B1G Expansion

From the points above there isn't anything in there that would have them not being equals - just asking for a few things that would apply to everyone.

I can understand 8 conference games with being each others protected rival. That isn't unfair. It might be kind of hard to work out with the 8 vs. 9 but asking for it isn't unreasonable.

Staggered scheduling to allow for mid-season non-con games is also reasonable. I think the Big 10 is the only conference that doesn't do staggered right now - I have seen non-con games mid-season for ACC, Pac12, SEC and Big12 for sure.

Stating that they don't want to make any move until 2014 - that is only 3 years away and gives everyone time to get details worked out.

There is nothing there that is asking for special treatment, just stating what their desires are for all teams to follow. Now I am leery about letting both of them in and risking them turning things into an us against them situation, but I am also willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Just make sure that Texas ends up with road games up to Madison and Penn State or the Big House in November their first year!

 
The ND/UT scenario is interesting particularly with the timing of 2014. ND's TV contract with NBC is up in 2015 while Big Ten's ABC/ESPN contract expires in 2016. Hypothetically if this scenario were to play out as outlined above, it gives them 2 years to prepare negotiations for what could be a landmark TV contract deal with ND/UT in the fold.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, I suppose this ND/Texas to the Big 10 rumor would explain why our administration remains so cordial in public to Texas, despite their seething hatred for that program and their cheating ways.

I can't see this happening, though--Delaney has said Bevo TV is a non-starter, and ESPN won't simply hand the keys to Bevo TV over to Fox (who owns 49% of the BTN). Who's going to pay ESPN for the startup costs they absorbed in creating Bevo TV?

If anything, this sounds like someone's wet dream from the first wave of expansion, back when we knew Delaney was actively courting Texas and Notre Dame...though I don't think Texas has the 'Tech' problem they once had.

 
College Football Playbook with Mike Leach and Jack Arute looked into the LHN and implied that if Texas changes conferences the contract is voided. Anybody have any details?

 
I heard it mentioned that they can not join another conference as long as they have LHN -- so that would imply it would have to be dropped/voided, etc, if they did join the B1G.

 
matthew_m_g said:
Well, I suppose this ND/Texas to the Big 10 rumor would explain why our administration remains so cordial in public to Texas, despite their seething hatred for that program and their cheating ways.

I can't see this happening, though--Delaney has said Bevo TV is a non-starter, and ESPN won't simply hand the keys to Bevo TV over to Fox (who owns 49% of the BTN). Who's going to pay ESPN for the startup costs they absorbed in creating Bevo TV?

If anything, this sounds like someone's wet dream from the first wave of expansion, back when we knew Delaney was actively courting Texas and Notre Dame...though I don't think Texas has the 'Tech' problem they once had.
Click to expand...
Just what I took real quick from the quoted deal above is that the second network would be absorbed by the BTN, but if it is a separate channel I could see ESPN remaining a partner in that channel. I don't think any of the ND/Texas thing is realistic, but it is fun to discuss. I could see an ESPN/ESPN2 type deal with BTN/BTN2; BTN would showcase a national game while the lower tier match-ups for the week are on BTN2 as a regional deal. Would ESPN (if remaining as a partner) have an issue with this? Certainly, so perhaps, they week to week it, where BTN gets the big game one week and BTN2 gets it the next and the regional broadcasts change each week too. Each team would still be assured to get televised each week depending on which channel they are lined up for that week. I should add that both FOX and ESPN would be able to make more money from this type of set-up with a league like that, it would just take lawyers a few months to negotiate it all out.

Again, I don't see this as a reality, just a pure hypo that in all likeliness will never happen.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
husker_hurdler said:
College Football Playbook with Mike Leach and Jack Arute looked into the LHN and implied that if Texas changes conferences the contract is voided. Anybody have any details?
Click to expand...
I heard that too, but I took it to mean that Texas wouldn't be voiding insomuch that it would be breaching contract and would owe ESPN damages (likely start-up costs).

These start-up costs can be prohibitive--that's why OU and A&M would never get the same sweetheart deal as Texas (and therefore be perpetually behind Texas in revenue), why Nebraska changed their mind about individual school networks, and why Nebraska has to wait six years before we're fully vested in the Big 10 (pay-in for network start-up costs).

I wonder if there's a dollar amount listed for breach of contract on Texas' part--that would likely be, at a minimum, an indicator of the money ESPN dumped into making this jalopy of a channel.

 
matthew_m_g said:
husker_hurdler said:
College Football Playbook with Mike Leach and Jack Arute looked into the LHN and implied that if Texas changes conferences the contract is voided. Anybody have any details?
Click to expand...
I heard that too, but I took it to mean that Texas wouldn't be voiding insomuch that it would be breaching contract and would owe ESPN damages (likely start-up costs).

These start-up costs can be prohibitive--that's why OU and A&M would never get the same sweetheart deal as Texas (and therefore be perpetually behind Texas in revenue), why Nebraska changed their mind about individual school networks, and why Nebraska has to wait six years before we're fully vested in the Big 10 (pay-in for network start-up costs).

I wonder if there's a dollar amount listed for breach of contract on Texas' part--that would likely be, at a minimum, an indicator of the money ESPN dumped into making this jalopy of a channel.
Click to expand...
Damages may very well be written into the contract. It could be very hard to discern the damages from a long-term contract like this judicially, so I would think they had written a damages clause into the contract. Since it is a public school, a freedom of information request by someone down in Texas could get the contract language, most likely (if it hasn't already been published somewhere).

 
BOJ said:
matthew_m_g said:
husker_hurdler said:
College Football Playbook with Mike Leach and Jack Arute looked into the LHN and implied that if Texas changes conferences the contract is voided. Anybody have any details?
Click to expand...
I heard that too, but I took it to mean that Texas wouldn't be voiding insomuch that it would be breaching contract and would owe ESPN damages (likely start-up costs).

These start-up costs can be prohibitive--that's why OU and A&M would never get the same sweetheart deal as Texas (and therefore be perpetually behind Texas in revenue), why Nebraska changed their mind about individual school networks, and why Nebraska has to wait six years before we're fully vested in the Big 10 (pay-in for network start-up costs).

I wonder if there's a dollar amount listed for breach of contract on Texas' part--that would likely be, at a minimum, an indicator of the money ESPN dumped into making this jalopy of a channel.
Click to expand...
Damages may very well be written into the contract. It could be very hard to discern the damages from a long-term contract like this judicially, so I would think they had written a damages clause into the contract. Since it is a public school, a freedom of information request by someone down in Texas could get the contract language, most likely (if it hasn't already been published somewhere).
Click to expand...
It's already been foia'd and published to several sights. It's what caused the A&M rumbling to turn into a frenzy over the last two months as it was discovered that highschool games and extra Texas football games were added as "best effort" deals into the contract. So to them (and the rest of the conference) it meant Texas was dishonest about the scope of it's independent network.

However there were sections that were redacted and nobody has mentioned anything about damages with any actual figures, so I wouldn't be surprised if that was one of them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The whole ND & UT thing seems to have some legs out there...The terms if correct do NOT give either school a advantage in ANY way they would be Equal in EVERY way....I know theres alot of animosity btw Neb and TX BUT if the BIG can get TX and ND otgether..its GOOD for the conference and REMEMBER in the BIG we do whats BEST for the entire league...That may take some getting used to for Nebraska and its fans having gotten screwed as much as u did from them....Let it go this time...

 
People act like PBC or what ever the dudes name is is batting a thousand on the big 10 rumors. He's been pretty much wildly off the mark in the two posts he's made like this which makes me believe this rumor has almost no legs, but even if it did, you show you obviously have no understanding of anything Texas is like beyond the money they make.

It's fine, all the big ten fans wetting your pants over the Texas rumors obviously know Texas better then we do and there is no reason for Nebraska fans to worry about them joining a league they are in.

Those won't be the demands they make though, Texas negotiates in reverse. They'll work out a deal in principle then say the legislature is threatening to make them go to the pac12 with Tech/Baylor or some nonsense and need more, like to keep the LHN for the jobs it creates in the state.

Texas is batting a thousand on destroying the conferences they are in after all. I doubt Nebraska would try to block them from the league, but don't doubt for a minute 15-30 years down the line us Nebraska fans will be serving up another big bunch of "I told you so" to another soon to be dead conference as you all scramble for an exit.

How anyone could follow anything that's been happening in the big 12 over the last 2-3 years and think to themselves "ohh goody, we might get the prize that is Texas" is way beyond comprehension for us. It's idiotic and blind to how Texas operates it's athletic department.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top