Realignment talk not going away

[Slacks 6819]

4 hours ago, Lone Star Horn said:

Well, considering that the typical aggy couldn't win a fight against a 5 year old little girl, it's easy to understand why they wouldn't try to pick a fight with you.

 

Oh snap!  I always thought that picture was just something Thujone made up!

[TKthunder2 4985]

5 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

I'm curious how you believe the Big 12 was giving the middle finger to Texas. They allowed unequal revenue sharing for a very long time when all other conferences split revenue equally. They allowed schools to keep all tier 3 revenue and allowed Texas to have their own network when no other conference would have even considered that. Frankly, the biggest anti-Texas voices in the conference bailed, and now Texas is leaving to rejoin one of them. Texas has been kneecapping themselves competitively all on their own.

Are you serious?

[TrashMaster G 17551]

The ability, or lack therof, to quickly and efficiently channel flip is the single biggest factor in why I HATE any live college football moving to streaming platforms. The user experience blows goats.

[Brisketexan 105083]

The ability, or lack therof, to quickly and efficiently channel flip is the single biggest factor in why I HATE any live college football moving to streaming platforms. The user experience blows goats.

So much this. Shit, it’s annoying when we’re watching anything on Netflix and I want to flip over to catch the weather on the local news.
Also, I like watching live sports with a DVR. I can rewind and replay key plays as I wish. I can pause the game while my wife comes out of the bedroom to tell me we need to add milk to the shopping list, so I don’t miss an actual play.
Streaming is fine for movies and standalone series. It sucks for live sports.

[DFW Horn 6123]

10 hours ago, Lone Star Horn said:

Well, considering that the typical aggy couldn't win a fight against a 5 year old little girl, it's easy to understand why they wouldn't try to pick a fight with you.

 

I hadn't seen Clem's profile yet. Egad

 

[closetohumping 17437]

7 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

I'm curious how you believe the Big 12 was giving the middle finger to Texas. They allowed unequal revenue sharing for a very long time when all other conferences split revenue equally. They allowed schools to keep all tier 3 revenue and allowed Texas to have their own network when no other conference would have even considered that. Frankly, the biggest anti-Texas voices in the conference bailed, and now Texas is leaving to rejoin one of them. Texas has been kneecapping themselves competitively all on their own.

Lhn was what kept this league together. We would’ve bailed long ago.  So fuck off and enjoy your games vs cincy

[TTU13 108]

I have multiple TVs in my man cave and am a chord cutter so games I want to watch and flip between isn’t a big deal for me.

The game changer not being talked about is legalized betting. As more states legalize gambling and if game times are staggered enough you’ll see more adoption.

I have friends who never cared about sports or only care about one sport (not football). As they e gotten exposure to sports betting they’ve gotten way more into sports. That is the game changer I imagine Amazon is betting on.

Bars are starting to recognize this and are doing a much better job pre-setting their TVs with various platforms and marking the TVs so when you show up it’s pre determined what is on where. This is most likely the future and Amazon is going to get into the sports betting world with their own app or acquire someone.

[TKthunder2 4985]

22 minutes ago, TTU13 said:

I have multiple TVs in my man cave and am a chord cutter so games I want to watch and flip between isn’t a big deal for me.

The game changer not being talked about is legalized betting. As more states legalize gambling and if game times are staggered enough you’ll see more adoption.

I have friends who never cared about sports or only care about one sport (not football). As they e gotten exposure to sports betting they’ve gotten way more into sports. That is the game changer I imagine Amazon is betting on.

Bars are starting to recognize this and are doing a much better job pre-setting their TVs with various platforms and marking the TVs so when you show up it’s pre determined what is on where. This is most likely the future and Amazon is going to get into the sports betting world with their own app or acquire someone.

I have multiple TVs as well and I went back and looked at the PAC12’s regular season schedule and figured I watched about 1.5 games per week on average. More than the ACC but less than any other P5 conferences. That being said, when you remove USC/UCLA from that equation that number drops to just 1 game a week. I noticed that every game I watched was on ABC/ESPN or FOX. I did not watch (or at least remember watching) any games on ESPN2/U or FS1/2/+ (though honestly I might have split screened one in on the ESPN app if nothing else was on though it wasn’t memorable).

If the PAC12 was pulled off ESPN/FOX entirely, I’m not sure how many of those I would watch. The answer is obviously not zero, but I think it’s reasonable to say it will be less than the 1 a week that I currently tune into.

Changing the app isn’t a huge deal breaker but it is more cumbersome and unless there is nothing else on or it’s a highly ranked matchup I’m far less likely to tune into Amazon than simply flipping to the channel or adding it to my multi view on the ESPN or FOX apps…and that WILL drive down viewership, exposure, and their future earnings.

[BurntOrange&White 39930]

8 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

So much this. Shit, it’s annoying when we’re watching anything on Netflix and I want to flip over to catch the weather on the local news.
Also, I like watching live sports with a DVR. I can rewind and replay key plays as I wish. I can pause the game while my wife comes out of the bedroom to tell me we need to add milk to the shopping list, so I don’t miss an actual play.
Streaming is fine for movies and standalone series. It sucks for live sports.

Why is she telling you about a grocery list? That's her job! 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

11 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Are you serious?

Yeah, I really don't see how the league could have been more accommodating, short of having different schools that made more money. The schools in the conference have done everything they possibly can to keep Texas happy.

[closetohumping 17437]

I also prefer everything in one app.  Changing to amazon was annoying 

[TKthunder2 4985]

39 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Yeah, I really don't see how the league could have been more accommodating, short of having different schools that made more money. The schools in the conference have done everything they possibly can to keep Texas happy.

Let’s do this for the 100th time…

Back in the late 90’s before 12 game schedules were a permanent fixture and before FOX had college football, there were only so many broadcast windows.

Texas football was popular, Baylor (for example) was not. Texas had most of its games broadcasted and Baylor had very few. The UNEQUAL revenue sharing was to compensate Texas for having more games on TV. Yes, as a reward, but also because without unequal revenue Baylor and the other less popular schools would have made MORE money off PPV than Texas did because they did not share 3rd tier rights. Texas would be lucky to get access to one football game a year that it could sell on PPV, while Kansas and Baylor could sell most of their games and keep those profits.

Obviously that was the reason for unequal revenue sharing. Not because the Big 12 was thankful for Texas.

Texas didn’t like this system and wanted to push for a joint network (before the BTN ever existed) to share those 3rd tier rights, but the smaller schools shot down that idea and said it would be a failure because they didn’t want to risk their PPV income.

When the Big12 voted down the conference network Texas tried to do a joint network with aggy and later alone but neither were successful as Texas didn’t not have a lot of guaranteed inventory to make that was predictable year in year out.

When the conference blew up thanks to corn and aggy, Texas offered to go full equal revenue with the remaining schools, in exchange for some guaranteed third tier inventory which ESPN quickly gobbled up. This was completely predictable and Texas never hid its desire for a network but when the news came out it was as if Texas had somehow fucked over the Big 12 despite just giving them a shit load more money each year.

The Big 12 didn’t “allow” any of these things. They were obvious decisions that had to be made at the time. The Big 12 have never in its history been a forward thinking, progressive organization. The other schools are only self interested and never think past their immediate gratification.

Start a Big 12 Network…nope…NU/CU leave…let’s give Texas/Oklahoma more of the exit fee to stay (which they declined because they knew it would be thrown back in their face years later)…EQUAL revenue sharing for guaranteed third tier rights…ABSOLUTELY…LHN started with those same rights…let’s bitch about that for the next decade and bemoan the lack of a conference network (despite voting down that idea years ago) and pass rules and restrictions on what they can and cannot do.
 

The Big 12 has no one to blame but themselves for their incompetence.

Edited January 17, 2023 by TKthunder2

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

There's really nothing the Big 12 did in the last decade to spite Texas organizationally.  Do the other fanbases hate Texas and blame Texas for everything?  Yeah.  Did the institutions themselves treat Texas that way?  Not from what I can see (at least I know my school didn't).

Texas's dissatisfaction with the Big 12 had a lot more to do with concerns about making up revenue gaps vis a vis the SEC in the NIL era, and fans wanting more blue bloods on the home schedule than it did how the schools left after the 2010-2011 realignment acted as partners.  The 10 team Big 12 was never going to provide those things at a satisfactory level.

And there really isn't a ton of reason to keep hashing it out.  The new Big 12 will be financially viable, have a seat at the table, and the remaining schools won't have to be constantly waiting for the blue bloods to pull the rug out anymore.  Texas will make more money and have a home schedule that features bigger brands on a more regular basis.  Everyone's arguably better off - or at least you could say everyone got what they wanted at the end of the day.  Maybe the remaining Texas schools are pissed that they don't get UT on the schedule anymore, but from my perspective that's not a big deal at all.

Edited January 17, 2023 by Al_4_ISU

[closetohumping 17437]

22 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Let’s do this for the 100th time…

Back in the late 90’s before 12 game schedules were a permanent fixture and before FOX had college football, there were only so many broadcast windows.

Texas football was popular, Baylor (for example) was not. Texas had most of its games broadcasted and Baylor had very few. The UNEQUAL revenue sharing was to compensate Texas for having more games on TV. Yes, as a reward, but also because without unequal revenue Baylor and the other less popular schools would have made MORE money of PPV than Texas did because they did not share 3rd tier rights. Texas would be lucky to get access to one football game a year that it could sell on PPV, while Kansas and Baylor could sell most of their games and keep those profits.

Obviously that was the reason for unequal revenue sharing. Not because the Big 12 was thankful for Texas.

Texas didn’t like this system and wanted to push for a joint network (before the BTN ever existed) to share those 3rd tier rights, but the smaller schools shot down that idea and said it would be a failure because they didn’t want to risk their PPV income.

When the Big12 voted down the conference network Texas tried to do a joint network with aggy and later alone but neither were successful as Texas didn’t not have a lot of guaranteed inventory to make that was predictable year in year out.

When the conference blew up thanks to corn and aggy, Texas offered to go full equal revenue with the remaining schools, in exchange for some guaranteed third tier inventory which ESPN quickly gobbled up. This was completely predictable and Texas never hid its desire for a network but when the news came out it was as if Texas had somehow fucked over the Big 12 despite just giving them a shit load more money each year.

The Big 12 didn’t “allow” any of these things. They were obvious decisions that had to be made at the time. The Big 12 have never in its history been a forward thinking, progressive organization. The other schools are only self interested and never think past their immediate gratification.

Start a Big 12 Network…nope…NU/CU leave…let’s give Texas/Oklahoma more of the exit fee to stay (which they declined because they knew it would be thrown back in their face years later)…EQUAL revenue sharing for guaranteed third tier rights…ABSOLUTELY…LHN started with those same rights…let’s bitch about that for the next decade and bemoan the lack of a conference network (despite voting down that idea years ago) and pass rules and restrictions on what they can and cannot do.
 

The Big 12 has no one to blame but themselves for their incompetence.

Didn’t Texas and Ou also let the remaining schools split the buyout money?

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

2 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Let’s do this for the 100th time…

Back in the late 90’s before 12 game schedules were a permanent fixture and before FOX had college football, there were only so many broadcast windows.

Texas football was popular, Baylor (for example) was not. Texas had most of its games broadcasted and Baylor had very few. The UNEQUAL revenue sharing was to compensate Texas for having more games on TV. Yes, as a reward, but also because without unequal revenue Baylor and the other less popular schools would have made MORE money off PPV than Texas did because they did not share 3rd tier rights. Texas would be lucky to get access to one football game a year that it could sell on PPV, while Kansas and Baylor could sell most of their games and keep those profits.

Obviously that was the reason for unequal revenue sharing. Not because the Big 12 was thankful for Texas.

Texas didn’t like this system and wanted to push for a joint network (before the BTN ever existed) to share those 3rd tier rights, but the smaller schools shot down that idea and said it would be a failure because they didn’t want to risk their PPV income.

When the Big12 voted down the conference network Texas tried to do a joint network with aggy and later alone but neither were successful as Texas didn’t not have a lot of guaranteed inventory to make that was predictable year in year out.

When the conference blew up thanks to corn and aggy, Texas offered to go full equal revenue with the remaining schools, in exchange for some guaranteed third tier inventory which ESPN quickly gobbled up. This was completely predictable and Texas never hid its desire for a network but when the news came out it was as if Texas had somehow fucked over the Big 12 despite just giving them a shit load more money each year.

The Big 12 didn’t “allow” any of these things. They were obvious decisions that had to be made at the time. The Big 12 have never in its history been a forward thinking, progressive organization. The other schools are only self interested and never think past their immediate gratification.

Start a Big 12 Network…nope…NU/CU leave…let’s give Texas/Oklahoma more of the exit fee to stay (which they declined because they knew it would be thrown back in their face years later)…EQUAL revenue sharing for guaranteed third tier rights…ABSOLUTELY…LHN started with those same rights…let’s bitch about that for the next decade and bemoan the lack of a conference network (despite voting down that idea years ago) and pass rules and restrictions on what they can and cannot do.
 

The Big 12 has no one to blame but themselves for their incompetence.

Once Aggy and Nebraska bailed (over issues that they very much helped create) there was nothing the remaining Big 12 schools could do satiate Texas and OU's desire for name brand opponents, and there wasn't the demographic power to demand top dollar TV contracts.

None of this is due to the incompetence of the post 2011 Big 12 members.  The bad decisions that ultimately doomed the Big 12 were made long before that point with departing schools (IE Neb and Aggy) being heavily responsible.

Edited January 17, 2023 by Al_4_ISU

[TKthunder2 4985]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

There's really nothing the Big 12 did in the last decade to spite Texas organizationally.  Do the other fanbases hate Texas and blame Texas for everything?  Yeah.  Did the institutions themselves treat Texas that way?  Not from what I can see (at least I know my school didn't).

Texas's dissatisfaction with the Big 12 had a lot more to do with concerns about making up revenue gaps vis a vis the SEC in the NIL era, and fans wanting more blue bloods on the home schedule than it did how the schools left after the 2010-2011 realignment acted as partners.  The 10 team Big 12 was never going to provide those things at a satisfactory level.

And there really isn't a ton of reason to keep hashing it out.  The new Big 12 will be financially viable, have a seat at the table, and the remaining schools won't have to be constantly waiting for the blue bloods to pull the rug out anymore.  Texas will make more money and have a home schedule that features bigger brands on a more regular basis.  Everyone's arguably better off - or at least you could say everyone got what they wanted at the end of the day.  Maybe the remaining Texas schools are pissed that they don't get UT on the schedule anymore, but from my perspective that's not a big deal at all.

 

39 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Once Aggy and Nebraska bailed (over issues that they very much helped create) there was nothing the remaining Big 12 schools could do satiate Texas and OU's desire for name brand opponents, and there wasn't the demographic power to demand top dollar TV contracts.

None of this is due to the incompetence of the post 2011 Big 12 members.  The bad decisions that ultimately doomed the Big 12 were made long before that point with departing schools (IE Neb and Aggy) being heavily responsible.

These are generally fair posts but let’s not act like 6 Original B12 members: Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, K State, and Oklahoma State had nothing to do with the previous issues as well.

And yes some things have been done like restricting the LHN from broadcasting high school events (even those held on our own campus) and trying to limit NIL budgets.

Still overall I agree that this move was likely for the best for everyone involved.

[Nueces River Rat 5538]

I thought this idiotic conference we are going to leave was supposed to release the conference schedule today?

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

36 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

 

These are generally fair posts but let’s not act like 6 Original B12 members: Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, K State, and Oklahoma State had nothing to do with the previous issues as well.

And yes some things have been done like restricting the LHN from broadcasting high school events (even those held on our own campus) and trying to limit NIL budgets.

Still overall I agree that this move was likely for the best for everyone involved.

I don't think these schools had as much to do with the issues in the original Big 12, simply due to their lack of cache and power internally.  It's not like they're above that sort of behavior, just that their actions have less consequence.  I just don't think they were all that capable of wielding influence in any particular direction.  To use a reversal, I don't think the Big 10 has the harmony level it does because of Iowa, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, NW.  It's because of Ohio State and Michigan being in lock step for 120 years and the other schools acquiescing because it behooves them.

Because the Big 12 was the Big 8 + the four most viable members of the SWC, you had multiple schools that were used to being the swinging dicks crowding into the same room without a baseline for institutional cooperation (whereas the Big 10 and SEC have blue bloods who'd been working together for 100 years).  Nebraska and Texas hated each other almost immediately.  It's like when 2 small towns merge their school into one - in the first few classes there are guys who have been used to being top dog crowded into the same field and they hate each other and things are generally dysfunctional for a period of time before it normalizes.  The Big 12 never normalized because a couple of the schools with the most influence bailed pretty quickly into the arrangement.

6 minutes ago, Nueces River Rat said:

I thought this idiotic conference we are going to leave was supposed to release the conference schedule today?

Now this is something that conference is being completely incompetent about.

Edited January 17, 2023 by Al_4_ISU

[camel at sea 589]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Once Aggy and Nebraska bailed (over issues that they very much helped create) there was nothing the remaining Big 12 schools could do satiate Texas and OU's desire for name brand opponents, and there wasn't the demographic power to demand top dollar TV contracts.

None of this is due to the incompetence of the post 2011 Big 12 members.  The bad decisions that ultimately doomed the Big 12 were made long before that point with departing schools (IE Neb and Aggy) being heavily responsible.

Disagree.  The R8 handled OU's desire for expansion unbelievably poorly (both in 2012-2013 with Louisville and 2015-2016 with BYU/Cincy/Houston.)  The R8 admins used media intermediaries (Dennis Dodd / Sam Mellinger) to insult Boren.  They refused to talk expansion privately and then attacked Boren for going around them and forcing the issue publicly (something he had to do b/c his donors were insisting on it.)  The biggest issue seemed to be a refusal to believe that OU's gripes were real (i.e. "what do you mean that you aren't happy with your home schedule?  That's absurd!  We're on your home schedule!")  

The whole thing got really petty by the end of that second expansion process.  That's when the "Baker Mayfield Rule" stuff came up.  Texas and even Texas Tech voted to implement the new walk-on transfer rules.  Three schools (you can guess who they were) voted no.  After all of that, OU got really quiet until the SEC move was announced.

Texas - by contrast - never attacked OU (directly or via media intermediaries) over any of that.  By most accounts, UT didn't want expansion but was open to discussing it.  Texas voted for the walk-on transfer rule change b/c it was a good rule change (even if its immediate beneficiary was Oklahoma.)  In short, UT brass acted like adults.

Edited January 17, 2023 by camel at sea

[MAUFRAIS 6620]

Now this is something that conference is being completely incompetent about.

They’re waiting for UH to tell them all their requests. You’ve got to handle VIPs with care.

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

12 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Disagree.  The R8 handled OU's desire for expansion unbelievably poorly (both in 2012-2013 with Louisville and 2015-2016 with BYU/Cincy/Houston.)  The R8 admins used media intermediaries (Dennis Dodd / Sam Mellinger) to insult Boren.  They refused to talk expansion privately and then attacked Boren for going around them and forcing the issue publicly (something he had to do b/c his donors were insisting on it.)  The biggest issue seemed to be a refusal to believe that OU's gripes were real (i.e. "what do you mean that you aren't happy with your home schedule?  That's absurd!  We're on your home schedule!")  

The whole thing got really petty by the end of that second expansion process.  That's when the "Baker Mayfield Rule" stuff came up.  Texas and even Texas Tech voted to implement the new walk-on transfer rules.  Three schools (you can guess who they were) voted no.  After all of that, OU got really quiet until the SEC move was announced.

Texas - by contrast - never attacked OU (directly or via media intermediaries) over any of that.  By most accounts, UT didn't want expansion but was open to discussing it.  Texas voted for the walk-on transfer rule change b/c it was a good rule change (even if its immediate beneficiary was Oklahoma.)  In short, UT brass acted like adults.

I don't believe for one second that OU would have been happy to add Louisville, BYU, Cincy, or Houston to their schedule when they were already thinking the Big 12 schedule wasn't good enough.  The R8 remained against expansion because they believed (based on information from the networks) that per school pay out would drop and OU and Texas would bail for that reason. 

The only hope to keep UT and OU would have been snagging a blue blood from another league (like when Clemson and FSU were rumored to be annoyed with the ACC), but the perception of the Big 12 at that time was so damaged that simply wasn't possible.  At the end of the day, I really don't think there was anything that could have been done by the rest of the Big 12 after Aggy and Nebraska left to keep UT and OU interested in staying.  Even if one of the other schools had won a natty or something the response would have been a more succinct version of "we don't care about playing them because they weren't good 30 years ago and they don't have that kind of prestige".

Money and prestige were never coming from the R8.

[TrashMaster G 17551]

16 minutes ago, MAUFRAIS said:

They’re waiting for UH to tell them all their requests. You’ve got to handle VIPs with care.

Tilman Fertitta can get bent

[YGIFS 19449]

20 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Tilman Fertitta can get bent

He's got a serious Kevin Eltife envy complex.  

I would assume we'd play just 2 games from the new group.  1 home, 1 away.  1 neutral with OU.  And in a 9-game slate, 6 others from the remaining 8 current members (3+3).  Not sure what that looks like for an 8-game slate.  

Best case scenario for travel/TV-v. Oklahoma, Cincinnati, TX Tech, K-State, OK-State, @BYU or @UCF, @TCU, @Baylor, @ISU or @WVU.  +3 non-conf.

Worst case scenario for travel/TV-v. Oklahoma, UCF, Kansas, OK-State, TX Tech, @Houston, @Iowa State, @West Virginia, @Baylor +3 non-conf.

League needs us to have the first slate.  AD's and opposing fans want us to have the second slate.  

But yeah there's a chance, bullshit aside, our home schedule next year is Rice, Wyoming, Kansas, Kansas State, UCF, and OK-State.  That'd be pretty awful

[camel at sea 589]

30 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I don't believe for one second that OU would have been happy to add Louisville, BYU, Cincy, or Houston to their schedule when they were already thinking the Big 12 schedule wasn't good enough.  The R8 remained against expansion because they believed (based on information from the networks) that per school pay out would drop and OU and Texas would bail for that reason. 

Expanding to 12 would have allowed a return to an 8 game schedule, and an extra OOC game annually.  *That* is what would have helped the annual home slate.  The rhetoric at the time was that OU's home slate was fine as it was and that OU could play 2 P5's OOC, in the three game window, if Castiglione had any issues with it  There was nothing conciliatory coming from the old Big 12 North schools. 

There was also the general pettiness that was a problem (the media attacks, the transfer rule vote, etc.)    

As for money?  The Big 12 had a pro rata clause in its contract.  The Big 12 would have made additional money via the CCG (from ____ until the rule change in 2017.)  The Big 12 could have had an extended phase-in period for new members financially.  The R8 were concerned about elevating more universities to P5 stature and creating future competition for open slots that might open elsewhere.  They were also concerned that expanding would make it easier for OU and Texas to leave at the end of the current deal.  Nobody from the R8 was being forward thinking about building up the Big 12.  

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

19 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Expanding to 12 would have allowed a return to an 8 game schedule, and an extra OOC game annually.  *That* is what would have helped the annual home slate.  The rhetoric at the time was that OU's home slate was fine as it was and that OU could play 2 P5's OOC, in the three game window, if Castiglione had any issues with it  There was nothing conciliatory coming from the old Big 12 North schools. 

There was also the general pettiness that was a problem (the media attacks, the transfer rule vote, etc.)    

As for money?  The Big 12 had a pro rata clause in its contract.  The Big 12 would have made additional money via the CCG (from ____ until the rule change in 2017.)  The Big 12 could have had an extended phase-in period for new members financially.  The R8 were concerned about elevating more universities to P5 stature and creating future competition for open slots that might open elsewhere.  They were also concerned that expanding would make it easier for OU and Texas to leave at the end of the current deal.  Nobody from the R8 was being forward thinking about building up the Big 12.  

Exactly.  Not just easier, but more desirable.

The message from the TV partners was "you will all make less money if you expand" and the R8 figured (knew?) that was all UT and OU needed to move on.  Same thing with an 8 game schedule.  The payouts would have gone done, and OU would have had that reason to leave.

At the end of the day, this was doomed when the other blue bloods left and ESPN went all in on negging the league at every corner.  With the money less and the prestige damaged these concessions you speak of would have been meaningless and have ultimately functioned as another reason to leave, thus underscoring the ultimate inevitability of said event.

I agree that the R8 weren't forward thinking, but the message they were getting at that time is "you have no value without UT and OU".  Our AD was very transparent about this on a regular basis.  They were focused on keeping OU and UT here, and that just wasn't possible in the end.  Knowing what we know today, I wish they had added Louisville and Pitt in '12 and some others in '16.  At the time, the information they were receiving was indicating that it would destroy that version of the conference.

Edited January 17, 2023 by Al_4_ISU

[camel at sea 589]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Exactly.  Not just easier, but more desirable.

The message from the TV partners was "you will all make less money if you expand" and the R8 figured (knew?) that was all UT and OU needed to move on.  Same thing with an 8 game schedule.  The payouts would have gone done, and OU would have had that reason to leave.

At the end of the day, this was doomed when the other blue bloods left and ESPN went all in on negging the league at every corner.  With the money less and the prestige damaged these concessions you speak of would have been meaningless and have ultimately functioned as another reason to leave, thus underscoring the ultimate inevitability of said event.

I agree that the R8 weren't forward thinking, but the message they were getting at that time is "you have no value without UT and OU".  Our AD was very transparent about this on a regular basis.  They were focused on keeping OU and UT here, and that just wasn't possible in the end.  Knowing what we know today, I wish they had added Louisville and Pitt in '12 and some others in '16.  At the time, the information they were receiving was indicating that it would destroy that version of the conference.

The Big 12 contract had a pro rata expansion clause in it, which  means the statement that the Big 12 would be making less money from expansion was never true.  Beyond that, the Big 12 would have added a CCG ($), and the current members would have made additional money via an expansion school's phase-in period.  "You will make less money if you expand" was not true and all of the admins at every R8 school knew as much when they were telling the media otherwise.  You don't think that made OU angry behind closed doors?  Maybe they were worried about the *next* deal or making media partners angry, which is understandable.  Maybe the R8 decided they'd rather make OU angry than FOX.  Hindsight is 20/20 and all, but that seems to have been a bad bet.  Today FOX seems fine with Cincinnati, BYU, and Houston.   

You can't really make an honest argument that ISU (and KU, KSU, etc.) were focused on trying to keep OU happy when they were using media intermediaries to insult OU's president and downplay the concerns Boren was talking about with the media.

The R8 strategy seems to have been "Texas is happy at ten, OU won't leave by itself, so OU needs to shut up."  That might have worked if Texas had actually been happy.  It was a pretty big failure on the part of the R8, then, that they didn't verify that Texas was actually happy.  Ironically, you're left saying (paraphrased) "knowing what we know now, I wish we'd done what OU wanted to do."  Your leadership just played all of that poorly.  

 

Edited January 17, 2023 by camel at sea

['stache 21801]

I think you all are putting way too much thought into what individual schools wanted or didn't want. The networks make the calls, almost exclusively. If they wanted the Big 12 to add Louiville, BYU, etc., they would have offered the money and made it happen. I think ESPN new all along that OU/Tex to the SEC was the target and stifled anything that might have interfered. They gave UT $15 mil a year for a network nobody wanted to keep them from joining the FOX owned PAC and gave everyone else enough of a pay bump to keep them together. With the contract coming up they knew they wanted OU/TX in the SEC, it got leaked earlier than expected because of aggy butthurt, but it was inevitable. Too many dollars at stake. It really is that simple.

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

1 hour ago, camel at sea said:

The Big 12 contract had a pro rata expansion clause in it, which  means the statement that the Big 12 would be making less money from expansion was never true.  Beyond that, the Big 12 would have added a CCG ($), and the current members would have made additional money via an expansion school's phase-in period.  "You will make less money if you expand" was not true and all of the admins at every R8 school knew as much when they were telling the media otherwise.  You don't think that made OU angry behind closed doors?  Maybe they were worried about the *next* deal or making media partners angry, which is understandable.  Maybe the R8 decided they'd rather make OU angry than FOX.  Hindsight is 20/20 and all, but that seems to have been a bad bet.  Today FOX seems fine with Cincinnati, BYU, and Houston.   

You can't really make an honest argument that ISU (and KU, KSU, etc.) were focused on trying to keep OU happy when they were using media intermediaries to insult OU's president and downplay the concerns Boren was talking about with the media.

The R8 strategy seems to have been "Texas is happy at ten, OU won't leave by itself, so OU needs to shut up."  That might have worked if Texas had actually been happy.  It was a pretty big failure on the part of the R8, then, that they didn't verify that Texas was actually happy.  Ironically, you're left saying (paraphrased) "knowing what we know now, I wish we'd done what OU wanted to do."  Your leadership just played all of that poorly.  

 

Where we differ is I don’t believe OU actually wanted that, and we both know Texas didn’t.

So even if OU had actually wanted that, if the Big 12 does it against Texas’s wishes, the league blows up, and OU is fine because they were always gonna be fine.

OU could conveniently push for this because they have never had to be concerned about getting left out.

And Boren was going rogue, around everyone’s back, and contributing to the air of dysfunction.

Regardless, all of this is conjecture.  At the end of the day we all know that there was never gonna be any move the 10 team Big 12 could make that would financially compete with UT and OU joining the SEC.  None.  And that money is more important than any feeling or pointed finger.

[statsman 5456]

You guys are all wrong.  
 
It’s this simple. TAMU joined the SEC, and started dominating Texas recruiting. The other SEC schools came in and recruited Texas, too. Besides paying liberally, they had a simple message- “play in the SEC to get to the NFL”. The message was supported by the shear numerical advantage SEC players have over Big 12 players. 
 
The Big XII is a coach’s conference. The SEC is a players’ conference. 
 
Sure, the Ags did nothing with their advantage. The fact remains- Texas and OU both need to win in Texas recruiting to teach their potential. Recruiting the best in the Big XII isn’t enough. They need to get the best from Texas. 
 
NIL came, and Texas saw that, for the first time, it could make pay part of its recruiting pitch. It could compete on an equal (maybe better) footing with SEC schools,…if it could also pitch its conference. 
  
That’s all there is to it. It’s not about what the R8 did or didn’t do. (Now, whether you ever get another game from UT or OU does depend on that). 

Edited January 18, 2023 by statsman

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

7 hours ago, YGIFS said:

He's got a serious Kevin Eltife envy complex.  

I would assume we'd play just 2 games from the new group.  1 home, 1 away.  1 neutral with OU.  And in a 9-game slate, 6 others from the remaining 8 current members (3+3).  Not sure what that looks like for an 8-game slate.  

Best case scenario for travel/TV-v. Oklahoma, Cincinnati, TX Tech, K-State, OK-State, @BYU or @UCF, @TCU, @Baylor, @ISU or @WVU.  +3 non-conf.

Worst case scenario for travel/TV-v. Oklahoma, UCF, Kansas, OK-State, TX Tech, @Houston, @Iowa State, @West Virginia, @Baylor +3 non-conf.

League needs us to have the first slate.  AD's and opposing fans want us to have the second slate.  

But yeah there's a chance, bullshit aside, our home schedule next year is Rice, Wyoming, Kansas, Kansas State, UCF, and OK-State.  That'd be pretty awful

If that’s our home schedule they should make season tickets a 2 for 1. Jesus. That would be a f***ing disaster Longhorn Foundation members. 

[theaveragejon 988]

To the UCF AD: 

 

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

The only thing that can explain this scheduling delay is you guys being real close to having finished the deal to leave at the end of this sports year.

[mdmost 43001]

Agreed. I think the delay has to be Texas and OU figuring out the two return trips to make Fox whole. I'm assuming we're going to drop the home game against Colorado State in 2024 for Tech or TCU and the possibly the 2026 Texas State game. 2025 doesn't work since we're away at Ohio State. We're not doing two away OOC games. OU only has 2 OOC opponents in 2024 since Georgia got dropped. 

Edited January 18, 2023 by mdmost

['stache 21801]

Did anyone from the league office say the 17th for the schedule? All I saw was a twitter report quoting a UCF person as a source.

[SimkinsMan 4386]

55 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Did anyone from the league office say the 17th for the schedule? All I saw was a twitter report quoting a UCF person as a source.

It was an unconfirmed report, since retracted. The new target is a somewhat nebulous "end of this month."

['stache 21801]

I don't understand the consternation. It's a pretty drastic change going from a 10 team round robin to a 14 team non-round-robin while trying to keep everyone happy as possible, including the two teams set to depart. I'm also almost certain that UT and OU are having some last minute discussions with the networks to see if there is any chance they can enter the SEC next season, or at least set the date for 2024 so that the schedule can be made knowing that OU and UT are only there for one year. Or, as some of you are convinced, the schedule is already set for UT.

@ UH

@ ISU

@ UH

@ BYU

@ UH

@ Tech

@ UH

@ UCF

@UH

Edited January 18, 2023 by 'stache

[Alien Octopus 516]

On 1/16/2023 at 2:13 PM, Gidnik said:

The big problem for me is say I’m watching a game on a streaming service and there is another game with a huge pending upset switching timely back and forth is impossible 

If you get a program like Resolume  you can switch back and forth pretty easy by having multiple browsers running. You can then use your mouse to remote between games. If you want to be able to cache the games you can run a quadro card. Just need a tower and HDMI. Running this set up off a Starlink dish to pull multi streams now, and to sometimes stream out. Cost about the same as a laptop. Happy to share specs.

[PilotsError 2287]

16 minutes ago, Alien Octopus said:

If you get a program like Resolume  you can switch back and forth pretty easy by having multiple browsers running. You can then use your mouse to remote between games. If you want to be able to cache the games you can run a quadro card. Just need a tower and HDMI. Running this set up off a Starlink dish to pull multi streams now, and to sometimes stream out. Cost about the same as a laptop. Happy to share specs.

I’m so out of touch technologically I can’t tell if this is satire or not. If it’s not, fuck all that. 

[thunderlounge 7815]

Tabs? On a tv?

 

crazy talk

[Trojan Man 429]

I didn't think what I said about the relationship between Texas and the Big 12 was that controversial.  Anyways, while we're talking about conferences taking way too fucking long to publish their 2023 schedules the Pac 12 is finally releasing theirs today.  With adding 4 new teams and uncertainty over how long Texas and Oklahoma will remain I can understand the Big 12's delay but the Pac 12 screwing around with the schedule for this long doesn't have any such excuses.  2023 opponents and locations have been known for years but for some reason the Pac 12 needed extra time to get the dates down.  Usually they announce the next year's schedule during CCG week.

According to some rumors it sounds like the conference is positioning itself for a huge finish to the season with nearly all the games between every Pac 12 team expected to contend for the league title in 2023 scheduled for November.  USC is supposedly getting Washington/at Oregon/UCLA to finish the season which I'm not too thrilled about, but as long as those teams also have to play real competition the week before they play USC instead of Colorado or ASU or St. Mary's Blind Pregnant Teenagers of the Poor I won't complain.

[thunderlounge 7815]

Them poor blind, teenage girls. Just couldn’t see it coming. 

[Mitch Cumsteen 18547]

All this talk about UT and OU playing away games against the newcomers next year, but I just can't imagine a scenario where any of the petty leftover fucks give up their biggest home gates of the year to a group of schools who don't even get a full share of the conference revenue. I'm sure Baylor and TCU are cool with giving up a home game against Texas (potentially the last one, ever) to BYU or Cincinnati. Yeah, that just isn't happening. Who can forget all the bellyaching from Tech about the economic hardship foisted upon the Lubbock economy after Texas goes to the SEC? 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

17 hours ago, statsman said:

You guys are all wrong.  
 
It’s this simple. TAMU joined the SEC, and started dominating Texas recruiting. The other SEC schools came in and recruited Texas, too. Besides paying liberally, they had a simple message- “play in the SEC to get to the NFL”. The message was supported by the shear numerical advantage SEC players have over Big 12 players. 
 
The Big XII is a coach’s conference. The SEC is a players’ conference. 
 
Sure, the Ags did nothing with their advantage. The fact remains- Texas and OU both need to win in Texas recruiting to teach their potential. Recruiting the best in the Big XII isn’t enough. They need to get the best from Texas. 
 
NIL came, and Texas saw that, for the first time, it could make pay part of its recruiting pitch. It could compete on an equal (maybe better) footing with SEC schools,…if it could also pitch its conference. 
  
That’s all there is to it. It’s not about what the R8 did or didn’t do. (Now, whether you ever get another game from UT or OU does depend on that). 

This, all this.  Money is money, its nice, but neither NEED it.   

This talk of schools badmouthing Boren through intermediaries is, frankly, laughable.  He didn't need help.  He made so many douchewagon moves unprovoked that they likely teach a course in the Syracuse Journalism School now about how to just keep someone talking for clickbate due to him.  Thinking the r8 shot down expansion is almost as comical.   You think OkSt, TCU or Iowa State is saying, "no but we wants this FU!"?   They're fucking Golum and Texas is precious.  These schools know the only way they stay in that realm is by appeasing, not hating.  KState's president is on record saying he voted for anything Texas wanted.   This had nothing at all to do with LHN or adding Louisville, which they could have done to go to 11, or any goofball talk like that.   

While on that rabbit hole the expansion clause is only for ESPN, which is half the contract.   So Louisville just doesn't pay for itself.   It pays for half of itself.   On top of that, the reason the B12 made the same money when A&M/Nebraska left wasn't out of altruism of ESPN, it was because they moved to 9 conference games.   Conference games are 95% of the value in a contract, OOC games are used toilet paper.  Moving from 8 conference with Nebraska/A&M/Colorado/Missouri was the same value as nine with TCU/WVU.  This is also why the Big Ten makes more than the SEC, they play 9 conference games.   Point being, adding Louisville/BYU and going to 8 conference games brings less money than staying at 9 without expansion.   And if Oklahoma wanted to expand so badly, why is it that the conference took the top 4 options literally minutes after Oklahoma said they were leaving?   Likely because everyone else wanted to add them the first time they collected pitches from schools.  And why wouldn't they, they may get an extra win they won't get in a round robin.

@statsman has this entirely correct.   This move is all about regaining control of the narrative in Texas recruiting, period.  Now A&M and Arkansas can't waltz in and use "but you SEC bro?  SEC State!" as their only line to offer.   Without DFW, Oklahoma becomes Nebraska, fast.  Without playing for championships yearly, the B12 is never going to match the SEC's recruiting advantage.

SEC recruiting, + beating SEC powers = massive exposure.   Texas got more exposure losing to Alabama this year than beating anyone in the Big 12.   A&M lives rent free in Bristol due to high recruiting classes and one win a year.   They'll be top ten again next year, for no reason at all but those two.   Once OU and Texas join, that will diminish significantly.

Massive exposure = mega money, far and away bigger than any broadcast rights.  We're not talking $20-40m more in tv rights per year, we're talking billions in free PR.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

4 hours ago, mdmost said:

Agreed. I think the delay has to be Texas and OU figuring out the two return trips to make Fox whole. I'm assuming we're going to drop the home game against Colorado State in 2024 for Tech or TCU and the possibly the 2026 Texas State game. 2025 doesn't work since we're away at Ohio State. We're not doing two away OOC games. OU only has 2 OOC opponents in 2024 since Georgia got dropped. 

I think this is the case too.   There is a game of "let's make a deal" going on.   Its either going to work and end with a big splash about Texas/OU leaving next year, or its going to fail and be two years of B12 schedules.

[hook me 2092]

2 hours ago, 'stache said:

I don't understand the consternation. It's a pretty drastic change going from a 10 team round robin to a 14 team non-round-robin while trying to keep everyone happy as possible, including the two teams set to depart. I'm also almost certain that UT and OU are having some last minute discussions with the networks to see if there is any chance they can enter the SEC next season, or at least set the date for 2024 so that the schedule can be made knowing that OU and UT are only there for one year. Or, as some of you are convinced, the schedule is already set for UT.

@ UH

@ ISU

@ UH

@ BYU

@ UH

@ Tech

@ UH

@ UCF

@UH

They've had 16+ months to figure out a football schedule, if they can't do it in that time then you should be very very worried about your new leadership. If they're trying to make a big deal out of it like the PAC12 or ACC you'd think they'd be organized enough to at least give a date. It smells of being unorganized or incompetent.

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

5 minutes ago, hook me said:

They've had 16+ months to figure out a football schedule, if they can't do it in that time then you should be very very worried about your new leadership. If they're trying to make a big deal out of it like the PAC12 or ACC you'd think they'd be organized enough to at least give a date. It smells of being unorganized or incompetent.

It's almost like behind the scenes they don't know who's going to be a member of the conference next fall.

[hook me 2092]

50 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

It's almost like behind the scenes they don't know who's going to be a member of the conference next fall.

They can't put out a schedule this year because they're worried about next year? That makes tons of sense. Maybe sometime in the last, I don't know, 12 months or so someone should have suggested "hey let's make a schedule for both situations" if it were going to cause this big of a hang up. Everyone has been pointing to 2024 since news broke in 2021, & the lack of 9.95ers spoiling any secrets seems to affirm that's still the case.

[TrashMaster G 17551]

6 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The only thing that can explain this scheduling delay is you guys being real close to having finished the deal to leave at the end of this sports year.

My assumption is that the delay is the Big XII office going back and forth with the network boys trying to hit upon a schedule setup they will agree to that maximizes fuckery with Texas & OU.

[camel at sea 589]

46 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

This, all this.  Money is money, its nice, but neither NEED it.   

This talk of schools badmouthing Boren through intermediaries is, frankly, laughable.  He didn't need help.  He made so many douchewagon moves unprovoked that they likely teach a course in the Syracuse Journalism School now about how to just keep someone talking for clickbate due to him.  Thinking the r8 shot down expansion is almost as comical.   You think OkSt, TCU or Iowa State is saying, "no but we wants this FU!"?   They're fucking Golum and Texas is precious.  These schools know the only way they stay in that realm is by appeasing, not hating.  KState's president is on record saying he voted for anything Texas wanted.   This had nothing at all to do with LHN or adding Louisville, which they could have done to go to 11, or any goofball talk like that.

It literally happened.  https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/sam-mellinger/article65340322.html

There's plenty more of it if I wanted to go to the trouble of digging through old Sam Mellinger and Dennis Dodd articles.  KC media trashed Boren b/c KC media was being fed that stuff from KU/KSU/ISU admins.  National media then picked it up and dragged OU.  Absolutely none of that was coming from Texas media sources.  The old Big 12 North schools have fans that like to envision themselves as perpetual innocent victims of fate.  It keeps them from looking honestly at reality and how bad their own administrators were.

It's also true that the Big 12 North schools shot down expansion.  Just look at the votes.  OU, WVU, and Ken Starr pushed for expansion.  Those were the three running the expansion committee.  Texas was open to it under certain conditions and said so publicly.  UT didn't shit on the president of the other blueblood football program in the conference in the media.  Who does that leave as the "absolutely not" votes on expansion?  It only took 3 "absolutely not" votes to kill the whole thing.  When Texas said, "we're interested in adding Houston if we can get a campus in Houston," what happened?  Plains States media outlets started a PR campaign against the "over Texasification of the Big 12." 

The narrative of "our poor little universities did what we were told" sounds plausible in theory but it never quite matched up with the voting history of the Big 12.  Everyone will be better off after the split.  

[Al_4_ISU 12453]

23 minutes ago, hook me said:

They can't put out a schedule this year because they're worried about next year? That makes tons of sense. Maybe sometime in the last, I don't know, 12 months or so someone should have suggested "hey let's make a schedule for both situations" if it were going to cause this big of a hang up. Everyone has been pointing to 2024 since news broke in 2021, & the lack of 9.95ers spoiling any secrets seems to affirm that's still the case.

No, I'm saying I don't think you'll be here in 2023.

12 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

My assumption is that the delay is the Big XII office going back and forth with the network boys trying to hit upon a schedule setup they will agree to that maximizes fuckery with Texas & OU.

That wouldn't be this difficult.