Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/25/24 at 1:03 pm to texag7
I'm okay with this. In fact, I'd welcome it. 
Posted on 4/25/24 at 1:07 pm to truth22
Posted on 4/25/24 at 2:59 pm to BigBro
quote:
TexAgs Discussion
Went there.
It was removed.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 3:07 pm to 308
quote:
It was removed
I wish I had taken more screenshots.. quote:
hes not wrong
apparently this thread has been anchored.. but yes
This post was edited on 4/25/24 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 4/25/24 at 3:24 pm to MurphyGator
quote:Nope
Did ESPN offer to partner with OU and A&M to have their own networks, too? If not, then that gave Texas a hugely unfair advantage over other Big 12 schools.
You must remember at the time (unlike today) ESPN was thriving and wanting to take over the broadcast sports world, and part of that plan was experimenting to see if single school networks were viable. Also at the time Texas was coming off two championship appearances in 8 seasons, (won '05, lost '09) and has a large fanbase, not just in Texas. Of course where they failed was basing what they paid out to the university on what cable (soon to become streaming) companies were willing to pay to add LHN to the usual suite of ESPN channels. So with some parts of the country with few Texas fans, LHN sort of became a regional thing, and early on there were even cable providers in Texas who either refused to pay extra for LHN or tried to offset the costs by putting it in an overpriced sports bundle the consumer had to pay extra for. So all in all, failed experiment, and wasnt a competitive advantage at all. Early on ESPN cameras would film practices which was not only a distraction...but according to some a competitive DISadvantage. Or at least the program started the doldrums the same time LHN started.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 4:52 pm to PerrillouxToTexas
Almost exactly even the last 50 years.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News