Texas is greedy, and doesn't like to share. | Syracusefan.com

Texas is greedy, and doesn't like to share.


All Conference
Aug 16, 2011
Why would Texas willingly go to the Pac 16?

Right now they control their conference, and have their own network that will continue to bring them in a ton of money.

Going to the Pac 16 means equal revenue (goodbye controlling the conference), and sharing the Longhorn Network with Texas Tech (goodbye large stream of revenue going only to them).

Why would they choose this option?

No one is forcing them to go to the Pac 16. If they don't go, will the Pac 12 really take OU and OSU without them? Would the Pac 12 want to add 2 schools that likely won't up the overall financial take? Even if they Pac 12 took OU and OSU, what's to say that they wouldn't stop expansion right there, and wait until the next time Texas may want to jump ship?

If the Big 12 doesn't lose another team, and simply adds some combo of MWC and CUSA teams, the conf TV package probably stays where it is, and Texas continues to have their own network.

If the Big 12 loses OU and OSU, and no one else, will ESPN really reduce their TV contract? ESPN has shown they don't want to be seen as destroying conferences. If Texas can add good enough schools to the conference, I'd bet their TV contract wouldn't change drastically. Even if it did, Texas could still demand an even larger share of the conf TV dollars, and since 5 newcomers, plus Baylor, plus Tech would owe their life to Texas at that point, they'd probably get it.

The only moves that could really force Texas' hand, would be OU and OSU leaving, plus KU, KSU, and Mizzou heading somewhere else. Minus those 5 teams, the TV contract would change dramatically, likely to the point that Texas would take a clear financial hit.

At this point, there is no guarantee any of KU, KSU, and Mizzou will leave. I'm sure KU and KSU really don't want to join an eastern based conference. They will happily do so, if their hand is forced, but I think if they can salvage the big 12, they will. Mizzou will obviously leave given the chance, but it's not obvious that chance will come.

The Big 10 says they won't make a reactive move. They will likely sit back here, and only make moves if the world clearly shifts (meaning Texas heads west IMO). So Mizzou to the Big 10 isn't likely to happen. The SEC will obviously be grabbing someone, and Mizzou is somewhere on that list. So it's possible, but far from certain.

Even if Mizzou left, the conference may still be fine with Texas, KU, and KSU headlining it.

Clearly, there are a ton of scenarios out there, and anything is possible, but I don't see Texas making the first move to the Pac 12. Texas does not want to go, right now, there is no reason for them to go. We saw the same thing last summer. Texas nearly left, up until the point that they realized the Pac 16 really was an even deal across the board. And Texas is clearly not in the market of looking for even deals.

Regardless of everything that the fans talk about, a lot less than we think usually ends up happening. Put me in the camp of fewer moves happening, and Texas to the Pac 16 not being one of them. At least of their own volition.
I work with some heavy UT donors, and these guys seem to think that going to the Pac-10 isn't probable.
Texas's problem is that they got exactly what they wanted. And now everybody else in their conference realizes how much they were getting screwed, and all of Texas' foes with any brand value are leaving the conference. Seems like very few really want to be relegated to "Washington Generals" punching-bag status for the 'Horns. They can't have that sweetheart deal in the Pac-24, so I don't think that move's gonna happen. Texas and some number of dwarfs to be determined may remain and keep the Big 12 alive. H0w many years until Notre Dame's contract with NBC is up?

Forum statistics

Latest member

Online statistics

Members online
Guests online
Total visitors

Top Bottom