Horns247 Board

As with most changes lately in college football the Big 10 move was about fear and greed.

Fear at having Notre Dame stick its toes into the ACC and where that might lead, and greed in seeing an opportunity to increase by millions its third tier money.

I think Delany was caught off guard by the Notre Dame move and it pissed him off. I believe the Big 10 is trying to gut both the Big East and the ACC. Well they simply put the final knife in the Big East. Taking Rutgers will set off another chain of events. I'm surprised that the ACC hasn't already announced Connecticut as the replacement for Maryland -- they desperately tried to go with Pittsburgh and Syracuse.

Getting Maryland may not be their last attempt at raiding the ACC. Weakening the league that Notre Dame is dancing with is a win-win for the Big 10.

Financially it will bring in a lot of money to the Big 10 Network, which will now be able to claim 35% of the nation's population as home to Big 10 schools. They don't give a damn if Rutgers is on Page 9 of the N.Y. Times.

They do care very much that the Big 10 Network now move on to the basic cable tier in these markets and that means monthly subscription fees from a much larger number of viewers. There are a lot of Big 10 grads and fans in the New York and Washington D.C area who will pick up the network for a nominal fee (instead of a monthly premium price) and that money goes straight to the conference.

Fox just bought the Yankees regional sports network (YES), and they are a major investor in the Big 10 Network. Now they will be a partner with the Big 10 in distributing and selling the Big 10 Network.

They aren't done. Delany wants the Big 10 to be the first Super Conference and the general consensus is that there will be four. Market forces may dictate something else, but there are a lot of smart people in both media and college football who believe that this is where we are headed.

If that is the case, the Big Ten, the SEC and the Pac 12 are in. That leaves the ACC and the Big 12 playing musical chairs for the last seat at the big boy table.

Now you're talking!

Maybe the Super Conf. will include OSU, MU to the Big 12.

Bowlsby has stated it's going to be about the electronic footprint (TV), but I believe some leaders of the Big 12 schools do not see it that way. He believes in the power of TV for everyone not just one or two schools and I beleive the conference as a whole should be looking down the road by adding the right teams to asssure we are one of the four major conferences which I believe will happen at some point. There will be some teams that others conferences would add, but not everyone and that is who we should also look out for.

The Big 12 has already become the SWC from a relative money perspective to the BIG and the SEC. It only looks good relative to the pathetic ACC money situation. The best case scenario for UT is for the Big 12 to take FSU, VT, Clemson and GT and create its own conference network for third tier rights. This would allow Big 12 games to be shown on TV in all those large markets and visa versa at the Tiers 1, 2 & 3 levels. I suspect all the teams in the new Big 12+2 would not object to disproportionate third tier rights just to begin receiving substantial third tier revenues they do not have now.

This would also allow for SEC type cross division scheduling that avoids the circular firing squad scenario of the current Big 12 and produces more top ten teams at year end for MNC and top bowl consideration that produces higher conference revenues. The addition of a championship game would add even more revenues.

It would be a huge win for UT on all levels but it's way over the head of Delost..

Except for the point above, I don't disagree with anything you said. I don't know the man personally, but Dodds strikes me as someone who is always about maximizing revenue so I suspect the scenarios you discussed are not lost on anyone at UT, OU, the Big 12 offices, or anywhere else for that matter. The conference re-alignment games and the BCS system (present and future) are all about maximizing television revenue. The difficulty lies in how to maximize revenue without damaging the value of the product generating that revenue. Bowlsby seems to be someone who has the skill set to do that and still navigate the political minefield (both inside and outside the conference) to get there. Time will tell.

It should be a blinding flash of the obvious that the Big 12 is in the position to maximize revenue and improve competition by adding VT, FSU, GT and Clemson. They are all above the average Big 12 team in terms of fan base, attendance and competitiveness and they are all in bigger TV markets than Oklahoma, Iowa and Kansas. There is no way this would damage the "product". Just the opposite.

Bowlsby may have all the skill sets in the world but it means nothing if he does not have the prescience to see the obvious and the stones to lead.

My fear about DeLoss is that his goals and the university goals may not be fully aligned. I say that because I feel DeLoss is concerned about his legacy. He has put a lot into the LHN. I wonder if the time comes if he would cut it for the benefit of Texas. I do not say this to mean DeLoss is not doing what he thinks is best for Texas. I do not know the man, but I believe he loves the university and would do his best to see it successful. I just wonder if his vision is clouded by his desire to be remembered for something great

We should go to the Big East.

Don't renew your season tickets.
That's really what it comes down to.
All Belmont cares about is making money.
When they stop turning profits is when change will be made.

It was actually probably Mizzou. AAU and the TVs Delany covets. However, all of that said, I'll bet Nebraska carries more weight in the NYC market than Rutgers does now or ever will.