By the way, Neinas on Gameday this morning confirmed many of my fears. Seems to want only 10 teams, not 12. Noted "some resistance" to adding another team from Texas. Gee, I wonder where those ideas are coming from? Spoiler
Is there anything concrete out there showing what the LHN was gonna be last year and currently? And no, the network wasn't going to be a 50/50 split but that's not surprising. One team has a top college brand and the other doesn't. Even passing on 30% of $300M is stupid. I understand the numbers weren't known but that's still a lack of vision.
Aggies definitely aren't Buddhists. http://blog.chron.com/believeitorno...e-rational-decisions-baylor-neurologists-say/
Nothing official. But OU's President has also publicly stated that what the LHN did was not what was originally proposed last year. I don't think it's a lack of vision at all. After accounting for expenses and the IMG Marketing Fees, LHN will generate less than $10MM per year for UT - and that's with numbers far outpacing anything anyone envisioned. Deloss Dodds says that just last year, they were *hoping* LHN could generate $3MM / yr. They were close to signing a deal with FOX for around that amount before ESPN jumped in. So UT had no more vision on this than A&M did in terms of dollars. Compare that to the Big10 Network generating $8MM+ and growing for each of it's schools, and the Pac12 Network projected to generate $11MM+ for each of their schools. Given that, A&M's better bet would have been a Big12 Network - far more money, far wider distribution, and far less cost. UT wanted the exclusive network primarily to promote themselves as opposed to the conference. Given A&M's finances at the time, my guess is they would have preferred the option that was more lucrative over the self-promotion aspect - and all signs pointed to a Longhorn-Aggie Network not being as profitable as other options out there. As it turns out, they'll probably be right - they'll likely make net out more in total with an SEC renegotiated TV contract + a future SEC Network than they would in the Big12 + Longhorn-Aggie Network.
Only from Texas? Not TTU, Baylor, OU, OSU or Missou who all recruit texas heavily. OU, despite getting some of its best players from Texas, hammered strict demands at the big 12 meetings demanding another Texas team in the conference but UT is just ****ing it up for everyone.
If there were serious talks in place to get a Big 12 network in place then I can agree with this take. But if not then I can't. Are you saying the Aggies vision when UT proposed to go in on a network (before there were even talks of going to the SEC) was to get a Big 12 network going? I don't see how they would have thought that possible when the major player wanted an exclusive network. That's also assuming the SEC gets a new TV deal which rumors say they won't...at least not by just adding A&M.
How could there have been serious talks about getting a Big 12 network going when the Tier 1 rights were not due up for another 3 years? Look, I don't hate on UT for making the decision they made (I fault the Big 12 for allowing it), but UT basically made the decision for A&M to leave the conference by pushing the issues they did with the LHN. Should A&M feel sorry for the other conference members that didn't have another conference that wanted them? I don't think so.
Post it in the forum and Clutch will tell you who left it. I started a thread about it, if it was bad he will expose the guy.
I can tell you BU is lobbying heavy to try to get TCU in the conference. But I understand Texas and the non-Texas schools don't want TCU in.
Just to be clear -- "neg" rep implies negative points rep, which only the admins can give out. So I thought there was going to be a problem, but that wasn't the case here... someone was leaving comments frustrated with your posts, but leaving positive rep in the process. I removed them and contacted the poster. I don't think it really warrants a call out in this case (wasn't that bad, unless I missed something).
So the weakest and smallest school in the conference is for TCU when it's likely most other schools don't want them and you are blaming Texas? It's baylor. Do you realize this completely contradicts your anti texas post? Look there are reasons to blame texas for. Don't make up new ones.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qO0mEG5gwVQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> In other news. I read that A&M cheerlsquad have been told to squelch any SEC chants. I think it would be kind of awesome if they did chant it. /shrug Oops, a fumble. Go pokes.
A&M president tells the side-line reporter that they decided to leave for the SEC 18 months ago. Bull ****!
I wish the SEC would require A&M to get rid of their male cheerleaders in order to join the conference.
just calling people out for doing that stuff anonymously. certainly don't think any of them were all that bad, but it's pretty cowardly to trash talk that way, imo. and i puff 'neg' in quotes cause i understand they were technically positive reps.
I got them too. Seems like an Aggie that wasn't confident in his post to post them publicly. After today's game, I can see why.
Lol I really hope from this point on, the Aggies shut up about how theyll be fine in the SEC and/or how great they are in football this year. Even moreso if they lose next week vs Arkansas.
