PonyFans.com

Texas A&M AD Bill Byrne: Big 12 landscape 'was altered by the creation of the Longhorn Network'

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/colleg ... twork_.ece


By ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published 31 August 2011 05:41 PM

HOUSTON — Texas A&M athletic director Bill Byrne is speaking out after his school's decision to leave the Big 12.

In a blog posted Wednesday, Byrne says the departures of Nebraska and Colorado and the creation of the Longhorn Network at rival Texas made the Big 12 "considerably different" than it was last summer -- when he said the Aggies should remain in the league.

The blog was posted a few hours after Texas A&M told the Big 12 it plans to leave the league by July 2012 if it is accepted by another conference. The Aggies have expressed interest in joining the Southeastern Conference.

Byrne says other developments "have caused a great deal of uncertainty within the Big 12," and says the "landscape" of the league "was altered by the creation of the Longhorn Network."

Crazy greed....was a good conference with Col/Neb etc. I assume UT will go indy once the Longhorn Network is up and running in a year or two.

That was a remarkably honest answer...

GiddyUp wrote:Crazy greed....was a good conference with Col/Neb etc. I assume UT will go indy once the Longhorn Network is up and running in a year or two.

Given this point, and I think you're right about the whorens, looking into the crystal ball do we really want to get into this conference? Best case scenario we're 1-2 years away from being able to join the Big 12. If UT has gone indy, likely OU and OU Lite will move elsewhere at the same time. If the remains find a way to stay together, does being a part of that group buy us anything? For that matter, does a Big 12 minus UT, A&M OU and OSU even maintain BCS AQ status? Folks have kept saying that the Big 12 lacks foresight; is our desperate desire to join it falling into that same trap?

so none of you would take a guaranteed 300 mil and your own network for your school? That's what I thought

RyanSMU98 wrote:

GiddyUp wrote:Crazy greed....was a good conference with Col/Neb etc. I assume UT will go indy once the Longhorn Network is up and running in a year or two.

Given this point, and I think you're right about the whorens, looking into the crystal ball do we really want to get into this conference? Best case scenario we're 1-2 years away from being able to join the Big 12. If UT has gone indy, likely OU and OU Lite will move elsewhere at the same time. If the remains find a way to stay together, does being a part of that group buy us anything? For that matter, does a Big 12 minus UT, A&M OU and OSU even maintain BCS AQ status? Folks have kept saying that the Big 12 lacks foresight; is our desperate desire to join it falling into that same trap?

I would think being in an AQ conference for two years would give us a bit more leverage than not bing in an AQ conference for two years when the Big 12 falls apart.

Pony ^ wrote:so none of you would take a guaranteed 300 mil and your own network for your school? That's what I thought

I'll gladly lay blame on ESPN. This has all gotten out of control..

What is funny is they are going to a better conference but they will still be "second" to Ut from a state and national view. Does Vandy or Kentucky football receive more kudos because they are in SEC? Do the hogs get more national respect since they went to sec and haven't won a title after 20 years. NOOOO! They only get more $$$$. The ags will only have a better excuse for not winning a conference or national title by saying" yea, but we play Alabam, LSU and Florida". You guys won the national championship with a weaker schedule.

As repulsive as UT is, the school can't be blamed for accepting the money. ESPN, however, loses even more credibility by funding a network for a particular school - no conflict of interest there, right?

Also, it's easy for Byrne to take a swipe at UT with A&M on its way out the door. That's not to say it isn't deserved -- it is -- but how convenient that he waits until this far into the Big 12 exit process before daring to criticize the cashcow that has carried the conference.

UT as an Indy is a mighty risky strategy. UT doesn't have the national following of a ND or BYU. UT is very regional in its appeal. Would Big X=II fans suddenly drop their support to watch UT play Iowa State? Might make the heart race a little thinking about it but in the end a Big X+II fan will stay a Big X+II fan.

With A&M, will SEC schools need to schedule UT? Former PAC X=II now XII schools might be interested in a trip but to Austin? Maybe Jerry's world which would harm not help UT recruiting.


UT is slowly backing itself into a limited option corner.

Chuck Cooperstein compared UT's network to that stupid system the Dallas Morning News tried to start a few years back, where readers were supposed to drag a computer mouse over a bar code or something. Called it "a complete, abject failure."

Love it.

A&M just was tired of being the little brother, period. LHN pushed them over the edge. Now though they will become the red headed step child in the SEC. Thought they were under appreciated by a conference before, wait until they move.

I hate A&M and I'm tired of hearing all their whining about the LHN here is my favorite quote from the FSN article comments section...

"T.U. and Oklahoma have always been infair to the Aggies. People say aTm should just get their own network. We can not do it as easy as t.u. because of the location we are in. It is also unfair that t.u. gets more of the top football recruits and with the network they will get even more. We are going to the SEC and we will be respected and become the top power in SEC within 2 years. Bye Bye Texas and stop your crying about us leaving."

It isn't fair. Well boo hoo. SMU not being in a BCS conference when the SWC broke up wasn't fair either. Nothing is fair in life. Stop [deleted] about the hand your were dealt! It's better than most. They knew about the LHN when they signed the TV deal with the B12 last year. What has changed? They just realized what it might become? Or they have no response to it, so they leave?

Last year Byrne said that Texas A&M was ahead of Texas and the rest of the Big 12 in setting up a Texas A&M Network.

"When we built the 12th Man Productions facilities, our plan was all along to eventually put together an Aggie Network," Byrne wrote a year ago. "We are better positioned than any other conference school to do it."

http://www.chron.com/sports/solomon/article/Solomon-A-M-move-flies-in-face-of-reason-2143552.php

Florida gets $10 mil from their deal with Sun Sports for 3rd tier TV rights. Alabama gets over $8 mil. Last time I checked (2009) Arkansas got less than $1 mil. Mississippi State gets $0.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2008/07/20080714/This-Weeks-News/Florida-Rights-Deal-May-Rule-Out-SEC-Channel.aspx

Thumper wrote:As repulsive as UT is, the school can't be blamed for accepting the money. ESPN, however, loses even more credibility by funding a network for a particular school - no conflict of interest there, right?

Why cant ESPN act in its own financial interest? They stand to make more than UT on the deal.

A&M pulled a lil b---- move. I have no problem with them wanting to go the SEC but to blame the move on Texas (with their network and A&M not wanting to be "little brother" anymore) is shameful. They didn't have the stomach for the fight, so they walked away. I don't like UT but they did nothing wrong by forming a network. They were opportunistic. I hope our school would do the same if we had the chance.