ABQCOWBOY
Regular Joe....
- Messages
- 58,929
- Reaction score
- 27,716
The LHN contract with UT pays them $300M for 20 years. That equates to $15M per year. Even adding that to the $453M, you are well short of A&M's amount. Both A&M's figures and UT's figures are donations to the overall school, not football revenue.
Actually, that's only the TV contract piece. The LHN is a revenue center which generates it's own profits on it's own, through TV spots etc. There is more to it then that but that's fine. I'm not trying to say that it makes Texas 700 Million annually. Besides, it's not really how much you take in. It's the GP you can make after expenses that really drive a Program.
I also don't think the LHN will be in existence in 20 year's time. It's a failure of a network by all accounts, with not enough diversity of programming to attract anybody except die-hard UT fans. And there's not enough of those to justify a national network. You think the general population in Michigan, Washington state, etc., really care enough about UT to want that channel? I don't.
This takes me back. This is the same thing that was said about ESPN back in the day. Not saying that LHN will be anything like ESPN, ever, but I am saying that the characterization of "Failure of a Network" is wide of the mark at this point in time.
As for people in Michigan, Washington etc., they don't have to want LHN for it to be successful. It can be a regional brand and still produce profits.
But you're right, this may be a one-year anomaly for A&M's donations. It is significant though, and I expect in the coming years the numbers will be roughly equal to what UT pulls. A&M will continue to fill the expanded Kyle Field (already sold out for season tickets before it's even been built) for years and years to come.
I think that in the short term, you can probably pull down numbers that might be close to what Texas is seeing but I don't think that this trend will continue. I think the numbers will move closer to what we have seen in the recent past. The money has to come from somewhere so in order for both Programs to pull in 400K, it would seem logical to assume that more money would have to come into Texas and that's unlikely, IMO, any time soon. I think one will benefit at the expense of the other but I don't think both can be equally prosperous.
I don't agree with you that there are better jobs in college football *FOR* Kevin Sumlin. There's nothing that's set up better than the situation at A&M right now, for him, program-wise. Even if he gets a big offer like you're suggesting, I would bet you it's matched at A&M.
A&M can not match what Texas or USC can offer long term. They just can't. They can try but the profit base is just not there. It's the same reason Alabama could not match either school if they really wanted to go after Saban. I believe that TAM would have every intention of trying to do so but I just don't see it.
We will agree to disagree.
And I'm not sure even the UT job is a better coaching position than the A&M job at the moment, for ANYBODY, in all honesty.
From a money standpoint, a recruiting standpoint, a facilities standpoint, it absolutely is. If you are saying that the quality of life in College Station is better, I can't speak for that. The relationship a HC has with the University, I don't know about that. Before Sumlin, life was horrific on TAM HCs. We are still pretty new into the Sumlin era. Things could be different if he doesn't continue to win. Hard for me to judge that but for the rest, no question, Texas is better IMO.