Pollard article in the World Herald

**dinger** · 05-29-2007, 08:06 AM

**kgreeny** · 05-29-2007, 08:19 AM

Love Pollard!

**MINNESOTACYCLONE** · 05-29-2007, 08:32 AM

This was a great article! Why didn't Bruce VDV bring this up?

**ColoradoClone** · 05-29-2007, 08:38 AM

This is crazy and brilliant at the same time. Honestly, who else would think to ask thier competitors for money? JP is certainly leaving no stone unturned. His "only as strong as your weakest link" argument is interesting, as well as the Big10 example.

I think Texas would tell you that their weakest link is strong enough, and most AD's would recognize the differences in the TV markets don't make the big10 a completely valid example. I love his effort though... it's worth a shot.

**Bobber** · 05-29-2007, 08:41 AM

Plus we appear to be in the middle of the current revenue sharing deal.

**CyBobby** · 05-29-2007, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by dinger7203

Omaha.com Sports Section

It will be a cold day in HADES before texas u every votes to share any revenue. Just ask Baylor or Texas Tech just how much largesse that the horns have when it comes to revenue sharing.

The reason the big ten is always on tv is because from top to bottom they have the strongest conference in the country both in finances and academics and when you throw in revenue sharing, is it any wonder that the bottom feeders can go to the Rose Bowl! Anyone remember the Rose Bowl trips by of all people Northwestern?

If the big 12 wants bigger and better then they will have to copy the big 10 model. Otherwise it will just be more of..If your good we will put you on tv...Otherwise forgetaboutit!!!!

Go Aggies Rip The horns!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

**BryceC** · 05-29-2007, 09:17 AM

It would be good for the conference if we went to full revenue sharing, but it would be bad for Texas. And whatever is bad for the big revenue boys, Nebraska, Texas, and A&M, pretty much doesn't happen. The Big 12 buckles like a belt under pressure from those schools.

**CYdTracked** · 05-29-2007, 09:37 AM

Pollard has the right idea. I mean you know that Texas and Oklahoma are going to be the first 2 teams to have televised games just because they are usually the 2 powerhouse teams in the conference in most sports. TV is not going to pick Baylor vs K-State over Texas vs about anyone in the conference so the teams at the bottom of the pool are at a disavantage regardless. If it's a Big 12 TV package then I say you split the revenue evenly to all teams. It's not the Texas/Oklahoma TV deal...

The teams getting the bigger piece of the pie already have budgets that far exceed most of the schools in the conference anyways. This is was a big topic when the whole ISU to the Big 10 discussions happened awhile back. Financially we would gain a lot more by going to the Big 10 because they have better TV deals and better revenue sharing than the Big 12 plus with that comes more national exposure. I'm not saying we should join the Big 10 but we'd gain a lot financially if we were a part of that conference.