Bowlsby - Some Interesting Comments on Expansion & LHN

[Chitownhorn]

Bowlsby's not a fan of LHN.

http://newsok.com/big-12-qa-with-big-12-commissioner-bob-bowlsby/article/5361578/?page=1

 

[Lukus Alderman]

Bowlsby's not a fan of LHN.

http://newsok.com/big-12-qa-with-big-12-commissioner-bob-bowlsby/article/5361578/?page=1

The guy sure doesn't know how to make friends with the big boys.

 

[streettopeschel]

'boulder in the road'? road to what?

i'm sure that line played well to the rubes in an Oklahoma audience, but not sure what it really means. ND effectively has their own network and somehow the ACC still worked them in.

 

[monarch]

i am most certain that this dude was completely aware as per the LHN before he signed on as commissioner of the big 12.  his current comments are nothing but spin.  he's just trying to appear to all of the powers that be... that he has no bias towards the big 12 cash cow that is TEXAS!

please trust me, we all can see right through this major spin job....

 

[Davharjac]

I don't really see what's wrong with what he said. It's true LHN makes establishing a Big 12 network or something along those lines difficult. That being said Texas did what was best for Texas, and I don't feel that they should have done anything else. At the same time I can see how the rest of the conference would be upset. It takes a special program to be able to carry their own network, Texas is one of the few...there isn't another program in the Big 12 that could. 

 

[doc longhorn]

Bowlsby doesn't make decisions for The University of Texas.  Furthermore, it will be a frosty day in May before UT gives the LHN up.

Now if the Big 12 is REALLY unhappy with the LHN, I'm sure there are several conferences that would be more than happy to accept the LHN , if it included UT joining their conference.

 

[BevoBlake]

His comments about the LHN are somewhat annoying but I'll give him credit...at least he's looking to the future for programming ideas instead of trying to imitate what other conferences are doing. There is a little bit of truth to what he says, it's reasonable to believe that in the next 5-10 years consumers will no longer need cable subscriptions to watch live sporting events. With that in mind, is it really all that profitable or advantageous to move forward with the same model? 

I don't know, just some of my thoughts. Maybe he isn't speaking out of his backside as much as we'd initially think.

 

[doc longhorn]

The Big 12 should have an opportunity to establish a solid Big 12 network when all the contracts for the tier 2 level expire.  There would be some flak from the networks, of course, but the UT and OU leverage should win out.  The tier 3 levels should then still be available for those programs that still belly ache over the LHN.

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

His comments about the LHN are somewhat annoying but I'll give him credit...at least he's looking to the future for programming ideas instead of trying to imitate what other conferences are doing. There is a little bit of truth to what he says, it's reasonable to believe that in the next 5-10 years consumers will no longer need cable subscriptions to watch live sporting events. With that in mind, is it really all that profitable or advantageous to move forward with the same model? 

I don't know, just some of my thoughts. Maybe he isn't speaking out of his backside as much as we'd initially think.

If the future is ala carte programming, UT and LHN are better positioned than any conference network.  

Just sayin'

 

[echeese]

If the future is ala carte programming, UT and LHN are better positioned than any conference network.  

Just sayin'

Hmmmm,

Maybe DeLoss wasn't as dumb as some of you think. . .