Texas and OU to the pac 12

[Vertnut]

UT is a recruiting machine, and always will be. It wouldn't matter if they went Indy or not.

[Bputacoma]

saw this picture on another forum. thought it would be fitting here. it was paid by TexAgs members. Its right off 35, on the exit for Baylor.

[Silverback]

UT is a recruiting machine, and always will be. It wouldn't matter if they went Indy or not.

Yes, but losing two big televised rival games, Oklahoma and Texas A&M would be a big hit for recruiting. And with A&M going SEC that will definately pull some recruits away from Texas to play in the big conference with more televised coverage, agaist higher caliber teams. Honestly more players from the SEC get drafted into the NFL than any other conference.

Then with Oklahoma and Tech going PAC12/16, another big TV market and creating a 16 team mega conference, they are gonna lose recruits there too.

I'm not saying it'll break them, but it definately puts A&M, OK, and Tech in better recruiting positions than before, so Texas has to take some kind of hit from it.

[BERT]

Yes, but losing two big televised rival games, Oklahoma and Texas A&M would be a big hit for recruiting. And with A&M going SEC that will definately pull some recruits away from Texas to play in the big conference with more televised coverage, agaist higher caliber teams. Honestly more players from the SEC get drafted into the NFL than any other conference.

Then with Oklahoma and Tech going PAC12/16, another big TV market and creating a 16 team mega conference, they are gonna lose recruits there too.

I'm not saying it'll break them, but it definately puts A&M, OK, and Tech in better recruiting positions than before, so Texas has to take some kind of hit from it.

Could happen, but more than likely it would be from Tech and Okie St. Cause that's where aggy is losing recruits to now. Hell, aggy has already had a recruit decommit and verbal to Okie St. just last week.

I just can't see Texas losing a big time recruit that they really want to Tech. Ever. Example, Jonathon Gray has verballed to Texas and his dad played for Tech. I know i know, that's just one example.

[hotrod66stang]

The money has a big factor in why Texas A&M and Oklahoma have been looking to move on. It made Texas too powerful in the conference with major decision making power, and no one really liked that.

Texas got greedy with their Longhorn network and now they are paying the price.

Please explain these two points to me. That just sounds like someone who WANTS to hate Texas, no matter what. No facts, just talking points that have been regurgitated by people who don't care to be informed or at least take a look from a neutral position. I definitely don't claim to have all the facts, but once you look at what has transpired, and the timeline, it's not quite as easy to believe "everyone should hate Texas, Texas is evil" [/paraphrasing]

#1. What power? What decision making power? They have a sole, singular, lone vote at the table. The first program to make this accusation was Nebraska, in reference to Texas not wanting to admit partial qualifiers or non-qualifiers to play Big XII football. Nebraska was used to winning with those kids and blamed Texas for shooting it down. The vote was 11-1 against Nebraska. None of the other teams that would benefit from it voted for it. That was the beginning....Now what power do they have? Texas wants to keep the Big XII alive and well. They want to keep recruiting the best Texas kids. They want to keep the LHN as-is. It is easier for UT or OU to get to the MNC game through the Big XII. Where is all this "POWER" that Texas has? Hell, Colorado left last year when the other teams were talking about bolting. Texas' immense power couldn't even keep Colorado at the table. Texas only has ONE vote, regardless of perception. The other schools (not in realignment talks currently) hang around because they have no other choice yet. Until I see concrete evidence to the contrary, Texas only gets one vote out of 12-2-1.

#2. Where is the Texas greed? Because they developed the LHN? How is it greed when it is documented and should be well-known (getting swept under the rug recently) that Texas invited A&M to the table to share the LHN? A&M shot it down because it "wasn't viable/sustainable." That's THEIR fault, not Texas'. Imagine if they had gotten in on it. Tech would probably be suing for being left out. It's all about the have-nots, and A&M feels entitled. Entitlement and being a "have-not" is seen in our everyday world, and those people aren't exactly looked upon favorably. It's funny how every diatribe Texas fans hear from Aggies consists mostly of "fags, queers, liberals, fags, liberals, sips, liberals," and they pride themselves on conservative values, yet they are all-of-a-sudden fans of wealth-redistribution, a *gasp* liberal idea! Of course, they voted against equal revenues every time when they were a "have," but not when they got left out in the cold from a network they could have been a partner in from the very beginning. Most other schools sell their 3rd-tier rights to networks, why is it unfair for Texas to sell theirs? If there were a "middle man" in this scenario, all they'd be doing is cutting him out. Instead, they're doing what only a handful of schools nationwide could pull off by co-owning their own network and selling the rights to air them.

There are certain things I don't like about the deal, or the way things are going as far as conference realignment, but this got way too long.

I hope OK, OK St, and Tech all leave, Baylor goes to the ACC, and the rest find homes, except Texas.

That is exactly what I expected to hear after reading the first part. It sounds like all the other vitriol from people who had their minds made up before the ink was even dry.

[Vertnut]

There's waaay too much money at stake in UT/OU and UT/A&M for all concerns. Those rivalries go back 100+ years, and will never go away, regardless of where they wind up. They weren't always in the Big 12...

[hotrod66stang]

There's waaay too much money at stake in UT/OU and UT/A&M for all concerns. Those rivalries go back 100+ years, and will never go away, regardless of where they wind up. They weren't always in the Big 12...

I agree with most of what you post, but I'm not certain of any outcomes until it's all set in stone. I think Texas will probably land in the PAC, but where they land will dictate who they will have to schedule as OOC games, obviously. I think it will be a few years until Texas and A&M play again.

Most Aggies I heard from did not want to play Texas when they thought they were going to the SEC right away. Then, when a lot of Texas fans said they didn't care and wanted to replace their Thanksgiving opponent, there was a lot of "Texas is running away" sentiment, although A&M is the one leaving conferences. The truth is, there might not be an OOC game open for a few years for Texas to play A&M (if I understand the scheduling correctly). It will be interesting to say the least, to see what will be dictated by politics, fan/booster input, academics, and/or money.

On a political sidenote: Isn't it interesting how the Texas legislature will step in and act and try to pressure things one way or another, then on different issues, have no opinion. Or the governor, for that matter.

[BERT]

There's waaay too much money at stake in UT/OU and UT/A&M for all concerns. Those rivalries go back 100+ years, and will never go away, regardless of where they wind up. They weren't always in the Big 12...

Don't be surprised if the aggy game goes away for awhile

[Silverback]

Here's a pretty decent article on the whole deal before even the A&M SEC talks started:

Dan Beebe was doing fine late Thursday afternoon. No, really. But the Big 12 commissioner understands your concern.

"Any time there is any kind of perceived crack," Beebe said, "we're going to have the vultures in the air."

The buzzards took flight again this week because of an internal squabble among league members over The Longhorn Network, Texas' new 24-hour channel that will launch Aug. 26. What's interesting is that The Longhorn Network is one of the main reasons the Big 12 still exists. Now, the Big 12's existence seems threatened by The Longhorn Network. Quite a paradox, isn't it?

Texas bailed last June on its negotiations with the former Pac-10 because the Longhorns wanted to keep some of their media rights in order to form their own television network. The Big 12 was more than happy to oblige, and the conference -- which stood on the brink of annihilation -- was saved thanks to the return of the Longhorns and some behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing by Beebe and company to ensure a 10-team league would split the same television revenue a 12-team league had split before. Texas went forward with its plan, signing a deal with ESPN that created a 24-hour channel that will launch Aug. 26 with fairly broad distribution. For this, Texas will receive at least $247.5 million over 20 years. Earlier this year, the Big 12 inked a monster deal with Fox for secondary television rights. The promise of an even bigger deal in 2016 for the primary rights should be enough to guarantee years of security. Shouldn't it?

But there was Texas A&M president R. Bowen Loftin on Thursday leaving a regents' session devoted to The Longhorn Network. Loftin told The Houston Chronicle that the network's plans to televise Big 12 football games and high school games created "a great deal of uncertainty for us and the conference." "High school games are very problematic," Loftin told the paper. "NCAA rules are extremely directed at recruiting functions. ... If we have an unequal playing field for various schools, that we think is a problem. That creates uncertainty."

There's your crack.

Even though the programming in question has already been announced, Beebe has issued a moratorium on it. Why? Because The Longhorn Network is a bigger deal than the members realized when they agreed to remain together. "ESPN operates in a different world than we do," said Beebe, who said the NCAA needs to clarify its rules so networks such as The Longhorn Network, the Big Ten Network and BYU's network can make plans. "They make a decision on Friday and implement it on Monday. We have a lot of stakeholders, a lot of people we have to consider. We have a lot of other factors that have to be looked at."

Beebe is smart, and so is Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds. Cooler heads should prevail here and keep the conference from exploding. But the fact that it only took 13 months after the Big 12 Missile Crisis for another major fissure to reveal itself suggests the league's members aren't exactly Superglued together -- particularly at the top.

Dodds, Texas seeking to alleviate fears of new network
The Longhorn Network will generate at least $247.5 million over 20 years for DeLoss Dodds (right) and Texas.
The Longhorn Network will generate at least $247.5 million over 20 years for DeLoss Dodds (right) and Texas.
John Rivera/Icon SMI

The concern other schools have over Big 12 games is obvious; why would a school want to play a game on a rival's network? The high school issue is even stickier. Depending on the interpretation of current NCAA rules, televising high school games on The Longhorn Network might give Texas an unfair advantage in recruiting on top of the inherent advantages the nation's wealthiest athletic department already has.

Dodds told SI.com that he doesn't think The Longhorn Network will cause too much strife within the league, but he admits other schools will have to adjust. "We love the Big 12. In my mind, it's in great shape," Dodds said. "In the long haul, us being able to do this gives the ability to A&M to be able to do this, Oklahoma to be able to do this. We're building a new world. We're living in a new world, and we all need to learn to live in it in a different way."

That's easy to say when your network will be distributed to at least the 25 million residents of Texas and most likely will be available to hundreds of millions of televisions nationwide. How wide would the distribution be for The Aggie Network or The Sooner Network?

That isn't the Longhorns' problem -- except that it is. If Texas were independent, it wouldn't matter what Texas A&M or Oklahoma thought. But Texas chose to remain in the Big 12, so it must find a way to coexist with its conference brethren.

By the same token, what right do Texas A&M, Oklahoma and the rest have to complain? They signed on for the new Big 12 last year knowing full well that Texas intended to launch its own network. Why should Texas be limited because its conference counterparts misjudged the scope and breadth of The Longhorn Network? It's almost as if they are saying, "We knew Texas was powerful, but we didn't realize it was this powerful." There was a reason we pundits called the conference Texas and the Nine Dwarves after the league was salvaged. It was obvious to us. Why wasn't it obvious to you?

TRUTH & RUMORS: Oklahoma considering own network?

For Baylor, Iowa State and Kansas State, none of this matters. Texas is Willy Wonka, and they are Charlie Bucket. They're just happy to be there. Kansas is closer to those three than it is to Oklahoma, but it has some juice thanks to its basketball program and probably could snag a Big East invite if things went sideways. Missouri would find a major-conference home, too, thanks to two large media markets within the state's borders. Meanwhile, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech had a chance to change conferences last year. Texas A&M and Oklahoma were courted by the Pac-10 and the SEC, and a sizable portion of Texas A&M's fan base remains angry the Aggies didn't jump to the SEC.

At the schools that had other options, coaches must have bristled when they heard Longhorn Network vice president of programming Dave Brown on Austin radio station KZNX-AM. During an interview about the network's planned programming, Brown got very specific about the plans to broadcast at least 18 high school games this season. "Certainly, we're going to follow the great players in the state," Brown said. "Obviously, a kid like Jonathan Gray from Aledo. I know people are going to want to see Jonathan Gray. I can't wait to see Jonathan Gray. The feedback we got from our audience is they just want to see Jonathan Gray run. Whether it's 45-0 or not, they want to see more Jonathan Gray. So we're going to do our best to accommodate them and follow the kids that are being recruited by a lot of the Division I schools -- certainly some of the kids Texas has recruited, is recruiting and everyone else in the Big 12 is recruiting."

Remember, Brown isn't a Texas employee. He isn't bound by NCAA rules against publicizing recruits. But the financial partnership between Texas and ESPN blurs those lines considerably. Essentially, someone with a huge financial stake in the success of the Texas athletic program got on the radio and promised coverage of the most coveted recruit in the state of Texas in the class of 2012. It doesn't matter that Gray committed to the Longhorns in June. The NCAA doesn't recognize verbal commitments, only signed letters-of-intent. Gray is a recruitable player.

What Brown said next probably made coaches' blood run cold in the Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC. "I know there is a kid Connor Brewer from Chaparral High School in [Scottsdale] Arizona," Brown told KZNX. "We may try to get one or two of their games on, as well, so people can see an incoming quarterback that'll be part of the scene here in Austin." Brewer, another member of the class of 2012, also is committed to Texas. But what about the players in future recruiting classes? Essentially, Brown admitted The Longhorn Network will highlight the players Texas wants -- no matter where they live.

In an e-mail, NCAA spokesman Erik Christianson wrote that the NCAA "is engaged in a conversation with the entities to better understand their plans and what bylaws may come into play." The bylaws (read the relevant ones here, here and here) don't specifically address this situation. Dodds is correct when he says it's a new world. Dodds also understands that a high schooler might not make the distinction between Texas and ESPN if, after a stellar performance, he delivers a postgame interview into a microphone with a Longhorn on the flag. "In our conversations with ESPN, and this is very early in the discussion, we have asked that the University of Texas not be associated with the broadcast in any way," Dodds said.

But is that enough? High-schoolers aren't dumb. If their game is on something called The Longhorn Network, they'll make the association that Texas has something to do with the broadcast, and if Texas is powerful enough to get their game broadcast nationwide, Texas must be a pretty great place to play football......(cont)

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1YSQ4WKxK

[Silverback]

Don't be surprised if the aggy game goes away for awhile

agreed, I don't see it happening right away, but as an Aggie, I really would like the game to stand for the tradition of Texas college football in general.

It's a long rivalry, and I think it would suck for it not to exist. The two biggest schools in Texas battling it out every year while we eat Turkey... I mean if they don't play each other anymore, I might be able to root for Texas some day... (my great granfather, A&M class of 1922, is rolling over in his grave on that comment)

[Silverback]

Please explain these two points to me.

Major decision making power on televising in conference games on their network. Limiting viewers without the LHN from seeing those games.

And Texas did get greedy when stating they wanted to show high school recruits on their network, as well as the in conference games on their network. They didn't offer to share any revenue for in conference games they broadcast on their network. But the conference forces those games to happen, and leaves Texas with broadcasting power.

Understand why I say they have the power?

[hotrod66stang]

Damn, and I thought my post was long. LOL. I'll have to give that a read, and post up any other good info you have. I definitely reserve the right to be wrong

I, too, would like to see the rivalry continue. That is one of my major worries. As many crazy/obsessive A&M fans as I've seen, I'm sure Aggies have seen as many contentious/ non-English speaking UT fans (argh), and it drives both sides crazy. In the end, it's good for both schools to play each other and I would much rather see Texas retain a rivalry with A&M than try to find a replacement in Tech, or have OU as the only school they have "history" with. That is the main reason I wish the Big XII could miraculously make it. VERY long shot at this point. Blah!

[BERT]

Major decision making power on televising in conference games on their network. Limiting viewers without the LHN from seeing those games.

And Texas did get greedy when stating they wanted to show high school recruits on their network, as well as the in conference games on their network. They didn't offer to share any revenue for in conference games they broadcast on their network. But the conference forces those games to happen, and leaves Texas with broadcasting power.

Understand why I say they have the power?

Texas wanted to show high school games or ESPN wanted them to show it?

[Silverback]

Texas wanted to show high school games or ESPN wanted them to show it?

Texas did, read that article I posted. They wanted to show games of recruits they were looking at on their network.

Also, one of the things I was glad to see comeback as far as rivalries go, is the A&M/Arkansas game the Southwest Classic. Now with them both in the SEC, that rivalry is set for a very long time to come too.

Hopefully the Lone Star Showdown will continue through all of this eventually.

[TRAXX]

When the LHN was first announced and they mentioned showing HS games, I thought that it was a BAD idea. That article lines out perfectly why it is. This Dave Brown fellow who spoke of following Gray (a well known Texas verbal commit) is an employee of ESPN, not of UT. He is also not an alum or had any affiliations with UT prior to his appointment to VP of programming for the LHN. He is a business man (not a UT alum/fan boy) thinking what the LHN viewership would most like to see. Naturally a majority of the viewship will be Longhorns fans so they want to see likely Texas recruits. I would venture to guess that D. Brown would have taken back what he said if he could but he cant. Regardless, the concern of a potential recruiting advantage was going to be revealed. Brown just made it easy with his comments for the naysayers to latch on. If you fast forward to today, the LHN is not showing and high school games, at least I havent seen any.