Jump to content

Leach fired by Texas Tech

BaltimoreTerp

By BaltimoreTerp
in NCAA Football

Recommended Posts

RShack Hangout Grand Counsel

RShack

Posted
Posted
They wouldn't have suddenly fired him otherwise or they would have earlier you'd think, so the James thing certainly was the reason for the sudden decision, but it does seem like they (Texas Tech) had this "gift" fall into their lap so to speak.

It was the excuse, the justification, which is often not the same thing as the reason...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply
RShack Hangout Grand Counsel

RShack

Posted
Posted
But wait, there's more...

And there's gonna be more still... it's gonna take a while...

My whole thing from the beginning is that the treatment was "inappropriate". This trainer saying "Leach wanted James to suffer" is what is the most telling here.

Well, no way to tell what that really means just from somebody quoting somebody else's intentions. I know that I've said things to students that did make (and still do make) perfect sense to me... but if somebody took them out of context and just quoted me about it, some folks would get up in arms about it.

As for the "suffer" thing, we don't know exactly who said what... but we do know that it's pretty normal for football coaches to make guys have a less-than-a-wonderful-time for perceived sins. Twenty laps in the hot sun (or ten times up and down the stadium steps, or whatever) for not giving enough effort in practice. Jockdom is a different world, and football is it's own little world within jockdom.

It's also the case that we have very much of a moving standard about what is and isn't appropriate. If any coach did now what Bear Bryant did back then, he'd be in jail. But does that mean Bear Bryant should have been in jail? I think these things are not-so-easy to judge properly unless you step inside that world. It's harder than just looking at your own little kid and asking yourself if you'd want some big bad coach to treat your kid that way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RShack Hangout Grand Counsel

RShack

Posted
Posted
Valid. The "reason" per se was insubordination per the Texas Tech President or whomever it was interviewed the other day.

At the risk of being guilty of the exact same thing that I warned you about doing, it sounds to me like the real reason is stuff that Texas Tech would never cop to... stuff that goes back a while, and involves egos and boosters and money and God-knows-what else. In other words, it sounds like a case of multiple people suffering from testosterone poisoning, so everybody's gonna look bad with zero winners...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BaltimoreTerp Hangout Grand Counsel

BaltimoreTerp

Posted
  • Author
Posted

http://deadspin.com/5439016/mike-leach-has-never-been-particularly-nice-to-adam-james

Well, Texas Tech got their own statements from the pair, and they're fairly damning. First, they predate the pro-leach statements, and second, they're affidavits, which in lazy journalist speak means they're unquestionably true. Right?

First up, team physician Dr. Michal Phy, before:

According to the information given to me, no additional risks or harm were imposed on Adam by what he was asked to do."

After:

In spite of the fact that James may not have been harmed by these actions, I consider this practice inappropriate and a deviation from the medical standard of care."

Next we have trainer Steve Pincock, before:

While in the garage, Adam was walking around, eating ice, sitting on the ground, and, at one point, sleeping; at no point was there any enforcement to make Adam stand up. Adam was checked by doctors every day....Adam was never locked in any facility, and was never placed in an electrical closet or tight space, or instructed to do so."

And, after:

Leach told me to place James in a dark place near the practice field. Leach further said something to the effect that he wanted me to tell James that I was to "lock his [redacted material] ass in a place so dark that" [redacted material], which I repeated to James. Leach further told me to have him stand in the dark during the entire practice. He wanted James to be uncomfortable."

So, we have conflicting statements. This just gets more and more interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beaner Veteran All-Star

beaner

Posted
Posted
http://deadspin.com/5439016/mike-leach-has-never-been-particularly-nice-to-adam-james

So, we have conflicting statements. This just gets more and more interesting.

Looks like Pinnock was looking out for his job until Leach got fired...Then either he told the truth or threw Leach under the bus because he wanted to keep his job and side with Texas Tech. Yea, the truth is probably in the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RShack Hangout Grand Counsel

RShack

Posted
Posted
More Texas Tech players speak out..

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/news/story?id=4792320

I was hoping I could be the first to post that :P

Now that's something against Leach.

The critical comment came from one guy. I have no reason to like or dislike Leach, I know nothing about the guy, and I certainly don't know who did what, but I think it's pretty normal for coaches to have some players who like them and other players who don't. To conclude that this is somehow damning evidence against Leach is just more knee-jerking based on not much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. FLK Hangout Grand Counsel

Dr. FLK

Posted
Posted

IMO, it sounds like Craig James' kid is a "brat", for lack of a better term. And, it seems to me like Craig James is abusing his platform with ESPN to get his kid what he wants. I don't think Leach did anything that horrible, but he certainly didn't handle himself as well as he should have. I don't know why TTU was in such a rush to get rid of this guy, so I wonder if they had other pre-existing issues with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RShack Hangout Grand Counsel

RShack

Posted
Posted
IMO, it sounds like Craig James' kid is a "brat", for lack of a better term. And, it seems to me like Craig James is abusing his platform with ESPN to get his kid what he wants. I don't think Leach did anything that horrible, but he certainly didn't handle himself as well as he should have. I don't know why TTU was in such a rush to get rid of this guy, so I wonder if they had other pre-existing issues with him.

Seems like one widespread story that nobody disputes is they got involved in a pissing match about his new contract. Leach has done nothing but win, he's the only reason we know or care about TT football, so he had them by the short hairs, and some influential TT guys stayed in a snit about the fact that he insisted on getting paid big. So, not only were influential TT guys carrying a grudge, but maybe the whole thing left a bad taste in Leach's mouth too. So, it appears that most of this isn't just about the ESPN guy's kid, that was just the trailing event that brought it all to a head.

If they wanted to work something out amicably to make the problem go away, they certainly could have found a way. But they didn't want to. Instead, each side wanted to assert dominance over the other side, so everybody involved in this whole fiasco winds up looking bad, with absolutely nobody looking good. The only thing people are arguing about is who committed the worst sin when, in reality, pretty much everybody involved in this mess ends up looking like a jerk...

EDIT: And while we're pondering the Jerk List, I would like to add the ESPN announcers who did the bowl game. The play-by-play guy was relentless about bringing it up and piling on Leach, while the ex-ND-coach color-guy largely played along. I thought it was shameless bias, presumably in support of their ESPN-pal. Plus, the play-by-play guy just would not let it go, he kept bringing it up again and again and again. It was a classic case of some media droid hanging a guy in public without a trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...