The Fake Lonnie Finch

Agreed. Especially since I've been to a Miami game in Miami. The last thing we want to be is Miami. You don't have to be Miami or Oklahoma under Barry Switzer to achieve greatness. I like the Tom Osborne model at Nebraska. Mack Brown at Texas. Bob Stoops at Oklahoma. R.C. Slocum at A&M. Jim Tressel at Ohio State. Joe Paterno at Penn State. Art Briles is doing some nice things down in Waco without his team resorting to thuggery on and off the field. You can win without having a complete breakdown of character in and around the program.

Reasons are listed in the USF documents in the other thread that you apparently didn't read, but commented on anyway. The universities set the line. Coaches agree to work under the university rules and policies in the terms of their contract. They move because of tort liability. The player ultimately said that as a non-scholarship player he felt that Leavitt would kick him off the team. His duress resulting from the situation is noted in the report that, again, had you read would prevent from asking over and over again what the problem is. The dismissal and report cover all the corners of the firing of Jim Leavitt. But, as in most other ventures in life, you do have to read to understand. USF is very clear as to which university rules and policies were broken. Further, they detail why his conduct ran afoul those policies. Finally, they give three separate reasons why those action independently gave rise to his dismissal. If you think UNT and every other college in America doesn't have a similar policy, you are kidding yourself. From the letter of dismissal: "As is reported in more detail in the report it was alleged that you inappropriately grabbed the throat and slapped the face of a student athlete. The report concluded that this allegation was accurate based on the independently corroborated statements of persons found to be in the best position to observe your conduct. The disparity of authority and power between you as the head coach and the student athlete makes the conduct more serious." .... "The physical conduct at issue that is substantiated in the report is misconduct in the USF Regulation 10.212 (Discipline, Misconduct, and Incompetence) because it is not compatible with with USF's educational mission and the health and welfare of USF student athletes. Under the terms of your Contract with USF you represented that you were familiar with USF Rules, including USF Regulations and Policies, and that you will abide by USF Rules in your duties as head coach. (Contract Sections: 3.b; 3.e; 5.a; and 5.d). Therefore your conduct represents a serious violation as contained in Section 8.c(8) of the Contract and states grounds for dismissal for cause under the Contract. The conduct described above is independent and sufficient reason terminate your employment for cause. Also apparent from the report is your interference with the University's investigation into the matter. Specifically, you had direct contact with material witnesses to the investigation at a time you knew or should have known was critical to the review process. Your conduct is both contrary and adverse to USF's public mission to insure the integrity of our review process. As such, your interference with USF's public interests represents misconduct under USF Regulation 10.212, a serious violation as contained in Section 8.c(8) of the Contract and an independent and sufficient grounds for cause dismissal under the Contract. Moreover, the report documents that you treated a student athlete adversely during the investigation. This conduct is a serious violation of the USF System Policy 0-020 (Retaliation, Retribution, and Reprisal Prohibited) and a basis for disciplinary action including termination under USF Rules. This renders the reported conduct a serious violation as contained in 8.c(8) of your Contract. This is an independent and sufficient ground from cause dismissal under the Contract."

Yes to either Koetter or Hawkins. Excellent mid-major coaches.

The player did say Leavitt choked and hit him: http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/01/14/south-floridas-joel-miller-wants-leavitt-to-admit-what-happene/ http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/03/04/joel-miller-wont-sue-former-south-florida-coach-jim-leavitt/ http://www.tampabay.com/sports/college/joel-miller-former-usf-walk-on-at-center-of-jim-leavitt-controversy-earns/1116866

This, I agree with. In fact, alot of what is happening in Leavitt's case is simply posturing. Unnecessary posturing. Joel Miller asked for an apology. Leavitt's attorneys said no. His attorneys said no. Here's the thing that is vexing to me: If, after the incident, Leavitt had just admitted to what he did quickly and apologized, I don't think he'd have even been fired. I think USF would probably have put him on some kind of probation as discipline. The problem, as is usually the case, is that Leavitt is letting his attorney call all of his shots. The clips I've seen with Leavitt and his attorney are ridiculous. Leavitt appears to just be a bystander. Franchione is clear. Mangino is clear. Leavitt...he's still in limbo because he's apparently been advised not to take any deal and to fight until the end. Unfortunately for Leavitt, that has meant going almost a full year without a paycheck. It's crazy. He's got about two dozen witnesses against him already and his attorney is keeping him sidelined. I have no doubt that if they had settled in February, his name would be coming up in any number of BCS vacancies that are popping open. He's too good coach not to have his name mentioned. And, of course he's going to be "interested" in our open job. Anybody currently drawing $0.00 is going to be interested in a job. No matter what the profession, it rarely does anyone - except the attorney being paid - well to drag out a matter. I wish Leavitt would settle and move on. We could really use him.

Yes, I understand you want Leach...and, you likely realize we don't have the money to pay him to come here given the number of BCS coaching jobs that are going to be available. You read alot into USF's actions that aren't there. The choking and slapping of Joel Miller is there. You got Leavitt's side doing what it has to do - make accusations publicly that it has no evidence of. It hopes there will be evidence of some conspiracy to oust him. But, as all North Texas fans know, hope is different than reality. Further, the point is not the possibility of harm in a locker room versus on the field of play. A player expects to be hit in a football game. It is unavoidable due to the nature of the game. The locker room is different. Players don't expect to be choked and slapped by their coaches. Nor does a university expect that their employees and representative will do such to a student. In short, hitting is expected on the field of play; it is explicitly forbidden by university code off the field. You are logical enough to understand the difference. But, even so, hitting on the field has it's parameters as well.

Let's get into the clear about two things: (1) Jim Leavitt was fired because he choked and slapped a player. That was the finding of the university investigation. They interviewed the players around the locker, assistant coaches, and others in the room. The majority, and particularly those closest in proximity to the assault, told the university HR department that it happened. Such action by an employee of USF is grounds for firing; and, Leavitt was fired. Until such time as Leavitt can get a court to say it didn't happen, it happened. (2) Choking and slapping are well within the definition of assault. In fact, whether you are talking criminal or civil law, assault does not even have to include making physical contact with someone else. The threat of imminent harm alone is enough to sustain an assault charge in either criminal or civil court. Again, until such time as a court says otherwise, Jim Leavitt was fired because he assaulted a student, which is against USF policy for it's employees. It's all good and well to like Jim Leavitt as a coach. I was one of the first to bring his name into the mix. But, you have to do your due diligence on every candidate. Jim Leavitt and Dennis Franchione, both excellent football coaches, are going to come under additional scrutiny because of the manner in which their former tenures ended. The difference, again, is that Franchione's situation is resolved; Leavitt's is not. Rick Villareal, the University, and the firm hired to help with the process will flesh out the details if Leavitt is considered. But, they will not be able to take away what USF has already found. Only a settlement or court finding can do that.

90, Isn't it good enough just to say that you prefer Leavitt over any other candidate at this point? Why excuse boorish behavior? The examples for coaches winning without having to resort to choking and slapping players are legion. Do you really want to stack up Leavitt's record against the records of coaches who never choked or slapped their players? I mean, drill down a little. They guy never won so much as a conference title in either Conference USA or the Big East. So, we stack him up next to those who have won titles without choking and slapping? Even taking out titles, the vast majority - and, at this point, I'd say all - win without choking or slapping. It's good enough to simply say you like Leavitt as a candidate without having to put on some charade about it being acceptable for grown men to be unable to control their emotions to the point where they assault kids in their late teens and early 20s.

NEWSFLASH - You don't need to file a motion in limine because mediations are already confidential. Leavitt's attorney had the opportunity to get Leavitt a settlement and he didn't do it. Mangino's did. There's nothing legally shocking or noteworthy to it. It's potentially stupid and career-limiting, but there's no special legal twisting that needs to be done for a plaintiffs attorney to do stupid things.

That's not really the case. Read through a coach's contract. You will see that these days coaches are expected to run programs that don't damage the reputation of the university...or, bring lawsuits against it. Just as the law of agency applies in commercial situations, the coach of any collegiate athletic program is bound to uphold the rules and reputation of the school that employs him. It goes into pro contracts as well. Read through any collective bargaining agreement pertaining to the sport and you will learn that conduct on and off the field is ground for termination: NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement MLB Collective Bargaining Agreement NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement Players are responsible for their actions in college and pro settings. And, the coaches are responsible for the actions of the players as well. This isn't a new concept. It's quite well developed over the past three decades. No school hires a coach and allows him to ignore the actions of his players on and off the field. And, why would you want that type of coach anyway? There's too much money at stake for the colleges to not hold their coaches responsible for upholding the rules and reputation of the colleges.

This. All day long, this. I've got no problem with a coach being energetic and enthusiastic about winning. I don't mind a coach showing emotion on the sideline. But, an adult should know where to draw the line on anger. There will be many good candidates for this job, thanks for the facility upgrades. Rick Villareal has worked hard to get this place better facilities. He made a mistake with Dodge. He realizes that. We know he means business when the official job posting is requiring head coaching experience at the pro or college level. This is going to be a good hire. If Canales can tick off two or three wins, I think he'll be in for consideration as well. And, that would be fine, too.

Sorry for the typo, gangrene. It was very early in the morning and I had been reading all of the documents I could find on Leavitt, Mangino, and their situations.

Except for the 20 or so witnesses listed in the investigation who say he did hit the kid. In the legal world, that's about 20 solid reasons. If Leavitt's laywer keeps pushing this thing, each will be deposed. It will be public, ugly, and Leavitt stands a better than 50% chance of losing it. If he loses, he will not have a clear record. In addition, the statute of limitations for Joel Miller or any of the other kids to file a civil suit against Leavitt won't end until November 21, 2011. The more Leavitt's attorney pushes this, the uglier it will get. He needed to settle in March and get Leavitt out of the situation altogether like Mangino's attorney did for him. Rick, it's not that I don't like Jim Leavitt as a candidate. It's just that once Rick Villareal, the interim president, and the firm hired to conduct the search do their due dilligence on each coach, there will be loose ends attached to the candidacy of Leavitt for the position. Step back and view the rest of the forest. There are many more trees in it. This is a job that will attract many excellent candidates. We can no more be "Jim Leavitt or Bust!" than we can be "Dennis Franchione or Bust!" or "Jeff Bower or Bust!" or any of them. There will be enough of a pool that we don't have to gamble on Leavitt's self-made legal problems. Rick Villareal understands how important this hiring is from both a competitive and a public relations stand point. After reading through the investigation and every legal move that has followed it, I don't think he can logically come to the conclusion that hiring Leavitt bring good publicity to the school. Every local, state, regional, and nationl news source would be scouring those documents and contacting the witnesses. That's their job as reporters and journalists. We don't need this thing diced further with our name on it. We all want the team to be "tougher." Fine. But, the era of Frank Kush and Woddy Hayes is over. There are plenty of coaches who succeed without grabbing kids by the throat or shaking them by the shoulder pads/facemask, etc. Let's not gamble, folks. There are too many other great candidates out there to get fixated on just one. As for Leavitt, my advice would be to seek the advice of other counsel...perhaps Mangino's attorneys. In my opinion, he needs to put his professional career over his attorney's ego. And, if it's his ego that's in the way, he needs to shelve it, settle, and move on. Having 20 or so kids on the stand or in deposition against him isn't going to help his future job prospects. We're talking about 20 to 25% of the 2009 USF football team taking the stand against him. That's not good. There will be more if it's pushed...and, who knows what else might come out. Once Mangino has one allegation out, others followed. Just from the current investigation report, it appears as though many of those would be airing other dirty laundry if given the platform. Don't give them that platform, Coach Leavitt. Settle and move on. Let your attorney go back to ambulance chasing and John Edwards-ing doctors. Get yourself back on the sideline with a clean slate.

Leavitt docs Includes: -letter from USF to Leavitt giving him notice of firing and the reason -official investigation report -contract signed in 2008 -copies of school policies that Leavitt's action ran afoul Guys, I think Jim Leavitt is a good football coach. However, this lawsuit is not going to be settled soon. I've also looked into his attorney, some of his past work, and I believe he is driving this thing further than it should be driven. Mediation was held on February 22, but the two sides could not agree on a settlement. That a mediation occurred tells me the school was willing to settle and put the matter behind them. In subsequent interviews I've read and watched, Leavitt's attorney appears to be dead set against it. Leavitt defers to his attorney; he doesn't know any better. The bottom line is this - we've got enough problems as it is. There are enough witnesses against Leavitt that, I believe, if his attorney keeps pushing, it will not turn out well for him. The last thing we need is to hire a guy in a lawsuit and have the whole thing publicized while he's our coach. We should not consider a coach that we might have to let go within a span of two years because of actions at a prior school. The whole incident is dirty. I'm wholly uninterested in what MizzouTigers' opinion or connection is. He has obvious bias. My bias is toward finding the right coach for my alma mater. To me, that means bringing someone in with a clean slate. Contrary to what MizzouTigers says, this isn't a slam dunk issue in favor of Leavitt. This will drag out because there are enough witnesses to drag it out; and, he has an attorney apparently hell bent on dragging it out. Overall, I believe you've got to compare Leavitt's situation with that of his former co-worker Mark Mangino. The terms of that settlement are here: KU-Mangino Settlement As you can read, the settlement between KU and Mangino specifically state that neither side admits liability. The University agreed to withdraw the internal investigation, the letter of firing, and talking points. Mangino also agreed to waive any future claims under certain Federal laws. For this, Mangino received a lump sum cash payment of $3 million, health insurance premiums on a current policy, and life insurance premiums on a current policy. Both sides agreed not "to disparage" the other publicly. The records are under seal, and the agreement is between Mangino and "Kansas Athletics, Inc." Kansas Athletics, Inc. is a non-profit that helps fund the KU athletic department. USF also has one, and it is clearly a part of Leavitt's contract. Part of the struggle between USF and Leavitt's lawyer is which documents are public and which are private. The USF foundation is private and wouldn't have to release certain documents to Leavitt's attorney. Those deemed public would. As you can see, this will drag on...and on and on. Mangino's attorney, in my eyes, did the right thing by getting him a good settlement and out of further negative publicity as quickly as possible. It is my opinion that Leavitt's attorney has unwisely chosen the other course; one that will prevent his client from gaining another coaching position until he is done posturing. What's the old saying? Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor. I would suggest that Leavitt's attorney lacks discretion by pushing this thing.

Diet Coke Boy may be at the service of the interim head coach of New Mexico soon. Ah, wouldn't that be a sight. Diet Coke Boy resurfacing in Albuquerque.

No, Jesus withered a fig tree; he didn't choke it.

Matthew 14:26-32 25During the fourth watch of the night Jim Leavitt went out to them, walking on the lake. 26When the North Texas Fans saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. "It's a ghost," they said, and cried out in fear. 27But Jim Leavitt immediately said to them: "Take courage! It is I. Don't be afraid." 28"Jim Leavitt, if it's you," North Texas Fan replied, "tell me to come to you on the water." 29"Come," Jim Leavitt said. Then North Texas Fan got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jim Leavitt. 30But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, "Jim Leavitt, save me!" 31Immediately Jim Leavitt reached out his hand and caught him. "You of little faith," Jim Leavitt said, "why did you doubt?" 32And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down. 33Then those North Texas Fans in the boat worshiped Jim Leavitt, saying, "Truly you are the Son of MizzouTigers."

It wasn't about Riley, it was about Jub's kid. Jub is not going to be the most objective source on Todd Dodge these days. Not that it matters now. I remember Jub ranting during the 2008 season about how Dodge would turn it all around and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Darrell Dickey was the probem, yada, yada, yada. No one understood. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just a bunch of crap. It's not that I don't like Jub. I listen to him every morning on the way to work. But, when the subject ever involved Todd Dodge, he lost his wits trying to defend the guy's on the field product.

Pro? Coordinator level? Hello? Are we on the same planet?

We already know all this from a couple of nights ago. Our point is, you have no new or inside information. If you do, either spill it or quit. Further, if I was his attorney, I'd already have had a settlement in hand for him, the way Mangino's attorney did quickly after he was accused. Leavitt's attorney don't seem to have the requisite skill to negotiate a clean break for him. Either that or he's such a hot head that he won't back down...or, his attorneys are too stupid to back down.

I already broke down his contract a couple of nights ago. He's in suit to collect a little over $7 million versus what would otherwise be a payout in the neighborhood of $60k. If he was terminated without cause, he has to seek similar football employment. It doesn't appear that he's done so in 2010, so I'd say USF would be off the hook for 2010 if they were to be have terminated him without cause. I just want MizzouTiger to give some bona fides with the information he claims to have.

Okay...I'm a non-practicing attorney. And, I knew even before law schools that both sides can have anyone submit affidavits. I'm sure that's what has happened here. And, again, Mizzou...if you went to school with Leavitt or have some special in with him, just have him call Rick. Should be easy. You seem to know him. We already know from you that he's willing to forgo his lawsuit to come here. That he's just waiting for the phone call and he'll come. I mean, for all we know...YOU ARE HIM!

Of course, if it was my kid Leavitt hit, there'd be problems for him totally outside the realm of whatever the school did. Yeah...I'm talking about a meeting with The Knuckle Brothers.

It's a sign from above.

Todd Dodge: "To be honest, there was a bit of relief when I woke up this morning." Agreed. The guy was beaten. Probably hasn't relaxed in 20+ years of coaching.