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

  • People who say that legislators are going to get in the way of A&M to the SEC, please name them.

  • Individual names? Don't be obtuse. The legislature works for the best interests of the state, not one university's athletic department. When it comes down to tax revenue and state income being endangered, even A&M grads in the legislature might not support the move.

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

    It's not over-simplification. Everyone at the public universities know they're subject to the legislature. It's the price of taking public funds. The B12 represents many hundreds of millions of dollars in state income and tax revenue - in addition to many tens of
    thousands of jobs. If you think the legislature is going to allow A&M or even Texas to endanger that for their own individual interests, you're {insert derogatory comment here}

    It is exactly that simple. Message board fans may not want to accept reality, but that does not change the reality. AD's can say anything they want and bluff whatever they want. The BoR and university presidents are not going to play chicken with the legislature over athletic conferences.

    I understand the vested interest the state has in the conference. I'm going to assume for a moment that the legislature has the constitutional authority to block a move on the basis that A&M or Texas leaving would be detrimental to state interests.

    However, if a suitable alternative is given to Tech, the sole remaining Texas public school left in the conference, what other problems would there be? Would the legislature attempt to block the 2 largest state schools from seeking greener pastures for their respetive university systems in order to ensure that the folks at the big 12 office are still employed?

    It seems if both A&M and Texas wanted out, the legal oases could be handled. If it was that simple, then the brass of both schools wouldn't be pushin each other in the fashion they are knowing there would be a stalemate, regardless.

    This really is a tired conversation and one that we all had last summer.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by WithoutRecourse 3 years ago

  • bruthaman said... (original post)

    ll Soldier, I disagree, but for your sake, I hope youre right. I think that texas better tell ESPN to tap on the brakes a bit and that appears to be whats happening. If it was as cut and dry as you make it sound, they wouldnt be waiting a year. IMO, ESPN can show it, but not with the texas name on it.
    So, will ESPN be allowed to follow a coach on a visit to a recruits house? I mean, if texas cant tell them what they can or cant do, whats to stop them? Can ESPN interview a kid pushing all texas things at him before he has signed an LOI? CaCan the cameras follow a recruit around campus?n they interview him on the sidlines after the game? Will the reporter remain nuetral (yeah right)?
    I cant see it, but time will tell. If you guys do get all this bonus coverage, you sure better win....LOL. The gameday signs will be classic if you dont....LOL.

    "I hope youre right." -- really? hahahaha r-i-g-h-t !!

    Although I havent read a statement from ESPN yet, if they choose to go along with the Big12 ADs, ESPN is taking a prudent business approach; not because they have to but because they choose to.
    .
    "So, will ESPN be allowed to follow a coach on a visit to a recruits house?" -- no, that is just dumb. NCAA bylaw 13.10.3 clearly states that the institution's coach or his staff can not be involved in the production. that is pretty clear
    .
    "Can the cameras follow a recruit around campus?" -- dont know why they would but... yes they can as long as the university is not involved in the production or programing of the event. There is nothing to prevent that now.
    .
    "Can ESPN interview a kid pushing all texas things at him before he has signed an LOI?" -- no, because then UT's coaches, or staff, or representative will be involved in the production.
    .
    "Will the reporter remain nuetral (yeah right)?" -- reporters dont have to remain neutral now and they wouldnt then either.
    .
    .
    NONE of this is new... all of this is spelled out in current NCAA rules.

    This post was edited by SoldierHorn 3 years ago

  • MartiMar said... (original post)

    dividual names? Don't be obtuse. The legislature works for the best interests of the state, not one university's athletic department. When it comes down to tax revenue and state income being endangered, even A&M grads in the legislature might not support the move.

    aggie yell leader Perry wouldnt support it either - too many voters at stake.

  • You clearly don't know how the legislature works.

  • The legislature won't block the move. They can, however, withhold public funding... the threat of which will cow the university. No public university is going to be able to survive without public funding, not even Texas. Public funding is the wellspring of our entire existence. People can talk big all they want, at the end of the day, nobody is going to risk it.

    And it's not just Tech, the B12 even makes Baylor a big revenue generator... albeit more because of whom they play than Baylor itself. Tech and Baylor in tier 2 and 3 conferences is a huge revenue loss. Texas and A&M playing away games outside of Texas is a huge revenue loss. And the jobs in question aren't in the B12 offices. It's all the jobs created by the B12 revenue machine... food, entertainment, apparel, television, internet... everything.

    signature image signature image
  • Jaxson11 said... (original post)

    You clearly don't know how the legislature works.

    That statement is hilariously hilarious. I'm tearing up over here. ROFL

    Seriously, tell me what I'm missing. I would love a free education. How does the legislature work?

    This post was edited by MartiMar 3 years ago

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

    The legislature won't block the move. They can, however, withhold public funding... the threat of which will cow the university. No public university is going to be able to survive without public funding, not even Texas. Public funding is the wellspring of our entire existence. People can talk big all they want, at the end of the day, nobody is going to risk it.

    And it's not just Tech, the B12 even makes Baylor a big revenue generator... albeit more because of whom they play than Baylor itself. Tech and Baylor in tier 2 and 3 conferences is a huge revenue loss. Texas and A&M playing away games outside of Texas is a huge revenue loss. And the jobs in question aren't in the B12 offices. It's all the jobs created by the B12 revenue machine... food, entertainment, apparel, television, internet... everything.

    So the legislature says "Because A&M and Texas leaving the Big 12 will result in a potential loss of revenue, we're going to withhold funding from our two worldclass research institutions"?

    Seems as though the state has more to lose by thwarting the efforts of our respective schools, then by your projected loss of revenue.

  • Roger Dorn said... (original post)

    Would like to hear Bobby's take on this.

    Lots of thoughts here.

    1. First, as I've been saying from the outset, whether or not Texas or ESPN likes it, the NCAA and its member institutions can make up rules as they go. That's what they did here.

    2. ESPN execs overplayed their hand. They think they can do and say what they want because they are not bound by NCAA rules but in this instance, they actually are bound them through a third party (UT).

    3. I would not be surprised if ESPN has real issues getting deals done with carriers now that they have lost two calling cards, the second Texas regular season game and high school football.

    4. To get past these rules, I think there could eventually be a name change for the network that does not include Longhorn in the title. Texas would obviously have to approve this and I doubt it happens until there are real carriage issues and/or ESPN tries to back out of the deal otherwise.

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • WithoutRecourse said... (original post)

    So the legislature says "Because A&M and Texas leaving the Big 12 will result in a potential loss of revenue, we're going to withhold funding from our two worldclass research institutions"?

    Seems as though the state has more to lose by thwarting the efforts of our respective schools, then by your projected loss of revenue.

    The legislature won't actually have to do anything. Having the ultimate authority often means you don't have to use it. A&M and Texas will fall in line - they don't really have a choice.

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

    1. First, as I've been saying from the outset, whether or not Texas or ESPN likes it, the NCAA and its member institutions can make up rules as they go. That's what they did here.

    what rule did they make up?
    .
    The Big12 expressed their position and ESPN chooses to go along with it; nothing has really changed.
    .
    And no rule the NCAA can make up on the 22nd has authority over ESPN. Therefore, it will be something vague like the Big12 meeting put out. I think ESPN will then choose to go along with it or not .

    This post was edited by SoldierHorn 3 years ago

  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)

    To get past these rules, I think there could eventually be a name change for the network that does not include Longhorn in the title. Texas would obviously have to approve this and I doubt it happens until there are real carriage issues and/or ESPN tries to back out of the deal otherwise.

    to get past what rules?

  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)

    Lots of thoughts here.

    1. First, as I've been saying from the outset, whether or not Texas or ESPN likes it, the NCAA and its member institutions can make up rules as they go. That's what they did here.

    2. ESPN execs overplayed their hand. They think they can do and say what they want because they are not bound by NCAA rules but in this instance, they actually are bound them through a third party (UT).

    3. I would not be surprised if ESPN has real issues getting deals done with carriers now that they have lost two calling cards, the second Texas regular season game and high school football.

    4. To get past these rules, I think there could eventually be a name change for the network that does not include Longhorn in the title. Texas would obviously have to approve this and I doubt it happens until there are real carriage issues and/or ESPN tries to back out of the deal otherwise.

    Interesting thoughts. 3. and 4. are wildly off-base though. ESPN understands fully the issues involved in placing the LHN with carriers. They tried to add a second game to help this effort (and may still have one), but the economic deal was not premised on this. The negotiations are always tough and ESPN is asking a premium price for the channel. I am sure that they view this as a multi-year effort. There would be no pressure that would cause anyone to think about 4. None. ESPN doesn't have carriage issues (at least none that they didn't anticipate) and there is nothing that would make them want to back away from their branding strategy and marketing efforts to date. Whether or not high school games can ever be aired is not a big issue.

  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)

    ts of thoughts here.
    1. First, as I've been saying from the outset, whether or not Texas or ESPN likes it, the NCAA and its member institutions can make up rules as they go. That's what they did here.
    2. ESPN execs overplayed their hand. They think they can do and say what they want because they are not bound by NCAA rules but in this instance, they actually are bound them through a third party (UT).
    3. I would not be surprised if ESPN has real issues getting deals done with carriers now that they have lost two calling cards, the second Texas regular season game and high school football.
    4. To get past these rules, I think there could eventually be a name change for the network that does not include Longhorn in the title. Texas would obviously have to approve this and I doubt it happens until there are real carriage issues and/or ESPN tries to back out of the deal otherwise.

    wow... this thread dropped off the pin-up status fast after this bomb was dropped hahaha

  • Sounds like ol' Bobby pretty much agrees with what I said. Itll be interesting to see what happens in the coming months.

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

  • bruthaman said... (original post)

    Itll be interesting to see what happens in the coming months.

    I'll give you a preview:

    You'll still be in the Big 12.

    signature image signature image
  • Yes, we will still be in the BIG12, and winning it as usual.

    FOOTBALL IS ALMOST HERE!!! OU BABY!!!!

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