SchizoAg said:
rootube said:
SchizoAg said:
rootube said:
ELGINAG said:
rootube said:
I swear people on here care more about the B12 than horn fans. Dodds made their 100 year decision and it was the correct one in both the long term and the short term. Short term it makes Texas one of the richest and most valuable sports franchises in the world. Long term if/when the B12 dies the Longhorns will go independant or likely take their pick of any conference they choose. Show me how any of this hurts the Longhorns. Again I expect Sharp and Woodward to make decisions based on what is best for Texas A&M not the SEC. Right now those two interests happen to be in perfect sync.
We just need to thank our lucky stars that their 100 year decision helped make ours possible. On a side note the real losers here are the journalists who used to get a paycheck from ESPN, I wonder if they got longhorn network merch as part of their severance package.
Take their pick of conferences?? Weren't they already turned down by PAC, ACC and Big 10? Who's left, SEC?? Truly delusional sip think to believe they can go wherever they want. I hope they DO go independant. Then we will see exactly how valuable the Jonses are.They can't go Anywhere else with their fashion show/women's volleyball network.
Had a better offer is not the same as turned down. Do people really believe that Texas would fall to the Conference USA in a college football realignment?
Define "a college football realignment"?
Do you mean something that can actually happen, or some hypothetical scenario that is predicated on some counterfactual assumption?
In the real world, as it exists today, t.u. is persona non grata in the SEC. To the Big 10 and Pac 10, the LHN is an unacceptable poison pill. And the ACC is a terrible geographic fit.
No, I'm not claiming that they will "fall to CUSA". The most likely scenario is that t.u. will remain mired in the Big 12.
Is a scenario hypothetical if we literally just went through a major conference re-alignment in '11-'12? Of course it may never happen in which case the Longhorn long term prospects are fine in the B12. They are absolutely not "persona non grata". They would just have to re-negotiate their TV rights with ESPN, something they are going to have to do anyway at the end of the current contract. Trust me ESPN dreams of the day when they can fold the horns into an existing conference deal and stop paying ransom for the turd horn network. Either way they are not going to get a refund for the money they invested in the Horns.
You keep asserting without evidence that the SEC would have no problems doing business with t.u. because of their irresistible marquee value. But you're wrong. There are too many members of the SEC who have done business with t.u. and remember what a terrible business partner they are. Then there is the "gentleman's agreement" which would require Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Kentucky to stab A&M and Arkansas in the back to let in t.u. That just isn't how the SEC works. There's plenty of evidence for the SEC sacrificing a little money for the sake of more important goals. We've got money to burn, but goodwill, mutual respect and solidarity can't be bought with money.
Nebraska would also fight tooth and nail to keep them out of the Big 10, but they might lose that battle. (That's assuming t.u. got rid of the LHN and was able to surmount the political obstacles to jettison its Gaylor/Tard/Purple Gaylor baggage. ESPN can't "fold the LHN into a conference network" there, because the Big 10 already has a conference network, affiliated with FOX.)
Again, I think everybody keeps missing the most basic obstacle, and it actually has nothing to do with their well-documented arrogance and cancerous presence.
The Whorns add no money to the pile.
The issue is not how much they have. The issue is how much INCREMENTAL money they bring that is then shared. You think "SEC" stands for "Socialism et Communism"? You don't sign up and then turn over your own cash from ticket sales, licensing, etc.
The distribution comes from revenue generated from television contracts, bowl games, the College Football Playoff, the SEC football championship game, the SEC men's basketball tournament, NCAA championships and a supplemental surplus distribution. (Copied that from an article online.)
From Wikipedia: On January 13, 2014,
Sports Business Journal reported that ESPN was seeking a carriage rate of $1.30 per-subscriber per month in SEC markets, and $0.25 in non-SEC markets;
Now, what part of that is INCREASED by the whorns being here by an amount MORE than the amount that would be paid out them as a member? Our presence already invokes the higher subscription rate for the SECN inside the conference footprint, and that won't be charged twice with the addition of Texas.
Unless their presence add another SECCG, expands the CFP, or ESPN somehow is able to add ANOTHER dollar to the subscription rate, they are a net negative on the money to the other schools.
