Did anyone vote against this during the formation of the Big XII? I agree on the revenue sharing, but setting up a conference one way and then complaining about it later seems to fit every school.
Why does anyone care about LHN?
- Thread starter TedKumsher
- Start date
Did anyone vote against this during the formation of the Big XII? I agree on the revenue sharing, but setting up a conference one way and then complaining about it later seems to fit every school.
A huge recruiting advantage? They already had the best recruiting class in the country before LHN showed a damn thing. Is this network going to inject their recruits with steroids to make them so damn great that they'll go 6-6 instead of 5-7 this year?
UT would need to if they want conference games on their network. The other conference teams would be losing other third tier broadcast opportunities like ESPN3 if they show games on LHN. Hence the LHN needs to be competitive in attracting teams to show their games vs. UT on the LHN.
Like I said before, I don't really understand why it's a huge recruiting advantage. I would think other states' high schools athletes would consider it an advantage for Texas high schools' athletes because of the exposure. It's not like LHN is gonna go to a kid and tell them -- IF you sign with Texas we'll put your high school game on LHN. And once they sign with Texas -- then there's -- nothing more in it for them. Once they're at Texas, the LHN doesn't do much of anything for them.
Perhaps a year or 2 of "novelty" recruiting bump, but eventually it'll just be normal for Texas high school games. It'll likely get more high school games across the nation on TV in various ways.
Perhaps a year or 2 of "novelty" recruiting bump, but eventually it'll just be normal for Texas high school games. It'll likely get more high school games across the nation on TV in various ways.
It's not a huge issue to me. It's theirs, they created it and if they can make it fly, more power to them. I'm opposed to them showing conference football/basketball games on it; non-conference games and non-revenue sports I couldn't care less.
I do think if they are not going to truly share the revenue from it, however, they should at least pay some kind of fee to the schools that appear on the network. I mean, if they broadcast a swim meet that ISU is participating in, ISU is contributing to that content and should get something, no matter how small it is.
I do think if they are not going to truly share the revenue from it, however, they should at least pay some kind of fee to the schools that appear on the network. I mean, if they broadcast a swim meet that ISU is participating in, ISU is contributing to that content and should get something, no matter how small it is.
I did think of a reason finally. I don't think full games would be bad, but highlights and/or recruiting videos could produce leverage.
Isn't it available to only like 20 percent of the state? Does Austin even have it yet? I really hope none of the major carriers picks it up and ESPN takes a bath on this thing in the long run.
More like 5%. Not on Direct, Dish, or a MAJOR cable company. One or two very small cable companies and Verizon FIOS, which next to nobody can get.
Actually, I think ESPN being involved is a big part of the problem. ESPN doesn't want to take a bath on it, get it? They are a business and want to make money (profit) on their investment. Others have mentioned that they overpaid for these right and I'm not an expert in this area but that seems to be reasonable to me. So, how does ESPN maximize their profit on the LHN? Well, for starters they want to draw the largest audience they can. And how do they do that? Well, everybody loves a winner; if UT went undefeated and won the national championship every year that would draw lots of viewers. But that's not realistic; but what is realistic is for UT to get even better than they are. Lets say the lose 1-2 games every year and are ALWAYS ranked in the top 10, would that draw viewers? You bet it would. So how does ESPN ensure that UT stays in the top 10? By featuring the recruits they are after and helping UT gets the best recruits year after year, that's how.
So the way I and just about everyone else sees it, is that the LHN is about ensuring that the rich get richer. That agreement (LHN/ESPN) ensures that UT will dominate the B12 for years and years to come and that everybody else will find it very hard to compete. The boys at the top who are competing with UT for the top recruits are likely to be hurt the most and as we found out, those teams were the first to bail (or try and bail) before it kicked in. And yeah, ATM, OU, and to a lesser degree NEB competed in Texas for the best recruits while teams like ISU don't. I'm pretty sure that those teams realized that their odds of getting any of the best recruits out of Texas just went down the toilet.
I'm pretty sure that OU is going to set up their network to compete. And not by showing games. For every texas recruit that the LHN features, the OU Network will go into Texas and feature one of their own recruits and if they are recruiting the same kid they get featured twice ... gotta love that, now the kid gets 2 sports networks following them around spitting out highlight reels to a national TV audience. And people wonder where the spoiled, childish, multi-billionaire, professional athlete's come from? Some people already say that college athletes ought to get paid; we probably won't have to worry about that because these kids will be indoctrinated from age 14 to expect tons of money and attention. Next thing you know, there will be Texas High School Football union and the high school kids will go on strike if they don't get paid more (a share of the TV rights). Sorry maybe that's a bad analogy but the whole thing just stinks.
Last edited:
The reason that the Aggies are leaving is because with 300 million dollars you can BUY a lot of football players.... thats why people are concerned with the Longhorn Slush Fund er Network....
Of course the reason the Huskers went for greener pastures are too fold the Horns basically run the Texas Nine conference and the Huskers could only muster one win in ten tries against the Horns and that was on a Neutral Field....Thee Huskers could NOT ever BEAT the Horns in Lincoln and that was more than they could handle...
Of course the reason the Huskers went for greener pastures are too fold the Horns basically run the Texas Nine conference and the Huskers could only muster one win in ten tries against the Horns and that was on a Neutral Field....Thee Huskers could NOT ever BEAT the Horns in Lincoln and that was more than they could handle...
The issues I have with the ESPN-LHN are the following:
A. High school content. High school children, which is what they are - children, should be left alone. It's difficult for college kids, and professional athletes for that matter, to handle the pressure associated with fame, notariety, success. Highlighting children on the ESPN-LHN will likely have the impact of turning high school sports into even more of a business than it already is. Where does it stop. We already have ESPN televising the Little League World Series. What's next, the baby crawling championships? Let kids be kids. Let's not complicate our childrens' lives by setting them high on a pedastal before they are mature enough to handle it.
B. ESPN. The fact that ESPN has tier 1 rights to the XII and tier 3 rights to the ESPN-LHN is a HUGE conflict of interest. This could be alleviated if rules are put into place that prohibit ESPN-LHN from televising Big XII conference games. However, until that is in place, ESPN may gamble and pass on a tier 1 game, then get to show it on their ESPN-LHN (if it isn't picked up tier 2), and the rest of the conference would get no benefit from ESPN showing that game. Further, ESPN paid a steep price for LHN rights. So, to geta positive return on investment, Texas has to be really good. In order for Texas to be really good, they need the best athletes. Highlighting the best athletes on the ESPN-LHN helps this cause.
This is different from Iowa State and Leerfield Sports. Leerfield owns all Iowa State tier 3 rights. They broadcast games on 100.3 and KXNO. KXNO has highschool segments on various nights highlighting the best prep teams and athletes. However, I don't think anyone associated KXNO with Iowa State. In other words, when Joe Athlete is featured on the KXNO prep report, he doesn't automatically think "Sweet, I'm going to Iowa State because their network just highlighted me!" The ESPN-LHN and University of Texas on the other hand are synonymous with each other. That being said, it would be a bit hypocritical of me to say Texas shouldn't have high school content, but it's okay for Leerfield sports to.
I have no issue with not sharing tier 3 money. Every school for themselves with tier 3 as far as I'm concerned. That allows schools with more success to reap more benefits. However, this assumes that individual schools aren't showing high school content and/or other Big XII content on their own network. If either is allowed, then tier 3 money should be shared and individual networks should be labeled Big XII productions without any monikers, trademarks, etc. of the individual networks when showing Big XII games.
A. High school content. High school children, which is what they are - children, should be left alone. It's difficult for college kids, and professional athletes for that matter, to handle the pressure associated with fame, notariety, success. Highlighting children on the ESPN-LHN will likely have the impact of turning high school sports into even more of a business than it already is. Where does it stop. We already have ESPN televising the Little League World Series. What's next, the baby crawling championships? Let kids be kids. Let's not complicate our childrens' lives by setting them high on a pedastal before they are mature enough to handle it.
B. ESPN. The fact that ESPN has tier 1 rights to the XII and tier 3 rights to the ESPN-LHN is a HUGE conflict of interest. This could be alleviated if rules are put into place that prohibit ESPN-LHN from televising Big XII conference games. However, until that is in place, ESPN may gamble and pass on a tier 1 game, then get to show it on their ESPN-LHN (if it isn't picked up tier 2), and the rest of the conference would get no benefit from ESPN showing that game. Further, ESPN paid a steep price for LHN rights. So, to geta positive return on investment, Texas has to be really good. In order for Texas to be really good, they need the best athletes. Highlighting the best athletes on the ESPN-LHN helps this cause.
This is different from Iowa State and Leerfield Sports. Leerfield owns all Iowa State tier 3 rights. They broadcast games on 100.3 and KXNO. KXNO has highschool segments on various nights highlighting the best prep teams and athletes. However, I don't think anyone associated KXNO with Iowa State. In other words, when Joe Athlete is featured on the KXNO prep report, he doesn't automatically think "Sweet, I'm going to Iowa State because their network just highlighted me!" The ESPN-LHN and University of Texas on the other hand are synonymous with each other. That being said, it would be a bit hypocritical of me to say Texas shouldn't have high school content, but it's okay for Leerfield sports to.
I have no issue with not sharing tier 3 money. Every school for themselves with tier 3 as far as I'm concerned. That allows schools with more success to reap more benefits. However, this assumes that individual schools aren't showing high school content and/or other Big XII content on their own network. If either is allowed, then tier 3 money should be shared and individual networks should be labeled Big XII productions without any monikers, trademarks, etc. of the individual networks when showing Big XII games.
Last edited:
If A&M is worried about teams buying players they certainly chose an odd conference to move to.
No kidding.
School: "Hey top recruit you want to be on our network?"
Top Recruit: "Aw, hell ya that would be cool."
School: "We can set it up; are you thinking about committing?"
Top Recruit: "Where's my cash? LSU, AU, etc. has offer $$$. What's your best offer?"
From Baylor forums:
Baylor fighting with Aggy.
Source: Crucial Big 12 vote fell short last spring
Conference realignment and Longhorn Network timeline.
Conference realignment and Longhorn Network timeline « ESPN Front Row
Also NOTE: Kansas is also broadcasting the UT/KU game on their station.
http://www.kuathletics.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/090211aaa.html
Last edited:
