and do what is best for the Aggies. The Big XII is on life support right now. No way it lasts more than 2 years.
I don't think this really affects that. If the Big12 disbands, Texas would still be in demand by the other major conferences. Unlike this year, though, Texas would already have BevoNetwork, so the conference would just have to accept that. It's not like the network will be showing very much that would be shown on a Pac10 network or anything anyway. It would involve a bit of extra negotiating, but wouldn't change much, IMO. I don't think the Big12 will be around in 10 years. The whole thing is built on a foundation of sand.
I get that A&M could theoretically leave, but the fact that the state legislature all but forced them to go crawling back to UT's servant quarters this summer casts a great deal of doubt in my mind as to whether they will ever leave Texas' side. Things could change, of course, but the SEC is A&M's only realistic option and that possibility have been scuttled last year. A&M and Oklahoma are still making some comparatively big money in the UT+9 conference, and never expressed any intention of leaving until UT started spreading the PAC-10 rumors. I really do not think they are eager to leave UT and I certainly don't see them breaking up the conference of their own accord. If the conference dissolves, it will be UT's decision. Ultimately, I'm looking for a compelling reason for UT to go independent in the near future. They got their own network and don't have to worry about a conference championship game. Thanks to their threats over the summer, they get the lion's share of the Big 12 pie. Would going independent increase revenues further? How?
I think the two key issues would be: (1) Can they generate more in a TV deal for their premiere football / basketball games than the share they get from the Big12? The Big12 gives them about $20MM. They just got $15MM for a bunch of garbage games, so it may be possible to generate more than $20MM there as an independent. I think Notre Dame's next negotiation will probably give us a bit of a sense of that side of things. It will also be interesting to see what BYU generates as an independent. (2) Bowl money. If Texas makes a BCS Bowl now, the conference splits the $18MM or whatever that is generated. If Texas makes it as an independent, they get all of that. However, if they don't make a BCS bowl, they would get scrub bowl money as an independent; as a B12 member, they are guaranteed some decent bowl money because at least 1 team makes a BCS bowl for sure. Both of these kind of rely on Texas staying good, which is probably the biggest risk of going independent. If Texas goes back to what they were in the Mackovic years, things could go south very quickly.
I agree, Big 12 is on its last legs. So you think a conference would bend the rules to allow UT to enter and keep its own network even if a conference network already exists?
At the end of the day, if that's what it takes to get you Texas, I think so. Of course, that assumes Texas is what it is today. If Texas goes back to 1997 Texas, they lose a lot of that leverage. I think the biggest negotiating issue would be whether the Pac10 Network or BevoNet would get precedence for televising some random UT event (or that 1 football game, for example). But all the major sporting events would be in the Pac10's primary ABC/ESPN/etc contracts so I don't think it would be a dealbreaker.
Props to Matt Thomas on 790 for putting this promo together. <iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4C8f8H1w5t8" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>
really? you're not even trying anymore. maybe you should take a breather, regroup and come back to us with some new material.
Maybe I am biased, I don't think I am because I don't have anything against UT... but starting last night on ESPN, before the TAMU/UT bball game, I started to feel some UT bias.... you know, like USC had before they died. Maybe I am crazy... I hope so. Because a UT bias would make me grow to hate them.
