Brad Rock: Rock On: ESPN needs facts from (duh!) ESPN

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Nov. 27, 2012 11:17 a.m.

    It looks like BYU is learning double speak from ESPN. They never denied the story was true they simply labeled in "speculation" and said they have a policy of not commenting on stories they have labeled "speculation." Sounds like a non-denial denial to me.

  • Levin Hightstown, NJ
    Nov. 27, 2012 5:57 a.m.

    I think it's a smart move. Rutgers is not invited to the B1G because so many New Yorkers love Rutgers. It is simply an "in" to get the Big Ten Network on a more basic cable tier in the NY area. Yes, some people will watch Rutgers-Minnesota, but TONS of people will watch the other BTN games and programs in the NY area.

    This move helped me make sense of the Pac 12 not inviting BYU along with Utah. Utah was (at the time) the best team that could provide an "in" to get the Pac 12 Network into Wasatch Front homes. They didn't need BYU, per se. They invited Colorado because they were the default team to provide an "in" to Denver homes. Again, while it was a move to capture the market that would watch any Utah or Colorado game, it's as much a move to get folks in those areas to watch, say, Oregon - Oregon State on the Pac 12 network(s).

    Given this, if the Pac 12 sees SLC as a valuable TV market, it is very probable that the Big 12 could make the same decision with BYU.

  • SpanishImmersed Mesa, AZ
    Nov. 26, 2012 8:58 p.m.

    Rutgers is no where in the same league as any of the Big Ten schools. Under what scenario would the Big Ten presidents extend such an invite? It's asinine.

    No offense intended, but if such a decision was made by such a prestigious conference, it is well within the realm of possibility that the Big 12 could invite BYU to its league at any unpredictable moment.