Quote:
Originally Posted by jAZ
From what I have posted and read from "my source" (heh)... Pac-12 feels like they have the cards. They are VERY satisfied with where they are today. They felt like UT and OU (even with TT and OSU) would improve things, but not overwhelmingly. They had a plan to let UT save face by "keeping" their network (in name only, basically) but allowing all teams to have equal money ultimately (because the Pac-12 media deal is better than what the Big-12 overall can get... and all teams in the Pac-12/6 are and would make more money than UT would in the Big-12).
But Pac-12 wanted UT, OU, KU and MU ideally. And the politics and demands of UT were becoming complicated. So the Pac-12 cut off further discuss.
They *were* interested. But on their terms.
You are right that UT felt like they wanted to get certain things and they weren't happy without those things. So in that sense UT was still holding out. But as I understand it, it's the Pac12 that walked away. Not UT.
|
It doesn't matter who walked out first. There's no more reason to believe that Texas was desperate to get into the Pac12 than there is to believe that the Pac12 was desperate to have them. They both saw the possibility of a benefit and pursued it for a while, but in the end, neither got what they wanted and the talks broke down. That's my point. Larry Scott's statement and your posts based on a Pac12 source are spun to cast the Pac12 in the best possible light. I'm sure DeLoss Dodds could tell the exact same story with a more favorable Texas flavor and both would be true. The Pac12 isn't crying because Texas left them at the altar but Texas isn't either.