ESPN gives UT 10 year/$120 million Bevo network deal

[CalallenStang]

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -network/1

The reason why UT didn't go to PAC or Big Ten already is because neither wanted UT to get this network started. Now that UT has the network they can go to PAC or Big Ten and keep their own network as well. It's only a matter of time before they leave the Big 12-2

[Stallion]

I think your logic is backwards. Texas doesn't need to go anywhere now and they definitely won't be the first to leave unless the Big 12 crumbles around them. They are self funded. Texas interest is and always will be protecting its fertile recruiting goldmine from as many outside competitors as possible. It definitely makes going to the SEC unneccessary

[CalallenStang]

I think your logic is backwards. Texas doesn't need to go anywhere now and they definitely won't be the first to leave unless the Big 12 crumbles around them. They are self funded. Texas interest is and always will be protecting its fertile recruiting goldmine from as many outside competitors as possible. It definitely makes going to the SEC unneccessary

Texas will go wherever the $$$$ is greatest and I'm sure they see that over time the Big Ten (and possibly the PAC, depending on who they can attract) can offer them a bigger deal than the Big 12, which soon may be losing A&M to the SEC. They are self funded right now but even they know that you don't stay self-funded without maximizing profit whenever possible

[CalallenStang]

Though if they are committed to Big 12, you will soon see Big 12 try to take two Big East teams (Louisville and Cincy) in order to thwart TCU to Big East.

[Stallion]

ask yourself-what networks televise the PAC 12, Big 10 and the SEC. This is a network battle won by ESPN and I doubt that ESPN paid all that money so UT can go play on Fox or CBS or the Big 10 Network. ESPN has essentially immunized itself from expansion of the PAC 12 or SEC or Big 10 into Texas because it has devalued any possible PAC 12(Fox) or SEC(CBS) or Big 10 (Network) offer to Big 12 South schools. Now other Big 12 schools may get pissed and the Big 12 might crumble but it won't be Texas who leaves first. The worst that could happen is that UT goes independent schedules A&M, OU, BYU and Notre Dame and fills its schedule with 8 home games(since home team controls TV rights). Also, I'd bet all 3 competing conferences have revenue distribution or exclusive contracts with other networks that would have to be rewritten to even make a run at Texas

[leopold]

Texas will go wherever the $$$$ is greatest and I'm sure they see that over time the Big Ten (and possibly the PAC, depending on who they can attract) can offer them a bigger deal than the Big 12, which soon may be losing A&M to the SEC. They are self funded right now but even they know that you don't stay self-funded without maximizing profit whenever possible

Maybe. if that was the case, though, if money was the only issue, then they would consider the SEC, but they haven't - at least not publically. Keep in mind, Texas was the largest revenue producing school in the entire country, and that was before this deal. They are in the position of of being able to turn down a million here and 3 million there in order to keep the strategic, political and recruiting advantages the Big XII offers.

Though if they are committed to Big 12, you will soon see Big 12 try to take two Big East teams (Louisville and Cincy) in order to thwart TCU to Big East.

Doubtful. UL and UC really don't bring a lot to the table. The Big XII is fine on the cash they are getting for their TV contract, and if you think UT cares a damn about TCU or the Big East you're crazy. The only thing that would have UT care about TCU is if they landed in the SEC, and that ain't happening.

UT has the best of both worlds right now. They are self funded AND call their own shots. That doesn't happen with most schools in conferences - usually they have to check with their conferences before they make a move, or they have to give a little to get a little. The SEC, where Vandy makes the same in the conference TV money as Florida does, is a prime example.

Nobody in the country has a better sweethart deal as far as confences and money go than UT. They know this. It will take an awful lot for them to even tweak the deal they have now.

[Dwan]

It's hard to imagine the Big 12 being around for longer than 5 more years. Then Texas will go to whichever conference will give the the biggest piece of the pie. Seems like it will be Pac-12 or Big 10 and they will play them off one another in order to create the best possible deal for them. My guess is that the Pac-12 will need Texas more than the Big 10 and they will end up there. Big 10 will have more options to expand to 16 than the Pac-12 and they seem to be more focuses on expanding their footprint east. Big 10 gets Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers and maybe a Kansas/Missouri and they are pretty pleased. Unless the Pac-12 gets Texas and and OU and their buddies, they really are limited. I dont think the idea of adding BYU, UNLV, San Diego State, Boise State, Air Force or other Wac/Mountain West teams holds must interest for them.

[CalallenStang]

It's hard to imagine the Big 12 being around for longer than 5 more years.

They will be in a different conference, or independent, by 2015.

Stallion, the Big Ten has a HUGE contract with ESPN

[Stallion]

But this contract would violate the Big 10 Contract which has equal revenue sharing and interfere with the Big 10 Networks exclusive rights in games not picked up by ESPN/ABC

[Pony81]

UT will be an independent within 2-3 years. I think OU will go indendent as well. Both have the resources to money whip quality oponents to play them at home for the 8 games a TV outlet would want.

This is the future of college athletics. It is only a matter of time - 10 years or less - before the premier Big 10 schools - OSU, Mich, and Penn State go independent.

Only the SEC is immune - where Vandy is the only one not carrying its weight.

The Big 12-2 is history. Really this is nature taking its course. UT has the dominent position in the second most populous state. Cali has UCLA, USC, and Cal to vie for loyalty. Texas has only UT and A&M. A&M has been down for so long that they really are not a factor in TV ratings.

Look for SMU to join TCU, Baylor, OSU, TTU, K-State, ISU, Kansas, Mizzou, UH, - in a regional conference. Rice and Tulane get kicked to the curb.

[CalallenStang]

But this contract would violate the Big 10 Contract which has equal revenue sharing and interfere with the Big 10 Networks exclusive rights in games not picked up by ESPN/ABC

Those things can be worked out if the Big 10 is truly interested. You, I'm sure, know that better than anyone else

[Stallion]

Texas is in the cat-birds seat right now in a conference with the most beneficial revenue sharing contract possible. They ain't leaving first. As pointed out above they could end up as an independent and make even more money with 8 home games every year-OU, A&M, BYU(already signed), ND and probably Tech and 7 others they pick. Big 10 schools ain't going to bend over like Big 12 schools-why because Ohio St. Penn St. Michigan and maybe Nebraska could all demand the same. Plus they'd also lose value in their Big 10 Network joint venture

[leopold]

1) The Big Ten is done expanding for the time being. Not saying they won't expand, but it will be a while. Only way that changes is if Notre Dame shows up saying they were wrong. Texas will NOT be the one going to them.

2) A&M is the only wild card in the Big XII right now.

Texas is fat (and getting fatter) and happy. They will not be the one to break up the Big XII.

Oklahoma will stay with Texas, as evidenced by them turning down the SEC, and if UT and OU stay, it's hard to see the Big XII breaking up, even with A&M leaving - TCU (or BYU, or SOMEBODY), are you ready for close-up? But UT has shown they will make concessions to keep A&M, and loves that they are in the conference but are 3rd fiddle.

Other schools outside of A&M will do what they are told, as they have no other options.

UNDERSTAND SOMETHING:

CONFERENCES AREN'T JUST ABOUT A STRAIGHT-UP PAYCHECK. IT'S A WAY TO EXERT CONTROL ON SCHOOLS WHO ARE BOTH MEMBERS AND NON-MEMBERS OF YOUR CONFERENCE. TEXAS, AND TO A LESSER EXTENT OKLAHOMA AND TEXAS A&M, HAVE RE-WRITTEN THE RULEBOOK ON THIS. TEXAS ABSOLUTELY CALLS THE SHOTS NOW AND WILL NOT - REPEAT, WILL NOT - CALL THE SHOTS IN ANY OTHER MAJOR CONFERENCE.

3) Additionally, by joining another conference, UT gives the keys to the state of Texas to other schools. Its fine that they do that to Kansas and Iowa State, who pose no real threat. Oklahoma has always, and will always, have a foot in the door anyway, so it doesn't matter if they are in a conference with UT - it's better for UT, in fact. But if they share those keys with Alabama, or USC, or Michigan, the game changes. They'll find themselves with a TON more competition for recruits, and TV viewers, and ticket buyers, and UT still has to produce on the field in order for all the other stuff to work. TV viewers are great, but you still have to win. Just ask Notre Dame.

DOES TEXAS 'NEED' THE BIG XII? No. But that doesn't mean it's smart to let it disband.

[Stallion]

I agree with everything you just posted except that the only conference Texas is really worried about getting a foothold in Texas recruiting is the SEC because it is right next door and they have a recruiting culture and recruiting standards that could undermine Texas. The PAC and Big 10 are thousands of miles away. Yes A&M and its inferiority complex is what could blow up the Big 12. The rest will do as they are told to hold onto Texas recruiting

[Dwan]

Oddly enough though, the only time Texas has struggled in recruiting is when they were in an inferior conference in the SWC. The Big 8 and Pac-10 recruited really well in Texas when the SWC was ailing and considered a weak conference. You have to believe that the Big 12 at ten members will start to seem inferior to the 12 team conferences.

Right now Texas has no competition in recruiting. They get 95% of the players they offer and that has a lot to do with their success. Going to the Pac-12 would allow them still to be in a top conference and maintain their recruiting dominance. Primarly because of the level of talent in California. USC and UCLA recruit locally and nationally. You would see schools like Cal, Washington, Arizona, and Oregon recruit more in Texas if Texas joined the Pac-12....but those schools already recruit Texas and have inroads there.....and they never are going to pose a big threat to Texas. Texas would rather deal with those schools than LSU, Alabama, Tennessee and the rest of the SEC. I just think that the SEC schools are licking their chops at the state of Texas but the Pac-10 feels they are already there and that success in the Pac-10 will always be based on how well you do in California