My Leach Firing Theory

DallasGreen · January 3, 2010

leach knew who the kids dad was but still recruited and signed him anyway. leach could have just revoked his ship for lack of effort if he truly is lazy. instead he tries to make an example out of him to other players who may have injuries later and the parents complain. who would have expected that?

So now coaches should have to satisfy parents (cheating, powerful ones at least). Administrators should find joy that they can use a very minor incident to save public face for a move to break a contract. I hope TT and ESPN both lose much more than the $800K they shafted Leach to avoid paying. Yes I had sons who played the game, but they were taught to respect their coaches and be men, not a crybaby like Adam James and his powerful crooked dad.

sports1 · January 3, 2010

This is what Leach's trainer said in the affidavit.

"Lock his f-cking p-ssy ass in a place so dark that the only way he knows he has a d-ck is to reach down and touch it," Leach reportedly told Pincock.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2...een-texas-tech/

http://media.scout.com/Media/Doc/76/765864.pdf

Edited January 3, 2010 by sports1

NM Green · January 3, 2010

God bless Mike Leach! I would hire him in a heartbeat for not letting brat players run his show!

Go build it Leach! I will be rooting for you Man:)

Guns UP!

GMG

VideoEagle · January 3, 2010

So now coaches should have to satisfy parents (cheating, powerful ones at least). Administrators should find joy that they can use a very minor incident to save public face for a move to break a contract. I hope TT and ESPN both lose much more than the $800K they shafted Leach to avoid paying. Yes I had sons who played the game, but they were taught to respect their coaches and be men, not a crybaby like Adam James and his powerful crooked dad.

No, that is not the case at all. You can't punish a kid for having a concussion.

Again, nothing Adam James did caused Mike Leach to be fired. Leach's own angry actions got himself fired.

Craig James is still a jerk, but he didn't do this. Mike Leach did. When it came time to sign an affidavit, the real story came out.

Mike Leach fired himself.

Green Dozer · January 3, 2010

No, that is not the case at all. You can't punish a kid for having a concussion.
Again, nothing Adam James did caused Mike Leach to be fired. Leach's own angry actions got himself fired.
Craig James is still a jerk, but he didn't do this. Mike Leach did. When it came time to sign an affidavit, the real story came out.
Mike Leach fired himself.

Video Eagle,

I respect your opinion concerning this, you believe very much in your case. However, do you not think that all of this could have waited until after the bowl game? This week in San Antonio was ruined for the coaches and players who worked hard since last season in off season, during the season, watching game film, attending class, and doing what they were suppose to do. Instead they had to put up with this from their coach, a teammate, and some parents.

In closing, I would say that I find putting a student sitting at a desk in a cold blizzard, coat or not, in the middle of a football field as discipline for not studying just as much if not more bizarre than this incident. Yet, nothing was said about that at the time nor since. Guess he did not have a famous dad, and to me that is a double standard.

NT80 · January 3, 2010

This whole thing is actually pretty good drama. Entitled Rich Kid player vs Captain Bligh coach. Someone should file for the movie-rights for this script fast! :pirate: :whip:

OldTimer · January 3, 2010

I tend to agree with Harry's comments...I believe its going to be an interesting lawsuit when the sh.......hits the fan. Its hard to take sides at this time due to a number of conflicting statements out there.

Ft. Worth *Tele article:

1. Pincock, the TT trainer initially Pincock is quoted as saying...Adam showed up to practice in street clothes, no team gear and dark sunglasses...according to Pincock...then Leach asked that James be moved to a location "where sunlight could not bother him as he was wearing sunglasses" I instructured Adam to stay in the garage and out of the sun so the light would not worsen his condition..while in the garage, Adam was walking around eating ice, sitting on the ground and at one point sleepings...at no point was there any enforcement to made Adam Stand Up.

Then Saturday TT released 2 affidavits from medical staffers criticizing Leach's treatment and in conflict with their earlier affidavits given to Leach. same 2 key witneses. trainer Pincock and team Dr. Michael Phy.. according to both statements the incident occurred after suffering a concussion the day before and diagnosed that morning.

earlier reports from James indicated his bannishment to a small electrical closet within the room...but he was never in that closet.

Another poster" he was sent to a room larger than most dorm rooms, with trainers. No pattern shown hear..when allegations about Kansas coach Jayhawks players surfaced daily with tales of bad treatement....where only one allegation at TT>

Another poster stated you can see in their stories, that the concussion was minor, it was 2 weeks ago, he had already practiced days before and brought the consussion back up (after being cleared from doctors) so he could skip practices.

I can't vouch for the last two paragraphs. I believe as Harry stated that the TT administration wanted to get rid of Leach (and not have to pay him) and was looking for reasons to do so.

Everyone is bemoaning the fact that Mike Leach was wronged and that Craig James's son was out of line etc... I just don't buy it. This deal was already in motion prior to the James incident. Here's my take:
1). Tech knew after the last round of contract negotiations that Leach was not long for the world. His shoot from the hip attitude and anti establishment mentality was not a long term solution for the big business of BCS level football in Lubbock.
2). They (Kent Hance, the Tech establishment etc) had a plan to eliminate Leach prior to this entire James incident. They were probably estatic on the timing of this James revelation as it occurred prior to them making a huge 800K payment to him. Every AD and Administration fears a Head Coach that becomes as powerful and unpredictable as Leach.
3). They already know who his replacement is. They knew it before this James issue even came up. The James issue was just the catalyst they needed to start the process. Current Baylor HC Art Briles has ALWAYS been the guy that they wanted to take Tech into the sunset and replace Leach. In fact when Briles negotiated his contract with Baylor he specified that he could opt out if the Tech job comes open. Briles is a great recruiter and will be the yes guy that Tech needs. He could be the coach there for 20 years!
4). Leach, after becoming very wealthy in the settlement, will ressurect his career at a Mountain West level program like New Mexico or possibly even replace Mike Price at UTEP. It will be a program on the cusp of the BCS that will allow him full decision making authority.

Shuke-D · January 3, 2010

I tend to agree with Harry's comments...I believe its going to be an interesting lawsuit when the sh.......hits the fans. Its hard to take sides at this time due to a number of conflicting statements out there.

My brother and most of my friends from high school went to Tech. I've been talking with them about it. This is a textbook case on how not to handle a situation by all parties involved. Regardless of what actually happened and how it plays out in court, the students and alums (well, the ones I've talked to at least) feel that they've been dumped on by the administration (hence my edit above). In the court of public opinion, the Tech admin has lost this battle. According to one friend who still lives in Lubbock, there have been large, organized protests on campus. Even my mother, who really doesn't care much for Tech, went on a 20 minute rant about it. RV's little kerfuffle over the Dickey firing couldn't hold a candle to this PR mess.

SilverEagle · January 3, 2010

My brother and most of my friends from high school went to Tech. I've been talking with them about it. This is a textbook case on how not to handle a situation by all parties involved. Regardless of what actually happened and how it plays out in court, the students and alums (well, the ones I've talked to at least) feel that they've been dumped on by the administration (hence my edit above). In the court of public opinion, the Tech admin has lost this battle. According to one friend who still lives in Lubbock, there have been large, organized protests on campus. Even my mother, who really doesn't care much for Tech, went on a 20 minute rant about it. RV's little kerfuffle over the Dickey firing couldn't hold a candle to this PR mess.

Leach and TT are never going to get back together again unless there is a French Revolution amongst the TT fans/alumni and all of the TT administrators involved in this are gone. The best thing the administrators can do to salvage this situation is hire Ruffin McNeill as HC.

LongJim · January 3, 2010

The TT administration hated Leach, and wanted him gone. He had too much power at TT, and they were tired of it. They also need to bring in more $ to keep that program humming, and Leach was not interested in 'cultivating relationships' with anyone, nor does he have the personality to be effective in that capacity.

The administration had the James situation fall into their laps, and took advantage of it.

NT80 · January 4, 2010

The TT administration hated Leach, and wanted him gone. He had too much power at TT, and they were tired of it. They also need to bring in more $ to keep that program humming, and Leach was not interested in 'cultivating relationships' with anyone, nor does he have the personality to be effective in that capacity.
The administration had the James situation fall into their laps, and took advantage of it.

Leach is certainly no poster child for PR as far as coaches go. There was bound to be a lawsuit by some parent eventually. UNT is fortunate to have Dodge who basically says all the right things on TV or in print.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · January 4, 2010

Everyone is bemoaning the fact that Mike Leach was wronged and that Craig James's son was out of line etc... I just don't buy it. This deal was already in motion prior to the James incident. Here's my take:
1). Tech knew after the last round of contract negotiations that Leach was not long for the world. His shoot from the hip attitude and anti establishment mentality was not a long term solution for the big business of BCS level football in Lubbock.
2). They (Kent Hance, the Tech establishment etc) had a plan to eliminate Leach prior to this entire James incident. They were probably estatic on the timing of this James revelation as it occurred prior to them making a huge 800K payment to him. Every AD and Administration fears a Head Coach that becomes as powerful and unpredictable as Leach.
3). They already know who his replacement is. They knew it before this James issue even came up. The James issue was just the catalyst they needed to start the process. Current Baylor HC Art Briles has ALWAYS been the guy that they wanted to take Tech into the sunset and replace Leach. In fact when Briles negotiated his contract with Baylor he specified that he could opt out if the Tech job comes open. Briles is a great recruiter and will be the yes guy that Tech needs. He could be the coach there for 20 years!
4). Leach, after becoming very wealthy in the settlement, will ressurect his career at a Mountain West level program like New Mexico or possibly even replace Mike Price at UTEP. It will be a program on the cusp of the BCS that will allow him full decision making authority.

Most of this is true. And, unfortunately for Texas Tech, most of it is in e-mails dating back to December 2008. There are several now making the rounds on the internet.

We have a business associate who played football at Tech and is a donor. He's comfirmed the inside chatter of the e-mails. They will be damning to Tech in court because they show that the school was floating ideas to fire Leach even while they were negotiating his last contract.

In the e-mails, they details parts of Art Briles contract and the mechanics of the buyout. At one point, they suggest waiting a year to fire Leach so that Briles' buyout would be smaller.

There's also some humorous stuff in there as well. One of the Tech says Leach couldn't get another job as good as the one at Tech beased on the fact that he didn't interview for the Kentucky job when it was open. They put this down to Leach not being in demand. I guess it never crossed their minds that the Kentucky football job doesn't have a lot of prestige.

They also show the kind of dream world the Tech administration lives in. At one point, one of the Tech guys says that there are only 10 to 12 head coaching jobs that are better than the one at Texas Tech. That's laughable. But, even if it were true, it would be because Mike Leack put them on the map.

This thing will be tangled up in the courts for awhile. But, with the Tech administration people being so stupid as to e-mail this stuff back and forth - and to let big dollar donors be a part of the e-mail group - you have to wonder if they'll fight it. The e-mails are very damning. But, they do show a very ignorant administration. So, maybe they will fight, even with clear evidence that they were moving to find ways to fire Leach and hire Briles at least 13 months ago.

rcade · January 4, 2010

There's also some humorous stuff in there as well. One of the Tech says Leach couldn't get another job as good as the one at Tech beased on the fact that he didn't interview for the Kentucky job when it was open. They put this down to Leach not being in demand. I guess it never crossed their minds that the Kentucky football job doesn't have a lot of prestige.

Kentucky's not chopped liver. They're in the SEC, which has that massive TV deal, and pay the current coach $1.25 million.

BaylorGuy314 · January 4, 2010

There is no out clause for Briles to go to Tech. That much can be confirmed by this statement:

"If we had lost Leach this year, we couldn't have hired Briles if we wanted to because he had a $4 mil buyout." - Jim Sowell (Chairman of Tech BOR) to Gerald Myers (Tech AD) via e-mail dated 12/30/08

Briles has a $1MM buyout for each year remaining on his contract. (It was a 5 year contract of which he has completed two years, so the buyout is now $3MM.)

Three things:

1. The administration hated Leach because he used big city lawyers to constantly re-up his contracts. He was also not a glad hander- wasn't going to go to all the Tech events just to shake hands and woo donors. If you were a business man and your best employee was interviewing at other jobs every year and then using those negotiations to increase his compensation, it would get old to you as well.

The biggest hurdle of the contract negotiations last year between Tech and Leach were buyout issues. Tech wanted a buyout in the contract (something like Briles had) because it would hamper Leach's ability to jump to another school easily and would eliminate some of Leach's ability to continue the "interview then ask for a raise" action. Leach didn't want a buyout, but was willing to accept a structured payout ($800,000 if still coach on 12/31/09, $200k if coach on 12/31/10, etc). The problem with that is the structured payout keeps Leach from collecting all of his money if he goes to another job but doesn't cause a financial penalty on him that would eliminate the effectiveness of the "interview and ask for a raise" actions.

Either way, all of these things combined were frustrating to the Tech BOR and AD which has led to a lot of run-ins between Leach and Myers. They wanted him gone...yesterday. But were struggling for a PR reason to do it when their coach is winning...and winning a lot.

2. James wasn't locked in the shed. He was told to stay in the shed. Big difference there, IMO. Tech players are asked to participate in practice even in injured. Having had a concussion, he wasn't cleared for contact play, but he could've easily have ran or rode a bike, and do other things. Instead, he came to practice in jeans and sunglasses and said "I can't do anything." When asked why he wouldn't take off his sunglasses (which he was wearing to also piss Leach off), he smarted off that he needed it to be dark. Obviously, a verbal argument ensued and Leach told James (in short) that if he couldn't do anything then he needed to go stand in the shed.

In essence, the kid threw a fit that he was put in timeout, told his well connected dad, and is using the whole thing to get back at Leach. Leach had no right to discipline the kid just because he couldn't practice...but that's not the issue. The kid wasn't willing to do anything- even things he was cleared to do. That and his cocky attitude are why he got told to stand in the shed. And, even though trainers told him not to mess with actually standing in the shed, the player did it anyways to get Leach in trouble.

Keep in mind, this all at an institution where Bobby Knight choked a TT basketball player on live TV just a few years ago. Not only was Knight not fired, but it was a non-issue 24 hours later. That double standard is sure to come up in court.

3. While I wouldn't be surprised to see Briles go to Tech, it's not near as black and white as most think. Tech was struggling to pay Leach the $2.3MM or so they owed him. Briles will request AT LEAST what he can make at Baylor, which is $1.8MM. And I'd bet it would have to be more than that- probably closer to $2MM. And Briles will probably require a 5 year deal or something thereabouts. If you take the $3MM buyout and spread it over each year of the contract, that's another $600M in cost to Tech. So, if they were to pay Briles $2MM and then incur the cost of $600K per year to buyout the contract, then that's a cost to the AD of $2.6MM per year for Briles. And that's assuming they don't have to pay Leach anything. And I think Leach will get something.

Meanwhile, they could hire Tubberville or Sumlin for probably $1.8-2MM with no buyout. (Unless UofH has signed a new contract with Sumlin adding a buyout that I'm unaware of.) They could promote McNeill (DC and now interim HC) for probably $1MM (he makes $300K now) or grab Sonny Dykes for probably close to 7 figures.

I know some of their major players want Briles and they just might get him...but it is by far the most expensive option...more expensive than Leach.

Edited January 4, 2010 by BaylorGuy314

Quoner · January 4, 2010

The administration hated Leach because he used big city lawyers to constantly re-up his contracts.

With gorillas!

Also, isn't Kentucky about to be open again? Full circle!

January 4, 2010

What puzzles me is why his contract was renewed at all. That would have ended the buyout negotiations and saved millions. Since Leach and the Tech administration have been at loggerheads for some time why not just say that the salary terms were not acceptable?

Anyone have any insight as to why that didn't happen?

Edited January 4, 2010 by GrayEagleOne

BaylorGuy314 · January 4, 2010

What puzzles me is why his contract was renewed at all. That would have ended the buyout negotiations and saved millions. Since Leach and the Tech administration have been at loggerheads for some time why not just say that the salary terms were not acceptable?
Anyone have any insight as to why that didn't happen?

Because there was a lot of pressure to lock him up after such a great season...especially with so many decent jobs opening...Auburn and Washington to name a few.

That being said, if he would've had a modest buyout clause in his contract, I don't think they would've extended the contract...or at least, wouldn't have upped the ante...because I don't think Leach been offered the job by Auburn or Washington.

Edited January 4, 2010 by BaylorGuy314

The Fake Lonnie Finch · January 4, 2010

And I think Leach will get something.

Um, yeah. The very public documents showing the scheme to get rid of him a year before they did so undercuts their "with cause" plea. They'll end up paying him most, if not all, of his remaining contract.

It's pretty funny to read their e-mails whining about Mike's lawyers dealing in "bad faith" during the contract negotiations while they are, at the same time, trying to figure out how to get rid of him and not have to fully honor the contract they offer him.

I actually think the whole thing can work out for everyone. If Briles goes to Tech, they get who they wanted all along. Baylor can then go after Tommy Tuberville, who is a great coach who wants back in the game. Leach will end up in the Pac-10 at either Arizona State or Washington State, or in the Big 12 North at Colorado. His personality is an excellent fit for the Colorado and Arizona State jobs - Western, laid back.

Finally, we've seen the e-mails back and forth from the keystone kops of the Texas Tech administration. It'd be interesting to see any e-mails between Craig James and the brass of Tech as well.

UNTFan23 · January 4, 2010

It'd be interesting to see any e-mails between Craig James and the brass of Tech as well.

This is only a FOIA request away.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · January 4, 2010

This is only a FOIA request away.

Awesome. If any exist, they'll be fun to read as well. Imagine the uproar that would ensue if Craig James was discovered to be in on the fix.

untbowler · January 4, 2010

Awesome. If any exist, they'll be fun to read as well. Imagine the uproar that would ensue if Craig James was discovered to be in on the fix.

Do you truly believe the e-mails would show up, more likely the AD and President would play delay for a few days in order to wipe out the e-mails only to get busted and fined for ignoring FOIA regulations.

A few heads should roll for this embarassment, including the AD if complicit and the President. Will be quite the soap opera for the next few weeks or months.

UNTFan23 · January 4, 2010

Awesome. If any exist, they'll be fun to read as well. Imagine the uproar that would ensue if Craig James was discovered to be in on the fix.

If I were to structure a request, I'd ask for all correspondence (electronic, facsimile, and regular mail) between Craig James and any of the TTU Board of Regents, Chancellor, Athletic Directory, and/or President of the University between the day of the first incident and Jan. 1, 2010.

I'm sure there were a lot of phone calls involved, so I don't know if there is any type of record available to request.

El Paso Eagle · January 4, 2010

Um, yeah. The very public documents showing the scheme to get rid of him a year before they did so undercuts their "with cause" plea. They'll end up paying him most, if not all, of his remaining contract.
It's pretty funny to read their e-mails whining about Mike's lawyers dealing in "bad faith" during the contract negotiations while they are, at the same time, trying to figure out how to get rid of him and not have to fully honor the contract they offer him.
I actually think the whole thing can work out for everyone. If Briles goes to Tech, they get who they wanted all along. Baylor can then go after Tommy Tuberville, who is a great coach who wants back in the game. Leach will end up in the Pac-10 at either Arizona State or Washington State, or in the Big 12 North at Colorado. His personality is an excellent fit for the Colorado and Arizona State jobs - Western, laid back.
Finally, we've seen the e-mails back and forth from the keystone kops of the Texas Tech administration. It'd be interesting to see any e-mails between Craig James and the brass of Tech as well.

In a few day's I think we will see an settlement between both sides. It does Leach no good with respect to future opportunities. As for the TT Chancellor, after making comments that (not an exact quote) anytime an employee takes his boss to court it will never work out well for the employee - Does he really want to explain that one to a judge???

UNTFan23 · January 4, 2010

Do you truly believe the e-mails would show up, more likely the AD and President would play delay for a few days in order to wipe out the e-mails only to get busted and fined for ignoring FOIA regulations.
A few heads should roll for this embarassment, including the AD if complicit and the President. Will be quite the soap opera for the next few weeks or months.

If this is the case, Tech would be inline for huge penalties as they would be violating federal laws.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · January 4, 2010

In a few day's I think we will see an settlement between both sides. It does Leach no good with respect to future opportunities. As for the TT Chancellor, after making comments that (not an exact quote) anytime an employee takes his boss to court it will never work out well for the employee - Does he really want to explain that one to a judge???

The problem for Texas Tech is that in the ticky-tacky legal world, contracts are supposed to be formed in good faith. Sanctions can be made, at a court's discretion, if one party to a contract is found to have formed the contract in bad faith.

Here, Texas Tech, even while discussing how to structure the contract, was already floating schemes for how to not honor it. That isn't good faith.

What Tech seemed to be upset with is that Leach wanted a Bob Stoops/Mack Brown-type of contract. They, absurdly, thought that was bad faith. But, in contract negotiations, one party can ask for anything. It doesn't mean they'll get it. But, it's not bad faith to ask.

Leach's point of view was this - you want Stoops/Brown type of loyalty (not interviewing for other jobs), then pay Stoops/Brown kind of money. That's not bad faith. That was simply Leach's side telling Texas Tech what the market was for loyalty. Tech didn't like the market price for loyalty. Fine. No big deal; but, not bad faith.

And, the truth is, if you want to play with the big boys in the big boys leagues (BCS/AQ), then you are going to have to pay a price. If not, there will always be bigger football fish who will notice what is happening and try to get your coach ("Look what that guy is doing at Tech! Imagine what he could do here in Tempe/Boulder/The Palouse!").

The problem as restated and restated and restated is that Texas Tech was put in the position last year of negotiating a contract with the best coach they'd ever had, coming off the best season Texas Tech had ever had, but who none of them at the admin level liked. They had an eye to Art Briles, but not his buyout, at the time.

In hindsight, they should have cut Leach loose and hired Tommy Tuberville. Tuberville had the BCS stripes and has always been willing to come to Texas, where he has family.

Edited January 4, 2010 by The Fake Lonnie Finch