Evil Empires Unite In Record TV/Media Contract

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 3:03 PM CST

The long awaited announcement came from the the Evil Empires of the University of Texas and ESPN for their new TV deal. According to the Austin Statesman, Bevo-tV could be on the air as soon as this fall.

The University of Texas has struck a 20-year, $300 million deal with ESPN for a new, 24-hour network that will broadcast Longhorn sports and some non-athletic content such as campus musical performances.

But after the big headline, like all things, the devil is in the details. This deal also includes IMG-college. They are a marketing firm that holds the rights to UT's Radio and Stadium Advertising right now. They will get 17.5% with UT getting the other 82.5 % so that works out to $12.5 million on average for UT.

via bealonghorn.utexas.edu

(is UT swimming something you want to pay to see?.....ESPN seems to think so)

Initially UT is promised $10 million per year for the first 5 years. It looks like after that there is increases and buy outs through out the deal, and I would assume that's on a 5 year basis.

Currently the Big 12's media deals net each school between $13-$15 million per year, and this deal does not affect that at all. The Big 12 and it's current contracts have first right of broadcast, meaning they get first choice. Right now, the Big 12's media partners are ABC, ESPN, and Fox Sports. Games not picked up by the Big 12 media partners then revert back to each school and each school can then resale them. (the Big10 and the 12-Pac have "all in" agreements meaning the league owns all rights to all sports, all the time for TV) Also under current Big 12 media agreements, schools also hold the rights to replays of any game.

The Channel will be offered nationwide, but it will probably be on a sport tier or as a pay individual channel, except in local Texas markets where the channel will be free (that doesn't mean free to the cable companies!)

So, Bevo-tv can put on the football games not broadcast elsewhere, and that's usually one or two games a year and the crappy ones at that, plus football reruns, Men's and Women's Basketball, and the other "Olympic" sports, like swimming, baseball, gymnastics, etc.

At first glance, $12.5 million for secondary sports seems excessive, and it is, just not as much as you think. The key is the IMG-College part. If that includes Radio, Stadium Advertising, and Internet, which IMG-College currently has as a package deal with UT, this deal is actually similar to Ohio State's deal for $11.5 for their radio and stadium advertising they struck this summer. (For reference, OU, has separate deals for Radio, and do their Stadium Advertising in house, and I saw something this summer that those brought in about $7-8 million for the school. Sorry no link, just off of memory)

If IMG-College is just getting bought out of their rights/contract and their payment is just a replacement of their profits from the UT deal, then $12.5 for UT isn't much extra at all as it would include money already being earned by their current deal with IMG-College or about $ 4.5 million more than OU currently gets. This is in line with the $3 million estimate that Bevo-TV would bring in when it was first proposed this summer.

What's next? Look for the Big 12 to put together their own Cable Network minus UT. They would still have the Houston, DFW, OKC, KC, STL, markets, plus combined there is more demand nationwide, than the 1 million UT alumn's could have. I would assume, a TV deal for the Big 12 would generate about $2.5- $3 million per school, or about $2 million less than UT's deal. The Big 10 Network has been a huge success, and others will want to copy it.

Now, this deal does represent something else, and that is the current chess game being played by 2 factions vying for the future of college football. One side has Fox and a Playoff System, and the other Disney Corp (ABC, ESPN) and the current bowl system who own all the rights to the current bowls, which will be about as important as the NIT if their is a Playoff. One of the big national pieces in this battle is now squarely in the Disney Camp.

UPDATE:

IMG released a press release, in which they say:

IMG College cedes the production and programming rights of these UT Athletics events to ESPN under this agreement. IMG College retains exclusive sales rights to the network while retaining its existing sponsorship/advertising inventory in UT Athletics-related radio, Internet, promotional and official corporate sales agreements.

So...the part that they are giving up is the Media Rights for the 2ndary sports. UT will receive separate money for radio and internet, however, the "sponsorship/Advertising inventory" can be ads on radio, game program books or in stadium advertising or it might not.

BUT WAIT there is more:

OU announced they are working on their own network as well from the Tulsa World. The key to this is OU currently has a Multi-Media Rights deal with Learfield sports which currently generates $7.5 for OU. This I believe includes radio but does NOT include stadium advertising.

SO...comparing apples to apples, UT's deal with Radio will be for the first 5 years, assuming radio is worth $2.5 million, and UT's guarantee of $10 million a total of $12.5 million (goes up after 5 years). to OU's current $7.5 million Learfield deal. Which means this deal is really $5 million more than OU gets.

Final updated thought: Does Cable really have band width for 60 or so college networks? I mean, USC will want one, so will Florida, and LSU, and OU, and Nebraska, and Ohio St, etc, etc.

FanPost are for the voice of the fan and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Crimson and Cream Machine administrators.

Tweet Comment 38 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Good

They can concentrate all that losing and burnt orange in one place so the rest of us don’t have to watch it.

"Coach Gundy, why was Oklahoma able to march right down the field against you?" --Erin Andrews

by dishingoutdimes on Jan 19, 2011 4:25 PM CST reply actions

Well put lol

by AKSooner84 on Jan 19, 2011 10:56 PM CST up reply actions

You might be wrong

I don’t mean to be a troll, but I thought your article was interesting and asked around a little to get more information as to the validity of your claims. Hookem.com is stating that it does not include the radio, stadium advertising, and internet revenue. If they are right this is a game changer that affects the entire NCAA, and could create a domino effect with OU/SEC powerhouses. (Pac-12/Big 10 gave up their individual TV rights)

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 5:04 PM CST reply actions

if it does not

then the extra part of UT’s sports is worth more than the entire Mountain West Conference! UT is a valuable commodity, but the extra sports isn’t worth more than an entire conference that covers (or will) markets like Colorado Springs, Denver, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Sacramento, Honolulu, and Sacramento

The first run football and basketball and baseball…the revenue sports is only worth $15 million per team in the Big 12. Can the rest of UT"s left overs be worth 2/3rds of first run football…even to UT fans?

also Hookem.com..doesn’t have the story up yet all all as of 5:32 central times on it’s main page.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 5:35 PM CST up reply actions

Agreed

I agree with you that the sum seems astronomical without the radio, stadium, and internet revenue being included, but I posed the question on that forum and Bobby Burton replied that radio/stadium/internet is not included and that this is a new rights deal.

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 5:41 PM CST reply actions

now...this is something I don't have

but…..it’s got to have some if not all. That’s what the IMG part was all about. If it didn’t, then there would be no need to play IMG anything, and UT/ESPN would have a separate deal and would have no reason to include IMG.

If this does not include radio, internet, and stadium ads, then UT’s other sports is worth as much as their football team is (which is worth $15 million right now from the Big 12) and that can’t be true. It makes not logical sense what so ever.

Also…it was reveled after the Pac16 deal was shot down, that part of the big money that was being tossed around to save the Big 12, was from UT proposing to have the Radio (which for OU is about $2 million per most schools), Advertising and internet included as a package deal to get the league the $200 million a year from their first run sports. That’s something that UT had done with IMG, so UT thought it was a great idea. (KU wasn’t so crazy about it, as KU basketball radio actually is worth money)

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 6:14 PM CST up reply actions

Check this out

Kirk Bohls (Austin-American Statesman)
“If you’re asking why ESPN is close to finalizing a deal to link up with Texas as its broadcast partner for the new Longhorn television network for exorbitant figures perhaps approaching $15 million a year, it’s because the worldwide leader is hoping to use this platform as a way to leverage – with Texas’ help – a deal to acquire all of the Big 12’s television rights that will be negotiated next spring. And, yes, we all know Texas has clout. If the other nine members of the reconfigured Big 12 don’t go along, Texas hasn’t minded using its power before and could easily reopen talks with the Pac-12 or go independent. ESPN is positioning itself for the inside track with the Big 12 and squeezing out Fox…”

If this is just a way to buy support I’d be pretty mad if I were an OU/A&M fan, since those two programs are the only ones with real value and would be basically subsidizing Texas. As a Texas fan, however, I’m ecstatic.

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 6:33 PM CST reply actions

How does giving UT a crap ton of money…help the Big 12 deal? It only helps…if ESPN takes this deal, and rolls it INTO a Big 12 Network deal. (the Big 10 Network has been a HUGE success) Basically saying, we are the only ones that can do a Conference network WITH UT in it. That means, OU and other others will be getting paid too..eventually.

Now, there was talk about a Big 12 network being kinda like Fox Sports…where you had a local schools on local outlets first, but then other network programing for a fuller package.

As for the leagues TV deal from ABC/ESPN/Fox Sports that’s up in a few years, UT still has to give their first run rights to the conference as they do now. That doesn’t change anything. UT, can vote and even encourage, but they are still only 1 out of 10 votes.

UT can’t go independent on their own, no more than they can go to another conference on their own. UT still is part of the Texas and still has to have things like conference or independence go through the Texas Legislature, and be signed by the Texas State Governor.

Also….independence is just an empty saber rattle. How exciting would it be to play baseball..and have literally nothing to play for? No conference championship? Unless..they put their 2ndary sports in a lesser conference like the Sunbelt and go Indy in just football only. And I can tell you…ESPN isn’t paying $12.5 million a year for UT vs. Arkansas State in Volleyball.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 6:59 PM CST up reply actions

+1

"Let’s hang half-a-hundred on ‘em."
-Barry Switzer

by OUPest on Jan 20, 2011 8:53 AM CST via mobile up reply actions

I think that single vote may be worth more

I think what Bohls is saying is that because of this deal Texas will go to bat for ESPN in the discussions, and that the clout that Texas may exercise will be worth 15 million dollars. I think it became pretty apparent how much clout Texas has this past summer. However, if this is true and ESPN is wagering that it can get a better deal by paying Texas to decrease the leverage that the Big 12 might have, it is in essence paying Texas instead of having to pay all the members of the Big 12. Since the only other rain makers in the conference are OU and A&M, they do have a right to be mad.

I wonder how much influence the legislature can really have on whether Texas moves to a different athletic conference. I know that when the Big 12 was started the legislature did pressure Texas to bring along some of the other schools, but I’m not sure that history would repeat itself without some of the specific actors from that time period.

Assuming that Texas is able to continue to threaten to leave the Big 12 during the TV negotiations if ESPN is not chosen as the rights provider, that decrease in leverage should be worth a great deal. On a related note, I wonder if this could bring up antitrust issues.

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 7:16 PM CST reply actions

Trust me…UT can’t act alone. The way it’s set up in the state of Texas is any conference move wither to join another or to leave one, has to be approve by the state legislature and then be signed by the Governor for Texas state schools…which UT is

AND…there is no way it be approved by a Texas State Legislature. There are too many with interests in helping their own schools. Baylor, A&M, Tech have supporters. A&M and Tech are also state schools and leaving the Big 12, would KILL those schools, so…I’m sure the State of Texas won’t vote to allow UT to walk while hurting 2 of their other properties.

Oklahoma only has to go through their Boards and then be signed by the Gov as head of Oklahoma’s University programs.

Threatening to walk isn’t much of a threat even if they could. If UT walks….the Big 12 is in the same boat they are in now….and that is with a bad TV deal. What kind of a threat is that? Here’s the choice UT would be giving: Sign with ESPN where we keep the lion’s share of money, and thus your pie will be small, OR we walk..and your pie will still be small cause you won’t have us.

Also…as far as "rain makers’ you are forgetting Kansas. They have a huge alumni base, actually get more donations from their fans than any other program besides UT in the Big 12, and are a if not THE biggest brand in the nation when it comes to Men’s basketball. (granted, even that may mean only a little as money is all about football as this summer’s Conference movement shown….which makes me doubt how UT’s softball games are worth $12.5 million a year now )

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 9:19 PM CST up reply actions

Outstanding post Redhawk, absolutely outstanding! Rec'd big time

"I don't like Texas. I don't like the city of Austin. And I don't like the color orange. It reminds me of puke." The Boz

Crimson and Cream Machine - There's only one Oklahoma!
Listen to Sooner Nation, the #1 podcast for OU fans

by Jordan Esco on Jan 19, 2011 8:01 PM CST reply actions

thank you!

I’ve been all over this and as my conversation with brntorange shows, I could have add far more to the article.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 9:22 PM CST up reply actions

This is sick

Evil empires is right. The goal is to reduce the rest of us to beggars holding a tin cup waiting for scraps from the UT table. Clearly, UT is quite confident Sooner Nation along with everyone else will not defy their lead for fear of having the spigot turned off….maybe it is time for us to consider a new conference home after all.

by leatherneck1061 on Jan 19, 2011 9:26 PM CST reply actions

the problem with the new conference idea

is OU actually benefits from the Big 12 set up. Not as much as UT does, but better than the “all in” aspect of the Pac12. The Big 10 doesn’t want OU, which leaves the SEC, which doesn’t want OSU.

Which leaves us with the Big 12….or be dateless for the prom.

UT’s deal…when it all boils down…is not for THAT much more than OU gets. If fact depending on what’s in the deal it could be only 3-5 million more than OU gets from the same package deal. OU currently gets $7.5 million a year for their media rights

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 9:36 PM CST up reply actions

I definitely see your point

I really wasn’t referring to the financial aspect although I realize that is always going to be the #1 motivator. Just referring to the fact that Bevo dictates the direction for the entire conference at gunpoint, and frankly I’m not sure how long such an arrangement will be feasible. If they are going to negotiate deals that the rest of us have no say in, and then turn around and demand we all fall in line with it or they will take their toys and go elsewhere, I guess one has to wonder how long it will be until our partnership cracks under the pressure.

by leatherneck1061 on Jan 19, 2011 9:56 PM CST up reply actions

in big business

and make no mistake…college sport is HUGE business, every one is a whore.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 9:58 PM CST up reply actions

But when all is said and done, they will still be that horrible upchuck orange.

by EasTex on Jan 19, 2011 9:54 PM CST reply actions 1 recs

It doesn't include radio/stadium advertising/internet revenue

“IMG College cedes the production and programming rights of these UT Athletics events to ESPN under this agreement. IMG College retains exclusive sales rights to the network while retaining its existing sponsorship/advertising inventory in UT Athletics-related radio, Internet, promotional and official corporate sales agreements.”

http://imgworld.com/news/news/2011/jan/espn,-img-introduce-tv-network-for-the-university-.aspx

Sorry to keep at this, but I was just as skeptical as you and you made some really good points. Any more thoughts?

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 10:13 PM CST reply actions

glad to read this release.

however, this DOES include money already going to UT from their secondary media rights.

OU currently makes $7.5 million per year off of these secondary media rights as from the Tulsa World article tonight:

OU signed a 10-year, $75 million extension with Learfield in September 2007.

Now, I think..but I’m not sure OU’s deal includes the 2ndary TV, Internet, and I THINK Radio. Radio is worth about $2-3 million a year.

That still makes UT’s deal at 12.5 million only 5 million more than OU has right now with no cable deal. or 7 million more depending on if OU’s includes Radio (which I think it does)

I’ll update the post with this info.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 10:42 PM CST up reply actions

Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but I understand it as Texas has its existing IMG deal that is equivalent to the OU/Learfield deal, its share from the Big 12 deal, and then it is getting an additional 12.5 million from ESPN for its new programming rights. I read the release as saying that IMG was ceding its rights to the new programming, while keeping its prior contract with Texas for its radio/stadium/internet revenues. I may be wrong, but I think that IMG’s previous deal must have included rights to any new programming and ESPN is now forced to buy it out of the new programming rights.

This would mean that you would have to compare Texas/IMG as the traditional secondary television rights with OU/Learfield’s agreement, but OU doesn’t have a third-tier television rights agreement with a cable provider.

Let me know if I am mistaken in my logic.

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 11:02 PM CST reply actions

yeah you are reading it wrong

UT currently has 2ndary media rights with IMG in which they get paid from IMG. This portion is being ceded to ESPN. However, IMG will still retain the rights to Radio and Internet and “advertising”, which I’m assuming means stadium advertising, but it might not.

So UT will get $12.5 from ESPN (only $10 million for first 5 years) for the new cable channel, but they already were getting some of this before. OU for example gets $7.5 million for this minus the stadium advertising but with radio.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 11:09 PM CST up reply actions

Right, so then you’re saying that OU’s 7.5 million doesn’t include radio/stadium/internet either?

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 11:12 PM CST reply actions

no

OU’s $7.5 includes Radio and Internet, but not stadium advertising.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 11:19 PM CST up reply actions

Or are you saying that “retaining” those rights does not mean that IMG is paying for them?

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 11:18 PM CST reply actions

Huh?

no…IMG and UT still have a contract for Radio, Internet and “advertising” (not sure what that covers). UT will receive additional money for that. If it’s just Radio, Internet and like stadium program books for ads….then that would be an additional 2-3 million.

so..apples to apples:
UT: $10 million for Cable TV for the first 5 years, plus $2.5 million (estimated guess) from IMG for Radio internet for a total of $12.5 million
OU: $7.5 million for the same thing currently

Which makes the UT deal FAR more realistic.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 19, 2011 11:23 PM CST up reply actions

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/388387-texas-longhorns-how-the-athletic-department-keeps-the-money-flowing

It says Texas has an all-inclusive deal for 16 million a year, so I guess it would be too hard to separate what part of that 16 million a year is for radio/stadium/internet and what is for general licensing. However, it does mean that Texas probably will continue to get the 16 million + 10 million (minimum under the new deal). Do you happen to know how much OU gets for its licensing? Maybe we can subtract that from the 16 million Texas gets and be able to compare the radio/stadium/internet rights to OU’s 7.5 million. I have a feeling that UT’s radio/stadium/internet rights themselves are north of 7.5 million, but this is just a guess.

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 11:42 PM CST reply actions

Oh how I live the occassional bleacher report article!

Most of their articles are about as legitimate as UT’s 2008 Big 12 Championship trophy.

"Let’s hang half-a-hundred on ‘em."
-Barry Switzer

by OUPest on Jan 20, 2011 9:17 AM CST via mobile up reply actions

Looking at the IMG/Michigan and IMG/Ohio State deals, the fact that ESPN is paying IMG, and that it doesn’t look like the IMG contract has been bought out, it looks like Texas will still get the IMG/Ohio State type of deal revenue AND the ESPN deal revenue.

by brntorange on Jan 19, 2011 11:49 PM CST reply actions

you wish

that’s not it at all….

It’s pretty impossible to do a comparison unless you have a line item budget. It is true that UT’s athletic budget is the largest of all colleges at over $100,000 in income before this ESPN deal. OU’s in comparison was around $80 Million dollars.

But…what is in IMG’s original agreement? one…don’t believe anything you read on Bleacher Report or Barking Carnival, with out full links. two…they were UT’s media partner. They got to broadcast all the stuff that is currently in the ESPN deal. They paid UT for that.

Do you think they will pay UT for media rights that they don’t use? Do you think both ESPN and IMG will pay UT for the SAME TV media rights? Of course not. So….even if that $16 million dollar deal was acurate, and I think it could be if it includes TV, Radio, Internet, licensing, AND stadium advertising (Ohio state got $11.5 for all that besides TV), part of that WAS TV…and a good chunk of it was.

Again…exactly HOW much is up for conjecture, but I’d guess, about $7 million at least. Which would put UT’s increase on this new ESPN deal at around $5 million dollars per year.

Also…if you hit the “reply” button, you comments will be threaded, and will make far more sense, as it will be easier to read.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 20, 2011 7:35 AM CST up reply actions

I hope that both the eeeeevil ones give to each other really good

utexass can accomplish their hosing of espin by staying the irrelevant losrs they are, espin can accomplish their hosing of utexass by talking trash about them and smack clown.

Praying utexass stays losurs for about 12 years. OU does NOT need utexass and OU can stand on their own.

Friends don’t let Friends do espin

by scarab on Jan 20, 2011 10:35 AM CST reply actions

How will this affect OU's recruiting?

Texas will have more exposure time than ever before and with Texas being prime recruiting grounds for OU…do we see a loss. UT is consistently ranked in the top 5 when it comes to recruiting classes and currently has the #1 class for this year regardless of what happened on the field while OU is #10 in some and #6 in others. Do we see a significant drop for OU and will UT remain at #1 for years to come?

by OnlyOneOU on Jan 20, 2011 12:52 PM CST reply actions

it will not matter, what matters is Coaching! Smack and his predecessors are way behind at last count

sure they have the lead in the RRS, but have they really checked their Trophy cases’s? No because they do not like to do that.
Count the NC trophys
Count the B12 C Trohpys
Cunt the Heisman Trophys

keep counting.

by scarab on Jan 21, 2011 9:23 AM CST up reply actions

wow, that is one heck of a spelling mishap my friend

"I don't like Texas. I don't like the city of Austin. And I don't like the color orange. It reminds me of puke." The Boz

Crimson and Cream Machine - There's only one Oklahoma!
Listen to Sooner Nation, the #1 podcast for OU fans

by Jordan Esco on Jan 21, 2011 10:37 AM CST up reply actions

They've only got as many spots as we do

So in that respect, at least for football, I don’t really think it makes that big of an impact. They’ve always “selected” as opposed to recruited the state of TX, so we’ll still get our guys and they’ll continue to get most of who they want.

I think if it has any kind of impact on recruiting, it will be more so on the secondary sports. But even then I don’t think it’s nearly a big a deal as idiots like Kirk Bohls tried to make it out to be in his joke of an article today. I’d post it, but I don’t want to generate traffic for that tool. So just trust me when I summarize it by saying he believed it to be the greatest thing in the history of the world (only slight exaggeration).

"I don't like Texas. I don't like the city of Austin. And I don't like the color orange. It reminds me of puke." The Boz

Crimson and Cream Machine - There's only one Oklahoma!
Listen to Sooner Nation, the #1 podcast for OU fans

by Jordan Esco on Jan 20, 2011 1:18 PM CST reply actions

My concern

Is that high school games will be aired on this new network. Won’t this be against NCAA rules?

by IBleedCrimsonandCream on Jan 21, 2011 5:26 AM CST via mobile reply actions

There is no rule currently in place

But I’m not sure of how you could make an argument that they should be allowed to do this. Normally I’d be in favor of the NCAA going away 100 out of 100 times, but in this instance I’m heavily in favor of them exterting some of their proverbial power and making this some kind of major violation.

They can show high school games, but they can never show a team with a UT commit or a kid considering UT. If they show a game and the kid ultimately winds up signing with UT = violation. Problem solved IMO.

"I don't like Texas. I don't like the city of Austin. And I don't like the color orange. It reminds me of puke." The Boz

Crimson and Cream Machine - There's only one Oklahoma!
Listen to Sooner Nation, the #1 podcast for OU fans

by Jordan Esco on Jan 21, 2011 10:40 AM CST up reply actions

I like that

Also, (and I know this can’t ever be enforced) there is something wrong with high school sports getting ruined by the big money of TV and exposure. I’d rather keep it purer. Yes, I realize that’s probably unrealistic and idealistic.

Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com)

by Redhawk on Jan 21, 2011 11:28 AM CST up reply actions