I’ve decided to be bemused with the insane rumors from the weekend through today.
The funny thing to me is how this spread from some bad message board material and specious, unsourced internet writings. Kept getting picked up and enough people were hearing something to wonder if there was something to it.
Now it gets doused in a bath of logic and reason. Yet if you want to play the game, no one is actually on record of saying anything one way or another — which allows it to fester and keep going.
The biggest refutation on the Big 11 side came from the Chicago Tribune‘s Teddy Greenstein.
Bottom line, a source at the conference reiterated to the Tribune on Monday that the Big Ten will adhere to the timetable it laid out in December: a 12-to-18 month period of analysis. The league will then determine whether it wants to expand and, if so, how many schools it will invite to the party.
Unnamed source, but still no formal statement. But that refutation spread as truth (and for the record I believe it but not because of an unnamed source at the Big 11).
Another popular source was ZagsBlog actually getting a “Pitt spokesman” on the record — something local beat writers couldn’t do.
Internet reports that Pittsburgh is moving to the Big 10 from the Big East are “100 percent’ false, according to multiple sources within the Pittsburgh athletic department.
“There is no announcement to make because there is nothing happening,” said Pitt spokesman Mike Gladysz.
Well, that’s neat except that Mr. Gladysz is not an employee of Pitt’s athletic department. Oh, he works in the area. He is employed by ISP Sports Network as an editor of the Pitt monthly “Panther Eyes.” At least that is what his profile says.
Oh, and that KC Star blog post that wrote:
Speculation is heating up all over the Internet that Pitt has accepted an offer to join the Big Ten Conference.
Here is what popped up on Bleacherreport.com, normally a pretty reliable outlet, just a few hours ago…
[Emphasis added]
Well, that bit has been scrubbed and now he, uh, updated it to say he was just posting the speculation on the internet. Nothing else. No. Of course not.
And the fun keeps coming.
[UPDATE, 5:30: Adam Zagoria has changed his post to delete the attribution to Mr. Gladysz, without indicating he ever wrote it that way. Good to see that responsible journalism hard at work.
UPDATE, 2/2/10, 9:00 AM: Interesting. Now it is back. to the original way written.]