Did Horns (here) really want expansion

[Son of Wasatch]

Like was said above, both have conferences for all the other sports outside of football. Texas would need the same kind of situation. BYU doesn't mind having their non-football sports in a smaller conference of religious-based universities, so that works for them but Texas has too much pride in their basketball, baseball, volleyball, golf, tennis, swimming, etc., to be ok with putting them in Conference USA or the Southland Conference, or anything like that.

They'd likely have to find a power-5 conference that would agree to take ONLY their non-football sports the way the ACC did with Notre Dame. And truth be told, the "football deal" of having to play said conference 4 to 6 times a season (Notre Dame has to play the ACC 5 times) wouldn't be the world thing in the world... the problem is, which conference would agree to that? The Big 10 never agreed to that kind of deal with Notre Dame. It's doubtful they ever would change their mind on that. I doubt the SEC would agree to that kind of thing either. The ACC seems the most likely to make the deal (since they did that with Notre Dame already anyway).

Unfortunately there's a problem with that. The administration at UT has been pretty vocal about the issues with sending our non-football sports halfway across the country on a weekly basis. Football is one thing... it's almost always Saturday, and there are only 12 to 15 games a season. Every other sport has week-day games regularly and has a lot more games or meets or matches or whatever. They miss class. They miss even more class when the event is in New Jersey or Massachusetts or Washington. And if you're just adding the non-football sports to the Pac 12 or Big 10 or ACC, you're likely not helping make arrangements to bring "travel partners" with you. If you're joining full time to one of those conferences, you're probably looking at bringing other Texas, Oklahoma, or Kansas schools with you, which helps make the travel at least a little bit better.

It's just a really complicated situation, and unlike Notre Dame, we aren't as close, distance-wise, to some of the members in the less stable conferences. I know there are TV issues that would need to be worked through, but when it's all said and done I think we're most likely to be in the East division of the new Pac 16, or in either the west division (or some kind of pod system) or the Big 10++ (which might be 18 members large or something like that). The SEC and the ACC seem less likely, but the SEC might be the 3rd most likely, if for no other reason than the ACC just makes it that much tougher to expand in a way that makes sense travel-wise if the administrators are at all serious about looking out for non-football travel. It gets really weird trying to come up with a way to add Texas "travel partners" to the ACC, while one could imagine 2 or 3 out of Kansas or Oklahoma or Rice or Tulane joining the Big 10 with Texas, along with looking into Notre Dame.

Here is a quick easy fix.

Texas football goes independent, and leaves the rest of their sports in the Big 12. Not sure how the big 12 would like that? It's sorta like being married to a girl who just flat out tells you she wants to be married but also wants to sleep with who she wants. Most schools would probably say no to it.

 

[misterTeasyEmalcomXf'inAkicksome]

Here is a quick easy fix.

Texas football goes independent, and leaves the rest of their sports in the Big 12. Not sure how the big 12 would like that? It's sorta like being married to a girl who just flat out tells you she wants to be married but also wants to sleep with who she wants. Most schools would probably say no to it.

The problems with this are:

If Texas leaves the Big 12... the Big 12 is essentially done as a power-5 conference. Sure, the other 9 members plus... whoever... Houston? Cincy? Maybe even 3 teams? Might still be able to grasp onto power-5 status for a while and see where things go, but you're assuming that the 9 other members would remain intact.

If Texas football leaves the Big 12, there's almost no way that Oklahoma and at least a few of the more upwardly-mobile schools look to leave too. If Texas doesn't make plans to go to either the Pac 12, the Big 10, or the SEC with Oklahoma... I have very little doubt that OU figures out who else to leave with and joins the SEC with... Oklahoma State? Kansas? An ACC school? Someone like that.

If both OU and Texas are gone... I mean, listen to the Iowa State coach talk about it. The conference loses it's status. And Texas basketball is in American Athletic/Conference USA/Mountain West equivalent.

 

[4MNChampsHorn]

Keeping the conference as is also makes it easier to pluck Herman from Houston.

 

[thedawg27]

when do we get out of this god awful conference

 

[mm42]

when do we get out of this god awful conference

2025 seems the most likely date

 

[rjdulaney]

If longhorns go solo ESPN hit a gold mind for atleast 6 years. Currently that looks like the most likely scenerio but a ton of time for things to change.

 

[topdecktiger]

Independent has worked well for Norte Dame and BYU, hasn't it?

Independence has not worked for BYU. They have admitted that it's unsustainable.

 

[bubba2023]

Texas isn't going independent, and why someone would want that makes zero sense to me.

 

[thedawg27]

All the independents are trying to get into a conference. That would be stupid. What we should do is grab choklahoma and get the hell outta the big 12. After we're out the big 12 falls and we don't lose anything

 

[mm42]

Texas isn't going independent, and why someone would want that makes zero sense to me.

Two reasons I can think of. They hate Texas and want you to screw yourselves or they love Texas and don't understand the likely outcome. Maybe there is a 3rd, but I can not imagine what it is.

 

[TexExSpur]

Indy is a NO go fellas...

 

[JHop6714]

I am in favor of staying in and keeping the Big XII, because it's our best chance to win a conference and make it in. I think we need more teams and more legitimacy. Passing on expansion was a big mistake. It would've rejuvenated the excitement surrounding the conference, brought in some new blood, and kept things going for a while. If the teams end up good at football, it makes the conference stronger. If not, we get some additional cupcake games. If you look at Michigan's schedule, since the B1G is so large now, Michigan plays several easy teams. Rutgers, Illinois, Maryland... It would be nice to have a few more beatable teams in a Big XII division, other than Kansas, to get some wins each year.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Hell Notre Dame isn't even really independent anymore. They play basically an ACC schedule. The only way I could see it working is if ND, BYU agreed to a yearly game and then we agreed to games with current big 12 teams, or made an agreement with another conference. It isn't going to happen.

I think we end up in big 10 take KU with us(they want KU bball)

 

[speedstrength]

Can't go to the Big 10 before 2031 unless they buy out ESPN'S contact for our teir three rights

 

[ryan_sublett]

Can't go to the Big 10 before 2031 unless they buy out ESPN'S contact for our teir three rights

Eh I've said from day 1. If Texas wants the deal done it will get done.

 

[HornsRuleU]

The best cultural fit is the B1G. Excellent academics. Programs that do things the right way, generally. Great reputation, all around. Schools that can handle Texas and OU joining with maybe just a small ripple in power politics. (The Big 12 is a motley crew, with egos that couldn't deal with Texas, clearly.)

$EC is a terrible fit for Texas. UT is in Austin, a sophisticated, open-minded city. UT-Austin has a great reputation. It's a diverse school, or becoming increasingly so, in just about every way possible (race, religion, academic programs, etc.). The athletic program does things the right way. By comparison, the SEC is a bunch of schools in redneck territory with cheating programs / boosters. The schools themselves vary widely in academic reputation -- just not as much as the Big 12.

The Pac12 might be a decent cultural fit, but they're 1-2 time zones away. Expect road games to go past midnight, and possibly jet lag for some athletes (although it'd be worse coming back). The exposure for athlete awards isn't good, so it could hurt recruiting. The travel would be like what WVU faces, and that includes non-profitable sports like golf, cross-country, and women's soccer. Are they all going to fly? That's a lot of class to miss.

If the Big Ten is open to growing to 16 schools, and can work something out for the TLN, then Texas and Oklahoma should join. OU and Nebraska would get each other back, so that'd be a plus for them. Texas and OU don't compete in all the sports that B1G offers, e.g., lacrosse, but that's already true with the Big 12. Texas and OU in the Big Ten is better for those schools than staying or going independent, or any other alternative.

 

[ryan_sublett]

I agree. Also think big 10 will want KU for its basketball. They are a big basketball conference

 

[jsto60]

Yes. I think expansion is imperative if we want to keep the conference alive. Otherwise who knows what conference we'd be moving in to.

I would personally prefer 5 or 6 power conferences each containing exactly 12 teams. The conferences would largely be grouped based on location. Not on TV sets and TV deals. You know, so the student athlete wins. And so the students and fans could travel less and see more games.

 

[speedstrength]

Eh I've said from day 1. If Texas wants the deal done it will get done.

Language in the contract is pretty binding. If Texas leaves the Big 12, the school must keep the terms of the present agreement, provide ESPN an exclusive 60-day window to negotiate for the other rights and allow ESPN a 48-hour window to match any offer. A prohibition on licensing content to third parties, prevents Texas from participation in the Big 10 network. Unless ESPN allows the Big 10 to buy out the LHN contract our only landing spot before 2031 is SEC or ACC.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Language in the contract is pretty binding. If Texas leaves the Big 12, the school must keep the terms of the present agreement, provide ESPN an exclusive 60-day window to negotiate for the other rights and allow ESPN a 48-hour window to match any offer. A prohibition on licensing content to third parties, prevents Texas from participation in the Big 10 network. Unless ESPN allows the Big 10 to buy out the LHN contract our only landing spot before 2031 is SEC or ACC.

Yeah but ESPN is looking to cut costs anyway it can right now. If Texas come to them and said we'd like out of the LHN. I'm pretty sure they'd throw a party

 

[gordo107]

I think Tx to Big 10, OU and poss OSU (politics) to SEC. SEC a much better fit for OU than Big 10 I think. Another question is how Texas legislature reacts in regard to Tex Tech.

 

[speedstrength]

Yeah but ESPN is looking to cut costs anyway it can right now. If Texas come to them and said we'd like out of the LHN. I'm pretty sure they'd throw a party

Once ESPN recoups their initial investment its a 70/30 profit sharing model. The end of the contract is very ESPN friendly. They aren't going to let us walk without a substantial buy out.

 

[TXSFRED]

If the Horns had wanted expansion, there would have been expansion. They didn't, so there wasn't. The death certificate is all ready to go, even know the date now. Kansas will be ok, but the other 7 just voted to kill their programs today. Annual football TV dollars will drop from $30M to around $3M. They are so used to bending over when Texas walks in the room, they dropped their pants before knowing what this means for their future.
Brilliant.

I don't usually get into what I call " the college boy" arguments on here - as I am just a tee shirt fan - but we need to worry enough about who's causing the pants to be dropped to get that right.

The fact seems to have been that it was going to cost the TV rights buyers $25,000, 000 X two to expand the "Big 12." They really did not like that, so they offered the existing 10 schools something less than that divided up NOT TO expand, so the money men caused all the trousers to fall. I hate ESPiNSECSECSEC...

The Horns wanted a Big 12 TV Network. Did they get that? That answer would be no. To me, ESPin paid my team $15,000,000 ti take them off the air any time they want to. Late in the season, when the Alligator aggies and the little Sisters of the Poor are in a hard fought 3-3 tie up in Oshkosh with 9 minutes to go in the fourth Quarter due to 3 rain delays, ESPiN doesn't put UT on my TV Set in Houston, Texas and leaves that crap on. Did I say I hate ESPiNSECSECSEC...?

I would watch UT Sports on the UT Network as, although they are 'homers", they call the games as is without any ESPINSECSECSEC balderdash by people who do not have a clue about UT or Texas, but we get it piggy- backed on one of my Sons whose TV carrier carries it - and the stream hangs up enough that I turn it off and listen on an Austin Radio station that carries Craig Way.

 

[misterTeasyEmalcomXf'inAkicksome]

Yes. I think expansion is imperative if we want to keep the conference alive. Otherwise who knows what conference we'd be moving in to.

I would personally prefer 5 or 6 power conferences each containing exactly 12 teams. The conferences would largely be grouped based on location. Not on TV sets and TV deals. You know, so the student athlete wins. And so the students and fans could travel less and see more games.

Talk about trying to get the toothpaste back in the tube. I'm not saying it doesn't sound like a nice, idealistic concept for college football. But, I mean... at this point you might as well also say that you'd prefer wishbone offenses, smaller stadiums, and leather helmets.
I get that change sometimes sucks... but at this point the Big 12 and Texas need to continue moving forward and making the best of it. I think, if the conference and (more important to me, Texas), want to stay competitive financially (which, in turn, means competitive on the field too), that this was the best option given what we had to work with now.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Once ESPN recoups their initial investment its a 70/30 profit sharing model. The end of the contract is very ESPN friendly. They aren't going to let us walk without a substantial buy out.

Well 5 years in and the network is just now showing a modest profit(2million) at that pace ESPN would be lucky to break even.

 

[speedstrength]

Well 5 years in and the network is just now showing a modest profit(2million) at that pace ESPN would be lucky to break even.

That 2 million profit is based on projections by an outside firm that estimated 7.5 million subscribers both of which are disputed by ESPN. ESPN has claimed 20 million subscribers. The network is cash flow positive. A major setback was the inability to broadcast high school games. They will most likely get rid of the studio and run all the production from Bristol in order to maximize profits.

 

[ryan_sublett]

That 2 million profit is based on projections by an outside firm that estimated 7.5 million subscribers both of which are disputed by ESPN. ESPN has claimed 20 million subscribers. The network is cash flow positive. A major setback was the inability to broadcast high school games. They will most likely get rid of the studio and run all the production from Bristol in order to maximize profits.

Even if the network was making 10 million profit this year it's not going to be a huge success for ESPN. As you said the inability to broadcast HS games and the slowness at which it became available to people like me outside the area really killed it. I bet ESPN and UT could come to an agreement on an exit if it came to that.