OT: Texas Tech fires Mike Leach

[unoriginal]

No, I mean Leach is probably going to sue Texas Tech for wrongful termination or some other thing, and the school will probably spend more than $800K on legal fees and/or a settlement.

I imagine they have relationships with a law school and alumni that will make the legal fees easy to bear, and I would be shocked if Leach's suit wasn't thrown out, probably very quickly.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Texas Tech fires Mike Leach

You might want to try that yourself first.

Edit: Oh, now I get what can laughably be called your "reasoning". Had you said you were disputing Shmessy's version of the facts -- specifically on the matter of "locking" -- you might have a leg to stand on. However, you didn't, and hence you don't.

As is your wont, you jump in without bothering to grasp context. Smessy was posting about the detention aspect, which is what I responded to. Had I wanted to deal with the other aspects of his enumerated posts, I'd have done so.

 

[Deus Irae]

I imagine they have relationships with a law school and alumni that will make the legal fees easy to bear, and I would be shocked if Leach's suit wasn't thrown out, probably very quickly.

Why? Unless the door was locked or there's a rule/bylaw that hasn't been mentioned, Leach has a pretty clear win here.

 

[unoriginal]

Why? Unless the door was locked or there's a rule/bylaw that hasn't been mentioned, Leach has a pretty clear win here.

I am not an expert on the subject, but I would be surprised if there aren't clauses in his contract allowing him to be dismissed on public relations or behavioral grounds. Additionally, I believe most athletic departments have the football trainers/doctors structured as a separate department not under the football coach's jurisdiction, and coaches have to sign waivers/statements indicating they will follow directions and look out for well being etc. If the trainers testify — as they apparently did to the AD, who just fired Leach — that Leach didn't follow their directions, he's not going anywhere at trial. I note his lawyer spent a lot of his time trying to indicate Leach didn't specifically violate medical prescription so I imagine that's a real legal issue.

Basically it boils down to the fact that we all hear about players being suspended and dismissed from teams and schools for disciplinary reasons, apparently without generating lawsuits. Why would a coach be any different? I've seen first-hand a positional coach get fired by a head coach for the way he dealt with an injured player.

 

[JMarr]

sorry if this has already been posted. white rapper from Tech channeling Adam James:
YouTube - "Cleaning out my closet- TEAM LEACH" -by KaiN & RyZe

"whether i'm right or i'm wrong
my daddy's a primadonna
acts like a little league Dad
now I feel like Osama"

Classic

 

[ctpatsfan77]

BTW, technically, you could argue it's "Semi-OT", since Craig James was a running back for the Patriots. [He also, BTW, was part of the SMU team that earned SMU the NCAA's death penalty.]

 

[Patriot_dynasty]

I don't see what the problem is...a locked closet was my babysitter for most of my childhood.

 

[Deus Irae]

*

1.) Coaches can discipline players.

2.) Coaches can require players attend practice even if they can't physically take part in the practice.

3.) Taking the kid out of bright light is a good thing when dealing with concussion, and the doctor reportedly stated that the actions taken were beneficial to the kid.


If Leach loses this case, pretty much every coach and teacher in America can be fired for cause immediately.


*Assuming there was no physical nature to the 'detention' and that nothing further comes to light.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Basically it boils down to the fact that we all hear about players being suspended and dismissed from teams and schools for disciplinary reasons, apparently without generating lawsuits. Why would a coach be any different? I've seen first-hand a positional coach get fired by a head coach for the way he dealt with an injured player.

Leach, who went 84-43 and took his team to 10 straight bowl games, was ostensibly fired for his mistreatment of a player with a mild concussion, but don't be fooled. The allegations by Adam James' family were a convenient excuse for school president Guy Bailey and athletic director Gerald Myers to rid themselves of a coach who, despite bringing the school considerable prestige, never fully earned their respect and butted heads with the administration for years (most notably in last winter's contentious contract negotiations). When the school rushed to suspend him Monday, we all knew where this was headed.

Firing Mike Leach will hurt Texas Tech more than it helps - Stewart Mandel - SI.com

 

[TrueBeliever]

I don't see what the problem is...a locked closet was my babysitter for most of my childhood.

Ah, so that explains it.

 

[scout]

sorry if this has already been posted. white rapper from Tech channeling Adam James:
YouTube - "Cleaning out my closet- TEAM LEACH" -by KaiN & RyZe

"whether i'm right or i'm wrong
my daddy's a primadonna
acts like a little league Dad
now I feel like Osama"

Classic

As much as I dislike Craig James (and many of the SMU alumni) and believe that his son is probably an apple from that same tree, I got to give a thumbs up to the dismissal. I also have enough experience with Texas football coaches to know a "see no evil" when one presents itself.
The timing was perfect.

 

[upstater1]

I am not an expert on the subject, but I would be surprised if there aren't clauses in his contract allowing him to be dismissed on public relations or behavioral grounds. Additionally, I believe most athletic departments have the football trainers/doctors structured as a separate department not under the football coach's jurisdiction, and coaches have to sign waivers/statements indicating they will follow directions and look out for well being etc. If the trainers testify — as they apparently did to the AD, who just fired Leach — that Leach didn't follow their directions, he's not going anywhere at trial. I note his lawyer spent a lot of his time trying to indicate Leach didn't specifically violate medical prescription so I imagine that's a real legal issue.

Basically it boils down to the fact that we all hear about players being suspended and dismissed from teams and schools for disciplinary reasons, apparently without generating lawsuits. Why would a coach be any different? I've seen first-hand a positional coach get fired by a head coach for the way he dealt with an injured player.

I read his contract. It was boilerplate stuff about putting the students first. TT would win a lawsuit. The only thing they need to protect (which may encourage them to settle) is their reputation in the coaching fraternity.

 

[upstater1]

*

1.) Coaches can discipline players.

2.) Coaches can require players attend practice even if they can't physically take part in the practice.

3.) Taking the kid out of bright light is a good thing when dealing with concussion, and the doctor reportedly stated that the actions taken were beneficial to the kid.


If Leach loses this case, pretty much every coach and teacher in America can be fired for cause immediately.


*Assuming there was no physical nature to the 'detention' and that nothing further comes to light.

You can't be serious. 3 hours locked in a dark room is now good treatment for concussions. Why were they coming in every 13 minutes to make sure he wasn't sitting down?

 

[upstater1]

Re: Texas Tech fires Mike Leach

It was not a strawman argument. It was a response specifically to the detention aspect of the discussion, and your response was irrelevant to that because your focus was on other aspects. When you realize that, I'll be here for your mea culpa.

Why in the world would be discussing detentions in general in this topic?

That makes no sense when we're talking about an injured player.

did he do something wrong?

 

[upstater1]

What do the Patriots do with players who can't practice?

When players can't practice due to injury, aren't they often required to attend the practice, nonetheless, and stay in a particular area? I know that I had such requirements beginning in Little League sports, all the way through college, and beyond.

Does BB lock them in a dark room when they get concussions and refuse to let them sit?

 

[JMarr]

Fack Craig James and his blue blood SMU a**

Mike Leach for OC next year. I remember BB talking about watching the Tech film on Welker before deciding on the trade, and commenting on all the crazy schemes Leach was running him in.

 

[JMarr]

As much as I dislike Craig James (and many of the SMU alumni) and believe that his son is probably an apple from that same tree, I got to give a thumbs up to the dismissal. I also have enough experience with Texas football coaches to know a "see no evil" when one presents itself.The timing was perfect.

What do you mean about "see no evil?"

And I guarantee you that Mike Leach was not one of the "good 'ole boys" in the Texas coaching ranks.

 

[Deus Irae]

You can't be serious. 3 hours locked in a dark room is now good treatment for concussions. Why were they coming in every 13 minutes to make sure he wasn't sitting down?

Does BB lock them in a dark room when they get concussions and refuse to let them sit?

First: the length of time he was in the darkened room is in dispute.

Second: He had a concussion. In such situations, a darkened room is better than a bright field or gym.

Third: The claim of a locked door is in dispute

Fourth: The reasoning behind the "every 13-15 minutes" is in dispute

Fifth: If the concussion was bad enough that remaining standing in a darkened room was a bad thing, the player should have gone to the infirmary or the hospital, particularly after being placed in such a situation the first time.

Sixth: BB, like some other coaches, forces the 'injured' players to go to a designated area, at least in training camp. Many of us have seen the video of the guys riding the exercise bikes.

 

[upstater1]

First: the length of time he was in the darkened room is in dispute.

Second: He had a concussion. In such situations, a darkened room is better than a bright field or gym.

Third: The claim of a locked door is in dispute

Fourth: The reasoning behind the "every 13-15 minutes" is in dispute

Fifth: If the concussion was bad enough that remaining standing in a darkened room was a bad thing, the player should have gone to the infirmary or the hospital, particularly after being placed in such a situation the first time.

Sixth: BB, like some other coaches, forces the 'injured' players to go to a designated area, at least in training camp. Many of us have seen the video of the guys riding the exercise bikes.

The length of time is only in dispute to the degree that James is saying 3 hours and the lawyer said 2 hours, so it's not much in dispute. I have been quoting Leach's lawyer anyway because I think there's enough there that Leach's lawyer admitted to for dismissal.

Second, I'm not even arguing that James suffered. I'm not saying he was in danger. All I'm saying is that he was being punished.

The problem is that you don't want to punish kids after they suffer a concussion not because it's dangerous and they can be hurt, but because it sends the wrong message to players about concussions.

How do I know it was punishment? Two reasons: the coaches' emails to CBS reinforce the idea that this was punishment and second, the length of time in a dark room when you're not allowed to sit is punishment.

Can you honestly look in the mirror and say that's treatment for a concussion?

 

[BB4PRez]

Part of me thinks Leach got a bad deal and he may have retaliation claim against the school for firing him for cause. But when you look at all the circumstances it seems to me the administration did what it had to do.

Leach handled this very poorly on many levels. There have been many reports indicating Leach could have avoided the suspension with a one simple public apology. Whether that is true or not, Leach certainily should have swallowed some pride and made an apology. The fact that he didn't and chose to bring an action for a TRO tells me he does not understand who is the boss and who is the employee.

Leach works for the college and is very well compensated for his employement. At worse, his actions may have put one of his employers students in danger. At best, his actions and decisions created an embarassing situation for his employer. Even if you give him the benefit of doubt and treat his actions simply as an embarrassment to the school, a public apology, even a vague one, was the appropriate thing to do. The fact that he couldn't swallow his ego enough to remember who is signing his checks tells me TT made the right choice in letting this guy go.