[Husker] PAC-12 will not expand

Wed Sep 21 09:46:52 CDT 2011

Shot Kleen also said that they viewed a "Nebraska Network" as not being profitable for many years.  They recognized all of the problems that LHN is currently experiencing in terms of carriage.  The only thing that I don't think Nebraska anticipated was the amount of money ESPN was going to give Texas for LHN, and how ESPN/Texas was going to push the envelope with LHN.  Remember how lovey-dovey the Big XII was in June?  "Nebraska was the problem" wrote Berry Tramel.  Then LHN announced their plans, and everything started swirling down the drain.

I imagine that if Nebraska had not jumped last summer, Nebraska would be just as unhappy as Oklahoma, A&M, etc.  If not more so.

Mike Jaixen
http://huskermike.blogspot.com
http://www.cornnation.com

________________________________
From: Rod Wellman <gobigred66 at mac.com>
To: husker at tssi.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Husker] PAC-12 will not expand

Actually, as I recall, NU didn't really have a problem with the LHN.  In fact, we were developing our own network. I read an interview lately with Shot Kleen (of HuskerVision) and he commented that we were actually pretty far along into the process of bringing our own network online when the Big 12 to Big 10 move happened, and put a stop to all the activity and planning of it. He made it sound like we could have launched it at a very similar time as the LHN.  Remember, in many of the comments from Osborne and Perlman regarding leaving the Big 12, they said it wasn't about the money.  NU was doing fine as far as revenue as a Big 12 member.  It was about overall conference stability, and not having to be in the unenviable position of not knowing what conference you're going to land in.  Prophetic, almost.  Unequal revenue sharing was one of the issues they felt needed to be addressed to get more of a "buy in" from all the members.  As Perlman put
 it, "Any President can say they
  are committed to the conference."  What was needed was action on items that would create an environment of strength and stability.  And in those meetings in KC a couple years ago, NU was willing to adopt an equal revenue sharing plan (and thus give up their plans for the Husker Network) as one step towards that stability.  Texas was not.

Rod W.
Sioux City, Ia.

On Sep 21, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Skylar Dodds wrote:

> To be fair, while we weren't for equal revenue sharing, we were definitely for revenue sharing as a whole.  The 'straw that broke the Big XII's back' here was that Texas was unwilling to share its revenue from the LHN.  It was the first time in Big XII history that TV money wasn't shared.
> 
> Nebraska never had a problem with 'weighted' revenue sharing, but they did have a HUGE problem with no sharing at all.
> 
> Sent from my Synergized HTC smartphone on the Now Network from Sprint!
> 
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Mike Jaixen" <mikejaixen at yahoo.com>
> To: "Jon Johnston" <jon.johnston at gmail.com>, "Paul Dalen" <quesohusker at gmail.com>
> Cc: "husker at tssi.com" <husker at tssi.com>
> Subject: [Husker] PAC-12 will not expand
> Date: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 8:26 am
> 
> 
> The Longhorn Network deal really tilted the economics.  When you factor the value of those third-tier rights, everybody except Texas benefits from equal revenue sharing.
> 
> That being said, since NU voted that down, it looks awfully hypocritical and wishy-washy.  (We were against it before we were for it.)
> 
> But LHN brings other baggage, and Texas has proven themselves to be a less than trustworthy partner in their dealings.  The Big XII agreed to allow each school to retain their TV rights to one football game a year.
> 
> Texas went out and signed a contract with ESPN that calls for no less than two.
> 
> That's why Jim Delaney told Texas no.  That's why the ACC told Texas no.  That's why the Pac-12 has twice told Texas no.
> 
>  
> Mike Jaixen
> http://huskermike.blogspot.com
> http://www.cornnation.com
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Jon Johnston <jon.johnston at gmail.com>
> To: Paul Dalen <quesohusker at gmail.com>
> Cc: "husker at tssi.com" <husker at tssi.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 7:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [Husker] PAC-12 will not expand
> 
> Osborne may have talked about equal revenue sharing, but while in the Big 12, Nebraska didn't support it, so I wouldn't play that card so heavily. It's not like we weren't benefiting more than most with the way revenue was set up, and why give up your advantages if you don't have to.
> 
> There's an indication that the Pac-12 didn't expand because they really wanted Texas, but realize that with Texas around, things aren't equal.
> 
> Perhaps a new Big 12 commissioner can change that.
> 
> Jon Johnston
> Corn Nation
> 
> On Sep 21, 2011, at 5:17 AM, Paul Dalen wrote:
> 
>> UT is either brilliant or moronic in its refusal to consider any equal
>> revenue sharing deal. It's on the record from last year that equal
>> revenue was a large part of NUs decision to leave and now the PAC12 is
>> backing away because UT is still opposed to it.
>> 
>> Dodds isn't dumb. An asshole perhaps, but not dumb. So I can't figure
>> out why they are staying this course.
>> 
>> Is the ESPN investment messing with the decision calculus?
>> 
>> On Sep 20, 2011, at 23:24, David Strong <gobigredlist at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> This is getting pretty weird.
>>> 
>>> http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6998751/pac-12-officials-decide-expansion
>>> 
>>> Dave
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> husker site list
>>> husker at tssi.com
>>> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> husker site list
>> husker at tssi.com
>> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
> 
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker

_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker