http://www.burntorangenation.com/2013/7/12/4514440/conference-realignment-texas-longhorns
Dated article but it gives a lot of insight to what the Big 12 might be thinking in expansion. Even in 2013, UT was seeing the LHN as failure.
"It depends upon what Texas deemed to be important. If having de facto control over a power conference is what Texas desires over everything else, then the Big 12 is the only conference that can provide that (in which case, Texas fared very well in conference realignment)."
Which I think has been huge for the shorthorns.
"In terms of making the most TV money, though, I firmly believe that Texas would have made more as an equal member of the Pac-16, Big Ten or SEC. That $15 million per year for the Longhorn Network looks great on paper, but that's not taking into account the fact that a cut needs to go to Texas' media rights holder IMG and the rights fee is much lower in the initial years of the deal. The Big Ten Network is already distributing over $7 million per school with the risk being spread out over 12 (and soon to be 14) members -- just think of what that network would be worth with all of the households in the state of Texas added on top of that. The SEC made that same market-based calculation in choosing Texas A&M and Missouri for its expansion since it knew that it could leverage those states' households for a new network."
This looks like the door is open for a Big 12 network. The last sentence is slightly negative for UH since the Big 12 has a big state presence but the Houston market is valuable. Bringing the Big 12 network to Houston is just as important for the Texas schools as it is UH. It will make money for the Texas schools as well as UH since we will all get consistent Houston exposure.
"but it was contingent upon getting enough viable content (beyond football, a critical mass of men's basketball games is actually very important as shown by how the BTN eventually got carriage in the Big Ten footprint)."
This is why I think the UCONN rumor might have some weight. The exposure from basketball would be very good.
From the tone of the article I think OU is realizing what a failure the LHN has been and now is a good if not the best time to move forward with the Big 12 network. It was enlightening that the profit isn't as big as it looks once IMG takes it fees and those fees are rising. It makes me wonder if Texas is really resisting as we have heard or just trying to assert its weight as the big boy in conference so no one forgets that.
Dated article but it gives a lot of insight to what the Big 12 might be thinking in expansion. Even in 2013, UT was seeing the LHN as failure.
"It depends upon what Texas deemed to be important. If having de facto control over a power conference is what Texas desires over everything else, then the Big 12 is the only conference that can provide that (in which case, Texas fared very well in conference realignment)."
Which I think has been huge for the shorthorns.
"In terms of making the most TV money, though, I firmly believe that Texas would have made more as an equal member of the Pac-16, Big Ten or SEC. That $15 million per year for the Longhorn Network looks great on paper, but that's not taking into account the fact that a cut needs to go to Texas' media rights holder IMG and the rights fee is much lower in the initial years of the deal. The Big Ten Network is already distributing over $7 million per school with the risk being spread out over 12 (and soon to be 14) members -- just think of what that network would be worth with all of the households in the state of Texas added on top of that. The SEC made that same market-based calculation in choosing Texas A&M and Missouri for its expansion since it knew that it could leverage those states' households for a new network."
This looks like the door is open for a Big 12 network. The last sentence is slightly negative for UH since the Big 12 has a big state presence but the Houston market is valuable. Bringing the Big 12 network to Houston is just as important for the Texas schools as it is UH. It will make money for the Texas schools as well as UH since we will all get consistent Houston exposure.
"but it was contingent upon getting enough viable content (beyond football, a critical mass of men's basketball games is actually very important as shown by how the BTN eventually got carriage in the Big Ten footprint)."
This is why I think the UCONN rumor might have some weight. The exposure from basketball would be very good.
From the tone of the article I think OU is realizing what a failure the LHN has been and now is a good if not the best time to move forward with the Big 12 network. It was enlightening that the profit isn't as big as it looks once IMG takes it fees and those fees are rising. It makes me wonder if Texas is really resisting as we have heard or just trying to assert its weight as the big boy in conference so no one forgets that.
