knapplc Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I find it extremely doubtful that this "play everyone" schedule comes to fruition. Texas lawmakers are pushing to include Houston in the Big 12, and if they succeed (and I can't imagine why Houston wouldn't want to join), you'll have to pick up another school and then you're right back where you were before. LINK Texas Lawmakers can't make us take Houston. The 4 Texas schools don't want us too, either (they won't say it), and the 6 non Texas schools don't have to care and therefore... Won't... we did not want baylor either... But that was part of getting the thing done in the first place. We were going to take 4, politics dictated which 4 in that case. I am not saying the politicians can never influence, just that the dynamics for that don't exist here... I just have one question - do you really trust that what you're hearing out of Texas is the truth? Really? Quote Link to comment
GMoose Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I don't know that I'd call that a "silver lining." Unless a silver lining is a near guarantee that the big12 champ is from the south every year.... Quote Link to comment
junior4949 Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Since 2003, the champ has been from the South. I'm not sure how the round robin format changes anything in terms of whether the champ is from the South or North. At least everyone plays each other, therefore crowning a champion. Now, they won't have the formula that they had to use a couple years ago when Texas beat OU head to head but lost the tie breaker which cost them a chance at playing for the NC. Now, they won't have a team like KU who had one of the worst strength of schedules getting to a BCS game even though they lost to the North representative. I definitely see it as a silver lining. Quote Link to comment
Mike N Posted June 27, 2010 Share Posted June 27, 2010 I find it extremely doubtful that this "play everyone" schedule comes to fruition. Texas lawmakers are pushing to include Houston in the Big 12, and if they succeed (and I can't imagine why Houston wouldn't want to join), you'll have to pick up another school and then you're right back where you were before. LINK Regardless of what UH and any other little school may want, they are not to be in the Big 12 Lite. All that does is split up the money 12 ways instead of 10, reducing the current members' take. You'll hear Texas Representatives scream about it in their Chamber, but in this state we have an 18 Billion (with a capital B) dollar budget deficit to deal with as well as redistricting, and football conferences are WAY down on the Leg's to do list. For those of you who don't know...the Texas Legislature meets for only 140 days (roughly January to May) in each odd-numbered year. We simply don't have time for this. Quote Link to comment
jayhawk Posted June 27, 2010 Share Posted June 27, 2010 I find it extremely doubtful that this "play everyone" schedule comes to fruition. Texas lawmakers are pushing to include Houston in the Big 12, and if they succeed (and I can't imagine why Houston wouldn't want to join), you'll have to pick up another school and then you're right back where you were before. LINK Texas Lawmakers can't make us take Houston. The 4 Texas schools don't want us too, either (they won't say it), and the 6 non Texas schools don't have to care and therefore... Won't... we did not want baylor either... But that was part of getting the thing done in the first place. We were going to take 4, politics dictated which 4 in that case. I am not saying the politicians can never influence, just that the dynamics for that don't exist here... I just have one question - do you really trust that what you're hearing out of Texas is the truth? Really? If you are asking do I believe everything out of Texas... No If you are asking if I think it is true that Texas/A&M/Bylor/Tech doesn't want Houston in, nor TCU, yes. It brings no new $$$, which they have proven is all they are focused on, and it hurts the recruiting of those already in (not really UT). I think Texas will predictably act, based on thinking of them as a business... Should it be that way, maybe not, but that is how I am convinced it mostly is. Quote Link to comment
HUSKER 37 Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 ...EDIT: By the way...I'm getting tired of seeing and spelling "Texass". Can't we get a smiley of a ass so it looks like "Tex or something similar? Found a more better one.. Quote Link to comment
Notre Dame Joe Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Since 2003, the champ has been from the South. I'm not sure how the round robin format changes anything in terms of whether the champ is from the South or North. At least everyone plays each other, therefore crowning a champion. Now, they won't have the formula that they had to use a couple years ago when Texas beat OU head to head but lost the tie breaker which cost them a chance at playing for the NC. Now, they won't have a team like KU who had one of the worst strength of schedules getting to a BCS game even though they lost to the North representative. I definitely see it as a silver lining. Doesn't the Big12 make more money when a KSU upsets in the title game and guarantees 2 BCS slots for their conference? Quote Link to comment
redbeerman Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 I find it extremely doubtful that this "play everyone" schedule comes to fruition. Texas lawmakers are pushing to include Houston in the Big 12, and if they succeed (and I can't imagine why Houston wouldn't want to join), you'll have to pick up another school and then you're right back where you were before. LINK Texas Lawmakers can't make us take Houston. The 4 Texas schools don't want us too, either (they won't say it), and the 6 non Texas schools don't have to care and therefore... Won't... we did not want baylor either... But that was part of getting the thing done in the first place. We were going to take 4, politics dictated which 4 in that case. I am not saying the politicians can never influence, just that the dynamics for that don't exist here... I just have one question - do you really trust that what you're hearing out of Texas is the truth? Really? If you are asking do I believe everything out of Texas... No If you are asking if I think it is true that Texas/A&M/Bylor/Tech doesn't want Houston in, nor TCU, yes. It brings no new $$$, which they have proven is all they are focused on, and it hurts the recruiting of those already in (not really UT). I think Texas will predictably act, based on thinking of them as a business... Should it be that way, maybe not, but that is how I am convinced it mostly is. You are correct but what stops UT from deciding to keep an extra 12 million (or whatever it will be)in state by replacing KSU with TCU. Who needs 2 schools in the state of Kansas? They have the power to do it because they would have the votes. No one is going to vote against what UT wants. All UT has to do is say they will take OU, aTM and tech to the pac 10 or SEC. It probably won't happen but it sure could happen to KSU, ISU, MU or KU. Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 I just have one question - do you really trust that what you're hearing out of Texas is the truth? Really? If you are asking do I believe everything out of Texas... No If you are asking if I think it is true that Texas/A&M/Bylor/Tech doesn't want Houston in, nor TCU, yes. It brings no new $$$, which they have proven is all they are focused on, and it hurts the recruiting of those already in (not really UT). I think Texas will predictably act, based on thinking of them as a business... Should it be that way, maybe not, but that is how I am convinced it mostly is. Don't believe that rhetoric. They are going to add two more teams, unless they get a special dispensation from the NCAA to hold a CCG with only ten teams. The CCG brings in something like $15 million every year - why would any conference willingly forgo that money? There is no way the Big 12-2 stays at 10 teams. If the conference lasts more than two years, there will be 12 teams, guaranteed. Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 I just have one question - do you really trust that what you're hearing out of Texas is the truth? Really? If you are asking do I believe everything out of Texas... No If you are asking if I think it is true that Texas/A&M/Bylor/Tech doesn't want Houston in, nor TCU, yes. It brings no new $$$, which they have proven is all they are focused on, and it hurts the recruiting of those already in (not really UT). I think Texas will predictably act, based on thinking of them as a business... Should it be that way, maybe not, but that is how I am convinced it mostly is. Don't believe that rhetoric. They are going to add two more teams, unless they get a special dispensation from the NCAA to hold a CCG with only ten teams. The CCG brings in something like $15 million every year - why would any conference willingly forgo that money? There is no way the Big 12-2 stays at 10 teams. If the conference lasts more than two years, there will be 12 teams, guaranteed. not to mention, without a CCG, there is a month of irrelevance between the last regular season game and bowl season. Quote Link to comment
huKSer Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Since 2003, the champ has been from the South. I'm not sure how the round robin format changes anything in terms of whether the champ is from the South or North. At least everyone plays each other, therefore crowning a champion. Now, they won't have the formula that they had to use a couple years ago when Texas beat OU head to head but lost the tie breaker which cost them a chance at playing for the NC. Now, they won't have a team like KU who had one of the worst strength of schedules getting to a BCS game even though they lost to the North representative. I definitely see it as a silver lining. Doesn't the Big12 make more money when a KSU upsets in the title game and guarantees 2 BCS slots for their conference? No, Texas makes more money going to the NCG. The Big 12 is irrelavent in this discussion. Quote Link to comment
jayhawk Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 I just have one question - do you really trust that what you're hearing out of Texas is the truth? Really? If you are asking do I believe everything out of Texas... No If you are asking if I think it is true that Texas/A&M/Bylor/Tech doesn't want Houston in, nor TCU, yes. It brings no new $$$, which they have proven is all they are focused on, and it hurts the recruiting of those already in (not really UT). I think Texas will predictably act, based on thinking of them as a business... Should it be that way, maybe not, but that is how I am convinced it mostly is. Don't believe that rhetoric. They are going to add two more teams, unless they get a special dispensation from the NCAA to hold a CCG with only ten teams. The CCG brings in something like $15 million every year - why would any conference willingly forgo that money? There is no way the Big 12-2 stays at 10 teams. If the conference lasts more than two years, there will be 12 teams, guaranteed. Total TV pool now (just an estimate to illustrate this point) $150MM. Share per team, $15MM With a title game and 2 more teams, TV Pool still $150MM with no new markets, $16MM for title game, total pool is $166M, $13.8MM per team. Adding even $16MM in revenue with no additional TV fund, means less money for all. I am not saying we won't go to 12 at some point, just I don't think a school like Houston that brings no viewers or new markets is who we bring if we do go to 12. I am curious how all this ends up, not sure how long the Big 12/10 looks like it's current self or even continues to exist... Quote Link to comment
Caven Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 I just have one question - do you really trust that what you're hearing out of Texas is the truth? Really? If you are asking do I believe everything out of Texas... No If you are asking if I think it is true that Texas/A&M/Bylor/Tech doesn't want Houston in, nor TCU, yes. It brings no new $$$, which they have proven is all they are focused on, and it hurts the recruiting of those already in (not really UT). I think Texas will predictably act, based on thinking of them as a business... Should it be that way, maybe not, but that is how I am convinced it mostly is. Don't believe that rhetoric. They are going to add two more teams, unless they get a special dispensation from the NCAA to hold a CCG with only ten teams. The CCG brings in something like $15 million every year - why would any conference willingly forgo that money? There is no way the Big 12-2 stays at 10 teams. If the conference lasts more than two years, there will be 12 teams, guaranteed. Total TV pool now (just an estimate to illustrate this point) $150MM. Share per team, $15MM With a title game and 2 more teams, TV Pool still $150MM with no new markets, $16MM for title game, total pool is $166M, $13.8MM per team. Adding even $16MM in revenue with no additional TV fund, means less money for all. I am not saying we won't go to 12 at some point, just I don't think a school like Houston that brings no viewers or new markets is who we bring if we do go to 12. I am curious how all this ends up, not sure how long the Big 12/10 looks like it's current self or even continues to exist... 16 million times 4 texas schools = 64 million for the state of Texas. 13.8 million times 6 Texas schools = 82.8 million for Texas schools. With the unequal revenue sharing that probably becomes over 100 million of the 166 million that the Big 12 would bring in going to Texas schools. Don't think for a second that the Big 12 won't add 2 more Texas schools in order to move more of the money to Texas. Quote Link to comment
jayhawk Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 That makes no sense for UT, they want to add new markets if they add people if they at all can... They could get TCU and Houston tomorrow, but they are not gonna... Quote Link to comment
huKSer Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 16 million times 4 texas schools = 64 million for the state of Texas. 13.8 million times 6 Texas schools = 82.8 million for Texas schools. With the unequal revenue sharing that probably becomes over 100 million of the 166 million that the Big 12 would bring in going to Texas schools. Don't think for a second that the Big 12 won't add 2 more Texas schools in order to move more of the money to Texas. The UNIVERSITY of Texas doesn't care about the other Texas schools (check their blogs). The UNIVERSITY of Texas doesn't care about the state of Texas. The UNIVERSITY of Texas DOES care about the UNIVERSITY of Texas. End of story Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.