Jump to content

Good News: Leavitt Is Interested

Harry

By Harry
in Mean Green Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Side Show Joe Newbie

Side Show Joe

Posted
Posted

Leavitt is the perfect candidate for this job. Only UNT could screw this up.

I still like Fran, because he has won everywhere he has coached, has the Texas recruiting ties, and name recognition we need to turn this thing around, but if we end up with Leavitt I'd be very happy. Leavitt has already done everything we would be asking him to do. He has proved he can build a program with limited resources, and develop a strong fan base. This is great news.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Rudy Grand Master

Rudy

Posted
Posted

So Leavitt IS interested in the NT job, despite Chico being here. Canales was one of the "witnesses" to the "incident" at USF. If Leavitt had something to hide or had done something wrong, wouldn't he want to stay as far away as possible from any school that has a connection to the "incident" and could blackball or give him a negative reference?

Hmmmmm...

  • Upvote 1
eulessismore Collaborator

eulessismore

Posted
Posted (edited)

So Leavitt IS interested in the NT job, despite Chico being here. Canales was one of the "witnesses" to the "incident" at USF. If Leavitt had something to hide or had done something wrong, wouldn't he want to stay as far away as possible from any school that has a connection to the "incident" and could blackball or give him a negative reference?

Hmmmmm...

I think a more complete reading of the documents posted by The Fake Lonnie Finch this would lead to the conclusion that Canales was NOT a "witness" to the "incident". The following is from the report conducted by the University of South Florida:

"Coach Mike Canales was also interviewed. It was discovered that he was not in the

locker room at the time the event at issue occurred. At halftime, he enters the locker area only to

use a “white board” to speak to offensive position Student Athletes about second half plans. But

Canales said that at a “tailgate” which is attended by assistant coaches after games at Raymond

James, “someone” said that Coach Leavitt had “gotten after somebody in the locker room.”

15

Later he heard from Coach Franks that Student Athlete A had spoken to Leavitt and Canales

thought the matter had been resolved. Canales also reported that after the publication of the

FanHouse piece, both Student Athlete A and Student Athlete B came to him separately and said

they were sorry for everything that “this” has caused. Canales said he told the Student Athletes

to just tell the truth and everything will be okay."

The above (in quotes) is the only part of that report in which I saw Canales name mentioned. If there is some other part of those documents that says otherwise, please point it out.

Edited by eulessismore
good_ken Newbie

good_ken

Posted
Posted

So Leavitt IS interested in the NT job, despite Chico being here. Canales was one of the "witnesses" to the "incident" at USF. If Leavitt had something to hide or had done something wrong, wouldn't he want to stay as far away as possible from any school that has a connection to the "incident" and could blackball or give him a negative reference?

Hmmmmm...

So there is a person on staff who can be used as a personnel reference for someone interested in coaching here. Sounds like a perfect opportunity for RV to get a 2nd perspective on a candidate.

Rudy Grand Master

Rudy

Posted
Posted

I think a more complete reading of the documents posted by The Fake Lonnie Finch this would lead to the conclusion that Canales was NOT a "witness" to the "incident". The following is from the report conducted by the University of South Florida:

"Coach Mike Canales was also interviewed. It was discovered that he was not in the

locker room at the time the event at issue occurred. At halftime, he enters the locker area only to

use a “white board” to speak to offensive position Student Athletes about second half plans. But

Canales said that at a “tailgate” which is attended by assistant coaches after games at Raymond

James, “someone” said that Coach Leavitt had “gotten after somebody in the locker room.”

15

Later he heard from Coach Franks that Student Athlete A had spoken to Leavitt and Canales

thought the matter had been resolved. Canales also reported that after the publication of the

FanHouse piece, both Student Athlete A and Student Athlete B came to him separately and said

they were sorry for everything that “this” has caused. Canales said he told the Student Athletes

to just tell the truth and everything will be okay."

The above (in quotes) is the only part of that report in which I saw Canales name mentioned. If there is some other part of those documents that says otherwise, please point it out.

Well, at the end in the appendix, they listed all of the coaches as witnesses. Even if he wasn't, I would still be hesitant to go someplace where there was someone who was on my staff at the time, if I had done something wrong.

eulessismore Collaborator

eulessismore

Posted
Posted

Well, at the end in the appendix, they listed all of the coaches as witnesses. Even if he wasn't, I would still be hesitant to go someplace where there was someone who was on my staff at the time, if I had done something wrong.

They also listed the player's father, who was not in the locker room at the time, and Trooper Hypes, who informed them that he was on vacation that day, so was nowhere near the locker room. I'm no lawyer, or otherwise qualified about legal matters, but the term "witness" as used in the report does not appear to require someone to see or even be at the location of the incident. Unless otherwise persuaded, I'm like TFLF, just not seeing that hiring Leavitt without at least some indication of when there might be closure in the pending lawsuit. I do think there is a problem in civil, as compared to criminal law, in that there's no "speedy trial" requirements (that I know of anyway).

Anyway, I'm fairly certain that (1.) President Rawlins has to approve this hire and (2.) The Board of Regents has to approve the proposed increased compensation increases for a head coach and assistants. No matter how free a hand Rawlins gives RV in the HC hire, getting that increase to pay a coach with these kinds of unresolved legal issues seems like it would be an uphill battle.

Rudy Grand Master

Rudy

Posted
Posted

They also listed the player's father, who was not in the locker room at the time, and Trooper Hypes, who informed them that he was on vacation that day, so was nowhere near the locker room. I'm no lawyer, or otherwise qualified about legal matters, but the term "witness" as used in the report does not appear to require someone to see or even be at the location of the incident. Unless otherwise persuaded, I'm like TFLF, just not seeing that hiring Leavitt without at least some indication of when there might be closure in the pending lawsuit. I do think there is a problem in civil, as compared to criminal law, in that there's no "speedy trial" requirements (that I know of anyway).

Anyway, I'm fairly certain that (1.) President Rawlins has to approve this hire and (2.) The Board of Regents has to approve the proposed increased compensation increases for a head coach and assistants. No matter how free a hand Rawlins gives RV in the HC hire, getting that increase to pay a coach with these kinds of unresolved legal issues seems like it would be an uphill battle.

I think you are right. They use "witness" to describe the Trooper, the coaches, the "victim" and they mention several student athletes as witnesses, even though they were only told about the incident. My original use of the term witness was in response to Video Eagle in another thread where he mentioned there were 20 witnesses, which is why I put it in quotations.

I think this little discussion we just had helps to show that the report and the incident were overblown, if not outright BS so USF didn't have to pay Leavitt.

akriesman Mentor

akriesman

Posted
Posted

Personally, I don't care about the first incident. I DO care about there being another incident. If Leavitt is deemed to be a good fit for our university right now, I am all for giving him another chance if RV believes in him after their meeting.

The only reason that we are even getting a chance to consider Leavitt for the job, is because of the alleged incident. Otherwise, Leavitt would probably be coaching a top-20 BCS team right now. Is this the gift horse that we have missed out on all these years ?

All About UNT Veteran

All About UNT

Posted
Posted (edited)

My only worry was the money with Leavitt....but after seeing how Fran can't land the last two positions he applied for in the 350k-500k region...that has to be in the thought process of Leavitt. If Fran was scorned for his mistakes and has issues seeking employment.....then will he follow down the same road? Would a 500-600k job make more than enough sense for Leavitt to commit to? I would say so.

Edited by All About UNT
eulessismore Collaborator

eulessismore

Posted
Posted

I think you are right. They use "witness" to describe the Trooper, the coaches, the "victim" and they mention several student athletes as witnesses, even though they were only told about the incident. My original use of the term witness was in response to Video Eagle in another thread where he mentioned there were 20 witnesses, which is why I put it in quotations.

I think this little discussion we just had helps to show that the report and the incident were overblown, if not outright BS so USF didn't have to pay Leavitt.

I'll have to agree that they use the term "witness" in a way that is different from my general understanding of its meaning, but even in criminal law, there is the use of "expert witnesses" who don't see "the incident". It's hard to be impressed with the quality of the "report", but I just don't think supporters of UNT Football would be realistic in dismissing the potential problems that hiring Leavitt poses as insignificant. I'm kind of taking the view of someone here who mentioned that a second chance is best to be given after the original problem is resolved.

One thing that did come out in the report that I had been wondering about (although his listing as a "witness" confuses the issue, but only slightly) was whether Canales was actually there at the time the "incident" occurred. I now conclude that everything indicates he was not. I had heard somewhere that the other USF coaches not retained by Skip Holtz have not been hired to comparable positions, and wonder now if their proximity to said "incident" may be a reason for that. It sounds like, at the minimum, assuming this goes to trial, that they would likely be called as witnesses.

NT80 Grand Master

NT80

Posted
Posted

This is fantastic news in two different ways. One, we know he is interested. And two, the University of North Texas and those who will be making this decision knows that we know he is interested.

Rick

Leavitt being interested in the UNT job adds credibility that quality candidates can be attracted to our program.

Some recruits and fans will see interested candidates as a sort of verification; recognition from outsiders of our place on the foodchain. A "you are who you can attract" mentality.

This is good! :)

GreenMachine Newbie

GreenMachine

Posted
Posted (edited)

The number one cheerleader for Leavitt right now should be Canales. I believe that RV was clear in the experience needed for our next HC candidate. Canales doesn't have the experience. If most HC's come in and bring in their own staff, Canales needs Leavitt here to have a better chance of keeping a job. Come on Canales, talk up Leavitt to RV.

Edited by GreenMachine

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Tell a friend

    Love GoMeanGreen.com? Tell a friend!

  • What's going on Mean Green?

    1. 187

      Minnesota (11/13/24)

      Mike Mitchell Jr. was out. He's a starter and Minnesota could've really used his shooting. Not as familiar with the other players but they're reserves. This game was a big data point for the Massie over Newell position!
      Son Of A Flying Worm in Mean Green Basketball
    2. 187

      Minnesota (11/13/24)

      Awesome win! The only bad part was the commentary from the TV announcers. They confused Newell and Lorient for an extended period of time, stated that Atin Wright originally played at Washington State, and clearly barely knew anything about our program. The play by play announcer gave major 'and boom goes the dynamite' vibes. Some thoughts on the game: - The defense was stellar as we've all come to expect. Delo and Massie were great playing multiple matchups. - Minnesota came out and blitzed our PnRs. We really struggled with the pressure. Eventually we started slipping screens and setting brush screens to counteract it. - Trey Edmonds in the second half forced us to play big. He has a grown man body. Hodge settled on a Lorient/Sissoko combination to match Garcia/Edmonds. - An extended run with a Floyd/Walker/Massie/Lorient/Sissoko lineup including to close the game aside from situational subs. Before the season I would've been shocked that this lineup would close a win on the road against a Big Ten school because of the offense. The spacing was predictably an adventure. Massie wasn't efficient but he kind of made the lineup 'work'. He shows handling, passing, and court awareness in the half court. Feels like he could turn into a secondary ball handler in lineups. - Atin Wright had a meh game by his standards, but still really excited about him this season. He's a bit of a showman and I love it. After getting fouled in transition, he slapped the ball away from the defender and stared at him. On Lorient's massive jam at the end of the game, you can see him standing over Edmonds (who was on the ground). GMG
      Son Of A Flying Worm in Mean Green Basketball
    3. 13

      UTSA Game Poll

      Still just a bit, but a sad one because it seems like a ceiling and not a floor.
      97and03 in Mean Green Football
    4. 1

      McNeese State (11/18/24)

      I will say that if we take care of business Utah State would like to have a say in that conversation. Lol
      untlynchka1 in Mean Green Basketball
    5. 187

      Minnesota (11/13/24)

      Most uneducated post I read was someone saying we could end up being a quad 3 blemish on the gophers tourney resume. 🤦‍♂️ gotta keep winning games like this. Only way to get past the stigma.
      untlynchka1 in Mean Green Basketball

  • Popular Contributors

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      15,476
    • Most Online
      1,865
    BleedGreen4
    Newest Member
    BleedGreen4
    Joined

WE BELIEVE IN THE MEAN GREEN!

News

Recruiting

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.