A Big 12 Cable Network in the Works?

**drednot57** · 08-22-2010, 02:30 AM

According to DM Register Staff Blog -- yes.

ISU vs. AP Top 10, and talk of a Big 12 TV Network | Des Moines Register Staff Blogs

According to the article cited in the blog, Learfield Sports looks to be the TV partner for the network.

**gondozors** · 08-22-2010, 07:49 AM

Sounds positive!

**cygrads** · 08-22-2010, 08:45 AM

The two schools not part of Learfield (KU & BU) should figure out a way to join the 7 schools (OU, OSU, TTU, TAM, Miz, KSU & ISU) and get this done. TX will never join in this effort and as time goes on I think TX is going independent and the rest of the conference needs to be prepared to keep the conference together (not that it will work).

**mganzeveld** · 08-22-2010, 09:25 AM

Too bad we couldn't just keep OU, OSU, TTU, TAM, Miz, KSU, and ISU then find one more and just be the Big 8 again. I am all excited about Learfield Sports picking up the Big 12 but it will probably take 2 years for Mediacom to negotiate and another year to add it to their channel listing.

**iowast8fan** · 08-22-2010, 09:38 AM

If this is just cable, it would really screw over the other fans who have satellite like me.

**RedBlooded** · 08-22-2010, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by iowast8fan

If this is just cable, it would really screw over the other fans who have satellite like me.

thats what i was thinking.

**JD720** · 08-22-2010, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by iowast8fan

If this is just cable, it would really screw over the other fans who have satellite like me.

It wouldn't be exclusive to cable. It would likely be available for any cable or satellite company to add to their lineup.

I'm not sure if there is a better term, but I think people say "cable channel" when referring to a channel not available for free over the air.

**iowast8fan** · 08-22-2010, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by JD720

It wouldn't be exclusive to cable. It would likely be available for any cable or satellite company to add to their lineup.

Do you know this, or are you just assuming?

**IcSyU** · 08-22-2010, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by iowast8fan

Do you know this, or are you just assuming?

Give me one good reason they'd limit it to cable? You lose your potential viewership from DirecTV and Dish, etc. The Big 10 Network is a "cable channel" for most people, but nearly everyone has access to it.

**clonedude** · 08-22-2010, 11:49 AM

Hey, that sounds like a great new name for the conference... The Top 10 Conference. Whaddya think?

Although, I think they should get away from having a number associated with the name in case of expansion in the future.

**cykadelic2** · 08-22-2010, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by drednot57

According to DM Register Staff Blog -- yes.

ISU vs. AP Top 10, and talk of a Big 12 TV Network | Des Moines Register Staff Blogs

According to the article cited in the blog, Learfield Sports looks to be the TV partner for the network.

I would suggest not reading too much into this. Learfield is the entity that holds/manages media rights for 7 of the 10 schools in the B12. Other companies do likewise for KU, Baylor, and Texas. I doubt that Learfield will facilitate the creation and branding of a "Big 12 Network" where only 7 of the schools are doing business with Learfield. Texas is supposedly already on their way to creating their own network with their rights holder, IMG, and KU may do likewise with IMG.

Things could change but my guess is that Learfield will manage the creation of individual networks for each school (and the schools will share costs) as opposed to creating a branded Big 12 Network.

**RedBlooded** · 08-22-2010, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by clonedude

Hey, that sounds like a great new name for the conference... The Top 10 Conference.

Thats a good one

I bet it could be tweaked a little and it would be great.

**HFCS** · 08-22-2010, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by cykadelic2

I would suggest not reading too much into this. Learfield is the entity that holds/manages media rights for 7 of the 10 schools in the B12. Other companies do likewise for KU, Baylor, and Texas. I doubt that Learfield will facilitate the creation and branding of a "Big 12 Network" where only 7 of the schools are doing business with Learfield. Texas is supposedly already on their way to creating their own network with their rights holder, IMG, and KU may do likewise with IMG.

Things could change but my guess is that Learfield will manage the creation of individual networks for each school (and the schools will share costs) as opposed to creating a branded Big 12 Network.

This sounds miserable. So down the road when we play at KU and ABC and ESPN laugh at the idea of televising it, I need to find a way to pay for a Kansas TV network while I live in the heart of Big Ten country? Or I have to go around to sports bars and ask them if they have the Jayhawk network and they look at me like I'm a space alien?

If 7/10 schools is the most it can be, fine, better than nothing. If we end up with ten TV channels that I have to beg, borrow and steal to watch... wow, that would suck compared to just having ESPN+ or a confernece network, or just getting more games televised under our current TV mish mash.

I still don't see how everyone assumes a Texas network will work and happen, but a network with a larger audience for the rest of the Big 12 wouldn't work. There are a lot of Texas fans, they don't outnumber the fans of 9 other teams now or 11 teams before Neb and CU left. It's more legwork to cover more ground, but the programming and content is split by 9 schools instead of just one as well. Texas would need to pay for all the infrastructure and content, not 1/10th of it.

**JD720** · 08-22-2010, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by iowast8fan

Do you know this, or are you just assuming?

I'm almost 100% sure. Like someone else said, it would be bad business for Learfield to do this. Even if a cable company like Comcast or Time Warner started the network, the FCC has rules about keeping content exclusive. There are a few exceptions or loopholes, but I don't think they would apply here.

**cykadelic2** · 08-22-2010, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by HFCS

This sounds miserable. So down the road when we play at KU and ABC and ESPN laugh at the idea of televising it, I need to find a way to pay for a Kansas TV network while I live in the heart of Big Ten country? Or I have to go around to sports bars and ask them if they have the Jayhawk network and they look at me like I'm a space alien?

If 7/10 schools is the most it can be, fine, better than nothing. If we end up with ten TV channels that I have to beg, borrow and steal to watch... wow, that would suck compared to just having ESPN+ or a confernece network, or just getting more games televised under our current TV mish mash.

I still don't see how everyone assumes a Texas network will work and happen, but a network with a larger audience for the rest of the Big 12 wouldn't work. There are a lot of Texas fans, they don't outnumber the fans of 9 other teams now or 11 teams before Neb and CU left. It's more legwork to cover more ground, but the programming and content is split by 9 schools instead of just one as well. Texas would need to pay for all the infrastructure and content, not 1/10th of it.

If by chance a future KU-ISU FB game is not being carried by ABC, ESPN, FSN, Versus, FCS, etc, you will likely being able to pick up the game live online on Clone Zone via your PC/Laptop that is plugged into your HDTV. That is the wave of the future.

The B12 will likely go the same route as the SEC and ACC, without a branded dedicated conference network. What happened with the SEC is that ESPN and CBS paid the SEC big bucks NOT to have a conference network like the BTN. SEC schools (like Florida with the SUN Network) are then free to pursue their own TV deals beyond the primary deals. The B12 will likely go down the same path as they renegotiate their TV deals.