Praise for Chip Brown

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HawkKing81

Well-Known Member
Even though it's unpopular on this site. Chip Brown is starting to get the credit he deserves for being the source during one of the wildest college football stories in recent history. He was right on every step of the way. ESPN had to source Orangebloods during the entire duration of this expansion story, when they didn't, they were wrong.

Here is a good take on it. News Headlines
 
How was he right every step of the way? He was adamant for a week that 5 Big 12 schools were going to the Pac 10. Then, when it appeared A&M wasn't going along, he was adamant that 4 Big 12 schools were going to the Pac 10. Finally, on the day it all went down, he said the Big 12-2 would be saved...

I enjoyed following his updates, but he flip flopped more than John Kerry and John McCain.
 
I give him.credit for his relationships within Texas. They served him well as Texas was the nexus of all of this. He was also used like a pawn by Texas during the process and that is fine too. If he wants to keep playing to that audience he just guaranteed lifetime employment in that genre and market
 
HawkKing81 said:
Even though it's unpopular on this site. Chip Brown is starting to get the credit he deserves for being the source during one of the wildest college football stories in recent history. He was right on every step of the way. ESPN had to source Orangebloods during the entire duration of this expansion story, when they didn't, they were wrong.

Here is a good take on it. News Headlines
Click to expand...
Completely agree. If you wanted the latest information Orangebloods was the place.
 
JonDMiller said:
I give him.credit for his relationships within Texas. They served him well as Texas was the nexus of all of this. He was also used like a pawn by Texas during the process and that is fine too. If he wants to keep playing to that audience he just guaranteed lifetime employment in that genre and market
Click to expand...

Jon, all insiders with sources in a big story are pawns. It's a way to get a message out without having to say it directly. You know this.
 
JonDMiller said:
I give him.credit for his relationships within Texas. They served him well as Texas was the nexus of all of this. He was also used like a pawn by Texas during the process and that is fine too. If he wants to keep playing to that audience he just guaranteed lifetime employment in that genre and market
Click to expand...

Do you consider yourself a pawn for the university of iowa?
 
JonDMiller said:
I give him.credit for his relationships within Texas. They served him well as Texas was the nexus of all of this. He was also used like a pawn by Texas during the process and that is fine too. If he wants to keep playing to that audience he just guaranteed lifetime employment in that genre and market
Click to expand...


Jon this quote smacks of professional jealousy. The guy was on the inside of maybe the biggest college football story of the year -- seems to me he was just doing his job.

If we are going to characterize all insiders doing their job as pawns -- what does that make you? Or Rob Howe? Or Tom Kakert? Chris Williams?

If you have additional information which suggests that this guy was more than a mouthpiece I would be interested in hearing you out on that. But this looks like petty name calling.
 
HawkeyeMike23 said:
Do you consider yourself a pawn for the university of iowa?
Click to expand...

In the past there have been times, yes. However that sort of a relationship is not something I am looking for now. I automatically look to lean to Iowa's side if given the chance, and always will. I am a fan. There are limits however, such as some of the aspects of the arrest cycle from two years ago.

I was pawnish during the first 6 years of the Alford era. And based on that experience, and being flat lied to, that was the end of my pawn days.

You can have relationships, and people know where your loyalties lie, without being an outright extension of the sports information office. Not that my opinions don't fall in line with theirs from time to time.
 
Last edited:
Pooker said:
Jon this quote smacks of professional jealousy. The guy was on the inside of maybe the biggest college football story of the year -- seems to me he was just doing his job.

If we are going to characterize all insiders doing their job as pawns -- what does that make you? Or Rob Howe? Or Tom Kakert? Chris Williams?

If you have additional information which suggests that this guy was more than a mouthpiece I would be interested in hearing you out on that. But this looks like petty name calling.
Click to expand...

I have no jealously whatsoever. I am doing exactly what I want to do, exactly how I want to do it.

And I have said over and over, Chip is playing to his constituents, and he will be handsomely rewarded. There is nothing wrong with that if that is your choice.

The guy made the choice to report every spoonfed bit from Texas...and that is fine. It is what it is. And yes, there are several pawns in this line of work. Some more than others, some at various times of their career.
 
Just because Chip Brown wasn't producing or selling the snake oil directly, let's be careful not place him on a pedestal for acting as the distributor.
 
Some posters here are blind to subtlety. There is a difference between REPEATING sourced information, and VERIFYING it. This is a distinction Jon makes, and Chip Brown does not.

He was wrong about the Pac-10 - remember he didn't just report the offer (true) but that it would be accepted (false). He was wrong about Baylor. He was wrong about A&M. He was wrong, embarrassingly wrong, when he stated repeatedly that Texas had NEVER TALKED to the Big Ten.
 
I've followed Jon for over 10 years and have never seen him be used as a mouth piece by the University of Iowa in the fashion Brown was for Texas.

Same could be said for Kakert and Howe. I don't recall a situation where the University of Iowa has leaked information in the manor Texas did throughout this.

I have no doubt in my mind via Brown, Texas floated a lot of disingenuous information out there to get a rise out of people, and to see how they would react.
 
Pooker, I just heard Tim Brando of CBS say that Chip was manipulated by Texas. I guess he is jealous of him too, right?
 
Billso said:
Some posters here are blind to subtlety. There is a difference between REPEATING sourced information, and VERIFYING it. This is a distinction Jon makes, and Chip Brown does not.

He was wrong about the Pac-10 - remember he didn't just report the offer (true) but that it would be accepted (false). He was wrong about Baylor. He was wrong about A&M. He was wrong, embarrassingly wrong, when he stated repeatedly that Texas had NEVER TALKED to the Big Ten.
Click to expand...

He was right...the situations changed, but he was right on it every time it changed.

Read the article.
 
JonDMiller said:
Pooker, I just heard Tim Brando of CBS say that Chip was manipulated by Texas. I guess he is jealous of him too, right?
Click to expand...

You could have picked someone better than TIM BRANDO. Lots of non tools have that same opinion as Brando.

I am curious though, hypothetically if Iowa was in the same scenario as Texas (the nexus of the expansion hoopla) and you had an inside source with the Iowa AD giving you the same info...how would you have handled it differently?

Just curious.
 
HawkKing81 said:
You could have picked someone better than TIM BRANDO. Lots of non tools have that same opinion as Brando.

I am curious though, hypothetically if Iowa was in the same scenario as Texas (the nexus of the expansion hoopla) and you had an inside source with the Iowa AD giving you the same info...how would you have handled it differently?

Just curious.
Click to expand...

I'd like to think I would have used quite a bit of it, but not all of it, as Brown was contradicting his own reports sometimes in the same half of the day.
 
roadhawk said:
Completely agree. If you wanted the latest information Orangebloods was the place.
Click to expand...

What good is the "latest information" when it doesn't have an ounce of truth behind it?

At the end of the day, this "huge story" wasn't really much of a story at all. Colorado went to the Pac-10 and Nebraska went to the Big 10. The remaining Big XII stayed together with a promised television deal that appears to be wishful thinking at best and outright deception at worst.

Here's some of Chip Brown's great reporting:

Sources say a TV deal that will hold the B12-Lite together is done. A formal announcement soon. No such deal has been signed, no contract has been drawn up, and every number Beebe gave was pure speculation.

Provisions in this Big 12-Lite TV deal keep the schools from jumping conferences. So they are locked in together (for better or worse). There's no such provision, because there is no TV deal.
Texas A&M regents have the votes to join the SEC and could announce that move as early as next week, sources tell Orangebloods.com So... why did they stay?

Texas will announce its plans to join the Pac-10 after its regents meet next Tuesday, source confirm to Orangebloods.com. Really?

I'm told Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are going to the Pac-10 with or without Texas A&M. That's odd.

Orangebloods.com: Several officials in the Big 12 South have said if Nebraska leaves the conference, the Big 12 is dead. Or perhaps not.

Media has probably let Tom Osborne's view of Texas infect the perception of the relationship between UT and Nebraska. It's good at top. Yep, everybody loves Texas.

Orangebloods.com: Texas, A&M, TTech, OU and Ok St getting invites to Pac-10. Last invite still up in air between CU and Baylor. CU gets the last invite but is the only team to join... nonsensical.

There's a difference between making some mistakes and letting your "sources" play you like a fiddle. Orangebloods.com turned into a propaganda arm for UT, and they used it to get as much money as possible out of the other B12 schools. The fact that people are defending this junk just shows that sports fans would rather have something new to talk about each day, even if it's completely untrue.
 
olivecourt said:
What good is the "latest information" when it doesn't have an ounce of truth behind it?

At the end of the day, this "huge story" wasn't really much of a story at all. Colorado went to the Pac-10 and Nebraska went to the Big 10. The remaining Big XII stayed together with a promised television deal that appears to be wishful thinking at best and outright deception at worst.

Here's some of Chip Brown's great reporting:

Sources say a TV deal that will hold the B12-Lite together is done. A formal announcement soon. No such deal has been signed, no contract has been drawn up, and every number Beebe gave was pure speculation.

Provisions in this Big 12-Lite TV deal keep the schools from jumping conferences. So they are locked in together (for better or worse). There's no such provision, because there is no TV deal.
Texas A&M regents have the votes to join the SEC and could announce that move as early as next week, sources tell Orangebloods.com So... why did they stay?

Texas will announce its plans to join the Pac-10 after its regents meet next Tuesday, source confirm to Orangebloods.com. Really?

I'm told Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are going to the Pac-10 with or without Texas A&M. That's odd.

Orangebloods.com: Several officials in the Big 12 South have said if Nebraska leaves the conference, the Big 12 is dead. Or perhaps not.

Media has probably let Tom Osborne's view of Texas infect the perception of the relationship between UT and Nebraska. It's good at top. Yep, everybody loves Texas.

Orangebloods.com: Texas, A&M, TTech, OU and Ok St getting invites to Pac-10. Last invite still up in air between CU and Baylor. CU gets the last invite but is the only team to join... nonsensical.

There's a difference between making some mistakes and letting your "sources" play you like a fiddle. Orangebloods.com turned into a propaganda arm for UT, and they used it to get as much money as possible out of the other B12 schools. The fact that people are defending this junk just shows that sports fans would rather have something new to talk about each day, even if it's completely untrue.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand that this was a very fluid situation. Things were changing on a constant basis. A week ago, nobody knew what the conferences were going to look like, not even Texas. There was a lot of lobbying, negotiating and out. The situation changed and as it did Chip Brown reported those changes and was the first to report them. He was right all along.

It still is a fluid situation. Who knows what might happen next? Nobody, but I would put my money on CB to be the first to know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top