OUInsider - Owen Field

Don't see how we can go now if this is what the ADs agreed too.

And I don't care if Texas and Iowa St is on the LHN, nonetheless, how did UT have any power in this?

I don't really understand the part of only a one year moratorium. Why wouldn't it be for perpetuity?

Because NCAA will rule or make a rule within the next year. Doubt it will be allowed by NCAA. On the radio today they said the NCAA meets on the issue in September.

One angle not explored is the freedom of speech issue.

One argument for the LHN are sites like these where high school football players are interviewed and glorified during their recruitment. The fact that the Big 12 allows this site and others and these sites can attach YouTube videos of players shows an acceptance of the Big 12 AD's for spotlighting high school football players even video of high school players.

The difference is that most of the Big 12 teams have a site if not more than one.

To now argue that LHN cannot take it to the next level with a station will eventually be challenged. Texas made a pact with a for-profit company that needs sets to tune in...looping the Mac Brown show will not suffice. If the LHN wants to broadcast high school football games they will and make their argument based on illegal censorship...First Amendment.

They gave us a friendly pass this year, but if the network needs the revenue they will do what they need to do. This will not end well unless every school gets a station...I dont see that happening.

SoonerJuris

100% agree with Juris ..

the Big 12 AD's resolution is a joke .. they have as much legal control of content on LHN as they do on ESPN ESPN2 or ESPNU ..

now will espn give in a delay high school game just to not rock the boat? maybe but that would be there choice not something forced by the big 12

lonestar .. a few problem with your logic ... Texas has no risk with the LHN .. they own 0% of it .. espn is carying all the risk .. right now texas has the best of both worlds they have their own network and they have the conf revenue as well ..

They are a voluntary member of the NCAA and B12. It is not a freedom of speech issue. They have voluntarily agreed to comply with the regulations and bylaws of each.

Lone Star Sooner,

You are entitled to your opinion, but that is not UT's gameplan. They need to be in a major conference. Their arrogance is pushing them to see how far they can go, but they know they need OU and A&M. Being independent in football is no longer a potential panacea. Notre Dame is still a holdout, but its really not working for them anymore. They could make more money as part of the Big 10.

They can and will sue based on the NCAA overreaching their mandate. JUST like OU and Georgia suing and winning against the NCAA demanding a monopoly over television appearance allocations.

So then why do fan-owned websites get in trouble for and possible implying university sanction by linking to official stats pages or posting certain images? Just remove those links and images and the NCAA has absolutely no problem. This website is affiliated with 24/7 and neither endorsed by or granted exclusive rights by OU. To my non-legal self, that is the biggest issue.

And I swear Boulder's account has been hijacked by either DeLoss Dodds or Mack Brown. Coca-Cola is a premier partner for OU athletics. OU isn't the only school they support and they have other interests besides college football - just like ESPN. Let's say Coke designed a line specifically for OU and then offered this product for free to select towns or schools. Although they are an independent company simply contracted to provide a service to OU, somehow the towns/schools that get the free OU product line all have a student either verbally committed to OU or are a high priority target of OU coaches. How is this not considered undue influence by a booster and deemed illegal by the NCAA?

ESPN and UT have to abide by the same rules as the rest of the country. Yes, this network may be breaking new ground but so did text messages and social media. That doesn't mean anything goes or prior statues cannot be amended - see publication rule cited by aTm.

Lone Star,

How many cable sites have signed up to carry the LHN? ESPN could have made a big mistake. It happens. The network isn't even generating much buzz where I live in Houston. When you throw out a number like $1.5 billion I think you are dreaming. Even if UT went independent, half of their games would be away games which they would probably not have the right to televise. And I believe it has been shown that Notre Dame would probably generate more television revenue if they were part of the Big 10 rather than having their own contract. Now UT can obviously generate more revenue on their own than what they could being in the Big 12, however, I thought it was ludicrous when I heard what ESPN was offering UT. I am not sure they adequately thought this through. I have a large number of Longhorn friends and most of them don't want to add to their cable bills to watch a steady diet of women's sports and lesser men's sports, as well as the assorted non-sporting events that are going to shown. There is a limit to Longhorn hysteria. But there is that annual campus gay volleyball tournament. I am sure that will attract the viewers and advertisers.