Texas' 20-year, $300 million deal with ESPN

**ChrisMWilliams** · 01-19-2011, 08:41 AM

Looks like the ball will drop today regarding the Longhorn Network...

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...exas-ESPN.aspx

**galactawitz** · 01-19-2011, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by ChrisMWilliams

Looks like the ball will drop today regarding the Longhorn Network...

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...exas-ESPN.aspx

Chris, how does this affect the contract situation for everyone else? Would ESPN then have the rights to Texas Football no matter what happens with the rest of the Big 12? Something like that would really lower the value of a Big 12 deal to a network if Texas wasn't involved wouldn't it?

**abcguyks** · 01-19-2011, 08:45 AM

Great - The rich get richer.

Do you suppose they will be strong supporters for revenue sharing amongst the balance of the conference?

**HFCS** · 01-19-2011, 08:45 AM

Reading those numbers... was the first time I truly believed Notre Dame is more likely to join the Big 12 (or full Big East membership) than the Big Ten.

**brentblum** · 01-19-2011, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by galactawitz

Chris, how does this affect the contract situation for everyone else? Would ESPN then have the rights to Texas Football no matter what happens with the rest of the Big 12? Something like that would really lower the value of a Big 12 deal to a network if Texas wasn't involved wouldn't it?

The odd part about this is it has almost nothing to do with football or men's basketball. Those will still be covered by the conference contract. This will cover the "non-revenue" generating sports and University programming. It won't have an effect on the Big 12 contract which is looking like it could be a big chunk of change. The recent Comcast/NBC merger will only help drive up the price for the new Big 12 contract.

**Wesley** · 01-19-2011, 08:48 AM

Looks like their non football teams have to now play better................

**Jonecy** · 01-19-2011, 08:49 AM

20 years!?.....that's surprising to me b/c a lot can happen in 20 years.

**State43** · 01-19-2011, 08:51 AM

Gag, I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

**HFCS** · 01-19-2011, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley

Looks like their non football teams have to now play better................

I gather their fans get into baseball, but the whole thing seems pretty odd when they can't produce decent crowds for basketball even when they have two ranked teams play each other. You need a dedicated network for a product that can't sell out a Big 12 arena? Is gymnastics or some other random sport packing them in since basketball is not?

The only angle I can really see this making sense for is the one or two football games they'll broadcast a year and all the football related shows they can produce. Also maybe having a lot of their baseball games. The other sports just do not make sense. It's already easy to watch any Big 12 team on TV in hoops and as I said their own fans don't like top 25 Texas Longhorns basketball much. The fact that Austin has about 15 times as many people as Ames clarifies it even more.

**HoopsTournament** · 01-19-2011, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by abcguyks

Great - The rich get richer.

Do you suppose they will be strong supporters for revenue sharing amongst the balance of the conference?

This is good for ISU for several reasons.

1. Texas is going nowhere. The Big 12 will be stable for a long time.
2. This is for third tier games. Big 12 contracts will still have first pick of games. This will not devalue Big 12 contract at all.
3. This additional money is not going to make Texas relatively more competitive in football and men's basketball. They already have great facilities and pay their coaches top salaries.
4. ISU can start their own network. We won't get $15m a year, but $2m a year would be big for us. The marginal return of every dollar is much greater for ISU than it is for Texas right now.

**brentblum** · 01-19-2011, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by HoopsTournament

This is good for ISU for several reasons.

1. Texas is going nowhere. The Big 12 will be stable for a long time.
2. This is for third tier games. Big 12 contracts will still have first pick of games. This will not devalue Big 12 contract at all.
3. This additional money is not going to make Texas relatively more competitive in football and men's basketball. They already have great facilities and pay their coaches top salaries.
4. ISU can start their own network. We won't get $15m a year, but $2m a year would be big for us. The marginal return of every dollar is much greater for ISU than it is for Texas right now.

Great post. Well said.

**cyclonepb** · 01-19-2011, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by ChrisMWilliams

Looks like the ball will drop today regarding the Longhorn Network...

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...exas-ESPN.aspx

My biggest question is how will this network be broadcast. Is it with the ESPN family of networks? On a sports tier? How many people will be forced to pay for it without ever wanting to watch it?

**crash_zone** · 01-19-2011, 09:00 AM

I'd love an ISU network - esp. if it could pick up the games that aren't currently on TV.

**ChrisMWilliams** · 01-19-2011, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by HoopsTournament

This is good for ISU for several reasons.

1. Texas is going nowhere. The Big 12 will be stable for a long time.
2. This is for third tier games. Big 12 contracts will still have first pick of games. This will not devalue Big 12 contract at all.
3. This additional money is not going to make Texas relatively more competitive in football and men's basketball. They already have great facilities and pay their coaches top salaries.
4. ISU can start their own network. We won't get $15m a year, but $2m a year would be big for us. The marginal return of every dollar is much greater for ISU than it is for Texas right now.

Solid post. I agree and disagree with a couple of points.

1 - I agree. This improves the stability of the Big 12 IMO. If Texas is happy, others will be happy.

2 - That's how I understand it as well.

3 - You nailed it. Who gives a crap if Texas makes an extra $15 million? The difference between Iowa State and Texas is already staggering. The two programs rarely recruit against each other in football. What are they going to do? Put gold-plated lockers in their football facility?

4 - Don't bank on ISU starting its own network. As I understand it, the resources simply aren't there. I'm not saying that this couldn't change in the future but I'd say as of now, this is a bit of a long shot.

**brett108** · 01-19-2011, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by ChrisMWilliams

Solid post. I agree and disagree with a couple of points.

1 - I agree. This improves the stability of the Big 12 IMO. If Texas is happy, others will be happy.

2 - That's how I understand it as well.

3 - You nailed it. Who gives a crap if Texas makes an extra $15 million? The difference between Iowa State and Texas is already staggering. The two programs rarely recruit against each other in football. What are they going to do? Put gold-plated lockers in their football facility?

4 - Don't bank on ISU starting its own network. As I understand it, the resources simply aren't there. I'm not saying that this couldn't change in the future but I'd say as of now, this is a bit of a long shot.

Could you see ISU having the ability to show more non-revenue sports on the web, through Clonezone or the like? I believe this is what T. Boone Pickens thought OSU would be doing. I know we do that to some extent now, but if I could see more wrestling and women's basketball and volleyball, plus get some lower level football and basketball games that don't get picked up, I would jump on it. Its hard to watch ISU in Texas.