Texas Longhorns (big hat, no cattle; please don’t Horns Down us)

[Dryden]

I realize it wouldn't help with "one" and "won", but BP could really use a spell check.

Does DaddyBigBucks have today off?

 

[Saw31]

Fuk spel chek!!!

 

[Zippercat]

Good idea, and I usually do that. But just this won time I didn't, and I got busted.

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

Does DaddyBigBucks have today off?

 

[Gatorubet]

Eye sea nothing!!

 

[colobuck79]

Eye sea nothing!!

Eye sea what ewe did their.

 

[BB73]

CBS

Mum's the word at Texas regarding Bryant

Texas is not talking about what led to the dismissal of longtime assistant Cleve Bryant in March.

Bryant first came to Texas in 1991 as an assistant under then head coach John Mackovic. In 1995 Bryant left with Mack Brown for North Carolina before returning to Austin with Brown in 1998. He had been employed as an aide at the school ever since. While Bryant still appeared on Texas' website as associate athletics director for football as recently as Friday, the Austin-American Statesman reported that same day that Bryant had not been an employee of the school since March 23rd.

As for what led to the change in Bryant's job status at the school, Texas is not saying.

The president of the University of Texas said Friday he could not discuss the case of a dismissed official with the football program because of legal, procedural and propriety reasons.

...

Bryant's lawyer, Tom Nesbitt, said this week that his client was unjustly terminated from university employment in March and promptly filed a request for a hearing with university officials. The hearing is expected to take place in mid-August, said Nesbitt, who added that Bryant is fighting for his job.​

Of course there's a reason that the school can't talk about Bryant's status at the moment, and that reason is likely related to the internal investigation the school held of the athletic department following allegations by a now former female employee. While the school will not elaborate on what the allegations were, the former staffer did hire Gloria Allred as her attorney, and Allred specializes in cases involving discrimination and sexual harrassment.

Cont'd ...

 

[knapplc]

I post this not because of Tramel's analysis of what this means to Nebraska Fan. Ignore all of his Nebraska comments, because they are 100% irrelevant to the main point.

The main point here is that Texas is already taking a larger slice of the pie than they promised when they launched their Longhorn Network. This is not an aberration, and this will not be the last instance of this. Texas will push and push until they get all they can from the remainder of the Big XII. And the reality is, there are very few, if any, options for schools such as Iowa State, Kansas State, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma State, Baylor, and Texas Tech. If Texas decides to play hardball - and they've done it before - these schools have no choice but to comply. Without Texas the Big XII cannot maintain their AQ status, meaning the death of the athletic budgets for most of these schools.

Big 12 football: ESPN, Fox collusion troubling

The Longhorn Network is getting another game for its stash of content. Fox has allowed ESPN to move one of Texas? conference games to the Longhorn Network.

Moving a Big 12 game to the Longhorn Network will cause quite the uproar this season. Depending on the opponent, it could be a firestorm. If it?s, say, Oklahoma State or Texas Tech, that means fans of the Cowboys or the Red Raiders possibly could have to subscribe to the Longhorn Network to see the game.

Big 12 spokesman Bob Burda said ESPN, which is a partner in the Longhorn Network, has agreed to make a ?best effort? to get the game placed in the market of Texas? opponent, which would minimize the damage. But it?s a PR fiasco.

The blame for this lies at the feet of ESPN and Fox Sports Net. ESPN hatched this idea, trying to build subscribers to the network and recoup its $300 million commitment. But Fox had to sign off. Fox owns the cable rights to Big 12 football; except for one game a year per school, which will almost always be against a rumdum opponent, ABC/ESPN and Fox own the rights to the games.

If a game is going to be on cable television, it?s going to be on Fox Sports Net, or FSN has to grant a waiver. FSN granted a waiver for the Longhorn Network.

FSN had its reasons. Sources say Fox in 2012 wants to move at least one game to big Fox ? its over-the-air network, which televises the NFL and Major League Baseball. Big Fox long has been mentioned as a possible destination for Big 12 football; heck, I?ve been mentioning it myself for years. The Big 12 on Big Fox is an idea whose time has come.

But not at this cost. The indignity of OSU or Tech or Baylor or whoever having to play a game on the Longhorn Network, with UT announcers, is not good for conference morale.

 

[knapplc]

I swear to you it is a matter of time until Texas finally trashes the Big XII. While the smaller schools will never call the Longhorns on their douchebaggery because they NEED the Big XII, Oklahoma and/or Texas A&M will eventually get fed up with this B.S. and strike off like Nebraska and Colorado.

The latest:

Winds of Change Blowing Again?

If you have followed my thoughts on the matter recently, President Loftin has told A&M donors privately that the Big 12-2 deal in its current form was not an ideal solution for Texas A&M, and acknowledged that the sweetheart deal Texas has with ESPN as he said "is a problem for us."

In fact, Loftin has made it crystal clear to A&M people who ask that the university has not signed anything that legally binds A&M to the new Big 12 despite what has been released to the public.

...the SEC felt they could get a new deal by expansion of two teams to get the networks to the table and that a priority was Texas A&M. In fact, my source claims that the SEC has/had Clemson ready to go and they were simply waiting to see if Texas A&M could get their ducks in a row and leave the Big 12.

So, to bring this to a conclusion, I think the big news that has people buzzing is that the A&M leadership that has been mostly hesitant of breaking away from Texas and the Big 12 over the past 13 months now see that the current situation is not feasible in the long-term.

I think the big news from all of this is that Texas A&M leadership privately does not see the Big 12-2 as a good long-term fit for the university. Given the public statements of leadership in support of the new Big 12 in the spring and the resulting apathy from the general fan base to realignment, I see that as pretty significant?if not immediate.

I'm not a big fan of anonymous sources, but there is not only smoke here. There is some fire to this issue, and it's not going to be put out any time soon. ESPN is completely in bed with Texas right now, NOT the Big XII, and they are going to protect their investment. As more ESPN muscle - and slanted "reporting" - gets thrown around, expect patience in College Station and Norman to wear very, very thin.

 

[Dryden]

I think the big news that has people buzzing is that the A&M leadership that has been mostly hesitant of breaking away from Texas and the Big 12 over the past 13 months now see that the current situation is not feasible in the long-term.

If this is big news, it's only big to the Texas A&M leadership, because the rest of us could see where this was going to go 14 months ago.

Of course, that's a big part of what makes A&M A&M. They have no problem playing the part of Texas' snot-nosed, slightly brain damaged, dependant little brother.

 

[knapplc]

Of course, that's a big part of what makes A&M A&M. They have no problem playing the part of Texas' snot-nosed, slightly brain damaged, dependant little brother.

I think that may have been true in the past, but for some time the veil has been lifted from their eyes.

These are two intricately tied programs. Both schools mention the other in their fight songs, as A&M fans took pains to point out to us before our game last November. There is a very long love/hate relationship that, apparently, has taken a turn for the worst in the past few years. Not sure why that is, but A&M seems, as a body, to have had enough.

The question remains whether that "had enough" motivates them to the point where they're going to take action as drastic as leaving the conference. That's a huge step, way bigger in many ways than Nebraska leaving, or Colorado.

And there's the Texas legislature to consider, the body of lawmakers that the PAC-12 has to thank for having Colorado in the fold. Will they let A&M strike off on their own, without Texas? I think if they try, there'll be a war inside the borders of the Longhorn State.

 

[ScriptOhio]

 

[Jaxbuck]

slightly brain damaged, dependant little brother.

 

[FCollinsBuckeye]

I think if they try, there'll be a war inside the borders of the Longhorn State.

 

[matcar]

Nice title change.