(05-11-2015 06:42 PM)blue68 Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 05:21 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 11:53 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 08:47 PM)cleveland2854 Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 05:37 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  When the SEC took a&am their big fish was the horns. The SEC will eventually strong arm Texas & OU into joining forces with them.

The SEC wanted TExas and OU. Now, I don't think Texas has an invitation. Texas adds Austin and more of San Antonio. The SEC wants a more Eastern influence. If the SEC has to add, it will come from NC State, OU, Cinncy, and Va Tech.

The SEC will invite Cincy the day after they invite Memphis. Virginia and UNC are the two they probably want the most.

1) Texas
2) UNC
3) Virginia
4) NC State
5) Virginia Tech
6) Florida State

I don't think the $EC really wants OU. It's like adding another South Carolina, but smaller with a great football program. OU has a national following, but does the $EC need that as much as big TV markets?

I don't think the SEC wants Texas. They have A&M. The SEC is looking east to expand. Missouri was told they would be placed in the eastern division temporarily when they joined. Once the SEC picks up two eastern teams, Missouri will be in the west division.

Texas has ten million more people than Virginia and North Carolina combined. If you think they'd bring in UVa or UNC before Texas because they have TAMU and those schools are out east, you are kidding yourself.

ACC wants Texas. B1G wants Texas. Pac-12 wants Texas. $EC wants Texas. Texas is on a different level of money, influence, and sports significance. That's not to mention the strength of UT's academics. Don't think TAMU is anywhere near what Texas is.

(05-10-2015 03:15 PM)blue68 Wrote:  SEC Network unreal revenue.


http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...rks-050715

(05-11-2015 02:14 PM)thagr82008 Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 11:00 AM)99Tiger Wrote:  I'm guessing those who seem to think the SEC will somehow allow TAMU to supplant UT haven't been in Texas on much more than an overnight stay. That state bleeds burnt orange...there's a smaller contingent of TAMU diehards in Houston, but that state is orange (unfortunately, much like ours).

When Texas is back to winning, it won't matter who they're playing. UT-LA Tech would be as popular (or more) as TAMU-LSU in that state.

This whole thread has very little to do with the state of Texas and more about National and Regional appeal and revenue earning and interest across the board......The SEC drubs BIGXII in this category and nationally/regionally the AGS are the better tix.......PERIOD....No one outside of TX/OK cares about a Red River

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(05-11-2015 07:33 PM)99Tiger Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 05:06 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 08:47 PM)cleveland2854 Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 05:37 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  When the SEC took a&am their big fish was the horns. The SEC will eventually strong arm Texas & OU into joining forces with them.

The SEC wanted TExas and OU. Now, I don't think Texas has an invitation. Texas adds Austin and more of San Antonio. The SEC wants a more Eastern influence. If the SEC has to add, it will come from NC State, OU, Cinncy, and Va Tech.

What?

That's like saying.... The Grizzlies don't want Lebron. They already have Jeff Green so they are looking for someone at shooting guard.

Errrrbody wants the University of Texas.

For a school who is "down" they're certainly doing alright...

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

This is about a paradigm shift....The popular entity is A&M! The excitement level and popularity of their games /matchups is increasing EXPONENTIALLY! It's NOT personal, It's business....And it's way passed a Red River Rivalry

4.The SEC Network is nearly worth the same amount as the NBA, NHL, and MLB's Networks combined.

"Those three bring in $565 million a year, the SEC Network brings in $541 million."

"The SEC dwarfs the Big Ten Network, producing nearly twice the subscriber revenue."

"Most still haven't realized how successful the SEC Network is. Just wait until these revenue distributions start to roll out to the individual schools. The SEC Network is a total game changer. It went from not existing nine months ago to the fifth most valuable sports network in the country in less than a year."

Why are you so keen on kissing the SEC's ass? SEC > B12 (for now), but TAMU < UT (forever).

(05-11-2015 09:56 PM)99Tiger Wrote:  Why are you so keen on kissing the SEC's ass? SEC > B12 (for now), but TAMU < UT (forever).

Is that like Virginia and Virginia Tech?

Or like Kentucky and Louisville?

Texas is in a precarious position and they seem to be incapable of acting.

Must be rough being #1 in income

(05-11-2015 10:51 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 09:56 PM)99Tiger Wrote:  Why are you so keen on kissing the SEC's ass? SEC > B12 (for now), but TAMU < UT (forever).

Is that like Virginia and Virginia Tech?

Or like Kentucky and Louisville?

Texas is in a precarious position and they seem to be incapable of acting.

UVA (the team I grew up cheering for) and Kentucky have never been in the same league (and I'm not talking conferences) as Texas. They're trying to right the ship and still pulling $20M a year over anyone else.

(05-11-2015 09:47 PM)thagr82008 Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 03:15 PM)blue68 Wrote:  SEC Network unreal revenue.


http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...rks-050715

(05-11-2015 02:14 PM)thagr82008 Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 11:00 AM)99Tiger Wrote:  I'm guessing those who seem to think the SEC will somehow allow TAMU to supplant UT haven't been in Texas on much more than an overnight stay. That state bleeds burnt orange...there's a smaller contingent of TAMU diehards in Houston, but that state is orange (unfortunately, much like ours).

When Texas is back to winning, it won't matter who they're playing. UT-LA Tech would be as popular (or more) as TAMU-LSU in that state.

This whole thread has very little to do with the state of Texas and more about National and Regional appeal and revenue earning and interest across the board......The SEC drubs BIGXII in this category and nationally/regionally the AGS are the better tix.......PERIOD....No one outside of TX/OK cares about a Red River

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(05-11-2015 07:33 PM)99Tiger Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 05:06 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 08:47 PM)cleveland2854 Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 05:37 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  When the SEC took a&am their big fish was the horns. The SEC will eventually strong arm Texas & OU into joining forces with them.

The SEC wanted TExas and OU. Now, I don't think Texas has an invitation. Texas adds Austin and more of San Antonio. The SEC wants a more Eastern influence. If the SEC has to add, it will come from NC State, OU, Cinncy, and Va Tech.

What?

That's like saying.... The Grizzlies don't want Lebron. They already have Jeff Green so they are looking for someone at shooting guard.

Errrrbody wants the University of Texas.

For a school who is "down" they're certainly doing alright...

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

This is about a paradigm shift....The popular entity is A&M! The excitement level and popularity of their games /matchups is increasing EXPONENTIALLY! It's NOT personal, It's business....And it's way passed a Red River Rivalry

4.The SEC Network is nearly worth the same amount as the NBA, NHL, and MLB's Networks combined.

"Those three bring in $565 million a year, the SEC Network brings in $541 million."

"The SEC dwarfs the Big Ten Network, producing nearly twice the subscriber revenue."

"Most still haven't realized how successful the SEC Network is. Just wait until these revenue distributions start to roll out to the individual schools. The SEC Network is a total game changer. It went from not existing nine months ago to the fifth most valuable sports network in the country in less than a year."

$EC network will be a cash cow. But half of the revenue will go to ESPN. If NBA TV could charge $1.40 per subscriber like ESPN set $EC Network to do in the $EC states, its revenue would be greater.

Texas will always be ahead of A and M, but not in any huge way. Must like Alabama is ahead of Auburn...but not that big historically.

We can safely argument about the stuff that *might happen* but I think we all have to agree on what *has happened* -- and that's Texas A@M's move to the SEC couldn't have worked out better for them --- and their new 'relationship' with Texas is much improved in AM's favor.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...tle-051115

...According to SNL Kagan, the Longhorn Network now has 6.5 million in-state subscribers paying an average rate of .29 a month. Based on SNL's numbers, that means in 2015 the Longhorn Network will bring in $22.6 million in revenue from those 6.5 million subscribers in Texas. ESPN doesn't comment on particular revenue numbers for channels, but ESPN says the LHN actually has 20 million subscribers. That's a big difference in subscriber numbers, but when you parse the difference between those subscriber numbers, the revenue isn't much different. That's because, according to SNL Kagan, all of the national subscribers outside the state of Texas -- that's roughly 13.5 million subscribers -- are paying $0.02 a month, or $0.24 a year, for the Longhorn Network. Those 13.5 million subscribers would add just $3.2 million more a year in revenue, meaning after four years the Longhorn Network is still just doing $25.8 million a year in revenue.

Given that ESPN has guaranteed Texas in the neighborhood of $15 million a year and the costs to launch and run the network were substantial, this also means ESPN has lost money every year the Longhorn Network has existed. Those losses likely run into the tens of millions of dollars so far....

... And here's the craziest fact of all: If the Longhorn Network hadn't existed, then the SEC Network wouldn't have existed either. Without Texas A&M leaving for the SEC, the SEC's own network wasn't lucrative enough to undertake. It was the eight million cable and satellite subscribers in Texas that made the SEC Network financially viable. Here's some simple math for you: Every major cable and satellite subscriber in Texas pays around $16.80 a year for the SEC Network. Every major cable and satellite subscriber in Texas -- except for those with Comcast, which doesn't carry it -- pays $3.48 for the Longhorn Network. So right now in Texas, the only state paying more than a quarter a year for the Longhorn Network, the SEC Network makes nearly five times as much every month. (Nationwide the SEC Network, on pace to do nearly $550 million in revenue this year, makes nearly 22 times as much money a month as the Longhorn Network.)

This means the Longhorn Network, launched to strengthen Texas' competitive stature for a generation to come, actually strengthened its rivals more than it did Texas.

Toss in the fact that TCU is now a member of the Big 12 -- slicing into the recruiting base of Texas --...

Yet Texas still makes more money than everyone else. Financially, their model is working. The Longhorn Network's might not but in the short term that is ESPNs problem. Not UT.

(05-10-2015 12:33 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 12:30 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  That's like asking does a Big Foot **** in the woods.

Never. They always use bathrooms.

They use the port-o-potties at Memphis in May. I must be hot on the trail of bigfoot because I almost always pick the same one shortly after he has deposited.

The folks who have "changed to A&M" are not loyal fans, they will change back just as fast once Texas is back. There is nothing wrong with the Texas Brand. A&M in the SEC will not change this. Period

(05-12-2015 09:03 PM)memphomike Wrote:  The folks who have "changed to A&M" are not loyal fans, they will change back just as fast once Texas is back. There is nothing wrong with the Texas Brand. A&M in the SEC will not change this. Period

Everything in life "ends" with a semicolon.

(05-12-2015 09:13 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 09:03 PM)memphomike Wrote:  The folks who have "changed to A&M" are not loyal fans, they will change back just as fast once Texas is back. There is nothing wrong with the Texas Brand. A&M in the SEC will not change this. Period

Everything in life "ends" with a semicolon;

FYP;

(05-12-2015 09:11 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  ..... ESPN has lost money every year the Longhorn Network has existed. Those losses likely run into the tens of millions of dollars so far....

Interesting. Seems to me that both ESPN and all the other Big 12 schools would be far better off creating a Big 12 network even if it meant losing Texas to another conference. Can they not see that as soon as Texas finishes strip-mining the conference they are likely leave anyway? A conference network would create a need for new TV markets such as Memphis and Cincinnati.

(05-13-2015 11:09 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 09:11 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  ..... ESPN has lost money every year the Longhorn Network has existed. Those losses likely run into the tens of millions of dollars so far....

Interesting. Seems to me that both ESPN and all the other Big 12 schools would be far better off creating a Big 12 network even if it meant losing Texas to another conference. Can they not see that as soon as Texas finishes strip-mining the conference they are likely leave anyway? A conference network would create a need for new TV markets such as Memphis and Cincinnati.

Oh yea! It will be gr8 once this does unfold....all the remaining schools will get their fair share, and espn can begin to see profits......works gr8 for both as we also will see some cataclysmic sports live as well as programming. .....#cantwait

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(05-13-2015 11:09 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 09:11 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  ..... ESPN has lost money every year the Longhorn Network has existed. Those losses likely run into the tens of millions of dollars so far....

Interesting. Seems to me that both ESPN and all the other Big 12 schools would be far better off creating a Big 12 network even if it meant losing Texas to another conference. Can they not see that as soon as Texas finishes strip-mining the conference they are likely leave anyway? A conference network would create a need for new TV markets such as Memphis and Cincinnati.

This is completely untrue. Each school is getting $23 million, with a large chunk of it due to Texas' presence in the conference. Without Texas, the conference is probably halfway between the AAC and the ACC; which would net it somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million per team, if that. Also, if Texas leaves that would open the door for the Big 12 to have Oklahoma poached.

(05-13-2015 12:48 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-13-2015 11:09 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 09:11 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  ..... ESPN has lost money every year the Longhorn Network has existed. Those losses likely run into the tens of millions of dollars so far....

Interesting. Seems to me that both ESPN and all the other Big 12 schools would be far better off creating a Big 12 network even if it meant losing Texas to another conference. Can they not see that as soon as Texas finishes strip-mining the conference they are likely leave anyway? A conference network would create a need for new TV markets such as Memphis and Cincinnati.

This is completely untrue. Each school is getting $23 million, with a large chunk of it due to Texas' presence in the conference. Without Texas, the conference is probably halfway between the AAC and the ACC; which would net it somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million per team, if that. Also, if Texas leaves that would open the door for the Big 12 to have Oklahoma poached.

Exactly. If Texas leaves then not only does the Big XII lose it's most valuable program it most likely loses someone else, like OU, and the Big XII can't keep losing their big names - the conference is shaky already. I say that if UT and OU leave the conference could disband entirely.

If somehow the conference had lost Texas instead of, say, Colorado as one of the first schools to go the Big XII could have survived the loss - they may have been able to keep TAMU, a school as big as it's in-state sister school, brought in TCU to keep the conference at 12 schools, or perhaps brought in an outside school like a BYU or Memphis to continue to try to grow markets, and then possibly restructured the Tiered payout system that is killing morale. But no, UT is deadset on keeping all the money, even if it means not growing, or even lessening, the pot.

(05-13-2015 02:57 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(05-13-2015 12:48 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-13-2015 11:09 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 09:11 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  ..... ESPN has lost money every year the Longhorn Network has existed. Those losses likely run into the tens of millions of dollars so far....

Interesting. Seems to me that both ESPN and all the other Big 12 schools would be far better off creating a Big 12 network even if it meant losing Texas to another conference. Can they not see that as soon as Texas finishes strip-mining the conference they are likely leave anyway? A conference network would create a need for new TV markets such as Memphis and Cincinnati.

This is completely untrue. Each school is getting $23 million, with a large chunk of it due to Texas' presence in the conference. Without Texas, the conference is probably halfway between the AAC and the ACC; which would net it somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million per team, if that. Also, if Texas leaves that would open the door for the Big 12 to have Oklahoma poached.

Exactly. If Texas leaves then not only does the Big XII lose it's most valuable program it most likely loses someone else, like OU, and the Big XII can't keep losing their big names - the conference is shaky already. I say that if UT and OU leave the conference could disband entirely.

If somehow the conference had lost Texas instead of, say, Colorado as one of the first schools to go the Big XII could have survived the loss - they may have been able to keep TAMU, a school as big as it's in-state sister school, brought in TCU to keep the conference at 12 schools, or perhaps brought in an outside school like a BYU or Memphis to continue to try to grow markets, and then possibly restructured the Tiered payout system that is killing morale. But no, UT is deadset on keeping all the money, even if it means not growing, or even lessening, the pot.

Each school does NOT get equal share of $23 mil! If you believe that,then you believe that JP will get us to an E8

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App