- Ban junk food advertising during family tv shows, say mps
- Tory chairman lord feldman interviewed as witness over bullying row
- Jeremy corbyn to make ruling on labour stance over syria air strikes
- HIV-positive doctor says his dog saved his life
- Trump drops event with black pastors after some object
- Princess charlotte pretty in pink as kate and william release official photos
- World leaders begin talks over climate change after marchers demand action
- Peter andre becomes ninth celebrity to waltz off strictly come dancing
- British Brimstone missiles can hit vehicles doing 70mph generating little debris
- Tyson Fury has a darkside and he's not afraid to show it after Kitschko win
More from Sports
- Rafa Benitez's relationship with Real Madrid stars 'looks broken', claims Steven Gerrard
- Jose Aldo 'can't wait' for UFC unification bout with Conor McGregor
- Chelsea star Willian is Europe's finest... but Nemanja Matic is shadow of his former self - FIVE THINGS WE LEARNED
- Tyson Fury to have dad John in his corner against Wladimir Klitschko following prison sentence for gouging man's eye out
- Duncan Watmore reminds me of Gareth Bale, says Sunderland striker Jermain Defoe
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.”