We will agree to disagree. Canzano inserted himself into the story, became a mouthpiece for the Pac-12, and refused to listen to other sources reporting information that completely contradicted the information he was getting. I was following both sides all along, and was very curious to see who was correct. It's evident now.
We will agree to disagree. Canzano inserted himself into the story, became a mouthpiece for the Pac-12, and refused to listen to other sources reporting information that completely contradicted the information he was getting. I was following both sides all along, and was very curious to see who was correct. It's evident now.
I don't have any problem with John reporting what Pac-12 insiders were telling him. The problem I have is his refusal to go to other sources that were clearly out there telling a completely different story. You print both and let the reader decide, if you are a real reporter. At least, that is what I was taught in journalism school.
Where it gets a little tricky is for an opinion guy, which John was at the Oregonian. And maybe he fancies himself as that today. But if that's the case, he's completely misrepresented himself by telling us over and over that if you read him you get real, sourced reporting. We didn't.
You seem to be placing a lot of importance on the concept of "Who was correct". I think you go off-track in doing so.
The implosion that occurred last week came very (very) close to not happening. FOX threw in additional funds that caused Oregon and Washington to jump ship. Had FOX not provided the extra last-minute money -- all presidents are saying that the 9 schools would have stayed together in the PAC12. That would have made John "correct". The fact that FOX swayed things at the end does not mean that John's earlier reporting was bad/wrong.
In the final eventful week John was reporting that Oregon was the key. And he was right. Perhaps we can both agree on this point.
Colorado jumping killed the linear deal that accompanied the streaming deal, correct?
So the genius reporter would have called that sequence - "Colorado won't wait until the 7/31 meeting, they'll jump quicker." And then called "Oregon and Washington will be in until a bailout an hour before the vote to accept "
I did not see a soul predict either. I could go back through the comments here to see otherwise. And maybe it happened - anyone can predict anything. Sometimes that will be right. But predicting something on social media is not close to being a decision maker in the room. It's worthless, it's guessing, it's betting that one out of four outcomes will happen and being right without any inside influence or knowledge.
I know very clearly what should have happened two-five-twenty years ago to have created a much better outcome for college football and the big names and the small names. I don't think that hindsight makes me a genius.
We will agree to disagree. Canzano inserted himself into the story, became a mouthpiece for the Pac-12, and refused to listen to other sources reporting information that completely contradicted the information he was getting. I was following both sides all along, and was very curious to see who was correct. It's evident now.
I don't have any problem with John reporting what Pac-12 insiders were telling him. The problem I have is his refusal to go to other sources that were clearly out there telling a completely different story. You print both and let the reader decide, if you are a real reporter. At least, that is what I was taught in journalism school.
Where it gets a little tricky is for an opinion guy, which John was at the Oregonian. And maybe he fancies himself as that today. But if that's the case, he's completely misrepresented himself by telling us over and over that if you read him you get real, sourced reporting. We didn't.
You seem to be placing a lot of importance on the concept of "Who was correct". I think you go off-track in doing so.
The implosion that occurred last week came very (very) close to not happening. FOX threw in additional funds that caused Oregon and Washington to jump ship. Had FOX not provided the extra last-minute money -- all presidents are saying that the 9 schools would have stayed together in the PAC12. That would have made John "correct". The fact that FOX swayed things at the end does not mean that John's earlier reporting was bad/wrong.
In the final eventful week John was reporting that Oregon was the key. And he was right. Perhaps we can both agree on this point.
Colorado jumping killed the linear deal that accompanied the streaming deal, correct?
So the genius reporter would have called that sequence - "Colorado won't wait until the 7/31 meeting, they'll jump quicker." And then called "Oregon and Washington will be in until a bailout an hour before the vote to accept "
I did not see a soul predict either. I could go back through the comments here to see otherwise. And maybe it happened - anyone can predict anything. Sometimes that will be right. But predicting something on social media is not close to being a decision maker in the room. It's worthless, it's guessing, it's betting that one out of four outcomes will happen and being right without any inside influence or knowledge.
I know very clearly what should have happened two-five-twenty years ago to have created a much better outcome for college football and the big names and the small names. I don't think that hindsight makes me a genius.