Don't you guys see what you're missing here?

[coolm]

The new TV contract is favorable and lucrative just as a matter of appeasement. Not because we did anything to increase the new league's viability and marketability. In fact, we lost a school with a rather major football following in the process as well as the Denver Market which, while not that large nationally, is still one of the bigger in our group.

When you combine this with the fact they are giving away the gem of individual networks vice conference ones then you hafta wonder WHERE will the bargaining edge be in the future?

This is as opposed to a contract based upon an actual large market which can lead to greater exposure, enhanced commercial opportunities offered by marketing in the new member cities, and the fact we won't need to make drama in order to have any bargaining chip come contract time. Not to mention the potential new rivalries.

We're being bought off with no consideration why we're at this juncture to begin with.

Why couldn't this TV contract have been made before?

Are we to believe that Nebraska and Colorado's presence kept this from happening? That's just silly.

Some of you really need to sit back and listen closely to the Nebraska AD's speech about the basis behind their decision. IMO this was a short term financial decision that is going to f*** us in the long run.

 

[Sid]

Why couldn't this TV contract have been made before?

Forget it, Cool. It’s hopeless. Like I stated in another thread, Texas got what they wanted. Now they have 4 years to test and develop their own tv network while maintaining control over the remaining idiots. I can’t imagine Michigan allowing their biggest rival, tOSU to have that much control over them.

 

[coolm]

btw Wetzel has a very good article describing how it went down and where the pitfalls still lie

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news;_ylt=AiUpZCDzSPpXic_05liOL3U5nYcB?slug=dw-big12save061410

 

[Cleavon Little]

From that article:

"For the Longhorns and Sooners, there was little doubt that the best place in terms of actual football was the Big 12. There was never a reason to leave."

"Life is potentially even better now for Texas and Oklahoma."

"UT and OU can keep on winning and keep on cashing checks. "

 

[coolm]

From that article:

"For the Longhorns and Sooners, there was little doubt that the best place in terms of actual football was the Big 12. There was never a reason to leave."

"Life is potentially even better now for Texas and Oklahoma."

"UT and OU can keep on winning and keep on cashing checks. "

that's nice Calaway....except you left out the "...but..."

 

[Cleavon Little]

Not seeing many in that article. It's really about how Larry Scott tried to raid another conference and fell short. Not saying there aren't a lot of big "buts," I cannot lie, but he doesn't really use this article to break them down.

 

[coolm]

Not seeing many in that article. It's really about how Larry Scott tried to raid another conference and fell short. Not saying there aren't a lot of big "buts," I cannot lie, but he doesn't really use this article to break them down.

well, it's not really fair to include quotes out of context like that without including the exceptions.

You can't ignore those big buts ... it's not a 25 year HS anniversary.

 

[Cleavon Little]

No, those were very much in the context of the article you posted. Here's more.

"The TV contract, which like some other details hasn’t been formalized, promises Texas and Oklahoma an oversized share of revenue that could reach over $20 million per year, on pace with the industry-best Big Ten."

"Texas, in particular, couldn’t have drawn it up any better." - that's a but, I guess

"It’s open to debate whether super conferences would really “ruin” college athletics..." - a but I guess

"This round of expansion hasn’t yielded a major financial windfall for anyone but Texas and Oklahoma."

"Without a playoff though, this season of minor expansion is but the calm before the storm." - Though other brothers may deny, that's probably the biggest but of all. We'll just have to go through it all again in the future, but didn't we know that anyways?

Again, man, read the article. Not saying this doesn't have some bad aspects of the deal, but you linked an article that didn't specifically state a whole lot of bad stuff to the deal for OU. Give that old quote button a workout and prove me wrong, lol. Just joshin ya.

 

[Cleavon Little]

Maybe you meant this, from the comments section of this other article:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basket...ow-that-the-Big-12-is-stayin?urn=ncaab,248328

"The real losers are the rest of the Big 12 teams. They will receive less money than Texas and must rely on the success of the UT program to draw the estimated revenue the Big 12 predicts"

That's a big but that I don't love.