In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1101
Online now 1031 Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
From 2004-2009 there was exactly 5 PPV games in football.
Living out of state I had access to all 5 of those games of I chose to pay for them (which I did).
In addition all of the ABC games were available on ESPN Gameplan if one chose to pay for it ($99 per year which I did).
Living out of state I had access to every single football game beginning in 2004 (probably even longer than that just began with the UT run in 2004).
Since the LHN formed there has been 5 games (and potentially 3 more in 2013) that I have no access to other than a stream on a computer that I am technically not supposed to have access to.
Three of the 6 seasons from 2004-2010 had no PPV game and wrere on a tier 1 or 2 option.
I was very excited when it was first anounced, but it is getting hard to defend.
- Shredded our conference - Aggie propoganda that is simply untrue. 2 schools left prior to the LHN and the other 2 were looking prior to it as well
- lowered our schedule quality - How? Schedule were set years in advance. Any change to the schedule would have been due to changing conferences across the country
- undermined our recruiting - Any examples that this is true? I've heard that recruits love going to the LHN set
- increased exposure of our rivals (in lieu of our own) - also conjecture that I'm sure is more impression than reality. Are you trying to tell me that there is more A&M and OU stuff on TV now because of the LHN? There is no more OU stuff and any more A&M stuff is probably more related to the SEC and Heisman winner than the LHN.
So, other than blacked out our games to a lot fans (not all, mind you), which nobody disputes, how is a ton of money for the school (including academics) a bad thing? Is it perfect, no. But it is better than anything any other school has. I will get to watch half of the baseball games this year with ESPN quality production. I get a dedicated nightly show to Longhorn Athletics. I get all access shows to all the teams. I get coach's shows. No other school can offer recruits the things the LHN can. The scapegoating of the LHN for the problems right now with Longhorn Athletics is ridiculous and not based in facts.
As I said in another post, there are growing pains with a new network. Ask half the city of Houston if they have seen a Rockets game this year. I know I haven't, but it doesn't mean it's CSN's fault that they lost to the Kings last night,
Not saying that it isn't harder to watch those 3 games now. Simply said, the statement that every game during that period was on regular cable was not true.
I completely agree that the university should put its foot down and only put the one game that it is contractually obligated to put on. I think most of the evidence shows that providers aren't going to give in based on demand for the live games (although Uverse did go live the week of the first game this year).
It is so much more than live football games and I am happy to have it for everything other than games (to date I haven't missed a game in Austin that was on the LHN), The strategy to get people to call in so they don't miss a game IMHO has been wrong and backfired by upsetting the fan base and has not hurt more than it has helped. If they want people to call the providers to get the network, they need to have the ads running all the time, and emphasize all the programming, not just the few live games.
This post was edited by utsal 14 months ago
Sorry it has been a long hard day.
You aint nothing but a hound dog
bunting all the time
275-0 scoring margin
Dana X Bible's National Championship team
Thanks for pointing this out. Amazed at how people really believe that Aggy left for this reason. Their athletic department was running on empty. Revenue sharing maybe, but not LHN.
JFrank, I posted this a couple of times on other threads but R.C. told me a couple of times a few years ago (he won't mind my repeating) that A&M felt it couldn't effectively compete in the face of the LHN when it came to recruiting in Texas. It wasn't really about the money. Ironic what's happened so far. Personally I suspect it will work out at some point when ESPN is capable of forcing more major distributors to pony up.
This is a football oriented website but I enjoy many of the other sports; baseball, softball, golf, track and the like come to mind. The LHN is perfect for broadening (no pun intended) the fan base. Women's sports in particular are quietly becoming more popular and they will continue to do so. Were it not for Dads with daughters it'd be a slower slog.
We're not yet Coca Cola but the sheer brand value remains tremendous. Can it remain so without consistent success, who knows?
BTW isn't anyone thrilled by the number of world class athletes in our general area? Michael Johnson, Jeremy Wariner, Britney Griner, Leo Manzano, et al? My kids met Leo at a cross country meet and it was a pleasure to meet someone so gifted and modest. We actually have become a region of Olympians. Actually I thoroughly enjoyed watching A&M and Baylor winning the women's basketball championships. Perhaps color me a regionalist.
This post was edited by mchief 14 months ago
The fact that OUR conference has been shredded is not propaganda. Why hasn't ANY other conference experienced defections like ours? What is the common denominator? It's funny when Aggies say the LHN was the last straw, the LHN defenders say no, that's just propaganda. What? Is an Aggie not entitled to know why they left? Only a Longhorn knows what Aggie was thinking? That sounds like an attempt at propaganda to me.
Schedule quality - did any of you actually attend that snoozer on Thanksgiving day last year? What was THAT? A hollow and failed replacement for an A&M game. What a joke. The place was quiet and half empty, or so it felt.
The LHN was peddled heavily to recruits last year, but not this time around. That's because it is a running source of mockery now, and even recruits have caught on. I know a young man that visited 4 schools, including Texas. The only school that did not mention LHN was Texas! The others mentioned it as a mockery, and a way to minimize his exposure. LHN has done a 360 in one year's time as a selling point. UT plays it down. Rivals play it up.
Oklahoma and A&M (to name two) have increased exposure by signing some tier-3 content over to Fox, so now their little programs are on all the time.
Basketball is catching it worse than football. EVERY basketball game was on the tube until last year. Everybody at work would ask me WTH happened to UT hoops? Complete MIA!!
LHN is a source of mockery and jest in just about all quarters these days. It's a joke. Except Longhorns aren't laughing. They are either crying or defending it. And Joe Q. college football fan is decking out in maroon.
Amazed at how many Longhorns implicitly engage in the following conversation:
AGGIE: We left because of the LHN.
HORN: No you didn't.
This is from an email I wrote when the aggies left I found in my sent files. It pretty much lays it out. I keep it because I think all Longhorn fans should know what they are dealing with when talking to aggies.
Did A&M ever vote for equal revenue sharing in the big 12? Did A&M take the blood money from Nebraska and Colorado when everyone else turned it down? Did A&M sign a deal to stay with a conference while staying in contact with another the entire time? Did A&M turn down an opportunity to explore a network with Texas? Do the aggies own their tier 3 rights, and if so could they have started their own network? Did 5 schools keep the big 12 together and not go to the Pac 10 for A&M’s benefit?
It’s a pretty simple timeline.
1. UT pushes for a big12 network, other schools don’t follow
2. UT explores the idea of starting a network
3. Unsure if it can secure enough programming approaches Bill Byrne about joining
4. Bill Byrne declines, UT continues the process
5. UT decides it can sustain a network on its own
6. Bill Byrne wants back in, Deloss says too late
7. UT continues the work and the due diligence
8. At this point it is public knowledge that UT is exploring a network
9. UT and 4 other schools look to join the pac 10, with Texas potentially willing to give up the right to its properties that could start the network
10. Aggies want to go to the SEC instead
11. Big 12 stays together with a new deal under the conditions that UT keeps its properties to start a network and A&M gets money from K-state, Iowa State, etc.
12. A&M keeps up contact with the SEC per bowtie
13. Bill Byrne says UT has no channel and nothing has changed and a single school network would not work
14. ESPN announces partnership, UT makes a ton of money
15. A&M cries foul and runs to the SEC forgetting step 4 where they declined and step 12 where they in contact with the SEC the entire time and step 13 where they further announced that it wouldn’t work
So which is it, will it not work, or is it such a big detractor that it requires a "100 year" move to a new conference.
The LHN was originally designed to address 3rd tier sports. Bobby is probably correct in saying that moving football to the LHN is self defeating since it's 1st tier. I really can't adequately address that.
What I can address is the "recent" history I've lived. As a child, blacks weren't called African Americans or Blacks; they were called colored people (there was a tendency to confuse the term Negro with other similarly sounding and pejorative terms). Public facilities for colored people included drinking fountains, bathrooms and schools. I'm uncertain where they ate, it just wasn't with us. Earl Campbell was a confusing figure to most of us. Similarly, women were relegated to three jobs in the marketplace; teaching, secretarial or nursing. Girls played no sports, they only could be cheerleaders or participate in the band.
Most of you have no idea how far we've come in a scant few decades. It's my prediction that when many of you are as old as I am you'll be telling your grandkids how different their world is than the one you knew. By that time we may have female athletes whose popularity rivals that of males. Don't laugh; I've personally experienced things I'd never have dreamed. When I was young there were no female entertainers to speak of, perhaps the Ronnettes, Supremes, Chiffons and the like...all girl bands. Nowadays individual women are dominating entertainment just like individual males did in the past.
The LHN ultimately may come to be something we all have trouble currently imagining, the true birth of 3rd tier sports, mostly women's sports. Hey guys, you're mostly young and as Bob Dylan once said "The answer's blowing in the wind." It has been quite windy lately. Go girls!
And now for something completely different.
Are you incapable of understanding how a timeline works? Aggy decided to leave because of their pathetic inferiority complex that has existed for the past 100 years. They were talking to the SEC when Texas was trying to get them into the Pac 10. When that fell through, you know, a FULL YEAR before LHN, they continued to secretly talk to the SEC. When they decided a year later they wanted to go the SEC, LHN was a convenient scapegoat for a decision they had made a year earlier. They lied because that's what they do and maybe someone would be gullible enough to believe them.
As for the remaining schools that left, Mizzou tried desperately to get into the Big 10 because they wanted to be in the Big 10, no other reason. Nebraska left to beat Mizzou to the punch, and it worked. Colorado always belonged in the Pac, but they had no choice but to bolt when Texas made overtures to the Pac because they didn't want Baylor to get the last spot. Then Mizzou, who started it all by running their mouth, left and no one gave a crap. Ironically Colorado is the only one that could legitimately claim Texas forced their hand. Any claim that Texas did anything to wrong them by Aggy, Nebraska, or Mizzou is just a bunch of self-serving crap that no Texas fan that bothers to actually understand things would believe.
I grow weary of the same old tripe. Over and over and here's a timeline (as if that negates the last chip that fell) .....yawn, snorefest, redundant, bore me to tears...
LHN caused Aggy to leave. Now shat up.
Do you seriously believe that? I'm honestly asking.
I've literally never accused anyone of this on the internet, because I find it to be a huge insult, but you must be an aggie. If you remember what allegedly tipped them was not the LHN itself but the prospect of showing high school games. Something that Texas agreed not to do, yet they still left. Is it really your position that they made what they call a "100 year decision" because an ESPN executive stupidly said the LHN may show Conner Brewer's games?
They were trying to leave BEFORE the network existed. So how could it have been the network that caused them to leave? A network, which by the way, they had every chance to be a part of and said would never work. They agreed to take $20,000,000 that neither Texas or OU wanted, and Texas (and every other school for that matter) wanted to keep its third tier rights. Something everyone agreed to, and they left a year later. Yet it is Texas and the LHN's fault?
In the face of all the evidence to the contrary you continue to spew the aggie company line. Which can only lead me to the conclusion that you are an aggie. And I don't take that accusation lightly because I would never want someone to call me one. LIke arguing with a mule.
No No No! I had to upload this! (It Loops Now :D)
Some of you might know as no no no mule! or Stubborn as a mule
Episode - "Boys do cry"
Family Guy kevin bacon was'nt in footloose
1) you're not honestly asking
2) any aggy will tell you LHN is the best thing that ever happened to them. You don't need me to connect the rest of the dots.
3) I understand all the sweet little timelines and the twists and turns and all the transitions and dramatic progressions of the Big 12 soap opera. I lived thru it. Not to mention a couple decades of SWC, whippersnappers.
4) LHN broke the camel's back. This is not a great mystery. It's almost like the truth must be rewritten because its politically incorrect or something. That happens a lot, you know. But it's not necessary in this case. LHN finished it off. Just ask Gene Stallings or Jackie Sherill or Bowtie or the TexAgs community or the Aggie of your choice.
Are you aware of the grand contradiction in what you just said? Allow me to condense: Aggy did not leave because of the LHN, so I must be an Aggy for saying they did.
I was honestly asking. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were being a jerk who was arguing for the sake of arguing instead of someone incapable of thinking. But since you have now outed yourself by suggesting we take Jackie Sherrill's word, I can now stop trying to reason with you.
For the benefit of anyone reading that actually is trying to form an opinion, aggy decided to go to the SEC when Texas was flirting with the Pac 10. That was a year before LHN. It is therefore an impossibility of the space-time continuum that the LHN had anything to do with their decision. LHN was just a convenient scapegoat when they decided to publicly announce their plan a year later. Don't ever let any aggy like browncountry tell you otherwise.
Look, everybody and their grandmother knows that Aggy didn't like the PAC idea, and that Aggy had SEC fantasies in the past.
Talk is cheap. Talk, talk, talk.
But WHEN DID AGGY FINALLY SHUT UP AND PUT UP? Yeah that's right, LHN.
You still don't understand the difference between "straw that broke the camel's back" and "convenient excuse to back out of your contractual obligation for which you had to accept $20,000,000 because your athletic department is broke."
And they "put up and shut up" when they were able to, they could not go to the SEC in the first round of realignment, but left when they could.
The aggie narrative is that it was the LHN because they wanted to make Texas look bad on the way out, and make it appear that Texas broke up the rivalry because they are insecure petty people.
You say to ask Gene Stallings or Jackie Sherill or Bowtie but they are the very one's pushing the narrative. Just because they say it, doesn't make it so. They wanted to go to the SEC in the first round of realignment (undisputed), they didn't get to, they kept open communication (undisputed) and left when they had a convenient excuse and the opportunity to go. To paint it any other way is to ignore all the facts.
Damage control is out in full force. LOL
But pray tell, why would Aggy need a "scapegoat"?? That's such a funny angle. Woooo, it was a "scapegoat"..... Sorry I crack up every time I ponder that... haha
Because they wanted it to be Texas' fault that a 100+ year rivalry broke up. But more importantly, they signed a deal and took $20,000,000 while secretly negotiating a deal with another conference (they haven't disputed this fact), they needed any excuse they could muster to break the contract. So they came up with "Conner Brewer's games might be on TV and another big 12 school might have a game on LHN, we didn't know about that." It's not really a funny angle as much as one based 100% in reality.
Ok, ok.... I'm hep. The "we didn't do it" police are lining up now. The complexity of a grand woven tapestry of logic is so much sexier than the plain truth.
Continue to weave.
The destruction of the Big 12 started with african monkeys. It had nothing to do with DeLoss Dodds.
Uh yeah, one little catch there.... Is it just me or didn't Aggy try to continue the rivalry?
In the dream I had, it was DeLoss who ended the game.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports