Interesting look at Texas and Notre Dame being ACC targets.
- Thread starter pandarod
- Start date
A conversation I had earlier this year involved details similar to this.
The story I heard, however, was that Texas would join the ACC in all sports but football, like Notre Dame, and also like Notre Dame, Texas would surrender/agree to schedule 6 games against ACC football teams each year, and in turn, the Longhorn Network would continue to exist and become more valuable as Texas would have the ability to show as many as 6 (more likely 4) games per season on its network.
The story I heard, however, was that Texas would join the ACC in all sports but football, like Notre Dame, and also like Notre Dame, Texas would surrender/agree to schedule 6 games against ACC football teams each year, and in turn, the Longhorn Network would continue to exist and become more valuable as Texas would have the ability to show as many as 6 (more likely 4) games per season on its network.
The problem with all this speculation is that people keep looking at things from the perspective of what is happening today, in the year 2016.
Just 4 years ago, Facebook was all the rage. Now it has become almost passé. Cable was strong and money seemed endless. Now, cord cutting is becoming more common, and cable networks such as Disney/ABC/ESPN are hemorrhaging money, to the point they are trying to prevent Big 12 expansion because they may not be able to afford to live up to the terms of their contracts.
But everyone knows what the landscape will be like 8 years from now when the Big 12 GOR expires.
Right..........
Not only the Big12 expires, the Pac12 does as well. If the Big 12 doesn't shake the tree in expansion right now. The tree will be shook in 8 years.
I was thinking about LHN and viewers. As a fan I want my team on National TV networks every week if possible. I'm not thinking its a good thing to limit amount of viewers of broadcast, as Texas has been doing. I always watch Texas on TV when I can watch it. I don't have LHN and I have the ESPN now app. I watched the SEC coaches show last night. LHN is not on my app. A lot of homes don't have it. So you're essentially cutting football fans options. LHN is not a hot item unless you're a fan of Texas. The SEC coaches show was really good. All the teams. Not one specific team as you have.
The SEC show might be good but you have to sit and watch other teams in your conference. LHN, it's all UT all day. I love it. I stay here in california and can see it anytime. I don't care to see any other teams in the Big12, just UT. Football, basketball, baseball or anything related to UT. Plus the amount of money they receive is crazy. You can watch LHN in Hawaii, DC, NYC. EVERYWHERE.
I realize the money priority for Texas. It's not very impressive when anyone is proud of being selfish. That's all I hear on message boards. We ain't sharing with anyone. Thank God all Longhorns aren't selfish.
Texas isn't going anywhere until the GOR is up. ND won't be a full member of any conference as long as they have their NBC deal. If we leave the Big 12 the only real landing spots are SEC and ACC.
It's not a point of being selfish. It's the point when a school worked hard in putting itself in the right position. If UT didn't have a LHN, folks still be complaining about something. Every school has the same opportunity to get their tier 3 going. I'm a firm believer of working hard and enjoy my check. I don't want to work hard and give a portion of my earnings to some other guy just to make us equal. He needs to find that career to make the same or more than I
As a WVU fan, I have no problem with the Longhorn Network. As such, I understand the arguments against it. I also know that if any other program could write its own ticket with its own network, they would either jump on the opportunity, or they would seriously consider acting on it.
The way I see it, the Big 12 is the best place for Texas. Texas - to a large degree - can make demands and they will be honored in the B12.
In the SEC, things are far different. They operate from a perspective of, "What's best for the conference as a whole." The SEC doesn't need Texas, and if Texas tried to join and make demands, they would be shut down on the spot.
Sure, they would love to have the Texas brand, but unlike the Big 12, the SEC understands there is strength in numbers, and that is why they are having the success they are having and the Big 12 is not. They would never allow a single program to have an individual network.
In the Big 10, Ohio State and Michigan run the show, and they are not interested in sharing that power. Ask Penn State, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Michigan State. Still, Ohio State and Michigan run the conference from the perspective of what will keep them viable and what will provide financial stability for all of its members. They are light years ahead of the Big 12, and you will never see an Ohio State Network, or a Michigan Network.
The PAC-12 has a model that could accommodate Texas' network to a degree, But Texas would still have to surrender its tier three content to the P12 Network, which would devalue the Longhorn Network because the P12 Network would televise the Longhorns every chance they got. For the casual fan, why pay for the Longhorn Network when you can get the same content paying for the P12 network. Non-Texas-specific fans aren't interested in watching Texas volleyball coach weekly shows, just the volleyball matches, themselves. So the filler content is useless outside of Longhorn fans.
And while the P12 would give its left testicle to get Texas, and would be content to have just Texas as an addition to the conference, what they really want is Texas and Oklahoma, but Oklahoma won't get out of the B12 without having Okie State as a tag along. So what you are really looking at is Texas and probably Texas Tech in addition to the Oklahoma schools. All that would be amazing for the P12.
However, at least half of the games featuring those former B12 programs would finish after midnight each season, and the ratings and viewership in general would plummet compared to what they have historically enjoyed. There is a reason we hear each year about an "east-coast bias."
As for the ACC, if you go for partial membership like Notre Dame, then it would probably be a good fit. But Texas will never win another conference championship with that model, and you will soon see how Notre Dame is scrutinized by not having the 13th data point via the conference championship game which will at some point keep them from earning a playoff spot.
Either they will be forced to join the conference as a whole (as would Texas) or they accept that they will be left out of the playoffs. If they join a conference, all those traditional rivalry games and regional match ups they have enjoyed over the last century will be impacted and many eliminated. Like WVU faces in the B12 now, your women's soccer team will be getting home at 2 in the morning more often than not when you have a road trip, as will your football team.
All of that other stuff said, Texas has the ability to make anything work with any conference. That is undeniable, All they would have to do is compromise.
The question I have is, if Texas is willing to give up so much in compromises to go elsewhere, then why are they not as willing to compromise with the B12 just a little and end up getting to keep most of its current set up, which includes being the unquestioned leader in the B12, all while keeping its network the way it is.
The way I see it, the Big 12 is the best place for Texas. Texas - to a large degree - can make demands and they will be honored in the B12.
In the SEC, things are far different. They operate from a perspective of, "What's best for the conference as a whole." The SEC doesn't need Texas, and if Texas tried to join and make demands, they would be shut down on the spot.
Sure, they would love to have the Texas brand, but unlike the Big 12, the SEC understands there is strength in numbers, and that is why they are having the success they are having and the Big 12 is not. They would never allow a single program to have an individual network.
In the Big 10, Ohio State and Michigan run the show, and they are not interested in sharing that power. Ask Penn State, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Michigan State. Still, Ohio State and Michigan run the conference from the perspective of what will keep them viable and what will provide financial stability for all of its members. They are light years ahead of the Big 12, and you will never see an Ohio State Network, or a Michigan Network.
The PAC-12 has a model that could accommodate Texas' network to a degree, But Texas would still have to surrender its tier three content to the P12 Network, which would devalue the Longhorn Network because the P12 Network would televise the Longhorns every chance they got. For the casual fan, why pay for the Longhorn Network when you can get the same content paying for the P12 network. Non-Texas-specific fans aren't interested in watching Texas volleyball coach weekly shows, just the volleyball matches, themselves. So the filler content is useless outside of Longhorn fans.
And while the P12 would give its left testicle to get Texas, and would be content to have just Texas as an addition to the conference, what they really want is Texas and Oklahoma, but Oklahoma won't get out of the B12 without having Okie State as a tag along. So what you are really looking at is Texas and probably Texas Tech in addition to the Oklahoma schools. All that would be amazing for the P12.
However, at least half of the games featuring those former B12 programs would finish after midnight each season, and the ratings and viewership in general would plummet compared to what they have historically enjoyed. There is a reason we hear each year about an "east-coast bias."
As for the ACC, if you go for partial membership like Notre Dame, then it would probably be a good fit. But Texas will never win another conference championship with that model, and you will soon see how Notre Dame is scrutinized by not having the 13th data point via the conference championship game which will at some point keep them from earning a playoff spot.
Either they will be forced to join the conference as a whole (as would Texas) or they accept that they will be left out of the playoffs. If they join a conference, all those traditional rivalry games and regional match ups they have enjoyed over the last century will be impacted and many eliminated. Like WVU faces in the B12 now, your women's soccer team will be getting home at 2 in the morning more often than not when you have a road trip, as will your football team.
All of that other stuff said, Texas has the ability to make anything work with any conference. That is undeniable, All they would have to do is compromise.
The question I have is, if Texas is willing to give up so much in compromises to go elsewhere, then why are they not as willing to compromise with the B12 just a little and end up getting to keep most of its current set up, which includes being the unquestioned leader in the B12, all while keeping its network the way it is.
Similar threads
