Says who?

Says who? Is the University of Texas going to quit playing sports? The whole purpose of the network is to promote and show UT sports. Everyone else be damned.

And how many homes get LHN?

Has the Big XII had any kind of statementsince Pinkel blasted Beebe, or now that Oklahoma is threatening to take OSU and possibly bail?

Pinkel was right - there isn't a single other conference out there dealing with the ineptitude the remaining Big XII schools are....

It's a fledgling network. You don't think UT fans won't clamor to have that added to their cable/satellite system? Verizon is the lone carrier, but either they get a shitload of new subscribers or others step up to the plate.

Not that I've heard. Beebe is all about Texas. They'll try to browbeat some conference into something that favors Texas. It's how they operate.

Just saw this poll on PowerMizzou.com

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 6px; PADDING-LEFT: 6px; PADDING-RIGHT: 6px; PADDING-TOP: 6px" vAlign=top>POLL: Big 10 or SEC</TD><TD style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 6px; PADDING-LEFT: 6px; PADDING-RIGHT: 6px; PADDING-TOP: 6px" vAlign=bottom noWrap align=right 1??>Reply</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<HR color=#cccccc noShade><FONT size=2><SCRIPT language=javascript>var voted = ',0,884335,882240,2284071,2415472,1316059,1929277,718161,357215,1935848,1495278,2186284,2118388,2226 241,2082890,280079,322049,576102,3391,1200988,1610785,2371427,413928,1799842,1963637,2287132,1384722 ,1951672,1483896,2100323,2265531,1901600,1611431,1826889,2470466,321259,2355377,993564,2356607,3014, 1957781,2251954,2372895,2358171,2315052,1638327,106229,2254615,2481016,151060,895285,1344835,44299,1 965358,118727,2185354,1967791,1935946,2357598,7385,1632501,106285,1914859,2319485,2397268,1513426,17 58103,2243804,1546061,2475176,2318579,2469920,253683,2231756,2293570,2210296,2475627,41480,34700,163 7278,2373438,1675322,1904537,1066270,83772,2159940,1920890,2174814,1601960,655530,1172743,2124837,23 16090,37938,116838,72728,1941294,2446233,2374065,2494146,36226,1454652,37371,2132389,1964193,393391, 2965,1877551,1547944,2125722,1949408,2413887,142600,23740,566298,2491250,35138,1909826,1495273,16283 ,1269649,1892609,2268530,1402541,384568,404765,2468127,50527,4221,2104298,243615,1924702,1952077,554 059,142433,2177697,2134292,2449340,1583590,1831177,460338,322241,1977864,896769,2268004,2210424,1016 840,74371,84684,1795395,2098437,2096910,2347398,1952600,2451601,1832850,2225149,2321641,1952021,2092 487,2485493,2371475,25828,2200316,2510359,2469532,1623920,2377922,1844237,1784030,1612993,2469054,23 17408,503711,2432362,377753,140898,1452491,2262772,2451116,245984,1389751,1450918,1614361,1933973,17 62722,1932882,120644,1932423,1962988,20678,1876056,670112,2271703,2355623,1755652,1331820,1831803,19 795,2238084,373876,1760007,1208509,381530,1489997,1555313,1902587,1380440,1361190,134811,1028262,582 105,287524,1858729,15398,2372552,1527835,2371482,2336264,1426134,1742212,2491332,2100709,40088,12073 9,72345,1585718,2092103,248010,2481804,2501237,1825949,1962913,706624,1453808,1617691,1724490,3320,1 454716,56115,2196432,1967844,1837720,115215,590227,846604,871632,632842,2300592,1044196,1542432,2286 013,1927602,352372,1111734,2296106,2119907,178250,';if (voted.indexOf(',' + GetUserCookie() + ',') == -1) {document.write ('<table bgcolor=ffffff><tr><td class=forum><font size=2><form action=vote.asp?SID=898&Poll=151456 method=post>Which conference do you want us to end up in?
<input type=radio name=answer value=1> SEC
<input type=radio name=answer value=2> Big 10

<input type=submit value=Vote> View Results</form></td></tr></table><hr>');} else {document.write ('<table border=0 cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 width="75%" bgcolor=ffffff><tr><td colspan=3 class=forum>Which conference do you want us to end up in?</td></tr><tr><td colspan=3 class=forum><font size=2>Results (total votes = 257):</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor=#000000 colspan=3 height=1></td></tr><tr><td class=forum><font size=2>SEC</td><td class=forum><font size=2>134 / 52.14%</td><td class=forum><font size=2><img src=http://vmedia.rivals.com/images/bar.gif height=10 width=140></td></tr><tr><td bgcolor=#000000 colspan=3 height=1></td></tr><tr><td class=forum><font size=2>Big 10</td><td class=forum><font size=2>123 / 47.86%</td><td class=forum><img src=http://vmedia.rivals.com/images/bar.gif height=10 width=129></td></tr><tr><td bgcolor=#000000 colspan=3 height=1></td></tr></table><hr>');}</SCRIPT><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width="75%" bgColor=#ffffff><TBODY><TR><TD class=forum colSpan=3>Which conference do you want MU to end up in?</TD></TR><TR><TD class=forum colSpan=3>Results (total votes = 257):</TD></TR><TR><TD bgColor=#000000 height=1 colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD class=forum>SEC</TD><TD class=forum>134 / 52.14%</TD><TD class=forum>http://vmedia.rivals.com/images/bar.gif</TD></TR><TR><TD bgColor=#000000 height=1 colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD class=forum>Big 10</TD><TD class=forum>123 / 47.86%</TD><TD class=forum>http://vmedia.rivals.com/images/bar.gif</TD></TR><TR><TD bgColor=#000000 height=1 colSpan=3></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<HR>I've seen this question asked with several options but I was wondering which one of our top 2 choices would you like to see MIZZOU join and why?

That's ****ed up. I have no idea how these things work, but can the schools get together and have a vote of no confidence in Beebe and get him out of a position of power in the Big XII? It's obvious he's rotting the conference away from the inside.

And when I said remaining Big XII schools, I meant everyone but Texas, obviously.

That's really surprising. I think the Big 10 is the superior option.

Mizzou would get pushed around in the SEC.....

Big 10 is the better choice for MU.

You're talking what, 50,000 hardcore fans? I really don't think you are understanding the numbers difference here. Texas is putting on an act, they are trying to claim OU is tying their hands by bolting first and much of their value is tied to the OU rivalry. They could make in ten years with the PAC that they could in the Big XII with their LHN in 20. Its a no-brainer.

"Would you like to make 14 million extra a year?"

"No. No, I don't think I would."

Who has that conversation with a strait face?

The really sad and ironic thing in all this is that the Big XII could have done something very similar in raiding the Big East. They could have set up a smaller network opportunity with those big east coast markets and made a killing for everyone. But, this is where hubris and ego are going to kill a conference and all the truly guilty parties are the ones that are going to get rewarded for it.

I would agree. But what bugs me is that we have been scorned by them once before and somehow I'm concerned that the present administration will respond like a wounded ex-girlfriend.

I know all you MU fans think you are sitting fine, but your dinner isn't served just yet. All this "we'll have a home in the SEC or B!G" conversation is based on two assumptions:

1. That both conferences really want to expand

2. That A&M is assured of a place in the SEC

Neither of those things have happened and there's been no real talk they are going to. There is a rumor that there is a voting bloc against A&M being included and the B!G has not said word one about expanding this time around. Everyone assumes it will happen because they think its a conference ego thing. If the TV networks aren't convinced it adds real value, those conferences will not be "eager" to split their takes any further. They already have signed deals, the networks are under NO obligation to restructure them. They have what they call "looks", but those are not legally binding.

I haven't said **** TEXAS yet today...

You really don't understand Texas (which I hate BTW). They have 50,000 students. Where'd you come up with 50,000 fans? Texas buries any school in the PAC by a long way. In fact, they bury all universities in sports money and fanbase except maybe ND.

Golden!

I'm selling Tuck Fexas! T-shirts.

Don't count "fans", count subscriptions. Just about every Longhorn football game will be on a channel the average Longhorn fan can get without an increased subscription. One, maybe two games a year will be on the LHN,which I'm sure most sports bars will subscribe to. The rest of the programming is non football sports.

Don't think in terms of state populations, or TV market shares, or the general Longhorn fan. The only people that are going to add another 5-10 dollars to their cable bill are hardcore fans that don't have much better to do. Not only that, but the deal they made was with a much smaller cable company, Verizon (which I have and really like, by the way). This means you not only have to want to have a higher cable bill, you also have to go to the trouble of switching your cable provider (something Verizon, I'm sure, is hoping for). They went with the smaller company because none of the larger ones were interested in airing it.

So, yes, about 50,000 is a more accurate number. And just about any cable exec outside of Verizon will tell you that.

Any particular reason you posted this, other than to try and rationalize that KU has a spot at the table somewhere long before MU?

In fact, if there really is a split of the conference, Kansas has nothing to offer a conference beyond Basketball dominance.

My worry isn't that someone wouldn't want MU whether it would be the Big 10 or SEC...it's that somehow our Administration could find a way to really screw up the whole thing.

The Tejas mouthpiece has spoken:

I think MU will end up in the SEC. I would like to see them in the BIG10.
IMO they can compete in either conference. Razor Backs compete in the SEC. So can the Tigers.

Again, you don't understand Texas. We've dealt with them for 15 years in our conference. If they move to the PAC, good riddance. They will dominate (and benefit) every discussion concerning sports ad nauseum in your league. The money in Texas buries anything on the west coast and they know it.

Yeah, the reason I posted it is because of the "polls" regarding which conference Missouri fans "choose" to go to. You may not have a choice and you're only real option may not be with either of them. I know the local media has you thinking you're in some catbird seat right now with "options". I'm not saying this to incite MU fans. You show me one thing that I posted that isn't correct, and I'll retract it. I'm not saying KU is in a good position, and I'm not saying MU isn't in a slightly better position. I'm just saying that neither of our positions have any validity right now and everything is based on media assumptions about what the SEC and B!G are "going to do". They may very well do nothing. There is no obligation by them to pick up "stray" teams.

Let me put it this way. MU, A&M, OSU are all fine programs. But their real worth was tied to Texas-OU. There's no doubt the programs could be added, but does any network think, on your own, you are a $17 million dollar a year program? Is there a conference who's members are prepared to add your program if it means taking a financial hit to their own bottom line?

Why do you think I'm a PAC person?

I never said you were, but you put up the PAC reasoning for bringing in Texas.

It sure sounds like you think I am.

Honestly, I really don't know who you are.

That's fine. I'm a KU fan and attended there. I'm originally from the midwest. Believe me, I understand. But, Texas is not the only ego in play here. OU is trying to remove the stranglehold Texas has in this conference, so they are taking their leverage and OSU to the PAC. Texas wants to rule its fiefdom, but now has to choose between splitting the Red River Rivalry (just after they lost the A&M one), or swallow some pride while making more money in the PAC. Texas is about power and money, but mostly money.

If chips start falling and Super Conferences start being created, then MU becomes more than just a "stray" team. Mizzou has markets that both the SEC and Big 10 would love to have. For the Big 10 that pretty much sews up everything in the state including the coveted St. Louis market. If the SEC manages to capture MU, then they steal away something that the Big 10 pretty much feels they can add at their convenience and catches the Big 10 with their pants down.

Super Conferences are going to happen.....it's just when and how. And quite frankly MU's situation isn't just slightly better than KU's...it's much better.

Says who? MU was snubbed by the Big 10 just last year. Suddenly they're the golden child?

I highlighted the only pertinent point of the discussion. "IF". IF all that happens, then yes, Missouri is in a good place. All I'm saying is that there has been no concrete message from either conference they want to expand. You assume the networks will say the St. Louis market is worth it. Fans throw around terms like "X metropolis" market like its some big bloc that will all automatically go where MU football goes.

When TV execs look at the numbers, they actually dissect it a bit more than that. They'll look at what percentage of St. Louis fans actually watch college football, what percentage of fans actually watch MU football (don't act like there's no Illini fans there). What percentage of fans watch SEC football anyway.

IF superconferences are the wave of the future, then yes, your situation is much brighter. But IF said conferences don't think it is advantageous to expand right now, they aren't going to expand just to expand.

And this, by the way, goes right into another of these myths about superconferences: "The good thing is that when we have four superconferences we're finally going to have a playoff system."

Yeah, right. The BCS, the organization that wants to preserve the bowls, is going to gather their teams together so they can get rid of the bowls. That's fan logic for you at its finest!

There are way more Mizzou fans in St. Louis than there are Illini fans.

Who knew?

I'm sure that there are. You guys are so blind sometimes you completely miss the point. Don't tell me "Mizzou can deliver the St. Louis market". That's obvious. Instead tell me what that actual TV share is. If its a significant number, then maybe Mizzou is a 17 million/year institution. Do you know what that actual number is and how much revenue that actually translates to for marketers?

No, I do not.

I think a gram of Meth goes for around 30 bucks in Mizoo

I don't either. But that's the point. When fans say "such and such market", they speak in hype, not real numbers. I agree that the MU portion in Missouri markets represents the largest potential market share that may be a "free agent". But, if that real projected revenue is not more than what each school in a particular conference currently takes in, these conferences will not expand just to expand.

The PAC is going aggressively forward because they can answer that question with a bold affirmation. In fact, they think so much of the Texas-OU market, they don't really care what two schools they add on to them.

Missouri has to show they are worth their take. If they can, Missouri may indeed have choices. If they can't, they may be the most valuable "stray" on the market.

This is my point. Who cares about TVs in St. Louis? The point is, what does MU bring to the national TV audience? That's the question.

I guess by reading all of the post you missed the point I was trying to make. The Big 10 is confident...almost cocky about it, that they can have MU anytime they wish.

Super Conferences are going to happen...no real if to it. My mistake in the post was putting it that way.

If you believe they aren't , please feel free to sit in your dream world.

Big Ten's next move will be east Maryland/Rutgers trying to get more of the untapped east coast market.

Sure, if you could forward that link to me, I would like to read it. Of course the B!G is confident they could take you anytime they want. But what time is that?

You're the one putting the value needed at $17 million....any particular reason you put it at that?

Wouldn't it be funny if Texas found it's way into the SEC? I'm not saying that there's any chance that it will happen, I just think it would be funny if Texas A&M tried to flee from Texas' shadow only to find themselves right back in it.

Well, I guess its hard to argue with sound facts like that, you win.

Isn't that what the SEC pays each team from its deal?

I'm sure they can. What puzzles me is the Big 10 took Nebraska and not MU. I thought it was all about TV sets.

I don't think these realignments are about TV sets at all.. except for the huge TV markets. It's about brand.

You know I kicked that around in my mind too. Then, I thought there is no way UT would follow aTm. They probably wouldn't want to give aTm that kind of satisfaction.

Also, because I don't think the SEC would allow that LHN revenue to go unshared.

Would be interesting to see the type of audience Nebraska pulls in on nationally televised games compared to Mizzou.

The problem is that you're believing that once Texas and OU disappear then nothing else will happen. Once Texas and OU make their moves, then the SEC and Big 10 will get antsy (and greedy).

My argument is that once OU and Texas go, then MU becomes the next most attractive pick along with OSU. If you don't think that the SEC and Big 10 won't start negotiations with those 2 schools with the possibility of the PAC 10 accepting OU/OSU and Texas/TT, then you're hiding in the sand.

It's only a question in a KU fans mind.

No, I am completely taking that into account. Your misconception is that you believe just because there are teams "available" that it means conferences will automatically expand without seeing if it adds value to their current contract. I'm thinking from a business angle, you're thinking from a sports fan perspective.

Could be about brand. But I don't think the PAC took CU because of brand. They took them because they can get the TV's in Denver and surrounding metro areas.

As I posted earlier, no one cares about the MU or OSU or TT brand. They don't bring eyes or interest to the national TV viewer.

Colorado to the PAC is more about alumni base and culture. Sure, they get some of the Denver market, but from what I've been told, CU isn't really a big draw. The PAC is limited because of geography, they really can't get much further than the Mississippi River. So, you grab the biggest markets you can that are in some sort of proximity to you.

Don't you remember the T-Shirts that said "The University of California at Boulder?" There's as big portion of Californians that attend Colorado.

This one is easy....the PAC 10 missed the opportunity to nab the Huskers thinking they weren't going anywhere. Instead they nabbed CU.

The Big 10 is highly confident that they can have MU anytime they want...MU has shown it wants to be in the Big 10. (The KU fans chided us for showing our skirt to the Big 10 and then getting dumped)

So the Big 10...pretty confident that they can add MU on their own time table, didn't need to offer MU anything because MU wasn't being looked at by anyone else.

When the Big 12 falls with OU/OSU heading west and Texas/TT probably following behind all the Big 10 has to do is pick the team(s) from the East they want most and add MU to that list. Then they stretch out in the areas they want.

That's because you can't see beyond KU basketball.

And, I'm just pointing out the fault in your logic is that just because the Big XII folds doesn't mean the SEC or B!G has to act. It could be several years before they do. They may wait until their current TV deals are done so they can freely negotiate an expansion package. Availability does not always equal "right time".

So, MU joins the Big 10 as a step child? Do what we say?... scenario?

Yea, I remember those. But I don't think that's what led CU to the PAC. And brand doesn't really explain Utah.

I want you to know, I'm not being snide here, but I think the 'brand' argument is a very small portion of the pie. And I think that's what sets Mizzou in the catbird seat in this discussion.

But KU basketball is a huge money maker on a national level.

HH...do you truly believe that once the Big 12 folds and those teams move to the PAC 12 (turned 16) that the other conferences won't act ?

That's the flaw in your logic.

So what you are saying is that KU BB money makes them more attractive than MU?

Then that refutes any argument here made by everyone else that the real money maker and driver of this realignment is Football Revenue.

So...which is it?

I disagree. How many millions of eyes watch KU basketball when they are shown nationally every week... sometimes twice As I posted before, the Financial Times writer said the top tier basketball programs bury a middling BCS program.

Interesting thought basketball wise:

Why would UCLA or Az want KU in their conference? As it stands now, they only have to deal with KU in a non con or NCAA tourney appearance. Is it in their best interest to have KU threaten their dominance of that conference?

Wrong! The Financial Times did a study and the top tier basketball programs are much more profitable than middling football programs.

And how do you classify middling?

I don't know what the fallout will actually be. All I know is that outside of the PAC, which is geographically neutralized from the SEC and B!G, is the only conference that has definitvely said they want to expand. Everything beyond that is an ASSUMPTION no matter which way you choose to assume. I'm making financial reasons why it MAY not happen like you THINK it will.

Of course. It creates interest. What's better than the top basketball programs playing each other. In fact, this year the top basketball teams are playing each other in the preseason.

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1260448

September 4, 2011

Sources: Texas being told to slow things down
Chip Brown
Orangebloods.com Columnist

Legislators and statewide office holders have swung into high-pressure mode to get Texas president Bill Powers and athletic director DeLoss Dodds to slow down any decision that might involve the Longhorns joining the Pac-12, multiple sources said Sunday.

With reports surfacing that Oklahoma is all but ready to commit to the Pac-12, Texas lawmakers are so concerned about the Longhorns possibly following suit that a full-court press is being made to slow things down by elected officials and corporate CEOs with influence, sources said.

"We don't want any hasty decision being made that hasn't been well thought out," one lawmaker told Orangebloods.com on Sunday.

Sources said the reason lawmakers are hot is that they received assurances from the Big 12, including Powers, that the Big 12 would survive without Texas A&M.

And because of those assurances, lawmakers did not take an aggressive stand against Texas A&M withdrawing from the Big 12. But that may be changing.

Sources said members of the Legislature are or will be reaching out to Texas A&M president R. Bowen Loftin to tell him the Aggies may no longer have the blessing of lawmakers to leave the Big 12, especially if it looks like the Big 12 will collapse.

According to sources close to Texas A&M, there is expected to be more movement involving the Aggies and the Southeastern Conference Tuesday or Wednesday of this week.

Sources say statewide office holders such as lieutenant governor David Dewhurst and Texas House Speaker Joe Straus haven't been active on realignment up to this point but now are getting involved.

A source in the Big 12 says there is also an increasing likelihood of litigation against the Southeastern Conference as well as the Pac-12 if the Big 12 comes apart.

In other words, it's about to get messy.

Orangebloods.com reported Friday night that Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe held an emergency conference call Friday afternoon with Big 12 presidents - excluding OU's David Boren, UT's Bill Powers and A&M's Bowen Loftin. The purpose of the call, sources said, was to get the rest of the Big 12 to "work on Texas" and keep the Longhorns in the league.

It's Beebe's belief that Oklahoma wouldn't be accepted into the Pac-12 without Texas, sources said. But sources have told Orangebloods.com Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott would take OU and Oklahoma State with or without Texas.

The question then becomes would OU go to the Pac-12 without Texas?

There is wide belief among those involved in this situation that OU needs the Texas rivalry and the ability to keep playing games in the state of Texas for recruiting purposes so much that it would forego the Pac-12 if Texas decided to stay in the Big 12.

But reports out of Oklahoma the past two days have said OU is totally focused on the Pac-12 and may be ready to commit.

A source close to Texas told Orangebloods.com Friday night that Texas is "leaning" toward the Pac-12 if Oklahoma would make such a move.

That source said Sunday the percentages of Texas joining OU in a move to the Pac-12 "are increasing. But a lot can change in seven or eight days."

Those things that could influence Texas' thought process are the pressure from lawmakers to hold the Big 12 together; ESPN's influence on the situation as the Tier 1 rights holder in the Big 12 and as the owner/operator of the Longhorn Network; and perhaps the appeal of another conference, the Texas source said.

A Texas source and an industry source say the Longhorn Network can be reworked to accommodate the Pac-12 and is not an obstacle for Texas to join that league. But sources say Texas has not indicated to ESPN that it plans to change conferences.

Legislative sources say Texas is telling them if Oklahoma leaves for the Pac-12, the Big 12 is dead and the Longhorns' best option would be to go with OU and join the Pac-12. Those legislative forces, however, are telling Texas to tell Oklahoma to slow down.

The pressure is mounting everywhere in this latest round of college realignment.

Stay tuned.

Teams the win half their games with an easy non-con.

To be honest Stewie I really don't know how many TV sets tune in to KU bball that aren't fans. I'm not that well versed in the demographics. If it were CBBall driving this change I think that would be a different matter.

Again I'm pretty much out of my element here ....

This is Texas! "We'll look and see, but if it doesn't make us the king of the conference....." There's no way in hell Texas goes to the PAC unless the PAC puts on the knee pads.

So basically you are using a somewhat invalid argument to say that KU would be more attractive than MU?

I could understand if you were saying that KU trumps K-State, ISU, Baylor, etc.....but MU offers more all around than KU.

Plus the Big 10 likes the MU academic status. In the case of the SEC, the academic status wouldn't really matter.

Plus...I can tell you that the SEC would have some members who are Basketball Powers who would want nothing to do with KU being in conference. (UK & FL)

I hope you are right, but I also hope Beebe and the Big XII powers that be get their heads on strait and start acting for the best interests of the conference as a whole and not just "what's best for Texas/OU/A&M".

http://www.statesman.com/sports/long...=rss_longhorns

I wonder why "Missouri's 'all-around'" didn't come first to his mind?

So ku should have no problem landing in one of the Big Ten, SEC, or PAC 12 given the huge basketball cash cow, right?

It would if there was no NCAA tournament. That is the biggest problem with basketball and why it is not a player in this. I have no idea why ppl cant understand this