FCS Delivers Sooner Sports TV Nationwide - SoonerSports.com - Official Athletics Site of the Oklahoma Sooners (http://www.soonersports.com/genrel/121312aac.html)

Will be available to more than 80 million homes and be seen in the nation's 25 largest cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, San Diego and Dallas......

Nearly 400 hours of OU Athletics programming will bebroadcast to 80 million homes….

This looks like a more sustainable model than the longhorn network

This is an incredible opportunity.

-- It's a big "F You!" to the Longhorn Network.

-- Does this mean increased revenue for OU or does the original deal remain the same?

-- We need to get better sets so that we don't look so second-rate on national TV.

This is an incredible opportunity.

-- It's a big "F You!" to the Longhorn Network.

-- Does this mean increased revenue for OU or does the original deal remain the same?



This is an incredible opportunity for a small state university like OU.
It probably won’t make near as much money at the Texas longhorn network but it’s in more homes and on an established network.

It also offers OU fans who are scattered across the nation an opportunity to become more engaged with the university, possibly leading to donations and merchandise sales.

It has recruiting implications that should help OU better recruit in all sports.

So how do I get the network here in Cleveland?

-- Does this mean increased revenue for OU or does the original deal remain the same?

The phrase "Sooner Sports TV has reached an agreement with Fox College Sports to distribute its content to a nationwide audience", mostly means they have agreed on a price to for Fox to do this

-- Does this mean increased revenue for OU or does the original deal remain the same?



The additional money that OU should make from this expanded TV deal is unclear at this point, at least to me?

However there were assumptions made in the media that OU would be making additional 5 to 7 million more from its TV network deal even before this new deal was announced. I would image we will soon hear more updated speculation.

I'm surprised Fox went for it. By all accounts that I've seen, Longhorn Network has been pretty much a disaster for ESPN, which makes sense because outside of Longhorn fans and alums, there's not going to be an interest in old UT games and other UT sports, and that's certainly not going to have widespread appeal. I'd imagine the OU network is going to be in a similar boat.

I'm surprised Fox went for it. By all accounts that I've seen, Longhorn Network has been pretty much a disaster for ESPN, which makes sense because outside of Longhorn fans and alums, there's not going to be an interest in old UT games and other UT sports, and that's certainly not going to have widespread appeal. I'd imagine the OU network is going to be in a similar boat.

Because LHN and OU's "network" are similar only in the fact that they share a common word: "Network." LHN is trying to pull off this goofy hat trick that they are so coveted and vital an intellectual property entity across the world that they can market a dedicated, 24x7 resource with nothing but UT content. You have to give ol Deloss Dodds and crew a great deal of sales credit, because they managed to sell ESPN on the concept so thoroughly that they paid out the ear for it, although it could be argued the agreement was more of a defensive move on ESPN's part in order to keep the content out of Fox's hands.

As far as whether it's a disaster for ESPN, that depends on how you look at it. On the surface, yeah, it looks idiotic to have shelled out that much cash for LHN rights. However, the bigger picture isn't about Texas. ESPN is waging a not-too-secret war to get FOX out of the sports/CFB coverage business entirely, and they surely didn't want to deal with any form of exclusivity for Texas content (regardless of its actual vs perceived worth), so, in view of their larger strategy, paying a premium for LHN wasn't quite so crazy. I will say, however, that I don't think ESPN expected it to be quite the dud it has turned out to be.

OU's network, by contrast, isn't anywhere *near* that ambitious. Its selective content - as noted, just a few hundred hours - which can be woven into FCS content as appropriate.

Great nationwide exposure, great fit, I think.

More broadly, though, I think OU fans everywhere need to step back and appreciate just how good an AD we have in Joe C. If you consider the financial environment he's in, and what he's done for athletics at OU, to appreciate what he's accomplished is nothing short of amazing. When you see some notable schools such as Nebraska go through their own disasters such as Steve Pederson, or public hiring/firing debacle of Leach at TTU, or the scandals at Ohio State for impermissible benefits, etc., OU has emerged as I think a school with a pretty well respected athletic program. Long way from the ragged end of the Switzer days, and I say that as someone who loved/grew up watching OU wishbone people to pieces!

Kudos Joe C!

Because LHN and OU's "network" are similar only in the fact that they share a common word: "Network." LHN is trying to pull off this goofy hat trick that they are so coveted and vital an intellectual property entity across the world that they can market a dedicated, 24x7 resource with nothing but UT content. You have to give ol Deloss Dodds and crew a great deal of sales credit, because they managed to sell ESPN on the concept so thoroughly that they paid out the ear for it, although it could be argued the agreement was more of a defensive move on ESPN's part in order to keep the content out of Fox's hands.

As far as whether it's a disaster for ESPN, that depends on how you look at it. On the surface, yeah, it looks idiotic to have shelled out that much cash for LHN rights. However, the bigger picture isn't about Texas. ESPN is waging a not-too-secret war to get FOX out of the sports/CFB coverage business entirely, and they surely didn't want to deal with any form of exclusivity for Texas content (regardless of its actual vs perceived worth), so, in view of their larger strategy, paying a premium for LHN wasn't quite so crazy. I will say, however, that I don't think ESPN expected it to be quite the dud it has turned out to be.

OU's network, by contrast, isn't anywhere *near* that ambitious. Its selective content - as noted, just a few hundred hours - which can be woven into FCS content as appropriate.

Great nationwide exposure, great fit, I think.

More broadly, though, I think OU fans everywhere need to step back and appreciate just how good an AD we have in Joe C. If you consider the financial environment he's in, and what he's done for athletics at OU, to appreciate what he's accomplished is nothing short of amazing. When you see some notable schools such as Nebraska go through their own disasters such as Steve Pederson, or public hiring/firing debacle of Leach at TTU, or the scandals at Ohio State for impermissible benefits, etc., OU has emerged as I think a school with a pretty well respected athletic program. Long way from the ragged end of the Switzer days, and I say that as someone who loved/grew up watching OU wishbone people to pieces!

Kudos Joe C!

espn and fox are now partners in the BIG 12 and the Pac 12 for the next decade plus .... they are both in a war to keep comcast out of college football ..

their is a very good chance that ESPN loses the Big 10 entirely when their rights come up in 2017 ... fox is the BIG's 50% partner in the BTN

This is an incredible opportunity for a small state university like OU.
It probably won’t make near as much money at the Texas longhorn network but it’s in more homes and on an established network.

It also offers OU fans who are scattered across the nation an opportunity to become more engaged with the university, possibly leading to donations and merchandise sales.

It has recruiting implications that should help OU better recruit in all sports.

texas makes 15mil (plus more eventually depending on distro) .. OU makes 7 mil ...

espn and fox are now partners in the BIG 12 and the Pac 12 for the next decade plus .... they are both in a war to keep comcast out of college football ..

their is a very good chance that ESPN loses the Big 10 entirely when their rights come up in 2017 ... fox is the BIG's 50% partner in the BTN

Fox doesn't trust ESPN as far as it could throw it.

I read about this ongoing warfare in some media journal roughly a year ago (sorry, can't remember any name or offer a link), and it was quite specific about how ESPN wanted FOX out. A partnership in the Big12 doesn't change that strategy at all, IMHO, because if ESPN continues to maneuver in that direction they'd probably offer to buy out Fox's portion of the partnership.

ESPN is a ruthless media empire, folks. Don't think otherwise for a second. The Big 12-2 isn't staying where it is in terms of membership for nothing.

texas makes 15mil (plus more eventually depending on distro) .. OU makes 7 mil ...

Considering the volume of content OU will be providing, versus the availability, I think that's still a great deal for OU. Heck, I'm an OU grad, been an OU fan forever, but I realize that in terms of $$$ resources and scope, we're never going to be a Texas, so for OU to be able to strike its own media deal of that scope I think is fabulous, especially considering the cost and effort that won't have to be expended to produce the content.

Don't underestimate that at least part of the angst in the Longhorn football offices these days is the amount of time the school expects Mack (and whomever replaces him) to participate in LHN content creation. It's no big secret Mack doesn't like it, but any new coach coming in won't like it either, but if they want that job (whenever it comes open), that'll be part of it. OU will be creating that content, but I strongly suspect it won't be coming at odds with the coaching staff. That's just another way the LHN is a really, really odd duck.

Fox doesn't trust ESPN as far as it could throw it.

I read about this ongoing warfare in some media journal roughly a year ago (sorry, can't remember any name or offer a link), and it was quite specific about how ESPN wanted FOX out. A partnership in the Big12 doesn't change that strategy at all, IMHO, because if ESPN continues to maneuver in that direction they'd probably offer to buy out Fox's portion of the partnership.

ESPN is a ruthless media empire, folks. Don't think otherwise for a second. The Big 12-2 isn't staying where it is in terms of membership for nothing.

espn can't force fox out ... fox owns 50% of the BTN has the BIG championship game ... and is likley to get the rest of the BIG in 2017

fox and espn are co partners on Pac 12 content ... they trade the Pac12 championship game every other year (they partnered to keep comcast out)

they are partners on the BIG 12 ... espn gave fox the right to put games on NETWORK FOX in exchange to put BIG 12 games on ESPN/ESPN2 along with ABC

Fox is not going any where ..

Boulder, do you know how much in additional revenue OU stands to gain from this expanded coverage? I haven't seen any estimate anywhere else.

espn can't force fox out ... fox owns 50% of the BTN has the BIG championship game ... and is likley to get the rest of the BIG in 2017

fox and espn are co partners on Pac 12 content ... they trade the Pac12 championship game every other year (they partnered to keep comcast out)

they are partners on the BIG 12 ... espn gave fox the right to put games on NETWORK FOX in exchange to put BIG 12 games on ESPN/ESPN2 along with ABC

Fox is not going any where ..

boulder, not meaning to argue, but ESPN is calculating every move they make. They are willing to make short-term concessions to FOX if they still, right or wrong, have in their own minds a path/mechanism to cut FOX out at some point, and the goals stretch way beyond the boundaries of college football.

We'll see how it all turns out. Not saying FOX is going anywhere imminently, but make no mistake about ESPN's preferred future for them - up to and including simply buying them out at some point. No question that NBC Sports (Comcast) is probably complicating that deal, as I'm not sure either expected a strong third party to enter the fray so aggressively.

Should be fascinating to see how it all plays out.

When it comes to ESPN and FOX working together it’s like keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer.
That’s why they work together in some cases.

Fox desires more college football coverage ESPN views this as a threat to their power.
As SoonerDave correctly points out the money paid to Texas for the Longhorn network is about far more than just the coverage of UT sports.

By having UT so beholden to ESPN they control Texas enough to have a major say in conference realignment and in TV negotiations… Texas has been perhaps the biggest player in the realignment discussions.
ESPN doesn’t want anything that could threaten their strangle hold on the power they have over college sports.

boulder, not meaning to argue, but ESPN is calculating every move they make. They are willing to make short-term concessions to FOX if they still, right or wrong, have in their own minds a path/mechanism to cut FOX out at some point, and the goals stretch way beyond the boundaries of college football.

We'll see how it all turns out. Not saying FOX is going anywhere imminently, but make no mistake about ESPN's preferred future for them - up to and including simply buying them out at some point. No question that NBC Sports (Comcast) is probably complicating that deal, as I'm not sure either expected a strong third party to enter the fray so aggressively.

Should be fascinating to see how it all plays out.

fox is in they are not going away .. .

espn partnered with fox (and vice versa) to keep NBC/comcast out of big time college football .. period

Boulder, do you know how much in additional revenue OU stands to gain from this expanded coverage? I haven't seen any estimate anywhere else.

i would bet very little .. this latest deal was more about coverage than money ... the reported figure continues to be 5-7 mil a year

And I used to think it was a game. Tell me, again why we don't just out and out pay college football athletes (above the table, that is) and call it what it really is: a farm league for the NFL?

fox is in they are not going away .. .

espn partnered with fox (and vice versa) to keep NBC/comcast out of big time college football .. period

I am certain that's precisely what ESPN wants Fox to believe.

I am certain that's precisely what ESPN wants Fox to believe.

i'm sure that is precisely what fox wants espn to believe also ..

And I used to think it was a game. Tell me, again why we don't just out and out pay college football athletes (above the table, that is) and call it what it really is: a farm league for the NFL?

are you going to pay bball players men and women tennis golf ect?? athletic depts do NOT make money ... almost all of them lose money

i'm sure that is precisely what fox wants espn to believe also ..

Boulder, I'm not sure what the issue is for you on this thread, and as I said before I'm not interested in arguing, but all I'm telling you is that what you are asserting (which is that ESPN and FOX are now best buddies) is in direct opposition to an article I read in a trade magazine about sports broadcasting. I know zilch about the sports broadcasting business, and perhaps you have greater insight than I do (even in the business itself, and that'd be great), but on a message board like this I have little option to defer to that source - a legitimate article that talked and analyzed in very frank terms about all manner of behind the scenes dealings you and I and the grand piano never even remotely conceive of in the battle for all the college and pro sports rights.

It was the unmistakable point of that article that, among other things, ESPN wants to push FOX completely out of the college sports broadcasting game over the long haul, even in spite of intermediate agreements and "partnering" arrangements that may occur in the interim. ESPN is very much seen as an aggressive, naked predator in the sports broadcasting world. So, as far as their intent with Fox goes, I get that you don't agree with those intentions, and that's certainly your prerogative, but understand there are those who most certainly are in the business that believe that's precisely ESPN's final objective.

If you want to keep this going, feel free, but I have nothing of fresh value to add, so I'm done on this part of the thread.

Have an awesome day.

And I used to think it was a game. Tell me, again why we don't just out and out pay college football athletes (above the table, that is) and call it what it really is: a farm league for the NFL?

Biggest problem with a university paying an athlete is that if you pay any of them, Title IX rears its ugly head and demands you pay all of them. That's why the stipend issue that arose earlier this year with the NCAA raised so many eyebrows, because there are a great deal more institutions that can't *begin* to afford to pay any student athlete anything than even begin to contemplate paying all of them something, or face the costs of extended Title IX litigation if they don't.

It's a nightmarishly complicated issue. What's sad for me is that no one seems to be placing any value whatsoever on the value of a college education, which is (at least theoretically) what they're getting in exchange for playing (whatever) at that school.

Boulder, I'm not sure what the issue is for you on this thread, and as I said before I'm not interested in arguing, but all I'm telling you is that what you are asserting (which is that ESPN and FOX are now best buddies) is in direct opposition to an article I read in a trade magazine about sports broadcasting. I know zilch about the sports broadcasting business, and perhaps you have greater insight than I do (even in the business itself, and that'd be great), but on a message board like this I have little option to defer to that source - a legitimate article that talked and analyzed in very frank terms about all manner of behind the scenes dealings you and I and the grand piano never even remotely conceive of in the battle for all the college and pro sports rights.

It was the unmistakable point of that article that, among other things, ESPN wants to push FOX completely out of the college sports broadcasting game over the long haul, even in spite of intermediate agreements and "partnering" arrangements that may occur in the interim. ESPN is very much seen as an aggressive, naked predator in the sports broadcasting world. So, as far as their intent with Fox goes, I get that you don't agree with those intentions, and that's certainly your prerogative, but understand there are those who most certainly are in the business that believe that's precisely ESPN's final objective.

If you want to keep this going, feel free, but I have nothing of fresh value to add, so I'm done on this part of the thread.

Have an awesome day.

please show me where i said they are buddies ...... of course espn wants fox out ... and fox wants espn out ... both know that is never going to happen ... (BTN is only going to get bigger fox is a 50% owner) they "partnered" to keep it a 2 team race .. and not let Comcast(nbc) get a hold

are you going to pay bball players men and women tennis golf ect?? athletic depts do NOT make money ... almost all of them lose money

The NCAA on the other hand...

It's a nightmarishly complicated issue. What's sad for me is that no one seems to be placing any value whatsoever on the value of a college education, which is (at least theoretically) what they're getting in exchange for playing (whatever) at that school.

Sure you get an education but what about the players that have their likeness used for video games or the ones that have their jersey sold in stores all around? The school, NCAA, and EA Games get to profit off of them, why shouldnt the student-athlete get their share?

This is why Im glad Manziel's family has attempted to trademark Johnny Football so they can keep others from profitting off his stardom.