Inside the Bubble

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

Boards ▾

Inside the Bubble

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

6th Street

The place for off topic discussion on Hookem

Reply

No HS games on the LHN for at least one year

  • bruthaman said... (original post)

    I think this conference is just too greedy, mainly Texas.

    ZeroU voted against equal revenue sharing.
    ZeroU demanded the same $20 million/year.
    ZeroU is trying to start their own network.

    Do they not report on current events up there? Or are you too concerned with your meth labs to pay attention?

  • Nobody is talking about how this affects the towns, highschools, and the players. I mean if you were 17 or 18 years old and could have a shot at playing on national tv wouldn't you be upset that some institutions thought it was unfair just because they had their own private interests to protect?. Just think how much publicity airing games in Brenham and other smaller towns would bring. ESPN crews have to eat somewhere, stay somewhere, etc. Brings a lot of revenue to those towns in a bad economy. I'd be pissed if I were the high school administration and the players. They are the true losers in this decision.

  • Rivver said... (original post)

    ZeroU voted against equal revenue sharing. ZeroU demanded the same $20 million/year. ZeroU is trying to start their own network.

    Do they not report on current events up there? Or are you too concerned with your meth labs to pay attention?

    Oh, I know what was voted. I see the greed from all, but I see more of it from texas. My post wasnt a mistake. None of the conference doomsday talk is because of what any other school is doing, its because of what texas is doing. Also, its not a schools private interest, its a recruiting rule. If you cant show a recruits face on a jumbotron, what makes you think you can show him on your own network? I have no issue with your station, but it has to conform and trying to hide behind the "ESPN can show what they want" line is pretty spineless, even you have to admit that. Show texas re-runs, your one or two games a year and the rest of your non revenue sports and its all good. Start showing recruits that havent signed an LOI and its an issue. After they sign, show every one of their games and highlignts. Heck, do a reality TV show on them after they sign if you want. But, until they sign, a school cant show a kid in relation to that school at all. No jerseys in the locker, no faces on the jumbotron or anything like that. Stoops has more than stood his ground agaisnt texas and all their recruiting greatness, so I dont think itll matter for OU anyway. We are the kings of the conference on the field, you guys just have a lot more money and have the nation fooled into thinking your the kings. We all know thats not the case. Mack taking a shovel to his staff shows thats not the case.

    There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.

  • bruthaman said... (original post)

    I see the greed from all, but I see more of it from Texas.

    Despite ZeroU doing the exact same thing Texas is doing, we're somehow more greedy than you?

    Put down the meth pipe, genius, and get off our forum if you're just going to repeat the same ignorant crap.

  • bruthaman said... (original post)

    Oh, I know what was voted. I see the greed from all, but I see more of it from texas. My post wasnt a mistake. None of the conference doomsday talk is because of what any other school is doing, its because of what texas is doing. Also, its not a schools private interest, its a recruiting rule. If you cant show a recruits face on a jumbotron, what makes you think you can show him on your own network? I have no issue with your station, but it has to conform and trying to hide behind the "ESPN can show what they want" line is pretty spineless, even you have to admit that. Show texas re-runs, your one or two games a year and the rest of your non revenue sports and its all good. Start showing recruits that havent signed an LOI and its an issue. After they sign, show every one of their games and highlignts. Heck, do a reality TV show on them after they sign if you want. But, until they sign, a school cant show a kid in relation to that school at all. No jerseys in the locker, no faces on the jumbotron or anything like that. Stoops has more than stood his ground agaisnt texas and all their recruiting greatness, so I dont think itll matter for OU anyway. We are the kings of the conference on the field, you guys just have a lot more money and have the nation fooled into thinking your the kings. We all know thats not the case. Mack taking a shovel to his staff shows thats not the case.

    Moral relativity much? Yes, OU is greedy, but Texas is super, duper, super greedy, so you guys are wrong. Please...

    There is nothing spineless about the argument. ESPN owns the damn network, not us. Our name and content is slapped on it so it can make money. We're a contractual content provider, not an owner. That is a basic and fundamental truth.

    signature image signature image
  • "In addition, the ADs learned and acknowledged that there may be contractual opportunities that allow more than one football game to be broadcast on institutions' branded networks. That game could be a Conference matchup. In these instances both member institutions and the Conference office must agree to the selection. Such games would result in additional financial and exposure opportunities for the rest of the membership."

    Huh? What does this mean? If we broadcast a Big12 game, we have to pay ALL the other 9 schools? huh

  • Easy solution. ESPN demands LHN be bundled with ESPN2 and ESPN across all carriers then shows Texas HS games on ESPN2 with very strong mention of "provided by the LHN" and show various college games that would have been on ESPN2 on LHN. Make people watch LHN to see games and show HS games where they already do. If ESPN doesn't like getting dicked around by the lowly Big 12 there are ways to stick it to them.

  • JumpingTheGun said... (original post)

    Easy solution. ESPN demands LHN be bundled with ESPN2 and ESPN across all carriers then shows Texas HS games on ESPN2 with very strong mention of "provided by the LHN" and show various college games that would have been on ESPN2 on LHN. Make people watch LHN to see games and show HS games where they already do. If ESPN doesn't like getting dicked around by the lowly Big 12 there are ways to stick it to them.

    This is an interesting idea. As far as ESPN is concerned, the LHN is largely a way to get another channel into the standard cable packages and get more money. They could easily show these same high school games on ESPN2 and mirror other stuff on the LHN in return. ESPN has all the flexibility here, and most of the power. In return, we get $300M.

    This post was edited by Sessamoid 3 years ago

  • Sounds like sour grapes to me...funny how if it this thing was reversed and OU or Aggy was in this position, don't think for a minute Stoops, Castiglione and Byrne wouldn't be out there defending the right for "ESPN to do what it wants based on a signed contract". Texas seems to be playing a different tune so far, which says a lot about our Administration trying to make this work for all. Not sure I agree with it though. I think if this drags out too long, will see ESPN "play nice" for a bit before they take matters in to their own hands and file a lawsuit.

    The issue is that Texas has the funds to do something that no one else in the conference can and that just pisses too many people off. I say too damn bad! The bottom line is Texas markets its brand very well and has been rewarded for that. It shouldn't be our problem to wait for everyone else to catch up. Texas has a huge national following and that is something that OU, A&M and good lord Missouri (three biggest whiners) haven't acheived.

    As for the high school content, I think it would be good for all of the big 12. Texas can't get them all anyway, All this would have done is made high school football in Texas highlighted even more across the country. You mean to tell me that other college coaches wouldn't want to see these kids on TV sitting in their own living room? Hell, saves them a trip and they get the added advantage of instant replay. Sure, ESPN is looking at the $$$ in all of this, because along with the exposure of Texas high school football, comes subscribers across the country. I can understand the NCAA wanting to take a look, but you don't need a year to figure this out. Are the Big 12 AD's magically going to come to some different agreement a year from now? I seriously doubt it.In the end, ESPN and Texas will get most of what they want and that's the way it should be..not because it's "Texas", but because there really is nothing to prevent ESPN from telling everyone "thanks for your input, but were moving forward". There just waiting for Texas to give them the green light and that needs to come from our Administration sooner than one year from now. I think DeLoss and Powers are just going through the motions to see if this can be worked out first, but we shouldn't have to acquiesce to schools in this conference, who if they could, would be doing the same thing today as Texas did.

  • Hooked636905 said... (original post)

    Nobody is talking about how this affects the towns, highschools, and the players. I mean if you were 17 or 18 years old and could have a shot at playing on national tv wouldn't you be upset that some institutions thought it was unfair just because they had their own private interests to protect?. Just think how much publicity airing games in Brenham and other smaller towns would bring. ESPN crews have to eat somewhere, stay somewhere, etc. Brings a lot of revenue to those towns in a bad economy. I'd be pissed if I were the high school administration and the players. They are the true losers in this decision.

    ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPN U, FSN are all allowed to broadcast high school games still. The moratorium only applies to institutional networks. There will be more high school games televised this year than last year, so I don't think high school coaches and players are losing sleep over this. Keep in mind that the aforementioned networks have and will have a much broader reach than LHN.

  • MartiMar said... (original post)

    Moral relativity much? Yes, OU is greedy, but Texas is super, duper, super greedy, so you guys are wrong. Please...

    There is nothing spineless about the argument. ESPN owns the damn network, not us. Our name and content is slapped on it so it can make money. We're a contractual content provider, not an owner. That is a basic and fundamental truth.

    Spineless is what it is. If ESPN wants to showcase texas high school sports, have them start a ESPN texas high school football and let the longhorn network showcase longhorn sports. Until they sign an LOI, they are not part of the school yet, so they cant appear on anything to do with the university. This channel has everything to do with the university. Its not that hard to see IMO, but I agree we disagree. This whole "OU would do the same thing" crap is just tired. ESPN/texas is trying to trump NCAA rules and just might get what they want, but I doubt it. They have a year to talk about it, so lets just see what happens. I trust in Stoops, so high school games or no high school games, he will keep OU on top of the BIG 12 until its gone.

    There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.

  • Apparently spineless equals reality. We don't own the network. We never owned the network. We provide content... period. Are any of those statements false?

    Neither ESPN nor Texas has trumped one single rule... the NCAA bylaws do not apply to ESPN.

    signature image signature image
  • Rivver said... (original post)

    ZeroU voted against equal revenue sharing. ZeroU demanded the same $20 million/year. ZeroU is trying to start their own network.

    Do they not report on current events up there? Or are you too concerned with your meth labs to pay attention?

    ZeroU was offered the $20 million, just as Texas was. ZeroU turned down the $20 million, just as Texas did. It was Texas A&M that demanded the $20 million and threw a hissy fit when it appeared that it may not be forthcoming.

  • I've stated this in another thread, the LHN will do nothing for recruiting at Texas. Winning football games is the name of the game in recruiting good players. Your program wins-you recruit well. You loose-not so much. If Texas is to take a step back in winning football games then what "advantage" will the LHN be? None. In fact, if we were to lose, I think the network would be the next running joke for all of Texas' foes.

    Bruthaman,

    Since Stoops have stood his ground against Texas in recruiting, why the issue with the high school games on the network? Would that change what he does in Norman?

  • Bossman23 said... (original post)

    I've stated this in another thread, the LHN will do nothing for recruiting at Texas. Winning football games is the name of the game in recruiting good players. Your program wins-you recruit well. You loose-not so much. If Texas is to take a step back in winning football games then what "advantage" will the LHN be? None. In fact, if we were to lose, I think the network would be the next running joke for all of Texas' foes.

    Bruthaman,

    Since Stoops have stood his ground against Texas in recruiting, why the issue with the high school games on the network? Would that change what he does in Norman?

    That is very short sighted thinking.

    There is unequal revenue sharing BTW because schools like Iowa State, Baylor and Kansas State have made little to no effort financially in their athletic programs. They do not get equal revenue and they do not even care.

    The Big 12 should have worked to create a network years ago. This is the result of that mistake and why the conference will be disbanded very soon.

  • ESPN will have to abide by the rules if it has your schools logo on it. If they take the logo off, they dont have to abide by the rules because there is no attachement to the school. Why cant you understand that?

    There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.

  • Bossman, I dont think it would change anything in Norman, but rules are rules. As Stoops said, we either all do it or none of us can do it. Same thing he said when Mack was doing all his whining in '08. Stoops said just tell us what the rules are and we will play by them. If you cant even show a recruits face on the jumbotron, what makes you think you can show him on a network with your logo on it?? You cant even hang a jersey in a locker with his name on it. I understand its ESPNs network, but its under the logo of texas. That means it has to abide by NCAA rules. Now, the NCAA just might rule that its all good to do it. If so, we will play it as it lies. So, OU will be able to win no matter what texas does, but other schools may not feel that way. If ESPN wanted to showcase texas to include high school games, they should have just called it ESPN texas and only showed texas highlights and did all things texas, but without the lable of texas. Then, they could have shown all the high school games they wanted to. Granted, there wouldnt have been a $300 mil payday, but there would be no fuss about content.

    There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.

  • bruthaman said... (original post)

    Spineless is what it is. If ESPN wants to showcase texas high school sports, have them start a ESPN texas high school football and let the longhorn network showcase longhorn sports. Until they sign an LOI, they are not part of the school yet, so they cant appear on anything to do with the university. This channel has everything to do with the university. Its not that hard to see IMO, but I agree we disagree. This whole "OU would do the same thing" crap is just tired. ESPN/texas is trying to trump NCAA rules and just might get what they want, but I doubt it. They have a year to talk about it, so lets just see what happens. I trust in Stoops, so high school games or no high school games, he will keep OU on top of the BIG 12 until its gone.

    BS...Stop it with the self righteous indignation on behalf of Stoops...While a good coach, he is also an opportunist and a hypocrite...

    And in regard to OU doing the same thing if they could, you have got blinders on...Texas has made no bones about wanting to start it's own network for years and made it happen. OU either could not see the potential or the returns were not there when they inquired. ESPN may agree to a moratorium for a year but they will end up doing what they want to because the conference and the NCAA have no way to enforce this other than ceremonial.

    Deloss is playing nice and working with ESPN to avoid a meltdown...However, a meltdown is coming, and not just for the Big 12. The NCAA will become irrelevant in 10 years or less.

    Now take your tired ass, holier than thou arguments back north. You have been on here far too long.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • Is Texas just testing the market, or will moves be made to exit the Big12?

  • bruthaman said... (original post)

    PN will have to abide by the rules if it has your schools logo on it. If they take the logo off, they dont have to abide by the rules because there is no attachement to the school. Why cant you understand that?

    wow... you couldnt be more wrong. ESPN goes along with this because it chooses to not because it has to. Why cant you understand that?

  • Bobby, Gerry, Jeff or Alan...

    hypothetical: If the Daily Texan were to provide non-highschool journalistic content to Hookem247, does that mean that Hookem247 can not then provide recruiting or highschool content because it obviously promotes UT logos?

    This, of course, would be absurd. NCAA bylaw 11.2.3.4 has to do with publications such as the Daily Texan publishing its own recruiting content. It does not have jurisdiction or authority over private or corporate media entities.

    Likewise, ESPN will probably choose to go along with the NCAA consensus, however, that doesnt mean it has to. I think highschool content will happen anyway down the road if not by openly deciding to do so, it could also happen through incremental programing. For instance, why couldnt ESPN, through LHN, provide an "ap" so people can watch highschool games while sitting in the stands at the game. It technically isnt being produced by LHN but by ESPNu or ESPN2..

  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! Start Free Trial
  • neonmoon said... (original post)

    Solution

    ESPN will air High School games on ESPN2 and have 1000 LHN commercials. HAHAHAHA

    I think you HAVE found the solution. I actually think ESPN will actually do that. ESPN is not one to back down when they think there's money to be made.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • Rivver said... (original post)

    ZeroU voted against equal revenue sharing. ZeroU demanded the same $20 million/year. ZeroU is trying to start their own network.

    Do they not report on current events up there? Or are you too concerned with your meth labs to pay attention?

    They are pissed because they don't have the demand that ESPN would be interested in. They would get FoxOklahoma, get 2-4 mill a year, and not enough national coverage to matter. They would not have the means to go to Texas to put their recruits on TV so they would be stuck with 2-5 kids in Oklahoma that they could show.

  • JumpingTheGun said... (original post)

    Easy solution. ESPN demands LHN be bundled with ESPN2 and ESPN across all carriers then shows Texas HS games on ESPN2 with very strong mention of "provided by the LHN" and show various college games that would have been on ESPN2 on LHN. Make people watch LHN to see games and show HS games where they already do. If ESPN doesn't like getting dicked around by the lowly Big 12 there are ways to stick it to them.

    Can't do indirectly what you can't do directly. Certain institutions with options would most likely not stand for espn2 serving as a vessel for LHN content.

    That being said, it'd be nice if it would happen.