Conference Re-Alignment Thread Part Who Knows

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

[quote=coogrfan;2042784124]The "Pac-16" was never a real possibility, because that conference would never grant UT the most favored nation status they enjoy in the Big XII. The UT admin used Chip Brown to put the threat out there in order to strongarm the remaining Big XII schools into agreeing to UT's desire to have it's own network.[/quote

Actually, it probably didn't occur because:

1) LHN Network came through to the amount of $300M
2) ESPN came in and basically put the Big 12 on par with the SEC
3) PAC 12 was not happy about the LHN.

One thing you need to realize is that Texas will be the big boy no matter what conference it goes to. It will always be one of the most desireable teams for any conference. The television revenue it will bring, the athletic department is the richest in the country, and it is a top academic institution.

Negotiations are always fluid when you are in a position of power.

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

The "Pac-16" was never a real possibility, because that conference would never grant UT the most favored nation status they enjoy in the Big XII. The UT admin used Chip Brown to put the threat out there in order to strongarm the remaining Big XII schools into agreeing to UT's desire to have it's own network.

Kansas St and Oklahoma are already in the works for their own TV networks. It isn't just Texas that wants this.

Every conference will have winner and Losers. You don't think that if Florida and Alabama wanted to make a move in the SEC that Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Miss St. wouldn't bow to that pressure? Or Northwestern, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue in the Big 10?

Texas didn't start all of this, Missouri, Nebraska, and Colorado did. No one was complaining about Texas when it was average at that start of the Big 12 and now because of its success everyone is crying. Oh well.

All of those schools benefitted from the BCS bowls that Texas went to. Texas passed on a larger share of revenue that the other teams offered to Texas and Oklahoma when the Big 12 split so that the revenue would be somewhat fair.

I would like to hear how Texas has bullied all of these schools.

[doom41]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Actually, it probably didn't occur because:

1) LHN Network came through to the amount of $300M
2) ESPN came in and basically put the Big 12 on par with the SEC
3) PAC 12 was not happy about the LHN.

One thing you need to realize is that Texas will be the big boy no matter what conference it goes to. It will always be one of the most desireable teams for any conference. The television revenue it will bring, the athletic department is the richest in the country, and it is a top academic institution.

Negotiations are always fluid when you are in a position of power.[/quote]


ESPN came in and put Texas on par with the SEC, not the Big 12-2.
FOX renegotiated their deal with the Big 12-2, after the schools came back together. All ESPN did for the Big 12-2 was agree to honor the current Big 12 contract, then they signed a deal with Texas and started undermining that Big 12 contract.

Tell me, if Texas will be the big boy, no matter what conference they are in, how come the PAC wouldn't "let" them have the LHN?
I'm not arguing Texas' value to a conference, but they won't get half of the benefits they enjoy in the Big 12-2 if the went to another confrence.

[AuburnAlumni]

It's looks like you are entitled to some "I told ya so's". Please be gentle.

I told you so.


That sums it up.

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Actually, it probably didn't occur because:

1) LHN Network came through to the amount of $300M
2) ESPN came in and basically put the Big 12 on par with the SEC
3) PAC 12 was not happy about the LHN.

One thing you need to realize is that Texas will be the big boy no matter what conference it goes to. It will always be one of the most desireable teams for any conference. The television revenue it will bring, the athletic department is the richest in the country, and it is a top academic institution.

Negotiations are always fluid when you are in a position of power.

ESPN came in and put Texas on par with the SEC, not the Big 12-2.
FOX renegotiated their deal with the Big 12-2, after the schools came back together. All ESPN did for the Big 12-2 was agree to honor the current Big 12 contract, then they signed a deal with Texas and started undermining that Big 12 contract.

Tell me, if Texas will be the big boy, no matter what conference they are in, how come the PAC wouldn't "let" them have the LHN?
I'm not arguing Texas' value to a conference, but they won't get half of the benefits they enjoy in the Big 12-2 if the went to another confrence.[/quote]

And you would be wrong about that:

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/mizzou/article_893a9d8d-a238-53e6-8225-61d9d3ba4d99.html

The fox contract is split equally among the schools and 76 percent of revenue is shared equally amongst schools up from 57%.

I think you need to get your information correct. The Big 12 splits revenue more equally than ever before.

[coogrfan]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Kansas St and Oklahoma are already in the works for their own TV networks. It isn't just Texas that wants this.

KSU's planned online digital distribution network isn't even remotely similar to the LHN; to claim otherwise is ridiculous. OU's network at this point is no more than an idea.

Every conference will have winner and Losers. You don't think that if Florida and Alabama wanted to make a move in the SEC that Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Miss St. wouldn't bow to that pressure? Or Northwestern, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue in the Big 10?

And yet UF, Bama, Mich and OSU don't pull rank the way UT routinely does. Both the SEC and Big Ten have far fairer revenue distribution schemes than does the Big XII. Not surprisingly, they also have far more lucrative tv deals than does the UT/OU centric Big XII. Think those two facts might be related?

Equal revenue distribution (after bowl expenses) = the best, strongest conferences in CFB. Grossly unfair revenue distribution as practiced in the Big XII has resulted in a conference that's about to come apart.

Clearly there is something to the old saw that says "A rising tide lifts all boats". UT could learn a thing or two from those conferences, but given the incredible hubris that is part and parcel of being a Longhorn they probably won't.

Texas didn't start all of this, Missouri, Nebraska, and Colorado did. No one was complaining about Texas when it was average at that start of the Big 12 and now because of its success everyone is crying. Oh well./

Actually, they did. All of those schools left because they grew tired of the being treated like second class citizens by the folks down in Austin.

As far as the powers that be at UT are concerned, the other Big XII schools exist solely to play the role of the Washington Generals to their Harlem Globetrotters. That might be good for UT, but it's bad for the long term viability of the Big XII.

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

KSU's planned online digital distribution network isn't even remotely similar to the LHN; to claim otherwise is ridiculous. OU's network at this point is no more than an idea.



And yet UF, Bama, Mich and OSU don't pull rank the way UT routinely does. Both the SEC and Big Ten have far fairer revenue distribution schemes than does the Big XII. Not surprisingly, they also have far more lucrative tv deals than does the UT/OU centric Big XII. Think those two facts might be related?

Equal revenue distribution (after bowl expenses) = the best, strongest conferences in CFB. Grossly unfair revenue distribution as practiced in the Big XII has resulted in a conference that's about to come apart.

Clearly there is something to the old saw that says "A rising tide lifts all boats". UT could learn a thing or two from those conferences, but given the incredible hubris that is part and parcel of being a Longhorn they probably won't.




Actually, they did. All of those schools left because they grew tired of the being treated like second class citizens by the folks down in Austin.

As far as the powers that be at UT are concerned, the other Big XII schools exist solely to play the role of the Washington Generals to their Harlem Globetrotters. That might be good for UT, but it's bad for the long term viability of the Big XII.

Do you even understand how the revenue is split in the Big 12 prior to all of this? It is based on TV money from Basketball and Football. Do you realize that if you put a quality product on the field and are televised more than you make more money? Kansas was #3 in revenue in 2008 due to its success on the football and basketball scene. It made roughly $1M less than Texas did. There were years were Nebraska and Oklahoma made more than Texas because they were on TV more or made BCS bowl appearances or whatnot.

All of the Big 12 members agreed to this deal at its formation. Now they have changed this and revenue is largely split evenly although it isn't clear exactly how much teams will receive. Nebraska of all people was against revenue sharing equally. Missouri that team that cried about the most, made more money than Nebraska made the year they wanted to leave. The largest spread between the teams as of 2008 was $3M dollars. Baylor made $3M less than Texas.

I think you guys need to understand what you are talking about before you start blaming Texas for this mess. None of the schools on top were going to vote to change this, including A&M and Nebraska. Nebraska left because they were going to make $20M dollars a year instead of $9M that they routinely made, not because of unequal revenue sharing.

By the way, Big 12 is onpar on its television deal with the SEC and the Big 10, er Big 12. They do not have substantially better deals.

Again, the Big 12 shares more revenue than ever before.

Yes, these strong conferences such as the SEC where really UK, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss St., Vanderbilt will never have a chance to win a national title really, but they will continue to chant SEC, SEC, SEC and be proud of the fact that they are the whipping boys for the power houses, Alabama (when they aren't on probation for cheating), Auburn, Florida, and LSU.

The SEC is powerful for these reasons:

1. Academics are largely not considered in recruiting
2. It is far more passionate about the sport in the southeast than in the midwest.
3. The powerhouse schools like Alabama, Florida, LSU have built in advantages that teams like Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Miss St, Ole Miss will never have.

So call me when any of those teams ever have a shot at a national title. I don't think they will.

Nebraska, Texas, and Oklahoma all played for National Championships in the Big 12, during that same time, LSU, Florida, Auburn, and Alabama played for national championships. One more team from the SEC played for a championship than the Big 12.

[jonpt]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

"One Big 12 administrator said there continues to be interest in gauging Arkansas' potential interest in joining the Big 12 - in what would essentially be a trade between the two leagues - and that BYU remains a potential target." From Chip Brown's article

Had to laugh at that...Not a chance in hell Arkansas leaves the SEC to get back in a conference with Texas. That comment makes no sense at all. Aside from that, very exicted to possibly having A&M in the SEC. We needed a true rival for a long time.

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

"One Big 12 administrator said there continues to be interest in gauging Arkansas' potential interest in joining the Big 12 - in what would essentially be a trade between the two leagues - and that BYU remains a potential target." From Chip Brown's article

Had to laugh at that...Not a chance in hell Arkansas leaves the SEC to get back in a conference with Texas. That comment makes no sense at all. Aside from that, very exicted to possibly having A&M in the SEC. We needed a true rival for a long time.

What I have to laugh at is that Arkansas was actually relevant in the SWC and since its move to the SEC has largely been irrelavant; although we will see if Petrino will change that.

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

"One Big 12 administrator said there continues to be interest in gauging Arkansas' potential interest in joining the Big 12 - in what would essentially be a trade between the two leagues - and that BYU remains a potential target." From Chip Brown's article

Had to laugh at that...Not a chance in hell Arkansas leaves the SEC to get back in a conference with Texas. That comment makes no sense at all. Aside from that, very exicted to possibly having A&M in the SEC. We needed a true rival for a long time.

By the way, your true rival was Texas. Frank Broyles thought that by joining the SEC that would force Texas to come along; however that didn't happen and Arkansas faded into mediocrity as it lost its in roads to Texas recruiting.

[jonpt]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

What I have to laugh at is that Arkansas was actually relevant in the SWC and since its move to the SEC has largely been irrelavant; although we will see if Petrino will change that.

Depends on what your definiton of relevant is. If you're only relevant if you win national championships as you mentioned earlier then Arkansas has never been relevant ever in football in either conference. You could basically say 80-90% of college football teams are not relevant today. Arkansas did go the Sugar Bowl last year and I am proud of that even though they lost. As far as relevance by whatever you're standards seem to be, the Big 12 compared to the SEC is becoming irrelevant and I have to laugh at that.

Also I put much more stock in winning the SEC west than the Southwest Conference. Just didn't mean as much to me. You win the SEC you're playing in the Natonal Championship. You win the Southwest then....well you're better than Texas that year.

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Depends on what your definiton of relevant is. If you're only relevant if you win national championships as you mentioned earlier then Arkansas has never been relevant ever in football in either conference. You could basically say 80-90% of college football teams are not relevant today. Arkansas did go the Sugar Bowl last year and I am proud of that even though they lost. As far as relevance by whatever you're standards seem to be, the Big 12 compared to the SEC is becoming irrelevant and I have to laugh at that.

Also I put much more stock in winning the SEC west than the Southwest Conference. Just didn't mean as much to me. You win the SEC you're playing in the Natonal Championship. You win the Southwest then....well you're better than Texas that year.

You are looking shortsided. From the 1960's to the early 1980's the Arkansas program routinely was ranked very high in polls and routinely went to prestigious bowls during that time. Yes, you have gone to a BCS bowl game recently, however, your move to the SEC has not shown the continued success that Arkansas had for over 20 years. You would not have been stuck in the SWC, but would have been in the Big 12 with rivals Texas and Texas A&M with natural recruiting ties to Texas.

Success would be BCS bowls and top 10 rankings, not necessarily National Championships.

[jonpt]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

By the way, your true rival was Texas. Frank Broyles thought that by joining the SEC that would force Texas to come along; however that didn't happen and Arkansas faded into mediocrity as it lost its in roads to Texas recruiting.

I just meant true rival as far as the LSU force rival for "the boot" that we have now. I think a team can have more than on rival. Texas would be bigger if we were in the same league just because of the dislike for them from most of the fans. Texas is still a big part of recruiting in my opinion. And I've never seen any documented quote from Broyles of what you say he thought.

[choadler]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

I just meant true rival as far as the LSU force rival for "the boot" that we have now. I think a team can have more than on rival. Texas would be bigger if we were in the same league just because of the dislike for them from most of the fans. Texas is still a big part of recruiting in my opinion. And I've never seen any documented quote from Broyles of what you say he thought.

Texas owns recruiting along with Oklahoma in Texas. Texas and Oklahoma take all of the top athletes and Arkansas is really not apart of that usually at all. Because of the 25 scholly limit, Arkansas gets the 2nd tier recruits, but usally doesn't take someone that Texas wants. Would it be different if Arky was in the same conference? Maybe, who knows.

[Perfect Zero]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Texas owns recruiting along with Oklahoma in Texas. Texas and Oklahoma take all of the top athletes and Arkansas is really not apart of that usually at all. Because of the 25 scholly limit, Arkansas gets the 2nd tier recruits, but usally doesn't take someone that Texas wants. Would it be different if Arky was in the same conference? Maybe, who knows.

Oh come on, now you're just fishing. One could argue (and I would agree) that Boise State has some of the top recruits in Texas going to Idaho and working their system well. A lot of kids from the Metroplex who might get overlooked go to the Bronchos and do very well playing on the smurf turf.

Which goes for me asking this: When Oklahoma starts to leave Texas behind, will Texas be the only team recruiting the best from this state?