The Big 12 conference is a feudal organization/society. The way in which these societies are supposed to work is the subjects give to the master, and the master protects and, when necessary for the good of the fiefdom, provides for his subjects. The University of Texas is the lord and master of the Big 12 conference. The other nine members primarily work for its benefit. Unfortunately, UT is seen by most to have taken the role of "Robber Baron"; taxing his subjects without dispensing any benefit back to them. UT owns all the facilities, hired all the coaches, and recruits all the players it needs to be the best collegiate athletic program in the nation. The extra cash the new deal provides to them cannot have any additional tangible benefit to that athletic department. UT is well past the "point of diminishing returns" in revenue.
The Big 12 administration, on the other hand, has created a reserve fund using the exit penalty funds levied against the universities of Nebraska and Colorado to be distributed to the five schools in the most vulnerable collective position if the conference dissolved. This fund is to be used by current members whose athletic budgets are in crisis now, or in the future. This kind of concern for the conference's future should not go unnoticed by the UT. Indeed, this sort of investment should not be only copied, but amplified by Texas. This show of concern, IMO, would greatly improve the university's image to the public at large as the benefactor for the conference versus its image as the "greedy institution" it owns today. If the UT wants to rule a fiefdom, it should do so as a responsible, beneficent lord, not as a "Robber Baron."
The Big 12 administration, on the other hand, has created a reserve fund using the exit penalty funds levied against the universities of Nebraska and Colorado to be distributed to the five schools in the most vulnerable collective position if the conference dissolved. This fund is to be used by current members whose athletic budgets are in crisis now, or in the future. This kind of concern for the conference's future should not go unnoticed by the UT. Indeed, this sort of investment should not be only copied, but amplified by Texas. This show of concern, IMO, would greatly improve the university's image to the public at large as the benefactor for the conference versus its image as the "greedy institution" it owns today. If the UT wants to rule a fiefdom, it should do so as a responsible, beneficent lord, not as a "Robber Baron."
