Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Football' started by ChrisMWilliams, Jul 25, 2011.
Big 12 coaches comment on Longhorn Network | Cyclone Fanatic
Mack Brown is generally a straight shooter but he has been brainwashed by ESPN and the LHN folks.
While he is correct that he has 20 to 25 committed players when fall rolls around, there are 4 times that number of underclassmen that are still in the process of being actively recruited by UT and other programs.
And while UT may not be active in selecting HS games to be televised and not actively involved in the telecast, it is foolish for him to claim UT will have nothing to do with those telecasts on a branded LHN and that other B12 programs will greatly benefit. ESPN needs to telecast those games on ESPNU or create ESPNHS.
Hopefully, the NCAA will listen to Gary Pinkel and apply common sense on this matter.
How is Art Briles line of thinking refreshing? I hope the ncaa winds up agreeing with Pinkel on this matter.
First, and probably last, time I'll ever say this: I hope Pinkel is right.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if the NCAA agrees with Texas based on some of their other recent decisions...
It's refreshing because he isn't saying the same thing as everybody else.
We saw the real Mack Brown when Texas starting going into the tank last year. Even blamed his wife.
First class whiner.
If someone could enlighten me on how it gives Texas a big advantage... I'm assuming the Texas recruiters don't go to the games to record for the Network.. how does it give them a huge advantage... or are the other schools not aloud to watch that channel?
Or is it just that Texas kids who got to play on that channel before would want to play there more at the college level? Because I'm assuming most Texas kids want to play for Texas regardless.
And I'm being completely serious when I said someone enlighten me.. because I'm most likely missing or overlooking something.
I'm baffled by it, too. Texas kids do grow up wanting to play for Texas. UT already knows who the good ones are, and they're a top player as soon as they make one phone call anyway.
I agree with you, its not like these kids don't know anything about Texas, or that Texas doesn't hand pick the in-state kids they want anyway. It's just another channel on TV, this is just being blown out of proportion because everyone has this compulsion to not want anything that Texas thinks is good for themselves.
Briles: We are going to take whatever situation comes at us and make ourselves better.
Pinkel: May I please have some more cheese to go along with my whine?
Yup. Nailed it.
This has nothing to do with any tangible benefit gain, and everything to do with pride.
I don't see it that way. I think Mizzou has an inflated opinion of itself. It perceives that it has options. In their mind they don't have to put up with UT's **** because the SEC and the Big 10 are just a phone call away.
Baylor knows better. They know the only thing keeping them from obscurity is being tied at the hip to UT. They're just along for the ride.
I think both coaches' comments represent the self-image that each school has of its opportunities.
In which case, it is refreshing to hear from somebody who has a grip on reality.
This is correct.
I agree with Briles. Quit whining and deal with it. I don't see it being much of a recruiting advantage at all?
Basically NOBODY competes with Texas for the top kids in Texas. They get who they want pretty much. But they can only take between 20-25 of the best kids each year, that leaves WAY more than enough great players for everyone else.
I don't see what playing on the LHN does to make a kid want to go to Texas? Let's say a HS kid is an OU fan and plans on going there. What does putting his HS game on the LHN do to persuade him to go to Texas over OU?
And ISU and Missouri don't even come close to competing for the recruits in Texas that Texas goes after.
I'm told A&M and Baylor refused to talk to Longhorn Network at Big 12 Media Day.
I think that the assumption is that if a kid signs with tx, then as a reward they will start being on tv for some of their hs games. If they don't, tx will have input to say, "nah lets put another kids hs on tv this week."
Thus Texas has control of a reward for kids who say yes to tx. and no to other schools.
Its speaking to the unfairness as a reward/compensation tool, not as an evaluation tool.
Practically speaking, after you've signed with UT, or for that matter, have offers from good schools, how much of a "reward" is getting on TV? What more can getting your HS game on TV do for you? It seems to me that it would be far more "rewarding" or beneficial for those who need offers or want to get offers from better schools.
This is not so much about recruting advantages as it is about a long-standing policy: Colleges cannot publicly comment on recruits until they are signed.
What started this latest ruckus were the public comments of Dave Brown from ESPN/LHN who stated the LHN intended to televise the games this fall of two unsigned committed recruits, Jonathan Gray and Conner Brewer. Those two will not sign until Signing Day next February or March. The LHN is an institutional network of UT and should not be televising or commenting on unsigned recruits of UT.
Also, too many here are downplaying the recruiting advantages. What if there is an uncommitted hotshot QB that UT is recruiting along with A&M and OU who is now a junior and the LHN approaches the kid or school about televising one or two of his games on the LONGHORN Network and pays the school a huge sum to do so. That is a definitely a recruiting advantage as long as A&M and OU don't have a network or monetary resources like UT's.
Bottom line is this, institutional networks should not be televising HS sports of any kind whether it is the LHN, Aggie Network, CTN, BTN or the new P12 network. ESPN has other avenues like ESPNU to televise HS sports without opening up a huge can of worms for the NCAA. In Iowa, leave HS games to Mediacom not some ISU network. It's a no brainer IMO.