Message from Dave..... Moderator Approval

Don't panic if your post doesn't appear immediately.

× Rock Chalk Talk: Basketball

Anything pertaining to basketball: college, pro, HS, recruiting, TV coverage

Not certain where to put this as it has impact on...

5 years 3 months ago #1785 by Kong
All things Big XII


It appears he wants to strike while UT is a bit down in hopes to create a lasting Big XII.

Expansion to 12 teams, a true Big XII network that would require the LHN to fold, and a championship game.

If the Big XII network could come to an agreement to fold the LHN in as part of it, that would go a long way to securing the Big XII's future. It would also provide a model for BYU to join as they would/could fold their network in as well expanding their footprint.


Visualize Whirled Peas

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Share this page:


5 years 3 months ago #1792 by NotOstertag
As a kid, I grew up with the conferences essentially being set in stone. The Big 8 had 8 teams that were geographically linked. The Big 10 and Pac 10 actually had ten teams as well.

Now it's become a mess and detracts from the history of every league that's blown itself up. While I think WVU is an asset to the Big 12's 10 teams (rolling my eyes), it's a ridiculous geographic nightmare to deal with. Basketball and Football get to fly, but I pity non-revenue sports that probably have to deal with 20+ hours on busses each way to compete. It's certainly worse for them since they dont' have a K-State, or ISU that's just a couple hours away.

So now it looks like it's becoming a "necessity" to have a league TV network. I suppose it's a sign of the times, but there will likely be unintended consequences. Running a TV network is a business, and like any business, it can succeed or fail. TV networks die off all the time, and usually take a lot of money with them on their way out. I get the Big 10 network here in New York, and while New York is geographically close to the core of Big 10 country, I guess it does well enough to survive. With that, however, I think some of the bigger Big 10 schools draw more out of state students, and disperse more students more widely after they graduate. You can't swing a dead cat in most major metro areas without hitting a Michigan grad it seems (figure of speech, don't try this). I'm not sure you can say the same about the Big 12. Frankly, I wonder if they'd draw much in the way of ratings in areas beyond the Big 12 footprint.

The other problem is Texas. In terms of money and influence, Texas is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Yes, they're down sports-wise somewhat right now, but that will inevitably change. If they don't want to give up their network, the Big 12 will be in for a fight that could eventually boil down to "leave our network alone, don't start yours, or we'll take our show elsewhere." Not sure that the Big 12 has the cahones or the desire to call their bluff.

In the end, I don't envy the Big 12 commissioners with how difficult it has become to hold a conference together. I'm all for picking up 2 more teams, as long as they're the right ones and that they're geographically relevant to us. The only downside I can see is that with basketball, we play a true 2-game home/away schedule with every team in the league. Going back to 12 takes us back to a 2 division conference and arguments that if you beat somebody from the other division on your home court, that unfairly benefit.

In the end, the fans have lost this war. While I despise Missouri, we lost a great rivalry there. Ditto with Nebraska, and I liked having Colorado in the league as well. Now, the foundations that the conferences sit on are quicksand, and we could go from being in a top conference in the Big 12 one year, to going begging for a home the next. That's not good for anybody.

STILL more conference championships than home losses

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

5 years 3 months ago #1794 by Bayhawk
Well stated and oh-so true. Exactly how I feel for anybody keeping score.

Thanks for the great post, ominous as it may be,


The end is nothing; the road is all.
-- Jules Michelet
The following user(s) said Thank You: NotOstertag

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

5 years 3 months ago #1795 by Illhawk
The problem with expansion is that all of the good ones are taken. UConn would be a horrid bus ride for volleyball or swimming. It might be nice to find West Virginia another team east of the Mississippi. I understand Louisville( with a high profile basketball program) was very interested, but the Big XII was looking for AAU members or at least "flagships." Cincinnati is close to Morgantown and Ohio has a lot of TVs. Memphis isn't that far from the Oklahoma schools.

BYU has a well known football program and may fit as well as anybody, though apparently Utah won't play them in some sports?

We already have much of the old SWC. I suspect SMU and Houston, which joined toward the end , would probably be thrilled to talk to the Big XII. I understand UT ( and probably Baylor, TT and TCU) feel like four teams from one state is enough.

The Longhorn network has one benefit; it works as a poison pill to curb the enthusiasm of the Big Ten and Pac 12 for taking a run at Bevo.

If things unravel with the Big XII I hope and think it likely our basketball program gets us a decent landing somewhere. I doubt I am the only one who suspects apprehension about having a very poor football program during the shuffling lead to the desperation hire of FHCCW. Now we are staying the course, taking a long run view as it seems our conference is as well.

Once UT gets good in both revenue sports will be the time to gauge their network. That seems likely soon, possibly next school year. If ESPN is still taking a beating they may want to rework that deal. It seems that a Big XII network that would rerun 109-106 and have live OSU-ISU wrestling and KU womens track would have interest in much of the central time zone.

My DISH package includes the Big Ten, Longhorn and Pac Twelve , and SEC Networks. Aside from watching football games live rarely tune in to any of them. But I like having the options.

I don't really have a conclusion on these points, but who does?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

5 years 3 months ago #1798 by NotOstertag
The other thing to think about is how the world of TV is evolving. People are cutting their cable/dish subscriptions and streaming more and more, making actual real "networks" somewhat superfluous. I watch some KU games streaming, and whether it's through my chromecast, or hooking my laptop directly to the big screen, there's almost zero compromise in quality. It's quite possible that in 10 years, KU will have its own "KU network" that's 100% online, and where they can bypass paying ESPN for some games.

Again, not really driving at any point here, there are a couple things afoot here. There's the whole conference stability discussion which is kind of scary. Then there's the TV network discussion and they're not necessarily 100% related.

STILL more conference championships than home losses

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

5 years 3 months ago #1806 by hairyhawk
I think you make a very good point. The entertainment models are changing rapidly. How traditional networks fit into it is not really certain. Someone still needs to produce the content and make it available and that has costs. How does it get paid for if not with a network selling commercials. The rate of change is accelerating and how it will shake out is not known. I think we will definitely see more content over the internet and every network will at least have an option to watch their material over the internet not just traditional broadcast methods. How will that change who does what and who gets what is a tough question. It definitely plays into this equation for the Bevo channel or Big XII network.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Powered by Kunena Forum