Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan
Another article discussing UT's options now that OU/OSU are basically gone. Amazing that UT has overplayed their hand so far to the point where they are left with no really good options assuming the Pac-XX holds firm on 'no LHN'.
Sources: Texas has three viable realignment options |
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgfan
I suppose it's possible that a surviving Big-12 could land a huge new TV deal in the future that, combined with the existing 2nd tier rights deal, the Longhorn Network deal and the various concessions negotiated with the rest of the conference would provide Texas with more money than what they'd get as an equal revenue sharing partner in the Pac-16 (or Big Ten for that matter), but I have my doubts.
Texas will make a shit-ton of money in the Pac-16. The existing mega-deal plus the projected revenues of the wholly-owned Pac Networks are already projected to bring in $33-36M per school once the Pac Networks are in full swing. And that doesn't even take into account the potential for the conference to renegotiate their deal with Fox/ESPN after landing Oklahoma and Texas (and the Big-12 no longer being an entity) for even higher per-team takes.
|
It's possible, but I think those numbers are high, unless they are projections down the road. The deal with the cable companies will be somewhat limiting because they are really going to be counting on the rights fees rather than subscriber fee. The cable companies want the programming to add value and fight cord-cutting. It's not about getting subscriber fees, which is the BTN/LHN model.
Texas things they can blow past that number. I think they believe LHN can bring in $50 million a year and they don't want to share that revenue.