i know that i'm slightly late to the party with all this (been working and other things a lot, sorry) but i wanna make one point here on chip brown's article.
that, during all of this, on this twitter (www.twitter.com/ChipBrownOB), not only would he put things out there, but every fifth or so post would put out a free offer to orangebloods.com. he let everyone in for free during that entire 2 week span where he had every scoop.
now, i get that he owns the site w/Rivals, but don't you find it odd that he had all this info before anyone else, even in austin with their ears pinned back ready to report anything had it?? furthermore, he magically needs to put it on his rivals site with a free offer to keep up afterwards? (for the record, he got about 7,000 new subcribers. i'm not sure about how much a month he gets from everyone, but that seems pretty good for his starbucks addiction, no?)
just a few days later after all of this, he kept spouting how Nebraska would owe the Big 12-2 80% of their first year's share in the big 10. i repetedly asked him on twitter (@btbowling) how he came up with such a number, and all he had was that the AD of baylor had told him on his show on espn104.9 in austin.
seems to me that, every morning, he would always be the first one to "break" a story at 6-7 am. so it would be the first topic of conversation on any show in america. magically, he just happened to not have anything to break when he was doing spots for sportscenter during the noon hour or when college football live came a calling.
here's questions that i asked him, and got no response...
- if there was a true offer for four teams to go to the Pac10, and it was a package deal, then why were all schools handled seperately by the Pac 10? if it's a package deal, don't you think all four AD's would have met together and made that deal?
- if you are Joe Castiglione, how are you seriously letting Deloss Dodds decide where your student athletes are going to compete? you can not tell me that the university of oklahoma, along with Okla. St and Texas Tech was just okay with having UT decide on where they were going to go. you can't sell me that Castiglione didn't know that UT was full of it.
- on the same angle, why originally, was Oklahoma getting more of a share than Tech and Oklahoma St from the four north schools and baylor? if oklahoma was going to go anywhere UT went, why was it then necessary for those five schools to give up the money to make sure OU gets paid? if they weren't leaving, why do they need it? a thank you from UT for trusting them?
- what makes you think ESPN/ABC and FSN will pay more for less available games to televise? what makes you think that FSN will (reportedly) raise their stake in your conference a estimated 500%? they only do 2 games, maybe 3 a weekend on their regional channels. they can't put you on national tv, that would upset ABC. also, what makes you think that you'll get the same money the big 10/pac 10 deals with, when they now can get a extra game AND a title game the first week of december?
i do honestly believe that the first school to bolt with be texas tech. they were the very last ones to say yes to anything, and with tuberville's comments, they will be looking for something that they could dominate, more than likely the mountain west. i could see the four north schools left finding something with conference usa.
again, sorry i'm late to the party, but i'd thought i'd share what happened when all this went down. and living in the firestorm (DFW), i got myself into it hot and heavy.
