Catchacold and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Belvis Noland on October 05, 2011, 04:54:59 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too. Why is the 6 year GOR bullshit? No other conference has anything tying the members into basically a contract to stay in the conference.
Quote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too.
1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.
Quote from: Panjandrum on October 05, 2011, 04:57:42 PMI think there's a scenario where you can create both a Big 12 Network for Tier 2 rights and allow things like the LHN to exist. It's tricky, but I think it can be done.However, for the sake of inventory, it's going to require a set of core sports and participation by all twelve teams. So we may have to nut up and start playing softball at some point.Fox controls our tier 2 rights.
I think there's a scenario where you can create both a Big 12 Network for Tier 2 rights and allow things like the LHN to exist. It's tricky, but I think it can be done.However, for the sake of inventory, it's going to require a set of core sports and participation by all twelve teams. So we may have to nut up and start playing softball at some point.
Quote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 04:59:38 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 04:32:33 PMQuote@ChipBrownOB Chip Brown Sources tell Orangebloods.com Big 12 schools were in talks starting last night to grant rights for Tier 1 & 2 TV for closer to 13 yrs.BITB hinted more than once that it was Mizzou that blew this proposed deal up. Doesn't really mesh with the going to the SEC for more stability talking point.Chip's full story (read his article) is that there was a proposal in place to sign a grant-of-rights agreement that was closer to 13 years, but that agreement also included no HS content on LHN. UT said eff that and refused to sign it. There was no agreement in place that everyone agreed to, then Mizzou backed out. There have been two options on the table:1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.On option 2 you could either look at is Mizzou blowing it up (refusing to sign while allowing UT to show HS content) or UT blowing it up (refusing to sign anything that limits their right to show HS content). Who blew it up depends on your perspective.I don't get why Mizzou cares about this so much, ultimately hedging your conference affiliation on this is stupid. It is will/be an issue for the NCAA. If UT is allowed to do it, whats to stop anyone else from tying high school content to their network? What is stopping Alabama from streaming high school content on rolltide.com?I think Missouri wants the LHN to die a complete and total death.
Quote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 04:32:33 PMQuote@ChipBrownOB Chip Brown Sources tell Orangebloods.com Big 12 schools were in talks starting last night to grant rights for Tier 1 & 2 TV for closer to 13 yrs.BITB hinted more than once that it was Mizzou that blew this proposed deal up. Doesn't really mesh with the going to the SEC for more stability talking point.Chip's full story (read his article) is that there was a proposal in place to sign a grant-of-rights agreement that was closer to 13 years, but that agreement also included no HS content on LHN. UT said eff that and refused to sign it. There was no agreement in place that everyone agreed to, then Mizzou backed out. There have been two options on the table:1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.On option 2 you could either look at is Mizzou blowing it up (refusing to sign while allowing UT to show HS content) or UT blowing it up (refusing to sign anything that limits their right to show HS content). Who blew it up depends on your perspective.I don't get why Mizzou cares about this so much, ultimately hedging your conference affiliation on this is stupid. It is will/be an issue for the NCAA. If UT is allowed to do it, whats to stop anyone else from tying high school content to their network? What is stopping Alabama from streaming high school content on rolltide.com?
Quote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 04:32:33 PMQuote@ChipBrownOB Chip Brown Sources tell Orangebloods.com Big 12 schools were in talks starting last night to grant rights for Tier 1 & 2 TV for closer to 13 yrs.BITB hinted more than once that it was Mizzou that blew this proposed deal up. Doesn't really mesh with the going to the SEC for more stability talking point.Chip's full story (read his article) is that there was a proposal in place to sign a grant-of-rights agreement that was closer to 13 years, but that agreement also included no HS content on LHN. UT said eff that and refused to sign it. There was no agreement in place that everyone agreed to, then Mizzou backed out. There have been two options on the table:1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.On option 2 you could either look at is Mizzou blowing it up (refusing to sign while allowing UT to show HS content) or UT blowing it up (refusing to sign anything that limits their right to show HS content). Who blew it up depends on your perspective.
Quote@ChipBrownOB Chip Brown Sources tell Orangebloods.com Big 12 schools were in talks starting last night to grant rights for Tier 1 & 2 TV for closer to 13 yrs.BITB hinted more than once that it was Mizzou that blew this proposed deal up. Doesn't really mesh with the going to the SEC for more stability talking point.
@ChipBrownOB Chip Brown Sources tell Orangebloods.com Big 12 schools were in talks starting last night to grant rights for Tier 1 & 2 TV for closer to 13 yrs.
Quote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 05:02:32 PMQuote from: Belvis Noland on October 05, 2011, 04:54:59 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too. Why is the 6 year GOR bullshit? No other conference has anything tying the members into basically a contract to stay in the conference. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the Big 10 and Pac-12 have both set it up so that they handed their rights back over to the conference for Tier 1 and 2. So there are other conferences doing this.
Quote from: Panjandrum on October 05, 2011, 05:04:30 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 05:02:32 PMQuote from: Belvis Noland on October 05, 2011, 04:54:59 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.My understanding is that the schools are giving all their broadcast rights to the conference so lets say Iowa wanted to join the Big 12. The Big 10 then gets to decide everything about Iowa broadcasts. They could keep all the revenue from the broadcast or just say sorry Iowa you are not going to be on TV for the next 20 years. Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too. Why is the 6 year GOR bullshit? No other conference has anything tying the members into basically a contract to stay in the conference. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the Big 10 and Pac-12 have both set it up so that they handed their rights back over to the conference for Tier 1 and 2. So there are other conferences doing this.Maybe I am misunderstanding. I thought the GOR goes beyond basic revenue sharing and goes into the penalities for leaving. Essentially stating that if you leave in that time period you are responsible for paying the conference your portion of the rights. ie Mizzou leaves after year 2 of the 6 year GOR, they have to pay $80 million if the teams are earning $20 mil/year on the tier 1 & 2 contracts.Even still I don't get how the GOR is a slap in the face.
Quote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 05:02:32 PMQuote from: Belvis Noland on October 05, 2011, 04:54:59 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.My understanding is that the schools are giving all their broadcast rights to the conference so lets say Iowa wanted to join the Big 12. The Big 10 then gets to decide everything about Iowa broadcasts. They could keep all the revenue from the broadcast or just say sorry Iowa you are not going to be on TV for the next 20 years. Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too. Why is the 6 year GOR bullshit? No other conference has anything tying the members into basically a contract to stay in the conference. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the Big 10 and Pac-12 have both set it up so that they handed their rights back over to the conference for Tier 1 and 2. So there are other conferences doing this.
Quote from: Belvis Noland on October 05, 2011, 04:54:59 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.My understanding is that the schools are giving all their broadcast rights to the conference so lets say Iowa wanted to join the Big 12. The Big 10 then gets to decide everything about Iowa broadcasts. They could keep all the revenue from the broadcast or just say sorry Iowa you are not going to be on TV for the next 20 years. Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too. Why is the 6 year GOR bullshit? No other conference has anything tying the members into basically a contract to stay in the conference.
Quote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.My understanding is that the schools are giving all their broadcast rights to the conference so lets say Iowa wanted to join the Big 12. The Big 10 then gets to decide everything about Iowa broadcasts. They could keep all the revenue from the broadcast or just say sorry Iowa you are not going to be on TV for the next 20 years. Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too.
this thread has hit an all new low. wow.
Quote from: chum1 on October 05, 2011, 05:53:16 PMthis thread has hit an all new low. wow.Srsly. Can we go back to talking about sight lines? Was 1000x better than what it is right now.
Quote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 05:02:32 PMQuote from: Belvis Noland on October 05, 2011, 04:54:59 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too. Why is the 6 year GOR bullshit? No other conference has anything tying the members into basically a contract to stay in the conference. Yes they do. it was in an article in the NY Times. The Big 10 has a grant of 20 - 25 years.
Quote from: Houstoncat93 on October 05, 2011, 05:34:43 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2011, 05:02:32 PMQuote from: Belvis Noland on October 05, 2011, 04:54:59 PMQuote from: TheHamburglar on October 05, 2011, 04:48:18 PM1. 6 year grant-of-rights with no Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which Mizzou refuses to sign.Mizzou countered with the following:2. 13 year grant-of-rights with a Big12 rule against HS content on LHN, which UT refuses to sign.Gotta say, I back Mizzou on this one. The LHN is a recruiting service funded by ESPN. That's rough ridin' bullshit. The 6 year GOR is bullshit too. If KSU had options, I'd tell UT to eff off too. Why is the 6 year GOR bullshit? No other conference has anything tying the members into basically a contract to stay in the conference. Yes they do. it was in an article in the NY Times. The Big 10 has a grant of 20 - 25 years.pac has it too I believe.
in the end, EMAW will always win.
HEY, I'M STEVE DAVE! WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT IF WE HAD A SITE LIKE KSUFANS EXCEPT FULL OF POSTERS FROM KSTATEFANS AND GPC? OKAY? SOUNDS AWESOME! ROLL CALL!
We need more/better Twitter posts.
@DanWolkenRealignment has officially jumped the shark when Tulane is being mentioned. TULANE http://es.pn/nZz9ji
Missouri also mad that KstateHD has rights to broadcast paking highlights?! Wow
