PDA

View Full Version : Options narrowing for Texas



tlongII
09-18-2011, 03:58 PM
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1266871

A source close to Texas repeated to me today the Pac-12 may now be the Longhorns' top option in terms of finding a new conference home.

The Pac-12 might be willing to accept a "modified" version of the Longhorn Network, the source said.

This development was first reported by Orangebloods.com on Saturday, when the Atlantic Coast Conference began moving in a different direction, according to a Big 12 administrator.

Multiple sources said Texas was banking on ESPN to make a marriage between the ACC and Texas that would allow the Longhorns to keep LHN. But that appears to have failed, the sources said.

Orangebloods.com was the first to report Saturday that the ACC was concerned about how LHN would fit into its revenue sharing; sees itself as an east coast conference and wasn't interested in extending into the southwest (no matter how much TV money adding Texas would mean); and had concerns about the academics of Texas Tech, whom UT would be under pressure politically to bring with them wherever UT went.

UT president Bill Powers and athletic director DeLoss Dodds told people inside the athletic department last week the ACC was Texas' best option if the Big 12 fell apart. Now, Texas is looking at the Pac-12.

Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott told a group of reporters that included Orangebloods.com at the Rose Bowl Saturday the Pac-12 would not be flexibile about third-tier rights revenue sharing. Scott maintains that schools have to share the money equally.

If Texas sought membership in the Pac-12, Scott said LHN "would be an issue." But Scott said his league has a great relationship with ESPN, which owns the rights to LHN and is also a TV partner in the Pac-12 (along with Fox).

The list of options for Texas appears to be down to the Pac-12 or trying - come hell or high water - to hold the Big 12 together.

But a Big 12 without Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas A&M does not excite the TV partners of the Big 12, industry sources have said. In other words, there's no way the Big 12 money stays the same if it's Texas, BYU, Louisville and some combination of Cincinnati, Houston and TCU along with the remaining members of the Big 12.

Also, schools like Missouri and Kansas would have to be convinced to stay in the Big 12 when they have other options, sources said.

DeLoss Dodds has told people who matter that Texas does not want to go independent and does not want to go to the Big Ten. Dodds has said the growth in the United States is south, and the Big Ten is not in the south.

It's not a done deal, but it's looking more and more like the Pac-12 with a modified version of the Longhorn Network, probably renamed as something like the Pac-12 Texas Network.

Stay tuned.

DUNCANownsKOBE
09-18-2011, 07:06 PM
If the Pac-12 lets UT in with any kind of LHN and lets UT think they get to play by their own set of rules, we'll end up just like the Big 12. Larry Scott would be a dumbass to try and appease Texas. The Pac-12 is doing just fine as it is.

DesignatedT
09-18-2011, 07:20 PM
If the Pac-12 lets UT in with any kind of LHN and lets UT think they get to play by their own set of rules, we'll end up just like the Big 12. Larry Scott would be a dumbass to try and appease Texas. The Pac-12 is doing just fine as it is.

Exactly. Have fun with that.

DUNCANownsKOBE
09-18-2011, 07:35 PM
I'm not sure why Scott even feels the need to entertain the notion of LHN. The ACC wants to remain an East Coast conference and not start taking midwest/southwest schools like Texas, the Big-12 dying is basically inevitable now, and IMO UT knows that going independent would hurt their basketball program too much. It seems like the Pac-12 is UT's only option, with or without LHN.

Even if it wasn't UT's only option, the Pac-12 doesn't need UT at all. UT to the Pac-12 is pretty much inevitable now so there's no reason to whine about it, but if Scott caves on LHN, it'll open up a pandora's box and eventually the Pac-12's revenue sharing policy will go to shit because it'll turn into every school for itself.

Kermit
09-18-2011, 07:40 PM
I'm not sure why Scott even feels the need to entertain the notion of LHN. The ACC wants to remain an East Coast conference and not start taking midwest/southwest schools like Texas, the Big-12 dying is basically inevitable now, and IMO UT knows that going independent would hurt their basketball program too much. It seems like the Pac-12 is UT's only option, with or without LHN.

Even if it wasn't UT's only option, the Pac-12 doesn't need UT at all. UT to the Pac-12 is pretty much inevitable now so there's no reason to whine about it, but if Scott caves on LHN, it'll open up a pandora's box and eventually the Pac-12's revenue sharing policy will go to shit because it'll turn into every school for itself.


The Longhorns would be able to keep all of their revenue from the network if that amount is greater than one-sixteenth of what the entire Pac-12 receives for its third-tier rights. However, if one-sixteenth of the money the Pac-12 receives from third-tier rights ends up being a larger amount, the schools would divide the revenue evenly and everybody would receive the same amount, the source said.

DUNCANownsKOBE
09-18-2011, 07:57 PM
The Longhorns would be able to keep all of their revenue from the network if that amount is greater than one-sixteenth of what the entire Pac-12 receives for its third-tier rights. However, if one-sixteenth of the money the Pac-12 receives from third-tier rights ends up being a larger amount, the schools would divide the revenue evenly and everybody would receive the same amount, the source said.

Yeah um if I'm not mistaken that helps UT more than it helps other schools, what that basically says is...

If UT makes more than the other schools, they get to keep it and the revenue isn't shared equally.

If UT makes less than the other schools, all the money gets thrown in a pot and UT then gets a bump in revenue to even out with the other schools.


Not sure how that's supposed to demonstrate how the other schools wouldn't be getting the short end of the stick.

Kermit
09-18-2011, 08:00 PM
Yeah um if I'm not mistaken that helps UT more than it helps other schools, what that basically says is...

If UT makes more than the other schools, they get to keep it and the revenue isn't shared equally.

If UT makes less than the other schools, all the money gets thrown in a pot and UT then gets a bump in revenue to even out with the other schools.


Not sure how that's supposed to demonstrate how the other schools wouldn't be getting the short end of the stick.

DUNCANownsKOBE
09-18-2011, 08:02 PM
Because when the PAC 12 renegotiates the contract, they'll be making more than 15 million a school for third tier rights.
I didn't read that anywhere in what you quoted. All I read was, "Equal revenue only applies when it helps Texas."