- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If the Big12 fails, who does Texas play in non-football sports?
Posted on 8/10/11 at 11:19 am to Dr Drunkenstein
Posted on 8/10/11 at 11:19 am to Dr Drunkenstein
The more I think about it, I think it's possible the Big10 or Pac12 would let Texas in with the LHN, but it would have to be a dollar-for-dollar reduction in conference TV money given to UT if they want to keep the LHN. (say the Big10 TV deal is $18mil per team, and UT gets $15 mil from the LHN... if every Big10 school is getting $18mil fro mthe Big10, then Texas would only get $3mil from the Big10, giving every school equal TV dollars).
No conference that has the status and structure of the Big10 or SEC is going to allow one school to bring in more TV money than the other conference schools. No doubt Texas is a heavyweight, but the Big10 and SEC as entities are much bigger heavyweights than Texas as a stand-alone.
No conference that has the status and structure of the Big10 or SEC is going to allow one school to bring in more TV money than the other conference schools. No doubt Texas is a heavyweight, but the Big10 and SEC as entities are much bigger heavyweights than Texas as a stand-alone.
This post was edited on 8/10/11 at 11:21 am
Posted on 8/10/11 at 1:51 pm to TejasHorn
quote:
As a Texas fan, I'm increasingly embarrassed by the LHN, and combination of naivity and arrogance of the business side of UT athletics. They are very heavily promoting the Rice-Texas game around Dallas with billboards, radio ads, etc. Like it's some sort of huge game. Please.
You, my friend, get it. Dr. Drunkenstein definitely does not.
Posted on 8/10/11 at 3:16 pm to SandStorm
quote:
SandStorm
You have no clue what national brand means. It has nothing to do with titles, and everything to do with money.
It means people will watch. Notre Dame sucks, but people still watch. USC was half-assed last year, but people watched. People will watch Texas.
Money-wise, go into a Champs store in any mall. You ALWAYS see Carolina shite, Texas, Miami, USC, Michigan, Duke, etc.
You have no clue what you are talking about.
ESPN signed the deal why? Because it makes them money...
And seeing as though Texas has one of the largest student bodies in the nation, something tells me they have enough fans to go around.
Funny how on here people bitch about the vast amount of UT 't-shirt fans' and whatnot, and now all of a sudden for this discussion their fanbase isn't big? It's a top 5 fanbase in the U.S.
Posted on 8/10/11 at 3:29 pm to TexasTiger08
quote:
TexasTiger08
First of all, calm down.
Secondly, just because UT's athletic program generates a ton of money does not mean more people are interested in UT athletics. It simply means they have A LOT of wealthy donors.
I live one state away from UT and have ZERO interest in their athletic program.
I realize that UT is a great program but it's 'brand' is of little interest to people in the Northeast, West and Southeast.
It is what it is. Deal with it
Posted on 8/10/11 at 3:38 pm to Bronwyn
quote:
I live one state away from UT and have ZERO interest in their athletic program.
Then why are you posting in this thread...and I don't mean that sarcastically.
Negative attention is still attention.
It's like the bitchy girl in school that everyone hated. Sure, she was hot...but a true bitch. Everyone kept an eye out just to see what she would do next, bust arse on a pom-pom or something. That is UT.
I am not saying people like them. I can't stand USC or Notre Dame...but they still get attention from me on gameday, just because I tune in to see a score, see if they are losing, etc.
And...what is your interpretation of 'national brand'?
Posted on 8/10/11 at 3:49 pm to TexasTiger08
So what you're essentially saying is that people will tune in and watch UT games because of their hatred for UT? Fat chance
The only reason I have any interest in UT right now is because my GF currently goes to school there.
I enjoy watching UT if they are playing OSU or OU but any other weekend and UT isn't even on my radar.
A national brand is bigger than just one program. Notre Dame is the sole exception to this rule and that is due to religious aspects/media hype.
UT is a great program, no doubt, but they are not going to hit their marks if they are independent.
The only reason I have any interest in UT right now is because my GF currently goes to school there.
I enjoy watching UT if they are playing OSU or OU but any other weekend and UT isn't even on my radar.
A national brand is bigger than just one program. Notre Dame is the sole exception to this rule and that is due to religious aspects/media hype.
UT is a great program, no doubt, but they are not going to hit their marks if they are independent.
Posted on 8/10/11 at 4:30 pm to Bronwyn
quote:
A national brand is bigger than just one program. Notre Dame is the sole exception to this rule and that is due to religious aspects/media hype.
Here's where we disagree...no problem. I think Notre Dame is on a tier with other schools, Texas being one of them.
quote:
UT is a great program, no doubt, but they are not going to hit their marks if they are independent.
Earlier in the thread, I agreed to this. I was just arguing the point with another poster about UT's stance within the nation. He tried to say that Miami and USC (of all teams) were 'national brands', but not Texas.
Posted on 8/10/11 at 4:48 pm to TexasTiger08
quote:
Earlier in the thread, I agreed to this. I was just arguing the point with another poster about UT's stance within the nation. He tried to say that Miami and USC (of all teams) were 'national brands', but not Texas
I apologize for not reading through the whole thread and picking up on this.
We kind of agree in a roundabout way.
Posted on 8/10/11 at 5:18 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
This is just weird. A lot of these conference members would not be in a BCS conference, and would make a lot less $, if not for Texas. For schools like A&M and OU who chose to stay, they are accountable for their own actions and it is silly to feel sorry for them.
they're in that conference and making the money because they joined before college football was a business... iowa state, kansas state, washington state, oregon state, mississippi state, texas tech, baylor, etc. were accidents of history
if we reformed the BCS conferences today, some schools would be kicked out and some not currently in BCS conferences would be added. i'm thinking we'd mostly have one BCS school per state, maybe two if they can be supported
This post was edited on 8/10/11 at 5:19 pm
Posted on 8/10/11 at 5:57 pm to SandStorm
And don't forget A&M has 50,000 students. One of the largest schools in the nation. There's a lot of Ags in Texas. Especially Houston which is only 85 miles from A&M
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:11 pm to Bronwyn
quote:
We kind of agree in a roundabout way.
I gotcha now. I think going Indy nowadays is a death sentence. Notre Dame gets away because of the tv deal and rivalries they have established with good teams. They have their own unique scheduling rivalries that simply won't be broken up.
Michigan
Purdue
Michigan State
USC
Stanford
Those teams are good any given season.
Texas can't do that...and I think BYU definitely solidifies themselves as a true mid-major now.
In the day of superconferences and the importance of scheduling and the BCS...Independence is bad news.
That said, Texas baseball and basketball could survive in some place like the Big East (if FB went Indy).
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:23 pm to TexasTiger08
Outside of Texas, what other states will pick up the LHN on their cable packages? I'm guessing a couple to none. The Big 10 Network is basically on DirecTv and the cable companies within the Big 10 Footprint. If the LHN doesn't get on DirecTv, then their will be a lot of PO'd Texas fans that won't be able to see a couple of games a year.
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:28 pm to JPLSU1981
JP, it's weird though. UTa athletics the first 5 years only gets just under $5 mil/yr. But once ESPN has hit the $295 mil profit mark, UTa gets 70% of all revenue. So if the LHN is successful there's no way to determine how much UTa athletics will earn in advance.
But again, Longhorn athletics is only getting $5 mil the first 5 years. Not what they've been beating their chest about is it?
But again, Longhorn athletics is only getting $5 mil the first 5 years. Not what they've been beating their chest about is it?
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:30 pm to TexasTiger08
yall keep ragging on BYU's schedule but i'd put:
@ Ole Miss
@ Texas
Utah
UCF
@ Oregon State
@ TCU
@ Hawaii
up against any major conference schedule. most of that is major conferences and UCF and Hawaii are two of the biggest non-AQ programs
now yeah the other teams they play are cupcakes, but for their "conference" games, that's 5 on the road and 2 at home
2012 BYU notable games scheduled
Oregon State
Hawaii
@ Utah
@ Boise State
@ Georgia Tech
@ Notre Dame
@ Ole Miss
@ Texas
Utah
UCF
@ Oregon State
@ TCU
@ Hawaii
up against any major conference schedule. most of that is major conferences and UCF and Hawaii are two of the biggest non-AQ programs
now yeah the other teams they play are cupcakes, but for their "conference" games, that's 5 on the road and 2 at home
2012 BYU notable games scheduled
Oregon State
Hawaii
@ Utah
@ Boise State
@ Georgia Tech
@ Notre Dame
This post was edited on 8/10/11 at 6:50 pm
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:32 pm to RedHawk
quote:
Outside of Texas, what other states will pick up the LHN on their cable packages?
it's under the Mothership's banner, it wont matter where you live as long as (a) you have digital cable & (b) whatever cable provider you have access to offers ESPN
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:35 pm to Uncle Stu
quote:
it's under the Mothership's banner, it wont matter where you live as long as (a) you have digital cable & (b) whatever cable provider you have access to offers ESPN
So it isn't a separate network? Fox owns 49% of the BTN, but it is still a separate network and channel. I'm guessing that the LHN will have to be a separate channel from the regular ESPN channels.
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:41 pm to RedHawk
it's a complete separate network in and of itself
but in today's times, where have you heard any cable company offering ESPN without ESPN2 ??
my point is that geography no longer has bearing
but in today's times, where have you heard any cable company offering ESPN without ESPN2 ??
my point is that geography no longer has bearing
Posted on 8/10/11 at 6:45 pm to Uncle Stu
quote:
it's a complete separate network in and of itself
but in today's times, where have you heard any cable company offering ESPN without ESPN2 ??
my point is that geography no longer has bearing
Some cable companies don't even carry ESPN Classic. The LHN will have a tough fight on their hands to get on cable outside of Texas. Would you want to pay for the LHN as part of your cable outside of Texas if you were not a Texas fan?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News