- Alcatel's strategic undersea cables unit to be swallowed by Nokia
- Swiss court upholds ruling against Swisscom, reduces penalty
- Schrems: the law student who brought down a transatlantic data pact
- Etsy doubles down on manufacturing as it faces off with Amazon
- Adobe 2016 forecast disappoints, shares slump
- Big U.S. firms hold $2.1 trillion overseas to avoid taxes: study
- Microsoft unveils first laptop, updated devices using Windows 10
- Samsung Electronics says third-quarter profit likely up 79.8 percent, beating expectations
- Ravens-Browns Preview With Tony Lombardi
- Charm City Circulator To Expand; Rides To Remain Free
Jon Gruden hasn't been offered Vols coaching job and won't be owning the Browns
More from Sports
- Arsenal's Per Mertesacker enjoys 'synchronised football' with Manchester United's Wayne Rooney on Twitter
- Barcelona are the 'best club in the world' but I needed a new challenge at Chelsea, says Pedro
- Bulls Center Derrick Rose Opens Up About Gun Violence In Joakim Noah's New Documentary
- Professional NBA Player Fell Asleep Or Something While Playing Defense
- NFL Champions Steve Weatherford And Sidney Rice To Donate Brains To Science
The Jon Gruden rumors hit fever pitch last night when it was reported that the former Vols coach was returning to Tennessee. There were also reports that that Gruden would be taking part ownership of the Cleveland Browns.
Unfortunately it doesn’t look like either of those rumors are true.
According to WREG in Memphis, Gruden was offered a contract from the University of Tennessee to be their next head coach. The Vols sweetened the deal by offering an ownership stake in the Cleveland Browns.
Awful Announcing reports that the Vols were able to offer the deal because new Browns owner Jimmy Haslam is a Tennessee Booster.
Gruden and the Clevaland Browns have both denied the rumors.
A Browns spokesman released a statement saying:
“Jimmy Haslam has no involvement in the University of Tennessee head coaching search, and the report that Jon Gruden would potentially have an ownership stake in the Browns is completely erroneous.”