The Big 12 expansion groundswell

[Paperback Writer]

Here is something interesting... According to Chip Brown UT tried to partner with TAMU on creating a sports network:

As the story goes A&M didn't want to spend the money to do this. Then ESPN approach UT and they created the LHN. I am starting to think A&M is just bluffing about going to the SEC in the hopes to force their way into the LHN now. Of course, if this happens then baby brother Tech may make a stink as well.

Here is UT calling TAMU's bluff...

I'm going back and forth about whether aTm is bluffing. The Aggies certainly didn't want to join the PAC-10 last year with most of the rest of the Big 12 South. Was joining the SEC a bluff back then? Perhaps, but the Longhorns folded and the Big 12-2 remained. But what exactly are the Aggies hoping to gain if they are bluffing? If the Aggies get included in the LHN, the rest of the Big 12 will cry foul more than they already are.

The Longhorns have been sold on a Texas/conference network for a long time. The Big 12 discussed it but most programs thought it wouldn't be profitable - that was before the BTN was in the black. I question whether a Big 12 network would have shown a similar profit. Cetainly, UT, aTm, OU and Nebraska would have brought in revenue but then Baylor, Tech, Okie St., KU, KSU, ISU, and Colorado would have diluted any profits (Mizzou can hold it's own).

I could see a scenario where the LHN expands to include OU, OK st., and Tech and the four programs join the PAC-12. Revenue from UT and OU could more than offset Tech and Okie St. without the additional anchors of Baylor, KU, KSU, and ISU. And that would only work within the regional PAC-12/16 network. I can't see how the LHN could expand to include aTm or OU and perhaps Tech in the Big 12 and still have the conference viable because it would be a huge disadvantage for the programs not included. Include everyone in the LHN and it's probably not profitable.

Agree that an expanded PAC-16 does not bode will for BYU.

[oxcoug]

Veddarhall sighting on CB.

http://www.cougarboard.com/board/mes...tml?id=7183355

Does he ever walk this way?

[Uncle Ted]

I'm going back and forth about whether aTm is bluffing. The Aggies certainly didn't want to join the PAC-10 last year with most of the rest of the Big 12 South. Was joining the SEC a bluff back then? Perhaps, but the Longhorns folded and the Big 12-2 remained. But what exactly are the Aggies hoping to gain if they are bluffing? If the Aggies get included in the LHN, the rest of the Big 12 will cry foul more than they already are.

The Longhorns have been sold on a Texas/conference network for a long time. The Big 12 discussed it but most programs thought it wouldn't be profitable - that was before the BTN was in the black. I question whether a Big 12 network would have shown a similar profit. Cetainly, UT, aTm, OU and Nebraska would have brought in revenue but then Baylor, Tech, Okie St., KU, KSU, ISU, and Colorado would have diluted any profits (Mizzou can hold it's own).

I could see a scenario where the LHN expands to include OU, OK st., and Tech and the four programs join the PAC-12. Revenue from UT and OU could more than offset Tech and Okie St. without the additional anchors of Baylor, KU, KSU, and ISU. And that would only work within the regional PAC-12/16 network. I can't see how the LHN could expand to include aTm or OU and perhaps Tech in the Big 12 and still have the conference viable because it would be a huge disadvantage for the programs not included. Include everyone in the LHN and it's probably not profitable.

Agree that an expanded PAC-16 does not bode will for BYU.

I don't see TAMU going anywhere but I can see a couple of good things coming out of all of this:

(1) Given that the LHN can't use high school games for content and will only have two UT games (and only has one booked for sure so far) I can't help from thinking that it will be expanded to include TAMU and Tech. (Baylor is private and, therefore, they should be on their own. Besides they don't add much value.) This should smooth things over with A&M and add a lot of value to the network. I believe Mack Brown would like this because he described the LHN network as his second full-time job the other day. I think he is getting a lot pressure from ESPN for adding content. As for OU and OSU, OU has been kicking around the idea of starting their own network. I can see OU including their kid brother in their network.

(2) The Big 12 will be going back to back to 12 teams by adding a couple of good anchor teams to stabilize things. I am not sure if this will happen any time soon. I think the Big 12 realizes this and they are just taking some time to find the right two teams. BYU just needs a good dance partner.

[ERCougar]

Again...if this is a planted rumor, why do it on a paid access forum? I mean, I guess it got out, so mission accomplished, but there are all kinds of other ways to do this.

[Surfah]

Again...if this is a planted rumor, why do it on a paid access forum? I mean, I guess it got out, so mission accomplished, but there are all kinds of other ways to do this.

Because only passionate fans subscribe and they do so for these kinds of tidbits. And then they'll run off and tell everyone. The paid access to a site run by supposed program insider gives some hint of credibility. And in the end if it was a bluff and planted rumor, TAMU has plausible deniability.

[TheAzzuri]

Veddarhall sighting on CB.

http://www.cougarboard.com/board/mes...tml?id=7183355

Does he ever walk this way?

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm guessing he's got serious connections? His posts create a feeding frenzy.

[Paperback Writer]

I don't see TAMU going anywhere but I can see a couple of good things coming out of all of this:

(1) Given that the LHN can't use high school games for content and will only have two UT games (and only has one booked for sure so far) I can't help from thinking that it will be expanded to include TAMU and Tech. (Baylor is private and, therefore, they should be on their own. Besides they don't add much value.) This should smooth things over with A&M and add a lot of value to the network. I believe Mack Brown would like this because he described the LHN network as his second full-time job the other day. I think he is getting a lot pressure from ESPN for adding content. As for OU and OSU, OU has been kicking around the idea of starting their own network. I can see OU including their kid brother in their network.

That does help with the content problem for the LHN - make it kind of a Texas thing. Perhaps if state schools pair up for their own network channels then others cannot cry foul. UT/aTm/Tech; OU/Okie St; and KU/KSU. Mizzou might succeed on its own while they hold out for the Big Ten. Baylor and ISU deserve their fate.

(2) The Big 12 will be going back to back to 12 teams by adding a couple of good anchor teams to stabilize things. I am not sure if this will happen any time soon. I think the Big 12 realizes this and they are just taking some time to find the right two teams. BYU just needs a good dance partner.

And that's been the problem all along. The best partner already booked a ticket to the East coast because their former SWC brethern didn't want to share and feel threatened (a legitimate concern). There's really not a suitable partner for BYU to enter the Big 12 with.

And blame the Irish for this not Nebraska. If Nebraska didn't accept the Big Ten invite then Missouri would have and BYU would still be in the same place. And some blame can be assessed to Austin as well. TCU would have been a good Big 12 addition. I just think their old SWC partners don't want to give the Horned Frogs any more help because they are a genuine threat in football right now. Who knows what could transpire with additional conference revenue to make further facilities upgrades and improvements to their program - just maybe they might start selling out their stadium a little more often.

[Mormon Red Death]

And that's been the problem all along. The best partner already booked a ticket to the East coast because their former SWC brethern didn't want to share and feel threatened (a legitimate concern). There's really not a suitable partner for BYU to enter the Big 12 with.

How about Louisville, Cincinatti, Memphis? Those teams are on par with byu.

[falafel]

How about Louisville, Cincinatti, Memphis? Those teams are on par with byu.

Not in football. Memphis is horrible.

[Mormon Red Death]

http://deepshadesofblue.com/big-name...-face-cougars/

Holmoe denied a blogger's report that circulated a few months ago saying the Big East had contacted BYU to gauge its interest. He said BYU isn't out selling itself to prospective conferences and hasn't heard from any since its announcement last Aug. 31

From the sltrib

[UteStar]

I know that Larry Scott has already said that the Longhorn Network makes it very difficult for Texas to be considered for the PAC-12. But in a lot of ways, it fits in nicely with the PAC-12 tv agreement in that it could end up being kind of a regional network. Yes, money issues would have to be discussed and there would have to be some maneuvering but if the PAC-12 could add Texas, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and then either a Kansas, Missouri or Texas Tech and package them in with the Longhorn Network somehow...voila, PAC-16. The PAC-12 would officially be a beast of a conference.

[Surfah]

How about Louisville, Cincinatti, Memphis? Those teams are on par with byu.

[Mormon Red Death]

If you are big 12 team Memphis, Louisville and Cincinatti are all closer than provo, have better basketball programs and football programs (sans memphis) are better as well. Not to mention the markets.

[falafel]

If you are big 12 team Memphis, Louisville and Cincinatti are all closer than provo, have better basketball programs and football programs (sans memphis) are better as well. Not to mention the markets.

I'm not sure Louisville is a better football program. On par, perhaps.

[Coach McGuirk]

If you are big 12 team Memphis, Louisville and Cincinatti are all closer than provo, have better basketball programs and football programs (sans memphis) are better as well. Not to mention the markets.