Help me out. There have been discussions about the 7th big bowl game, involving Aresco and the BE, presumably non-BCS conferences, and possibly "power five" conferences who would send a 2nd or 3rd place team to this bowl. The discussions presumably involve ESPN, but other networks too (why would they be exclusive to ESPN/Disney?). This is independent ofthe ESPN / BE contract negotiations, right? I can get the theory that ESPN would downplay the BE as part of a campaign to bring down the BE's price - if the BE winds up signing with ESPN during the window. It looks like that's not going to happen, but the main point being - there are more parties involved in the 7th bowl game besides just ESPN. So what benefit does ESPN get out of pushing the market value of the 7th bowl game down???
When Dick Cheney anonymously fed (false) intel on Saddam's metal tubes to the NY Times, and then cited that report on Meet the Press as if it were independently sourced information that backed up his WMD argument to invade Iraq, he had a clear benefit with no downside to it. (That is, until the troops went to the supposed WMD sites and found no WMDs). If ESPN is engaging in a propaganda campaign against the BE... specifically in relation to the value of the 7th bowl game, there's no clear benefit since any other network, FOX, NBC/Comcast, Turner, CBS/Viacom can just buy the bowl game if they decide it's worth it - regardless of what McMurphy's sources are saying.
Am I wrong? are the 7th bowl game contract and the BE TV contract tied together somehow other than in the perceived market value of the BE? I just don't understand the conspiracy here, if someone can explain it to me and provide evidence other than "the timing is supsicious" or "ESPN hates the BE" I might be willing to consider.