I'm not suggesting that Tech being ahead of schedule to achieve Tier 1 status puts them in the same covnersation with Stanford or UCLA. However, Tech is a better option for the PAC than Houston. Academically, yes I can see the argument for them being on par with one another, but tech is a far superior athletic program than UofH. Tech makes UofH's support look anemic.
Texas told the Big XII that they had no intentions to show conference games on their network, thus leaving the third tier rights available to be split amongst the member institutions. They also made no mention of showing HS sports. Then the contract came to light via a FOIA request that showed that was EXACTLY what they wanted to do. Almost immediately A&M started talking about the SEC. Coincidence? Maybe...but I doubt it.
This is the part I don't believe. Any sources? Main reason I ask is because when I first heard about the network, I'd always assumed that there would be football shown on the network. Did Texas also promise beforehand that high school games wouldn't be broadcast? Seems like a lot of conjecture on the part of the accusers.
And the damage to Texas A&M when the Longhorns square off against the woeful Jayhawks, with UT fighting for Alamo Bowl qualification, this fall....on the LHN...instead of on Fox Sports Southwest or regional ABC -- is what exactly?
The damage is that it's not a Tier 3 game if FSSW or Regional ABC was considering it. What is to stop Texas from putting 3 or 4 or 6 games on the network in the future? Or what's to stop ESPN, when their Big12 contract comes up for renewal in a few years, from demanding the right to take more UT games onto TLN as part of the deal? The minute ESPN developed a conflict of interest between their TLN and Big12 contracts, that becomes a problem for all other conference members.
So basically you're unable to identify any monetary losses or anything like that, and you're forced to resort to a slippery slope/dangerous precedent blah blah argument about what might happen in a few years - is this correct?
I never claimed there were any monetary damages - I don't think A&M has either. You're just creating a strawman here. Anybody with common sense would look at a situation as it develops and identify if their interests are being best served. It's quite clear ESPN was doing things that are not in the best interests of the other Big12 institutions, and so it makes sense for Big12 institutions to be alarmed. A&M saw a better alternative and took it. OU and OSU are now considering the same. If any other schools had better alternatives, they'd be jumping at them too. You'd have to be pretty terrible leader to wait until monetary damage has occurred before taking action to address a potential problem that can easily be seen, especially when you have the ideal opportunity to address it now. If you think it's a bad thing to look at what might happen in a few years and be proactive, please don't ever run an organization - it likely won't end well.
Nobody has claimed monetary damages. If anybody on this board could see the opportunity costs of LHN showing football reducing the overall take from a Big XII network (like the Big 10 network), I would have assumed it would be you. Conference networks for third tier rights is the future of college athletics. Texas demanding to show conference football games on their network diminishes the overall value for the package, thus reducing the take for everybody not named Texas.
West Virginia actually makes some sense. Culturally fits in, good football school that will be as competitive if not more so than A&M. And they instantly become one of the top basketball schools in the conference.
Lots of folks saying it is a done deal and th presser will be tomorrow, but Liucci is saying it is not a done deal and there are a few hurdles to clear (also that there will be no presser on Wednesday). Not sure who to believe, but I wont feel its done until I hear Loftin say it is done ... Too many powerful entities trying to derail this thing, and I still say they have a slim chance of doing that. Really want this to just end.
You are near the finish line but the fun is just getting started for the rest of the Little 12. I don't know if this is a good move for A&M's football program. Regardless, congratulations on leaving a solar system and joining a legit conference!
Well according to Liucci the last hurdle has been created by "Baylor" ... One can only assume some sort of litigation roadblock here. Funny thing is that if OU doesnt start talking openly about how the might leave the Big 12, this doesnt become an issue because Baylor was happy to just continue with a replacement for A&M. I still say the OU prez is bluffing in a last ditch attempt to stop A&Ms move by making sure Baylor does their dirty work in trying to stop us. Just dont think its a coincidence that OU went public right before we finalized things. This is getting ridiculous and we may be further from the finish line than most of us think.
The overall value for the current package? Or is this some unspecified future package that might maybe happen in the future that Texas A&M must protect itself from like skynet and the terminator robots?
So I guess I was correct - you can tell when Major is flustered when he resorts to personal insults - a rarity from our vulcan. You're trying to defend an untenable position - the answer, which you refuse to admit, is that there's not really any identifiable harm for Texas A&M to have a random conference game not involving it to be broadcast on one network or another...there simply is not.
Some are suggesting that Baylor filed some sort of Injunction to stop the move. Not a lawyer and im not going to pretend to know if it is even possible without us hearing about it yet. According to Looch, we will find out a lot more about it tomorrow so maybe this will be brought out into the light of day instead of behind the scenes legal posturing.
