re: Texas/A&M/OU/Okie State

quote:

---

the funny thing is that the Pac-12 is not rated significantly higher than the SEC (with A&M added) in terms of academic rankings.

---

Have to disagree on that

The california schools alone - Stanford, Cal, USC and UCLA are in the top 25-30 in terms of academics. U Washington is probably in the top 50 as well and Arizona has some good departments.

Thats only paper rankings - if you talk prestige/perception on top of reality - not many schools out side the IVY can compete with the number of Laureates at any of the California schools.

SEC has only Vandy in 25 and maybe florida in the top 50 followed by Georgia and Auburn within the 100. LSU has a couple of good departments.

Texas being in the top 50 would rather want to associate with Pac (in terms of academics) than the SEC.

The Big 10 would be a better fit for them academically or even the ACC since they both have evenly spread schools from top 15 to 100.

OU and Texas are somewhat unique programs in that they have a much different mindset than the rest of the major programs around the country. You have to remember that until the SWC collapsed and the Big 8 became the Big 12 in 1996, these 2 programs were not exactly used to playing other programs on their level week in and week out.

SWC:
Texas
aTm
Texas Tech
Arkansas
SMU
Houston
Rice
TCU
Baylor

Big 8:
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Iowa St
Kansas
Kansas St
Missouri
Oklahoma St
Colorado

They can call it academics or anything they want, but I really don't see Texas or especially OU being willing to enter a conference where there are already 6 teams who can go toe to toe with them most years.

quote:

---

SEC has only Vandy in 25 and maybe florida in the top 50 followed by Georgia and Auburn within the 100. LSU has a couple of good departments.

Texas being in the top 50 would rather want to associate with Pac (in terms of academics) than the SEC.

---

Many schools in the league like LSU have moved rapidly in the last decade to improve their standing and become more elite. Higher admission standards are just part of the equation at these major state "flagship" institutions in the south.

If this realignment deal is primarily about money and looking decades ahead, Texas should see the long-term value of the SEC. Both in academics and athletics, the league is on the major upswing.

quote:

---

would LSU's deal with Cox Sports be considered 3rd tier rights? What schools presently in the SEC have 3rd tier TV deals, and how much do they keep of it?

---

I believe Bama gets about 8 million a year in 3rd tier. Presently, every SEC team is guaranteed 1 game a year to be broadcast by PPV or whatever their 3rd tier organization is. LHN could fit in perfectly fine in this model so long as they keep high school sports off of it. No one cares that Texas makes a lot of money from the LHN. They care about constantly fighting them and ESPN from showing high school kids on there and turning it into a recruiting plug.

quote:

---

I believe Bama gets about 8 million a year in 3rd tier. Presently, every SEC team is guaranteed 1 game a year to be broadcast by PPV or whatever their 3rd tier organization is. LHN could fit in perfectly fine in this model so long as they keep high school sports off of it. No one cares that Texas makes a lot of money from the LHN. They care about constantly fighting them and ESPN from showing high school kids on there and turning it into a recruiting plug.

---

The funny thing is, if they just rebranded the network (call it Texas College Sports or something) with UT still getting those fat checks, then they could get away with showing HS games. It would be like a CST or Sun Sports that way. As long as UT gets the money, why would they care? Are they that arrogant and/or short-sighted?

UTx is the most attractive school for expansion if they agree to revenue sharing and abort the LHN, which doesn't seem likely.

Choosing a conference because of how easy it will be to get a BCS bowl could be a mistake. If the superconferences develop, the BCS system will get completely redone to include the bowls into a playoff system using division champions.

quote:

---

The funny thing is, if they just rebranded the network (call it Texas College Sports or something) with UT still getting those fat checks, then they could get away with showing HS games

---

While true, I think Texas would agree to never show HS football games or highlights if it could keep its 3rd tier rights and have the LHN running as is......

quote:

---

Choosing a conference because of how easy it will be to get a BCS bowl could be a mistake. If the superconferences develop, the BCS system will get completely redone to include the bowls into a playoff system using division champions.

---

100% agreed. You still have to factor in how easy it would be to win your division and then conference in order to make it to the 4 team playoff, but the days of teams like OU and VaTech making it to a BCS game every year by default are about to end.

quote:

---

quote:
The funny thing is, if they just rebranded the network (call it Texas College Sports or something) with UT still getting those fat checks, then they could get away with showing HS games


While true, I think Texas would agree to never show HS football games or highlights if it could keep its 3rd tier rights and have the LHN running as is......

---

And that is stupid. Plain and simple. Changing the name and the perceived terms of the relationship while keeping the money is the clear-cut call to make.