Mike Gundy tells CBS Sports ending Longhorn Network is key to Big 12's future

[jmfriendtx]

I'm tired of all this arrogant blather about the LHN and telling everyone else to build up their own brand nonsense. What's all this building up or own brand crap done on the field of play the last six years? NOTHING.

We do all this expanding, make all these improvements, we pay for it because the ticket prices go up. What happened. NOTHING And we wonder why our athletic department is 6 million in the red.

And the man I personally hold responsible for all this is Deloss Dodds. He's sitting somewhere in Austin, richer than croesus, no one in the Texas media who was ever willing to stand up to him, taking bows telling himself he did great. I don't care if there's longhorn gear at the local Target out here in the Golden State. What does it translate to on the field of play.

Let me put it another way. ND has had their own network with NBC for 25 years now. Everyone knows they do all their home games. But after Lou Holtz retired their fb program went into the tank and only in the last couple of years has their fb program shown signs of bouncing back. All this special tv exposure does nothing if the athletic department is mediocre.

My lord the more I talk about this the more sympathy I have for Mike Perrin. I think I'm going to have to call the Mormon temples in Oakland and Sacramento and put him in the prayer rolls the man's going to need it.

I'll never understand why an OU fan would post on a UT fans forum...anyways...the bottom line is that UT has the best brand in college sports. The product on the field has gone through a rough spot, but it's just a matter if time before things will improve. Kids flock to Austin and it's one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Fact is its a better and more popular place for people to gather and live than Norman. It's a telling sign that you have taken it upon yourself to register on this forum and dive into the UT culture. People are drawn to the sports programs at UT...even you. We will take you, come on and join us. UTs brand will endure whatever conference plays in. There is too much following and support for it to fail.

Also, the LHN has nothing to do with conference stability. Gundy has been known to speak this "garbage" before.

 

[jmfriendtx]

Old Horn our biggest rival was Nebraska it wasn't Texas. The RRR is a game I would like to do away with. Make it home and home, fair park area is a cesspool. Kind of like 6th st. Nothing good happens there. 6th st used to be fun and playing Texas used to be fun. I hate arrogance and Texas is the Jones's. I would love for you to go independent then who the hell could Scholz hate to a level that's not healthy for a grown man. Well I say adult but I see no evidence of that. Take your joke network and keep it. Austin was a wonderful college town 40 years ago. Now it's just a big congested city with a college. You guy's don't have any idea what you missed. Bring back the SWC or go independent. Let's Ride what are they riding Bevo?

You are a joke, why would you post on another fan bases forum...very telling and you should join us if you are so interested in UT athletics.

 

[oldhorn2]

I think you misunderstand the hierarchy of how conferences work. Florida State is a good example, they have been in the ACC since 1991 and to this day, their opinion counts for nothing with Tobacco Road. It is not who you are that matters in conference politics it is who you have been since the beginning and no matter how much Texas could and would do to earn the favor of the new conference elite, it would be a long time if ever before they were officially "in the club."

Let's put your little hypothesis to the test of history.....The last time Texas changed conferences....back when the SWC folded( due to SMU and Aggies by the way)..... They moved to the rival Big 8. Texas had to take their place in line........apparently right in the front.....and one of the anchor programs had to flee.

I doubt in Texas went anywhere else they would be just " one of the little guys" This might sound arrogant, but I don't mean it that way. I am just observing one of the lessons of history.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

I think there is some truth to what you're saying. However, it's also what you bring to the table in the big three sports - facilities, alumni, money, academics, national interest/appeal, prestige, history, tradition, following, etc. Texas has all of that. If, at some point, Texas does join a new conference, they won't take a back seat to any program. You can bet your hat on that.

On this I have no doubt. I am first and foremost a Mountaineer but I loved in Austin a very long time and learned I had enough love to give to Texas in that time. The problem is as I see it, Texas can drive the conversation in a conference in which they are the flagship but as much as they would like to in any other conference, they will not have the means to make good on their desires.

Do you think Notre Dame could come into the Big-12 and force Texas to second fiddle just because their fans and administration believe their own press? I don't think Texas would ever allow that to happen and Texas would not be alone in that. The problem for the Big East was that the majority of the schools fawned over the domers.

If Texas went to the SEC, there is a hierarchy that would limit Texas' ability to be a primary regardless of what the fans think of Texas. The Big-12 or whatever it evolves into is the best place for Texas, because at the end of the day it is Texas.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Let's put your little hypothesis to the test of history.....The last time Texas changed conferences....back when the SWC folded( due to SMU and Aggies by the way)..... They moved to the rival Big 8. Texas had to take their place in line........apparently right in the front.....and one of the anchor programs had to flee.

I doubt in Texas went anywhere else they would be just " one of the little guys" This might sound arrogant, but I don't mean it that way. I am just observing one of the lessons of history.

I disagree with your test.

Texas had been playing the members of the Big-8 for decades prior to moving with 3 others from the SWC into the BIg-8. Texas does not share such a history with any school in the SEC, except TA&M and Akansas; with no schools in the ACC, Pac-12 or Big Ten. Then there is the fact that Texas did not join the Big-8 in the literal sense. The Big-8 died the day Texas and other SWC teams merged with those from the Big-8 to form the Big-12. So the test fails completely on both levels. Which anchor program of the BIg-8 had to flee? From what I can determine all 8 of the BIg-8 schools:

Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Kansas State
Missouri
Iowa State
Nebraska
Colorado

All of these teams were present in the new Big-12 along with Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech and TA&M.

Strawman. Just because I assert that Texas would not be the leader in any other conference for some time, does not equate them to being a little guy either by default. My assertion is that Texas would not longer be calling the shots in the conference business as they do now in the Big-12. In that regard, Texas might not be driving the bus, but they aren't sitting in the back either. Right now, the Big-12 bus has a longhorn logo on the side as much as it says Big-12.

 

[oldhorn2]

which one?....well....I assumed Nebraska .....fact is, I am sure Nebraska. It was apparrant to them thatthey did not have the clout Texas did, and when it turned out they couldnt beat Texas on the field either, they went looking. I think Colorado left because they thought Texas would go to the Pac and when that happened they did not want to be the ones without a chair when the music stopped.

strawman?....failed test?...oh my!.....Seriously, if the ACC merged with the Big 12 you honestly believe that Texas wouldnt have a voice?....Texas in the SEC wouldnt have a voice?....Texas in the Big wouldnt have a voice? The most financially viable program in the country would be at the whim of more senior members? I suppose anything at any time is possible, but I think not so plausible.

 

[Scholz]

I disagree with the notion that Texas will have to run off to a different conference.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

which one?....well....I assumed Nebraska .....fact is, I am sure Nebraska. It was apparrant to them thatthey did not have the clout Texas did, and when it turned out they couldnt beat Texas on the field either, they went looking. I think Colorado left because they thought Texas would go to the Pac and when that happened they did not want to be the ones without a chair when the music stopped.

strawman?....failed test?...oh my!.....Seriously, if the ACC merged with the Big 12 you honestly believe that Texas wouldnt have a voice?....Texas in the SEC wouldnt have a voice?....Texas in the Big wouldnt have a voice? The most financially viable program in the country would be at the whim of more senior members? I suppose anything at any time is possible, but I think not so plausible.

You are mixing two concepts. Texas joining an existing conference like the SEC = Texas not being in the inner circle for a meaningful period of time, perhaps a generation or two. Texas joining with other teams ALSO leaving their conference to form a new conference, then all are equal and the big dogs stand out.

All teams in a conference have a voice. The problem for the UT faithful would be that it is not the same voice they have been used too, well since forever. Texas in the Big Ten stand behind Ohio State and Michigan - permanently, as in forever. Texas in the SEC, I think would after 20 or 30 years 'earn' the respect of the elites in the SEC and be placed among - notice not on the top - of the inner circle. Texas in the ACC? Well, I am sure everyone in Orange and White would find it a surprise just how much Tobacco Road would look down on Texas - forever.

It would be fun to watch longhorn reactions if Texas moved to another conference, so many of you would be crying crocodile tears. Texas is only all that to longhorns and that is not really fair because is so much than just about every peer out there. Only in a conference dominated by Texas will longhorns have the voice they feel is their due. Move to a new conference at your peril, the grass is never greener.

 

[swVAHorn]

You are mixing two concepts. Texas joining an existing conference like the SEC = Texas not being in the inner circle for a meaningful period of time, perhaps a generation or two. Texas joining with other teams ALSO leaving their conference to form a new conference, then all are equal and the big dogs stand out.

All teams in a conference have a voice. The problem for the UT faithful would be that it is not the same voice they have been used too, well since forever. Texas in the Big Ten stand behind Ohio State and Michigan - permanently, as in forever. Texas in the SEC, I think would after 20 or 30 years 'earn' the respect of the elites in the SEC and be placed among - notice not on the top - of the inner circle. Texas in the ACC? Well, I am sure everyone in Orange and White would find it a surprise just how much Tobacco Road would look down on Texas - forever.

It would be fun to watch longhorn reactions if Texas moved to another conference, so many of you would be crying crocodile tears. Texas is only all that to longhorns and that is not really fair because is so much than just about every peer out there. Only in a conference dominated by Texas will longhorns have the voice they feel is their due. Move to a new conference at your peril, the grass is never greener.

So foolish. You are talking like it is a "good ole boys club"....it is not. Texas is the big dog and the big dog gets what it wants. The money that Texas is worth speaks for itself in any conference. Seniority be damned. Go away.

 

[LonghornMM]

You are mixing two concepts. Texas joining an existing conference like the SEC = Texas not being in the inner circle for a meaningful period of time, perhaps a generation or two. Texas joining with other teams ALSO leaving their conference to form a new conference, then all are equal and the big dogs stand out.

All teams in a conference have a voice. The problem for the UT faithful would be that it is not the same voice they have been used too, well since forever. Texas in the Big Ten stand behind Ohio State and Michigan - permanently, as in forever. Texas in the SEC, I think would after 20 or 30 years 'earn' the respect of the elites in the SEC and be placed among - notice not on the top - of the inner circle. Texas in the ACC? Well, I am sure everyone in Orange and White would find it a surprise just how much Tobacco Road would look down on Texas - forever.

It would be fun to watch longhorn reactions if Texas moved to another conference, so many of you would be crying crocodile tears. Texas is only all that to longhorns and that is not really fair because is so much than just about every peer out there. Only in a conference dominated by Texas will longhorns have the voice they feel is their due. Move to a new conference at your peril, the grass is never greener.

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Just stop.

 

[Scholz]

It would be fun to watch longhorn reactions if Texas moved to another conference, so many of you would be crying crocodile tears. Texas is only all that to longhorns and that is not really fair because is so much than just about every peer out there. Only in a conference dominated by Texas will longhorns have the voice they feel is their due. Move to a new conference at your peril, the grass is never greener.

You sound very bitter toward Longhorns. Seems strange after the financial rewards that have come WVU's way after joining the Big XII. Anyway, your hypotheticals are moot since Texas won't need to join someone else's conference. The Big XII may morph but we'll be staying right here.

 

[RoboCocks21]

You sound very bitter toward Longhorns. Seems strange after the financial rewards that have come WVU's way after joining the Big XII. Anyway, your hypotheticals are moot since Texas won't need to join someone else's conference. The Big XII may morph but we'll be staying right here.

Haters always gonna hate

 

[oldhorn2]

You are mixing two concepts. Texas joining an existing conference like the SEC = Texas not being in the inner circle for a meaningful period of time, perhaps a generation or two. Texas joining with other teams ALSO leaving their conference to form a new conference, then all are equal and the big dogs stand out.

All teams in a conference have a voice. The problem for the UT faithful would be that it is not the same voice they have been used too, well since forever. Texas in the Big Ten stand behind Ohio State and Michigan - permanently, as in forever. Texas in the SEC, I think would after 20 or 30 years 'earn' the respect of the elites in the SEC and be placed among - notice not on the top - of the inner circle. Texas in the ACC? Well, I am sure everyone in Orange and White would find it a surprise just how much Tobacco Road would look down on Texas - forever.

It would be fun to watch longhorn reactions if Texas moved to another conference, so many of you would be crying crocodile tears. Texas is only all that to longhorns and that is not really fair because is so much than just about every peer out there. Only in a conference dominated by Texas will longhorns have the voice they feel is their due. Move to a new conference at your peril, the grass is never greener.

Now you have gone and stepped in it. You have no clue what Texas brings to the table. You really dont know. How could you? You have no reference point from your own experience. I would ask politely if you wouldnt mind just taking your beyond belief ignorant ideas down the hall and pass them off where someone with no sense might actually think they have some merit....CS perhaps....now run along and try to stay out of the big boys way.

 

[outhereincali]

I'll never understand why an OU fan would post on a UT fans forum...anyways...the bottom line is that UT has the best brand in college sports. The product on the field has gone through a rough spot, but it's just a matter if time before things will improve. Kids flock to Austin and it's one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Fact is its a better and more popular place for people to gather and live than Norman. It's a telling sign that you have taken it upon yourself to register on this forum and dive into the UT culture. People are drawn to the sports programs at UT...even you. We will take you, come on and join us. UTs brand will endure whatever conference plays in. There is too much following and support for it to fail.

Also, the LHN has nothing to do with conference stability. Gundy has been known to speak this "garbage" before.

I went to Texas dunce.

 

[outhereincali]

I'll never understand why an OU fan would post on a UT fans forum...anyways...the bottom line is that UT has the best brand in college sports. The product on the field has gone through a rough spot, but it's just a matter if time before things will improve. Kids flock to Austin and it's one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Fact is its a better and more popular place for people to gather and live than Norman. It's a telling sign that you have taken it upon yourself to register on this forum and dive into the UT culture. People are drawn to the sports programs at UT...even you. We will take you, come on and join us. UTs brand will endure whatever conference plays in. There is too much following and support for it to fail.

Also, the LHN has nothing to do with conference stability. Gundy has been known to speak this "garbage" before.

If we have the best brand in college sports than why are we mediocre in fb and rebuilding in men's bb? Also both coaches have had to clean up the mess left by their predecessors.

Our women's bb is on the rebound and there will be no sin in losing to UCONN on Monday. Augie still has his coaching magic but he is 77.

But nobody else is doing something special.

We're talking big to make up for the fact that our athletic program as a whole is not doing well.

And you obviously didn't know that our ad is reportedly $6 million in the red.

 

[LonghornSoldier]

You are mixing two concepts. Texas joining an existing conference like the SEC = Texas not being in the inner circle for a meaningful period of time, perhaps a generation or two. Texas joining with other teams ALSO leaving their conference to form a new conference, then all are equal and the big dogs stand out.

All teams in a conference have a voice. The problem for the UT faithful would be that it is not the same voice they have been used too, well since forever. Texas in the Big Ten stand behind Ohio State and Michigan - permanently, as in forever. Texas in the SEC, I think would after 20 or 30 years 'earn' the respect of the elites in the SEC and be placed among - notice not on the top - of the inner circle. Texas in the ACC? Well, I am sure everyone in Orange and White would find it a surprise just how much Tobacco Road would look down on Texas - forever.

It would be fun to watch longhorn reactions if Texas moved to another conference, so many of you would be crying crocodile tears. Texas is only all that to longhorns and that is not really fair because is so much than just about every peer out there. Only in a conference dominated by Texas will longhorns have the voice they feel is their due. Move to a new conference at your peril, the grass is never greener.

You FAIL entirely.Money talks bro - and NOBODY has more than Texas. Facts are facts.... either accept it or kick rocks.

 

[HornosaurusRex]

If we have the best brand in college sports than why are we mediocre in fb and rebuilding in men's bb? Also both coaches have had to clean up the mess left by their predecessors.

It would have been nice if both coaches rode off into the sunset a year or two before they got the axe. It is hard to keep a program on top year in year out and those few coaches that are able seem to be detail oriented perfectionists or particularly slick cheaters or both. That said, Texas is certainly in the top five brands and most would probably place it at the very top of the heap, with several inherent advantages [big dog in a state that produces a lot of talent, austin, academic reputation, money/facilities]. Yes, we should be winning and hopefully will reclaim our rightful place at the top soon.

And you obviously didn't know that our ad is reportedly $6 million in the red.

Do you have a link? The bottom line in accounting is surprisingly flexible and there is a lot of discretionary variability that goes into that number. I believe the Texas Longhorn brand is still tops in the nation and if we start winning again the sky's the limit.

"The football program reported a net profit of $94.9 million during the 2014-15 academic year, according to the audit. "
Football’s overall surplus is used to pay for the rest of the athletic department. Men’s basketball ($6.4 million) and baseball ($1.6 million) were net positives, but all other sports lost money.

Texas also is one of the few schools nationally that transfers money back to the campus. The athletic department gave the university $9.8 million, a record-high."
Austin American Statesman

Hook 'em

 

[JoeAg]

Ags doubling down on criticizing Austin. It must be spring because the delusion is in full bloom.
Where do I begin to address the argument of everyone who went to college in a dump town surrounded by cow shit is that it is a "college town"? So, you prefer to live in a town with one crappy bar and nothing to do? That enhanced your college experience? But lets not get ahead of ourselves, because there are truly great "college towns". Manhattan (Kansas), Ann Arbor, etc. Notice these towns have a lot to offer, but are not in large cities. College Station is just a dump, not a great college town because it lacks anything that would make a city attractive.
Racial diversity is an issue in Austin. You failed to mention why though. It has become such a desirable place to live, that property values have escalated to a point where the poor neighborhoods are being replaced with new, nice neighborhoods. To put it bluntly, your criticism here is that Austin has no more ghettos. Sorry, I find that to be a good thing, and so do all property owners, everywhere.
And last but not least, the article debating whether Austin has great music. The article referenced was actually about SXSW, and the question is whether that festival is a good place for unknown artists to be discovered. The author came to the conclusion that it is not, because so many famous acts dominate the scene, and there are so many small acts spread over so many venues, that it is unlikely that you will be discovered. So to paraphrase...its a great place festival for fans, but not starving artists.
So to close, everything you said was wrong.
Thank you,
God Bless Austin, the only place to live in Texas

 

[JoeAg]

A lot of people Love Austin, but to say that what I said was incorrect is a lie. The congestion in that city alone is enough to make it undesirable for a lot of people. Austin suburbs continue to move west away from town. Squeezing the undesirables out is what it sounds like you are talking about with respect to the "ghetto" situation. This happens in most places, but here is where some Austin lovers don't recognize reality. So there are fewer ghettos. Where did those people go? They went across 35 where their barrios and ghettos continue to exist. The author of the article which I mentioned said as much. The Hispanics travel east to clean offices and do other menial tasks then travel back across 35 to live. This was in the vaunted Texas Monthly. I didn't say it. Also, the high costs and commercialization of Austin is putting a huge squeeze on local musicians and artists there. That was just on an Austin news cast last week.

 

[HornsRuleU]

"Squeezing the undesirables out," JoeAg? Really?!

Sorry, but that phrase deserves comment.

Cue the anti-PC rant in 3, 2, 1...

 

[Scholz]

"Undesirables" is how racist aggys describe minorities.

Wow, Joe, there are rich and poor areas in Austin and the cost of living has gone up? Gee whiz, thanks for that breaking news.

 

[Son of Wasatch]

What is this nonsense that Texas joined the Big 8? Texas did not join the Big 8. The Big 8 schools and four schools from the SWC came together and formed a new conference called the Big 12. The Big 12 did not exist in any form before 1995. The Big 8 folded just like the SWC. Everything was started fresh in 1995. This conference was created through mutual need as both conferences were falling behind the others due to lack of TV deals.

 

[BringBackRoyal]

Texas had been playing the members of the Big-8 for decades prior to moving with 3 others from the SWC into the BIg-8. Texas does not share such a history with any school in the SEC, except TA&M and Akansas; with no schools in the ACC, Pac-12 or Big Ten.

Texas' only meaningful relationship with a Big 8 school was with Oklahoma.

Then there is the fact that Texas did not join the Big-8 in the literal sense. The Big-8 died the day Texas and other SWC teams merged with those from the Big-8 to form the Big-12.

Well, it was called a merger only because Texas was involved. Do you think it gets called anything other than a Big Eight "expansion" if aggy, Tech, Baylor and, one of TCU, SMU, or Houston were the four SWC schools involved?

 

[HornsRuleU]

"Undesirables" is how racist aggys describe minorities.

Yeah, I thought I just said that.

 

[Scholz]

Yeah, I thought I just said that.

Just reiterating. Didn't mean to step on your toes. Blatant racism like that should be called out.

 

[Plainosooner]

The LHN hasn't worked. The biggest reason for that is about the time it launched all 3 big sports took a massive dump all at once. That killed any momentum the network would of gained. It looks like we're heading in the right direction in football and basketball now. Is it to late to make it a success though? I guess we will find out. It isn't going anywhere.

I'm not trying to make fun, but just how many times can the LHN show the 2005 NC game in different forms? I've never quite figured out who controls the content of LHN. Somebody from UT? Or ESPN who owns it and pays dearly to maintain it?

I don't think it's an unfortunate coincidence that Texas on field or on court performances took a dip when the LHN went on air. Giving opponents an inside look at how things are done in house, is not conducive to winning. It is more a factor when playing out of conference opponents in football or basketball or maybe especially something like baseball, where you can learn so much about strengths and weakness of Longhorn players. It may not be a deciding factor, but it is a factor.

The flip side of that, is that especially in the non-revenue sports, the extra exposure has to be a huge boon in recruiting.

But I think the biggest factor has to be assistant coaches and especially head coaches having to take time in busy in season schedules to be competent on air.

Time will tell about Charlie. Same with the men's and women's basketball coaches. I suspect you've hit a home run with Shaka. And it looks like women's basketball is in good hands. I don't think anyone in the women's tournament is going to play UConn any closer than Texas did Monday night.

I'm a strong opponent of LHN, but in some ways, I think it hurts UT more than the rest of the conference. But I do believe that overall, it hurts everybody. I believe that as a couple of posters stated above, that the Longhorns ought to strongly consider being an independent. The jealousies would be dismissed. And Texas could go through their independence in the way their actions seem to prefer.

Wouldn't that be a win-win?

 

[BringBackRoyal]

I don't think it's an unfortunate coincidence that Texas on field or on court performances took a dip when the LHN went on air. Giving opponents an inside look at how things are done in house, is not conducive to winning. It is more a factor when playing out of conference opponents in football or basketball or maybe especially something like baseball, where you can learn so much about strengths and weakness of Longhorn players. It may not be a deciding factor, but it is a factor.

I'm sorry, but this theory is bogus. There's no useful inside information relayed to any opponents via the LHN.

(1) Some of the problems that would undo Mack's regime were forming long before the LHN ever came to fruition, even if great junior and senior classes kept that from being immediately visible to the outsider. Additional problems developed later, with depressed Mack essentially retiring on the job after the Alabama game, and all of the problems are relatively clear and straightforward in hindsight. None of them have anything to do with the LHN. Mack had already gone 5-7 before the LHN launched.

(2) Barnes was already further hardening into a ridiculously stubborn, no-fun coach that was willing to self-sabotage, ruin players' confidence, and crater an entire season just to prove that he was right about something. The epic crash-and-burn jobs he pulled in 2010 and 2011 happened before the LHN ever came on air. The problems that followed in subsequent seasons had their roots in earlier seasons and had nothing to do with the LHN.

(3) Only Augie's poor performance neatly coincides with the rollout of the LHN, but the two again have nothing to do with each other. Augie's problems have to do with one particularly bad coaching hire and a stubborn refusal to do anything about it, poor talent evaluation (that assistant is also the recruiting coordinator), and, per numerous accounts of those close to the program, much reduced drive, effort, and even physical presence on his part. The dude is 77 years old -- aggy's first and only MNC was still ahead of them when Augie was born. All of the great ones lose it eventually (or they retire in time). There's nothing surprising going on here.

But I think the biggest factor has to be assistant coaches and especially head coaches having to take time in busy in season schedules to be competent on air.

The time demands are not oppressive, and the coaches have say in how much time they're going to put into the LHN. This became a talking point because Mack used it as an implied excuse for his poor performance toward the end of his tenure. Mack did not have to spend as much time on the air as he did; indeed, by all accounts, Mack was very happy with the extra opportunities to blab on the air before he decided that he wasn't happy (once the fan base was breathing fire down his neck).

 

[swVAHorn]

I'm sorry, but this theory is bogus. There's no useful inside information relayed to any opponents via the LHN.

(1) Some of the problems that would undo Mack's regime were forming long before the LHN ever came to fruition, even if great junior and senior classes kept that from being immediately visible to the outsider. Additional problems developed later, with depressed Mack essentially retiring on the job after the Alabama game, and all of the problems are relatively clear and straightforward in hindsight. None of them have anything to do with the LHN. Mack had already gone 5-7 before the LHN premiered.

(2) Barnes was already further hardening into a ridiculously stubborn, no-fun coach that was willing to self-sabotage, ruin players' confidence, and crater an entire season just to prove that he was right about something. The epic crash-and-burn jobs he pulled in 2010 and 2011 happened before the LHN ever came on air. The problems that followed in subsequent seasons had their roots in earlier seasons and had nothing to do with the LHN.

(3) Only Augie's poor performance neatly coincides with the rollout of the LHN, but the two again have nothing to do with each other. Augie's problems have to do one particularly bad coaching hire and a stubborn refusal to do anything about it, poor talent evaluation (that assistant is also the recruiting coordinator), and, per numerous accounts of those close to the program, much reduced drive, effort, and even physical presence on his part. The dude is 77 years old. aggy's first and only MNC was still ahead of them when Augie was born; pretty much all the great ones lose it eventually (or they retire in time). There's nothing surprising going on.



The time demands are not oppressive, and the coaches have say in how much time they're going to put into the LHN. This became a talking point because Mack used it as an implied excuse for his poor performance toward the end of his tenure. Mack did not have to spend as much time on the air as he did; indeed, by all accounts, Mack was very happy with the extra opportunities to blab on the air before he decided that he wasn't happy (once the fan base was breathing fire down his neck).

BRB...You can't use common sense or intelligent and well thought out reason on a person who has made their mind up....Texas is the best University in the best State in the best Country in the World......jealousy runs rampant.

 

[bubba2023]

The LHN is what it is. There is some good programming in there, but just not enough to carry a channel at those costs. If you have ever watched the LHN for more than 10 minutes you would know there is no inside info to be gained. That theory is ridiculous. The LHN doesn't show anything that conference networks don't show, and as BBR states the programs were already dipping before it even launched.

Plainosooner do you not realize that OU has their own network as well?

 

[Scholz]

...the Longhorns ought to strongly consider being an independent. The jealousies would be dismissed. And Texas could go through their independence in the way their actions seem to prefer.

Our actions? What does that mean? The entire conference voted on the things we do. And ou has voted in lock step with Texas each time. Please expound on this baseless criticism if you can.

Wouldn't that be a win-win?

Everybody living up to what they agreed to would be a win. People trying to weasel out of legal agreements because they're butthurt about something would not be a win.

 

[Son of Wasatch]

I do agree with one thing the sooner said, I'd rather Texas go independent in football and join a lesser conference for the other sports, like the SEC.

 

[mm42]

The LHN came with a lot of risks, but also was a no brainer for Texas.

Risk - LHN network pisses off other big schools who leave and hurt the BIG12. Result for Texas, milions of incremental dollars.

Risk - LHN network doesn't take off and has trouble with distribution. Result for Texas, millions of incremental dollars.

Risk - Programming is bad, other Schools make fun of LHN. Result for Texas, millions of incremental dollars.

Basically the LHN has been pretty bad in a lot of ways (bad for ESPN, not Texas). But as long as the checks keep coming, it is a huge win for Texas. End of story.

 

[Scholz]

Risk - LHN network pisses off other big schools who leave and hurt the BIG12.

The LHN is a result of a conference vote on third tier media rights. The Big XII conference had a vote on it. It was agreed upon by the conference. Not sure how that's supposedly such a nefarious move on UT's part. Really don't understand how that's a talking point still.

 

[mm42]

I do agree with one thing the sooner said, I'd rather Texas go independent in football and join a lesser conference for the other sports, like the SEC.

That seems like a really wise thing to do. I think you should take this route.
You could just schedule all the BIG12 teams anyway, they'd have no choice but say ok. Maybe OU would tell you no, but the others would probably just bend over and take it. All the other Big12 schools would have Sun Belt revenues at that point (assuming OU leaves), and 10 wins a year would be in the bag. You could probably schedule all home games as well.
Or maybe you either stay put, or move on to a better conference.

 

[mm42]

The LHN is a result of a conference vote on third tier media rights. The Big XII conference had a vote on it. It was agreed upon by the conference. Not sure how that's supposedly such a nefarious move on UT's part. Really don't understand how that's a talking point still.

I was agreeing with the folks saying Texas had every right to have the LHN. To pretend Texas was the only school with a strategy is silly. Maybe it was just the media/political cover others were looking for. Doesn't make Texas wrong, but I think it was obviously a risk.

But what difference does it make. Texas made extra money anyway. That is a good thing for you guys.