PDA

View Full Version : Texas Tech Coach Mike Leach fired



DukeFencer
12-28-2009, 10:41 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls09/news/story?id=4776848

For his treatment of a player after player received a concussion. Allegedly includes making player stand by himself in a room where he could not sit or lean.

Player is son of ESPN college football analyst Craig James.

A-Tex Devil
12-29-2009, 07:51 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls09/news/story?id=4776848

For his treatment of a player after player received a concussion. Allegedly includes making player stand by himself in a room where he could not sit or lean.

Player is son of ESPN college football analyst Craig James.

I will note that all of the recent allegations against coaches have come from the Bill Snyder coaching tree (although Leach "married" in).

Dude is a mean summammabich.

roywhite
12-29-2009, 11:58 PM
I will note that all of the recent allegations against coaches have come from the Bill Snyder coaching tree (although Leach "married" in).

Dude is a mean summammabich.

What kind of reputation does Leach have in B12 territory, A-Tex? I see him as a mad genius type, but don't recall hearing stories about him being real hard-nosed toward the players. Any pattern of behavior that would support (or undermine) the current allegations?

Olympic Fan
12-30-2009, 10:47 AM
I beg all of you to remember the way the Duke lacrosse case was reported in the national media -- the assumption of guilt, the repetition of unsubstantiated charges and the rush to condemn and punish people who were only charged and and not convicted of anything (Nancy Grace, are you listening?).

In Leach's case, the stampede has already started. Driving home from the Duke game last night, I listened to a national radio host prat on about how what a vile person Leach was and how the charges must be true because the university suspended him. I guess he couldn't believe that a university would ever overreact to charges and punish a person (or persons) in the name of political correctness.

Look, if Mike Leach did the things in the original accusation, he deserves to be fired and never coach again. But I'm already starting to hear contradictory evidence. His lawyer denies the charges (or course he would, that's not evidence, but still it's a reminder that there MIGHT be another side to this).

All I'm saying is to wait for the facts to come out. Just because charges are repeated over and over in the national media doesn't mean they are true.

juise
12-30-2009, 01:13 PM
First suspended, now fired (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls09/news/story?id=4781981).

A-Tex Devil
12-30-2009, 11:08 PM
Leach is respected as a football strategist, but he's seen as kind of a joke as a CEO/professional type. The TTU AD and him don't like each other and he was almost fired last year when he was negotiating his contract. They were probably looking for a reason to fire him and are hoping that they found a reason "for cause."

IMHO, what he did is pretty tame as far as I'm concerned (especially when compared to the alleged verbal abuse doled out by Mangino and physical abuse by the USF coach), but whatever. "Cause" is tough to prove and the Desert Aggies think they have found a reason. This reeks of an administration that had been looking for a reason to fire him to save some money. Kinda like the Mangino situation.

TTU can slide back into mediocrity for all I care. Anyone that does well there will be gone within 3 years. I am not sure they realize the lightning in a bottle they had in Leach, regardless of his eccentricities. Kids like Michael Crabtree weren't going to Tech for the cosmopolitan metropolis of the high plains. They were going there to play for Leach.

Word on the street is Pat Hill. As a UT fan, that makes me yawn. I could see Kevin Sumlin or someonw like that end up there.

A-Tex Devil
12-30-2009, 11:18 PM
By the way -- lots of facts are coming out. I think Leach gets his severance at the end of the day. Don't care to post the links but among the things I read today:

1. Adam James was not one of the most popular players on the team among the players -- and that is being kind.
2. Craig James may have used his position at ESPN as an influence to get his son more PT.
3. IT has been reported that Leach told Adam James that if his daddy left any more voicemails for the football staff he'd play them for the entire team. Which, frankly, I think is funny.
4. The "closet" that this kid was left in was used for post game interviews at least once.

This is looking more and more to me like an AD that was looking for a reason to fire a guy. Too bad for Tech fans as that team slides back into mediocrity.

sagegrouse
12-31-2009, 12:09 AM
Lets see if I have this straight. Deservedly or not, Mike Leach singled out for punishment the son of a huge football hero in Texas, who is also a respected member of the national sports media.

Now that Bobby Knight has departed Texas Tech, Craig James has a bigger megaphone than everyone else in Lubbock added together. Really smart, Mike!

This is an act of buffoonery on the part of Leach and not a classier concept like "hubris." There is no way this situation could have ended well for Leach or his team. Hey, Mike! Just sit the kid, and if he says he's injured, believe him.

sagegrouse
'Never been to Lubbock but I did drive by the Cadillac Ranch outside of Amarillo once'

Jim3k
12-31-2009, 12:21 AM
This is looking more and more to me like an AD that was looking for a reason to fire a guy. Too bad for Tech fans as that team slides back into mediocrity.

It doesn't take much on the liability scale to force a university's hand. Here you have a coach doubting a player's concussion, despite the team doctor's diagnosis. That alone gets you on the president's carpet, not just the AD's. Then Leach's non-denial and refusal to attend a meeting about it goosed the administration into believing the kid's allegation was true. Finally, it comes down to Leach's unwillingness to follow university policy concerning concussions. That, together with his indifference in responding to the administration's queries, results in a finding of insubordination. That combination gets him suspended.

The $800,000 bonus then looms large. What does Leach do? He files an action seeking a judge's order to permit him to coach in the bowl. Does he want the money or does the university want to avoid paying it?

When he filed the suit, he made the university's decision for them. Bye-bye.

A-Tex Devil
12-31-2009, 12:26 AM
It doesn't take much on the liability scale to force a university's hand. Here you have a coach doubting a player's concussion, despite the team doctor's diagnosis. That alone gets you on the president's carpet, not just the AD's. Then Leach's non-denial and refusal to attend a meeting about it goosed the administration into believing the kid's allegation was true. Finally, it comes down to Leach's unwillingness to follow university policy concerning concussions. That, together with his indifference in responding to the administration's queries, results in a finding of insubordination. That combination gets him suspended.

The $800,000 bonus then looms large. What does Leach do? He files an action seeking a judge's order to permit him to coach in the bowl. Does he want the money or does the university want to avoid paying it?

When he filed the suit, he made the university's decision for them. Bye-bye.


From what I can tell the fact that he didn't believe the injury is coming from the James camp. The other side of the story is that the kid was cutting up in team meetings, etc. All that said, if he isn't so stubborn, he can probably talk his way out of it because frankly, sending a kid to a shed for 3 hours isn't that horrible.

Jim3k
12-31-2009, 12:42 AM
From what I can tell the fact that he didn't believe the injury is coming from the James camp. The other side of the story is that the kid was cutting up in team meetings, etc. All that said, if he isn't so stubborn, he can probably talk his way out of it because frankly, sending a kid to a shed for 3 hours isn't that horrible.

I understand he sent the kid to the shed two days in a row and both times required him to stand for the entire period of the practice, even removing equipment to enforce his instruction. How does that fit with treating a kid with a concussion? The kid came to practice because he had to -- but he should have been permitted to listen if he couldn't workout physically. If he was being a cut-up, you send him off; you don't put him into a closet. Either way, you don't second-guess the doctor. Yet, putting him into the closet without permitting him to sit is such a second-guess.

situation44
12-31-2009, 02:10 AM
http://statestreetsports.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/texas-tech-saga/

Jim3k
12-31-2009, 02:20 AM
http://statestreetsports.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/texas-tech-saga/

On its face, this sounds bogus. If he really wanted to go to SMU, he doesn't need Leach's permission. He just does it, sits out and plays. The schools are in different conferences, so there would be no league rule impediment. (SMU in Conf. USA; TT in Big 12).

Acymetric
12-31-2009, 04:33 AM
On its face, this sounds bogus. If he really wanted to go to SMU, he doesn't need Leach's permission. He just does it, sits out and plays. The schools are in different conferences, so there would be no league rule impediment. (SMU in Conf. USA; TT in Big 12).

I don't believe thats true...if you recall last year Marve wanted to transfer out of Miami, and there was a big fuss about Miami saying he couldn't go to certain (non-ACC) schools. I'm not exactly sure what the rules are, but the school definitely has to give a release for the player to transfer and play at another school.

Jim3k
12-31-2009, 05:26 AM
I don't believe thats true...if you recall last year Marve wanted to transfer out of Miami, and there was a big fuss about Miami saying he couldn't go to certain (non-ACC) schools. I'm not exactly sure what the rules are, but the school definitely has to give a release for the player to transfer and play at another school.

You may be right, at least in part. Keep in mind that scholarships are renewable annually. What you may be thinking about is a situation where the player needs a scholarship at his transferee school. He might not be able to afford school without it. Most kids would not want to attempt that and a scholarship bar might well prevent them from leaving.

But, if the kid wants to transfer badly enough, he might pay his own way to the second school. He'd still have to sit out for that year. Adam James can probably afford to pay for a year. Sure, he'd have to walk on the team, but I think it is fair to say that SMU would permit him to do so.

Nevertheless, the fact that the scholarship contract has no mutuality, would/should disturb any court looking at it. The school has the right to cancel the scholarship annually, but the student does not? I suspect the issue has been litigated somewhere, but have no idea of whatever ruling(s) might have been made.

Despite all that, though, the report still seems bogus. Why would Leach or the AD deny him the right to transfer? Why would the school want to pay for a scholarship for an unhappy player, one who might not give his best effort ... It's money down a rat hole. Wouldn't the school prefer to use that scholarship on someone who wants to be there? Maybe a better player? It makes no financial sense for TT to bar him from transferring to another conference even if it has the right to do so.

My sense is that this report is a type of smear. Keep in mind that there are Leach defenders who would rather blame the victim rather than Leach because of Leach's W-L record. Being a winner is more important to that sort of fan than any individual player. AFAIK, James had a real concussion. Why did he get punished because of it?

There really is no excuse for that, so some other issue needed to be raised.

Leach and his defenders would rather divert the discussion to the kid's supposed misfeasance, not Leach's. Blaming the kid is an easy way to do that. If they have to invent a story, they will. (You know the drill -- blame the rape victim for the rape... This is just a variation of the same thing.)

sagegrouse
12-31-2009, 09:11 AM
Originally Posted by Acymetric
I don't believe thats true...if you recall last year Marve wanted to transfer out of Miami, and there was a big fuss about Miami saying he couldn't go to certain (non-ACC) schools. I'm not exactly sure what the rules are, but the school definitely has to give a release for the player to transfer and play at another school.


Originally posted by Jim3K
You may be right, at least in part. Keep in mind that scholarships are renewable annually. What you may be thinking about is a situation where the player needs a scholarship at his transferee school. He might not be able to afford school without it. Most kids would not want to attempt that and a scholarship bar might well prevent them from leaving.

But, if the kid wants to transfer badly enough, he might pay his own way to the second school. He'd still have to sit out for that year. Adam James can probably afford to pay for a year. Sure, he'd have to walk on the team, but I think it is fair to say that SMU would permit him to do so.

I think the merits of whether Adam James could play football, was recalcitrant on the practice field, was a behavioral problem in team meetings, or wanted to leave are unimportant.

From a communications and public relations perspective, Leach's handling of the situation was an un-mi-ti-ga-ted disaster. Why is communications even relevant, you ask? Well, his poor handling of the situation has cost him his job and millions of dollars.

Should he have rolled over and put up with anything that Adam James did? Of course not.

In dealing with a high-profile athlete, you make sure there are no misunderstandings: Daily meetings with the player. Daily or regular phone calls with Craig James. A meeting once a month with the player and his father. The ultimate message is simply, "We believe Adam is a good football player that can contribute to the Red Raiders. His practice habits and behavior suggests he really doesn't want to play football here. If he wants to play elsewhere, we will do everything we can to help him transfer to the school of his choice." If there are academic issues, these can be dealt with as well. There is no need to go further. And if Adam's behavioral issues are overblown, then, for heaven's sake, treat the kid better!

A simpler was to say this is that Mike Leach should have developed a professional-to-professional relationship with Craig James re his son.

Now, is this singling a kid out and treating him differently from his teammates? Yes and no. This is roughly what should happen with any scholarship athlete. It is just that the personal communications artillery needs to be sized to the situation. Craig James is one of ESPN's lead college football analysts. In other words, he is a com-muni-ca-tions pro-fes-sion-al. I mean, what do you expect will happen if a Texas football hero and professional announcer believes his son is being mistreated?

In short, I stand by my earlier assessment that this episode makes Mike Leach out to be a buffoon. There is no way he should have behaved in this way.

sagegrouse

A-Tex Devil
12-31-2009, 09:19 AM
Now, is this singling a kid out and treating him differently from his teammates? Yes and no. This is roughly what should happen with any scholarship athlete. It is just that the personal communications artillery needs to be sized to the situation. Craig James is one of ESPN's lead college football analysts. In other words, he is a com-muni-ca-tions pro-fes-sion-al. I mean, what do you expect will happen if a Texas football hero and professional announcer believes his son is being mistreated?

In short, I stand by my earlier assessment that this episode makes Mike Leach out to be a buffoon. There is no way he should have behaved in this way.

sagegrouse


I tend to agree with this. Leach has always been this way. He's the opposite of a professional. When things are going well he's the quirky pirate - ain't it cute? When they aren't, you've got what you had here..... HIS failure to communicate.

I don't think Adam and Craig James are the innocent victims here that Craig James is making them out to be on ESPN. That being said, the Tech Chancellor is right that the only person responsible for Leach being fired is Leach.

This isn't a Mangino situation. I think Leach will be back, though he's probably coached at his highest level. If I am a new head coach, I absolutely consider him as my OC and at least give him an interview. NOte I just say consider because I'm not certain Leach is capable of working for anyone. Clearly not an AD, but likely not a head coach either.

Rudy
12-31-2009, 11:18 AM
From what I can tell the fact that he didn't believe the injury is coming from the James camp. The other side of the story is that the kid was cutting up in team meetings, etc. All that said, if he isn't so stubborn, he can probably talk his way out of it because frankly, sending a kid to a shed for 3 hours isn't that horrible.

I agree. A column in the Washington Post this morning suggested it wasn't really a shed anyway. His handling of the James kid wasn't so bad. His handling of his administrators was, well, as bad or worse than Bobby Knight handled his.

crimsonandblue
12-31-2009, 11:49 AM
Leach is respected as a football strategist, but he's seen as kind of a joke as a CEO/professional type. The TTU AD and him don't like each other and he was almost fired last year when he was negotiating his contract. They were probably looking for a reason to fire him and are hoping that they found a reason "for cause."

IMHO, what he did is pretty tame as far as I'm concerned (especially when compared to the alleged verbal abuse doled out by Mangino and physical abuse by the USF coach), but whatever. "Cause" is tough to prove and the Desert Aggies think they have found a reason. This reeks of an administration that had been looking for a reason to fire him to save some money. Kinda like the Mangino situation.

TTU can slide back into mediocrity for all I care. Anyone that does well there will be gone within 3 years. I am not sure they realize the lightning in a bottle they had in Leach, regardless of his eccentricities. Kids like Michael Crabtree weren't going to Tech for the cosmopolitan metropolis of the high plains. They were going there to play for Leach.

Word on the street is Pat Hill. As a UT fan, that makes me yawn. I could see Kevin Sumlin or someonw like that end up there.

Mangino wasn't fired for money saving reasons. We bought him out for $3 Million and turned around and gave his MAC coach successor $2 Million per (Mangino was making $2.3). Mangino was fired because he was a mean sunuvagun who ticked off the AD over time and then managed to turn the team against him to the tune of taking the best senior class in eons and managing a 1-7 conference record including 7 straight losses. And Mangino was mediocre at best with donors and boosters and KU is trying to build a $30+ Million addition to our football stadium with new ticket sales from that addition. He wasn't getting it done on the field, he was crap off it, and a pain to his bosses.

Leach's situation is different. He's just a pain to his AD and then publicly feuded with and punked his bosses, including refusing to play ball to massage the Adam James situation. If you're openly insubordinate to your boss and refuse to soften your positions, you generally give the boss two options: (1) fire you; or (2) let him remain in his job and thereby make it known that he's untouchable and you, as boss, are completely ineffectual. Leach could still be the coach at TT if he really wanted to be. It's not clear why he pushed this to the edge and over.

As for Sumlin, didn't Houston just lock him up? He'd be interesting there. He's a Stoops guy, like Leach. The question for Sumlin is can he win with his own guys, or did Art Briles spawn his success this year.

Lord Ash
12-31-2009, 01:20 PM
Here are some photos of the equipment shed in question.

http://sportsbybrooks.com/video-shed-electrical-closet-at-texas-tech-27504

Jim3k
01-01-2010, 05:51 AM
Or close to it.

N&O (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/story/263749.html)

Yeah, I understand it's not conclusive and this assistant may have other motives or issues for backtracking.