Texas to stay...according to new Orangebloods
- Thread starter TheHelgo
- Start date
Honetly, I don't like Iowa or Nebraska, but at least Iowa didn't vote to take money out of ISU's pockets (revenue sharing). They would if they had the chance though.
Absolutely they would have. As would ISU if they were in the catbird seat. It's easy to place blame when **** rolls down hill and you're at the bottom--but I just don't get everyone here blaming NU or TX or any other school. Makes us look like jilted lovers.
Iowa State shouldn't have voted to form a conference based on that, trying to change the rules after getting the "big fish" in isn't exactly stand-up behavior.
In most ways, I understand that those institutions (Iowa and NU) are looking our for themselves. That makes sense. However, in general they are condescending a-holes most of the time. That's the real reason I don't like them.
Personally, I take offense to a Fusker fan coming here and bashing ISU for bowing down to Texas. NOW we should make Texas share the TV money, since Nebraska is no longer in the conference.
It is just hypocritical since Nebraska has been a lesser bully in the Big12 before.
Huh? I am not following what you are trying to say here. What did ISU vote on and what rules were we trying to change?
Iowa State voted to accept the unequal revenue sharing when Texas, etc, joined to form the Big 12.
I assumed BIGGER! All schools are allowed to explore other distribution options. The Cyclone Television Network maybe able to carry games that are not picked up.
He's referring to back during the original formation of the conference. Who knows - it might have been one of those "just agree with this for the time being so we can get this deal worked out and we'll address the deficiencies later", only that one too many schools (ahem, Nebraska) benefited from the deficiencies, only to cut and run later instead of finally voting for change when they began to work against them.
Agreed. Beebe is a tool, but he's been an effective tool for Texas. I'm not surprised that the Big XII nearly imploded right before it was about to renegotiate a huge new TV contract. One that may have even included equal revenue sharing.
By threatening to leave, take the Big XII south to the Pac 10 and destroy the Big XII, Texas vastly improved its bargaining position. No different than a mobster holding someone out a tenth story window to collect a debt. Texas wants to collect a huge payday, and have the rest of the schools in the Big XII kiss the ring.
Not at all, as I've always rooted against NU. I just don't like all the Husker fans saying how awwwwffulll it will be in the Big 12 when it's clearly our best option. Is it the best possible situation? Absolutely not, but it could have been much, much worse.
You forgot to say that we will all end up better off. Again, why is everyone so concerned with what happens for Texas? It seems you would rather have us stay where we are financially and have Texas drop than have us improve our standing while Texas improves theirs. It's really quite sad.
I was unaware of that original vote.
However, I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to vote to change it later. It would be pretty crappy if you could never vote to change the conference rules and I really don't think it should be considered "not stand up behavior".
Having some sort of competitive balance in the conference is important and the benefits of being in a conference should apply at least somewhat evenly to all schools affiliated. Texas does benefit from being in the Big12 and has since its inception.
I think someone is a little bitter that they gave up an easy road to a conference championship to go to the Big Ten. Can Texas stop anyone from winning? I really don't think so. We are going to double our revenue and we will be in a much better place than we were before financially. Meanwhile, you will be in a worse place competitively but you will make a couple extra bucks.
Complaining about it when the later votes don't go that way isn't really the way to go is it? That's what's been happening. Adding Texas basically doubled the Big 8's tv market share, why would the teams benefitting give that up now? Also, why exactly does Texas care about competitive balance? They want to go undefeated, have a good enough strength of schedule to get into the bcs championship game, and call it good. They most certainly don't want NFL style parity.
Not at all. This is the best possible outcome for ISU, both athletically & academically by far. I'm excited about the possibility of having a self-sufficient athletic department for the first time in my life. I'm excited about the possibilty of a bowled-in Jack Trice stadium.
But just because Texas decided to be gracious enough not to destroy its second conference in 15 years, that doesn't mean I have to like them for it. I've never been naive enough to think that college athletics is about much more than money, but the fact that Texas was willing to blow up an athletic conference and hurt several schools for a little more money is pretty disturbing.
