(06-06-2016 01:45 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 01:17 AM)GreenWave16 Wrote:  The only two schools I see that even has a realistic chance to be added at this point would be BYU and Tulane.

Im so proud of you. You finally made -300! I didn't think you would make it.

How? How does one manage to both make it to -300 (-298 as I type this since someone ruined your moment), but not be enough of a troll to be banned?

(06-06-2016 05:26 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 02:14 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 10:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 09:15 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 08:54 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  So ESPN is losing money everyday yet they are going to just hand over $40mm a year for teams they currently pay $4mm, then they are going to let the current B12 members keep a higher percentage of the money. That should work.

It's called a contract. ESPN signed it, lol. Business.

And ESPN has zero say on how the Big 12 distributes the money.

Plus, when those two teams (or perhaps 4) are playing UT, OU, BU, TCU, OSU, etc., they will likely be pulling in much bigger ratings.

Oh, and ESPN is NOT losing money. Just the opposite. They are still the economic engine of Disney. They are losing money on the LHN, which is separate from the B12 Tier 1/2 contract.

I think someone posted a link not long ago that the LHN was finally operating in the black. Lol...probably not by much, but that's better than losing money.

Define "operating in the black". If the LHN is generating enough revenue to exceed its costs, including the $15 million per year to UT, I'd say that's pretty impressive. If it's before UT's payout, then not so much.

I don't know too many Texans who have it. Scratch that, I don't personally know one that has the LHN.
Cheers!

You must not know many Texans. LHN is on every major provider in Texas except for Comcast in Houston.

(06-08-2016 01:08 PM)BattleCougarRed_88 Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 03:29 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 05:26 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 02:14 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 10:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think someone posted a link not long ago that the LHN was finally operating in the black. Lol...probably not by much, but that's better than losing money.

Define "operating in the black". If the LHN is generating enough revenue to exceed its costs, including the $15 million per year to UT, I'd say that's pretty impressive. If it's before UT's payout, then not so much.

I don't know too many Texans who have it. Scratch that, I don't personally know one that has the LHN.
Cheers!

I get it through AT&T U-Verse. I've only watched it for the show Friday Night Lights. That's it. Besides, they only show pro-Texas highlights. It's like they're trying to be North Korea.

When I was in Frisco, TX for the Dynamo vs FC Dallas game last week, I got curious about the LHN since the hotel I stayed in had it. Nothing but re-run games. Flipped the channel to something better.

They did play an SWC-era UT vs. UH game during the football season. Of course, it was from one of the years where they won. Like I said, they're like the college football equivalent of North Korea in terms of wanting to control perception.

(06-08-2016 04:05 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:08 PM)BattleCougarRed_88 Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 03:29 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 05:26 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 02:14 PM)ken d Wrote:  Define "operating in the black". If the LHN is generating enough revenue to exceed its costs, including the $15 million per year to UT, I'd say that's pretty impressive. If it's before UT's payout, then not so much.

I don't know too many Texans who have it. Scratch that, I don't personally know one that has the LHN.
Cheers!

I get it through AT&T U-Verse. I've only watched it for the show Friday Night Lights. That's it. Besides, they only show pro-Texas highlights. It's like they're trying to be North Korea.

When I was in Frisco, TX for the Dynamo vs FC Dallas game last week, I got curious about the LHN since the hotel I stayed in had it. Nothing but re-run games. Flipped the channel to something better.

They did play an SWC-era UT vs. UH game during the football season. Of course, it was from one of the years where they won. Like I said, they're like the college football equivalent of North Korea in terms of wanting to control perception.

you lost to Texas 60% of the times (and won 35%) you played the in the SWC so it is not exactly like they would have to make a major effort to find a UT win in that time period

(06-08-2016 02:43 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 01:45 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 01:17 AM)GreenWave16 Wrote:  The only two schools I see that even has a realistic chance to be added at this point would be BYU and Tulane.

Im so proud of you. You finally made -300! I didn't think you would make it.

How? How does one manage to both make it to -300 (-298 as I type this since someone ruined your moment), but not be enough of a troll to be banned?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGTgEyTeoBU

(06-08-2016 03:41 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 05:26 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 02:14 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 10:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 09:15 AM)TripleA Wrote:  It's called a contract. ESPN signed it, lol. Business.

And ESPN has zero say on how the Big 12 distributes the money.

Plus, when those two teams (or perhaps 4) are playing UT, OU, BU, TCU, OSU, etc., they will likely be pulling in much bigger ratings.

Oh, and ESPN is NOT losing money. Just the opposite. They are still the economic engine of Disney. They are losing money on the LHN, which is separate from the B12 Tier 1/2 contract.

I think someone posted a link not long ago that the LHN was finally operating in the black. Lol...probably not by much, but that's better than losing money.

Define "operating in the black". If the LHN is generating enough revenue to exceed its costs, including the $15 million per year to UT, I'd say that's pretty impressive. If it's before UT's payout, then not so much.

I don't know too many Texans who have it. Scratch that, I don't personally know one that has the LHN.
Cheers!

You must not know many Texans. LHN is on every major provider in Texas except for Comcast in Houston.

Ummmm....you do know where I live correct?

Cheers!

(06-08-2016 04:41 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 04:05 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:08 PM)BattleCougarRed_88 Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 03:29 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 05:26 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I don't know too many Texans who have it. Scratch that, I don't personally know one that has the LHN.
Cheers!

I get it through AT&T U-Verse. I've only watched it for the show Friday Night Lights. That's it. Besides, they only show pro-Texas highlights. It's like they're trying to be North Korea.

When I was in Frisco, TX for the Dynamo vs FC Dallas game last week, I got curious about the LHN since the hotel I stayed in had it. Nothing but re-run games. Flipped the channel to something better.

They did play an SWC-era UT vs. UH game during the football season. Of course, it was from one of the years where they won. Like I said, they're like the college football equivalent of North Korea in terms of wanting to control perception.

you lost to Texas 60% of the times (and won 35%) you played the in the SWC so it is not exactly like they would have to make a major effort to find a UT win in that time period

I used that as an example. They show many other games UT games against other opponents where the Longhorns win. My statement remains valid.

Oh, and get off UH's ass already.

(06-10-2016 12:43 AM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 04:41 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 04:05 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:08 PM)BattleCougarRed_88 Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 03:29 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  I get it through AT&T U-Verse. I've only watched it for the show Friday Night Lights. That's it. Besides, they only show pro-Texas highlights. It's like they're trying to be North Korea.

When I was in Frisco, TX for the Dynamo vs FC Dallas game last week, I got curious about the LHN since the hotel I stayed in had it. Nothing but re-run games. Flipped the channel to something better.

They did play an SWC-era UT vs. UH game during the football season. Of course, it was from one of the years where they won. Like I said, they're like the college football equivalent of North Korea in terms of wanting to control perception.

you lost to Texas 60% of the times (and won 35%) you played the in the SWC so it is not exactly like they would have to make a major effort to find a UT win in that time period

I used that as an example. They show many other games UT games against other opponents where the Longhorns win. My statement remains valid.

Oh, and get off UH's ass already.

UH might have more losses to UT but nothing compares to Tech's of only 16 wins to 49 losses. Also, UH has more wins against Tech. Raiders' fans and their inferiority syndrome.

The only reason they relevant was because of politics that got them into the Big 12. Take that out and they would've been in worse shape than the SWC when they were also a mid-card team.

(06-10-2016 02:13 AM)BattleCougarRed_88 Wrote:  

(06-10-2016 12:43 AM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  I used that as an example. They show many other games UT games against other opponents where the Longhorns win. My statement remains valid.

Oh, and get off UH's ass already.

UH might have more losses to UT but nothing compares to Tech's of only 16 wins to 49 losses. Also, UH has more wins against Tech. Raiders' fans and their inferiority syndrome.

The only reason they relevant was because of politics that got them into the Big 12. Take that out and they would've been in worse shape than the SWC when they were also a mid-card team.

Oh, I know. Feckless Tech is pathetic.

(06-08-2016 04:41 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  you lost to Texas 60% of the times (and won 35%) you played the in the SWC so it is not exactly like they would have to make a major effort to find a UT win in that time period

Here's the thing. Houston (32%) has a better series record against Texas than the following (minimum 10 games). A&M is only at 33%.

Nebraska 29%
Arkansas 28%
Baylor 27%
TCU 27%
Missouri 26%
Texas Tech 25%
Rice 24%
Oklahoma St 20%
Iowa St 15%
Kansas 13%
Tulane 8%
North Texas 0%

OU, Notre Dame and LSU fare better than 33% against Texas. So do Colorado, Vanderbilt and Kansas St. The list is pretty short.

Source: Winsipedia

(06-08-2016 04:41 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 04:05 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:08 PM)BattleCougarRed_88 Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 03:29 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 05:26 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I don't know too many Texans who have it. Scratch that, I don't personally know one that has the LHN.
Cheers!

I get it through AT&T U-Verse. I've only watched it for the show Friday Night Lights. That's it. Besides, they only show pro-Texas highlights. It's like they're trying to be North Korea.

When I was in Frisco, TX for the Dynamo vs FC Dallas game last week, I got curious about the LHN since the hotel I stayed in had it. Nothing but re-run games. Flipped the channel to something better.

They did play an SWC-era UT vs. UH game during the football season. Of course, it was from one of the years where they won. Like I said, they're like the college football equivalent of North Korea in terms of wanting to control perception.

you lost to Texas 60% of the times (and won 35%) you played the in the SWC so it is not exactly like they would have to make a major effort to find a UT win in that time period

You a tech fan, aren't you???

(06-07-2016 05:32 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  **Whispers**
The Big 12 is never going to expand.....

Like the BE, only after the good schools leave.

The Big 12 will take Houston, USF, UCF, Memphis, ECU and Cincinnati. Then Texas and Texas Tech will be allowed to trot over to the Pac 14. All major conferences will be at 14 teams and Oklahoma will become the new master of the Big 14. Or not. The Big 12 are a fickle bunch.