Fact 1: Texas make more football revenue than anyone else.

Fact 2: Texas shares money with the Big 12.

Fact 3: Texas is looking at making a University of Texas athletics network.

Rumor has it that the desire to pursue this network weighed in on their decision a month ago to not join the PAC 10 or SEC. Both of those conferences would not allow a team to form such a network after they join. The Big 12 cobbled together an agreement that divided the outgoing team's fees, their previous share of the revenue pot and promised new TV revenue. This total rivaled what other leagues were promising.

But how does that TV revenue flow once a Texas Longhorns Network is launched? If you were signing a TV deal with the Big 12 now, would you not include a clause allowing you an out if Texas formed their own network? It seems clear to me that the TV revenue would go very much towards Texas and away from the rest of the Big 12. Will the Oklahoma Sooners and Texas A&M Aggies agree to stay once that point is reached?

The formation of a Texas network could spell the death of the Big 12, but the waves would not end there.

First of all, the Texas Network would still be an issue for conference expansion. Texas would be right to insist on taking their TV network into any conference they join. Conferences would be right to avoid having a member with a side revenue that other members don't enjoy. The logical result is that Texas would become an independent. (This is not an entirely new idea.)

Where would the remaining Big 12 teams go? Oh wait. We just looked at that, didn't we. They all said they would go with Texas this time, but that is not an option if they are leaving Texas.

The PAC 10 might be open to a modified version of the 16 team format they sought last year. With Texas out of the equation, it is uncertain what that picture looks like. Oklahoma State and Texas Tech might not be the draw they were when Texas was in the picture. Oklahoma and Texas A&M flirted with the SEC, but chose Texas. The SEC could pickup the four teams mentioned above and go to 16. The remaining teams could join the MWC, who appear to be on pace to be a BCS conference by the time all this happens.

The real question is whether other teams look at Texas and think, hey, why not us? Dedicated TV networks for independents would be a game changer. With complete control of 24-7 coverage of their brand, increased promotion and coverage of all Texas sports and no need to share the revenue with anyone, Texas would have many advantages other teams wouldn't.

"Play us in womans' soccer and we will televise that game." Difficulties in non-football scheduling adds TV programming.

If such a network would generate more revenue than the conference revenue share, the thought of independence would become a viable option. Is a USC Trojans network better than their PAC 10 revenue share? What about an Alabama Crimson Tide network or an Ohio St. Buckeyes network? I would buy a sports tier with those channels, and channels for the conferences that remain, like the Big 10 Network and the Mountain West Network.

If two TV independents play, their networks can simulcast the game.

Conferences would be forced to react. The days of equal revenue sharing would be done, or the top teams will go independent. The MWC and Big 12 already have made this change. The MWC and Big 12 have also been the most consistent movers up the conference standings during the past decade. The ACC and PAC 10 have been the most downward trending conferences and have the most equal revenue sharing plan. Equal revenue sharing costs teams that use resources wisely to produce success and does not motivate teams to improve. It fails just like it did in the Soviet Union.

An independent Texas also throws a big monkey wrench into the ideal super conference design. One could see the super conference design as a precursor to four super conferences whose champions played in a two round tournament. Essentially the conference championship games would be the first round of an eight team playoff.

The first difficulty that arose in this design was that it appeared like a fifth conference (not strong enough to replace any of the others outright, but strong enough to get its top team into the national picture) was about to form. Five super conferences would include 80 teams but make the tournament design problematic. Either one conference would be left out each year or two would have to play an additional round.

The second difficulty is that this design leaves no room for independents. If Texas becomes independent Notre Dame gives up all thoughts of joining any conference in football. They might even look to Texas' model in other sports and consider leaving the Big East. If other teams join the ranks of the now elite independents, a super conference design becomes futile. Nine or twelve members become the optimal numbers for conferences, depending on whether you want a round robin or a championship game format.

The birth of a Texas Network (and the resulting emergence of a new class of TV independents) would be the death of super conferences and a serious strain to any playoff proposal.

The question is, "Is that really such a bad thing?"