Assuming that in 2012 the Big 12 is down to 5-6 teams and UT is either an independent or a part of the Pac-16 and given that you guys currently have money like the Golden Corral has carbs and high fructose corn syrup, is the LHN worth it? In a world where one of our two universities have played for the NC 4 times in the last 11 years, is being a part of a group of 16 going to increase that? I don't think so. I do believe that you could argue the affirmative on this question IF there is an 8 team playoff. Otherwise, I'm not so sure and I don't see the playoff coming anytime soon. The status quo is best for us both. But, I don't think that has much of a chance of happening. ESPN has some culpability here. They've gone from reporting the news to creating it. They let Craig James railroad Leach a year ago. Now, they're pulling the strings in a network that is leading to the largest conference shift since the Big 12 started, and possibly the largest ever. At what point is the LHN something to simply make pay per view and avoid it being a deal breaker to the current conference members or potential future conference members? Are other conferences mostly socialist in nature and share revenue equally? I assume that the Big "10" and the SEC do but I don't know that. I miss NU more than Aggy. And, the loss of the NU-OU rivalry proves that nothing is sacred in college football. So, OU-TX isn't a given in the future, as much as I want it to me.
What is wrong with me wanting to see every UT home baseball game on TV? I would also like to see our other non-revenue sports every now and then, in addition to behind-the-scenes information on football and basketball. If there is a demand for such programming, why can't other schools allow me to follow the Longhorns on TV?
Here's how I see it. 1) The Bill Powers that be aint giving up that LHN money. The only entity that can pull the plug on that puppy is ESPN. Whether Texas is indy or in a conference is secondary. I think even if there is a playoff there will be at least one at large slot and it may well be the easiest path. Texas will keep the OU game going in or out of conference but only so long as its no skin off their back. 2) OU needs that R3 game for recruiting worse than Texas needs it. Arkansas used to regularly get lots of quality north and east Texas recruits in the SWC; now its down to a trickle. OU can be replaced by another quality opponent. There are several top schools/programs that will play anybody anytime anywhere (LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Georgia, Ole Miss, USC, Oregon, BYU, Penn Sate, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Miami, FSU, Boise, TCU etc.). Can OU mitigate this by scheduling another marquee game in JerryWorld every year? Maybe, to some extent.
ou needs Texas more than Texas needs ou. The LHN is so bad that the PAC is allowing "in state networks" which involves two schools. So one school is bad and two schools is ok. Don't buy that logic. Right now every D-1 school can start their own network. It is penis envy on a nationwide scale.
Taking the Longhorn Network with us to the Pac-16 is my first choice, but if the Pac-16 is going to be such a stickler about the LHN, independence is starting to sound better and better. We'll be set in terms of media with ESPN in our corner, and we'll be able to schedule whoever we want whenever we want.
The right conference is the way to go. For Texas the right conference (in order of preference) is the PAC and the B1G. The PAC opens up the entire country west of the Mississippi to Texas recruiting which will negate any additional access that the SEC (not aggy) might gain in Texas. The upside to the B1G is one guaranteed win each year (Nebraska). The downside is Texas recruiting would become harder because the SEC and the PAC in addition to being stronger conferences, offer an exciting brand of football that the B1G cannot match. (Want to play at least twice in LA or at State College, PA?) However what is lost in all of this is that it has been made very clear that OSU and ou are a package deal. From an academic standpoint it is a less than desirable deal so something else must be added. That something else is Texas. ou puffing that they can walk away from Texas is true - they can walk away with OSU to the SEC. However the people in charge in Norman cringe at that thought as they have been trying to raise the academic level (would have said standards but they haven't reached standards level yet) and a move to the SEC would crater that effort. It is Texas that still holds the cards, and the bright lights in Austin are being very quite.
If we only consider Football, going independent makes sense. But the true value of being a member of a conference is found in scheduling all the other sports. I know that Football is the biggest money maker - but let's not diminish the importance of the other sports. We need to be in a conference, and one that is poised to become a super conference at that.
Ok.. Think too many of us are focusing on the wrong arguments. Ok... to start, this goes beyond football. The problem is that everyone is looking at this from a football only stand point because honestly thats all that matters to the majority. I for one don't know what the best scenario is. I like what the conference structure brings. You can build rivalry with any school. You have a predetermined schedule and you have in most instances an automatic birth to a top tier bowl. What happens to the other sports is what makes this decision complicated. Our Hoops program is now an elite program. Our baseball program is among the best in the nation. Swimming and diving is up there as well. These programs are affected by the conference alignment more so because they have more than just 12 scheduled events. I keep reading these dam alignment scenario posts because I am intrigued but I am becoming so tired of it. I say Texas just needs to sit back and let the other schools make their moves. If Texas is a 5 star blue chip prospect.. there will be a home somewhere that it chooses to be part of.
Big money only cares about the money. It is worth it for the small handful of people who actually control UT. They do not care about tradition. They are not sentimental. They care about the fans only to the extent that the Laffer Curve model (at some point marginal tax rates will result in lower revenue) analogy turns on them. They just made a decision to make it more costly to watch football and they have successfully gotten a large part of their constiuency to blame Time-Warner who had NOTHING to do with it. Now the academic side has been paid off so they will be quiet too... Yeah... as long as there is not some poison pill that ESPN can invoke to cancel the contract it will have been worth it. The insiders will pretend to care but they don't. They have been paid off.
The LHN wasn't created to televise one crappy football game a year. I trust that the guys at ESPN know what they are doing.
...but I'm not comfortable trusting ESPN. Independence is a possibility for the short term - while this crap settles out. Then we can pick our spot among the four confereces - after our network is established - whoever gives us the best deal. Longterm - independence is quite risky imo, mostly because of residual image issues.
