Mike Leach FIRED according to ESPN

[CapstoneTider]

This will go back and forth. There was no doubt someone could find a couple of his buddies to smear the coach. I believe the consensus of players wish he was still there, but as times drags on and the AD has meetings with the players, you will start to hear more about backing the new interim coach. Predictable progression.

I want to see who wins the lawsuit, and how what happens to the James gang.

I hate to see the day when an enemy shows up on our soil in great number. Many of the "elite" have become arrogant and weak.

 

[trenda]

BTW what did Urban do to Tebow when he claimed a concussion?

He told him that there's no way Jesus gets a concussion and told him to get back on the field.

 

[Crimson Speed]

Jump school..........ah, the good ol days. Makes me nostalgic. Nothing like a good punch in the gut to make sure that you don't do it again.

Ha. It worked because I made sure it never happened again. Lessons learned.

Based on the TT action in firing Leach, this may change the game of football in the future, at least how coaches practice. I remain convinced coaches must maintain the right to discipline players when needed. Otherwise, it's a case of the tail wagging the dog with poor results on Saturdays.

This whole thing could open up a can of worms across the country. Coaches could be hamstrung into handling these athletes with kid gloves. Maybe the PC crowd would prefer flag football.

 

[WishIwasInBama]

my bad guys i didnt realize that Coach leach knew the Dr. lied and James was faking...... and you know those little girl friends were Fat.
BTW what did Urban do to Tebow when he claimed a concussion?

i am not sure if this is sarcastic or a joke but I think you are buying into the ESPN hype to much. now whether or not you agree with the form of punishment is a different story but the kid was not punished becasue he was hurt, the way it seems to have happened is the kid showed up to practice in sunglasses with a I don't have to do anything attitude and that attitude is what was being addressed not the concussion. ESPN has been spinning it that way since the story broke, it looks better to say he was mistreated because he was hurt rather than to have to say the son of a coworker is a slacker/spoiled kid

 

[crimson mo]

i am not sure if this is sarcastic or a joke but I think you are buying into the ESPN hype to much. now whether or not you agree with the form of punishment is a different story but the kid was not punished becasue he was hurt, the way it seems to have happened is the kid showed up to practice in sunglasses with a I don't have to do anything attitude and that attitude is what was being addressed not the concussion. ESPN has been spinning it that way since the story broke, it looks better to say he was mistreated because he was hurt rather than to have to say the son of a coworker is a slacker/spoiled kid

My point( as addressed in an earlier post) is that untill the player is cleared by the Dr., Leach should have treated him as if he did have a concussion regardless if he was faking or not.
Do I think he should have been fired for this.... NO.
But as I said in an earlier post UCF is dealing with the death of a kid that was run to death even though other player stated that he was clearly having trouble with the drills but the Coaches thought he was faking.
UCF players, coach differ over death - Orlando Sentinel

 

[CAgirl]

Yep, you're exactly right. My son played baseball at Tech and is friends with some of the coaches there now and said the same thing. Mike Leach brought Tech football back to prominence and the football program was making so much money for the university. He's beyond disappointed with how Gerald Myers has handled this - so unprofessional and so public and right before a bowl game! Guess Craig James had something to do with the timing - what's up with that - it couldn't wait until the season was over??? Craig James hasn't done his son any favors by handling this situation this way and then getting on ESPN and blabbing about it. He should have just said it was a private matter and he wouldn't be making any statements about it until a later time. But he didn't give a darn about the team or the other players - and that's what's so bad - it makes you think - like father, like son. Selfish, selfish, all about me, me, me. I understand you must protect your kids if you REALLY feel they're in danger (which I don't think was the case here), but there's other ways to handle it than making a public spectacle of your son.
Tech football will go back to being a non-entity in the Big 12. They had a hard enough time recruiting against Texas as it was - they won't be able to recruit at all with all this upheaval. My son said the alumni are calling for the AD's resignation!

 

[RedStar]

My point( as addressed in an earlier post) is that untill the player is cleared by the Dr., Leach should have treated him as if he did have a concussion regardless if he was faking or not.
Do I think he should have been fired for this.... NO.
But as I said in an earlier post UCF is dealing with the death of a kid that was run to death even though other player stated that he was clearly having trouble with the drills but the Coaches thought he was faking.
UCF players, coach differ over death - Orlando Sentinel

.

Have you read this thread? He did treat him for a concussion. He sent him to a dark room with a trainer, what have you missed?

 

[WishIwasInBama]

My point( as addressed in an earlier post) is that untill the player is cleared by the Dr., Leach should have treated him as if he did have a concussion regardless if he was faking or not.
Do I think he should have been fired for this.... NO.
But as I said in an earlier post UCF is dealing with the death of a kid that was run to death even though other player stated that he was clearly having trouble with the drills but the Coaches thought he was faking.
UCF players, coach differ over death - Orlando Sentinel

ok just so I am clear putting a kid in a dark room is equal to running a kid to death? I can't figure out which side of the argument you are on, Leach didn't do anything that was harmful to the players health. he hurt the kids pride but I don't see the correlation you are trying to make between a kid being pushed to far (UCF) and a kid being lazy and made an example of just by being put in an embarrassing situation. I don't get the Dr. leach comment either, what was he doing to try and be a Dr? I think your example of the UCF kid is the complete opposite of what happened. Leach didn't make the kid run, didn't make the kid take off his glasses and stare at the sun, didn't make him read a playbook or study. I was always taught in the military to try and make the punishment fit within the crime i.e. mopping floors has nothing to do with someone being late, if someone is late have them come in early for a week or they owe me 15 minutes for every 1 they were late. If everything is true about what happened the kid was being a smart butt and wearing sunglasses (which it seems that this is one of leach's pet peeves) and said the doctor told him the sun would make his condition worse. Now I don't know either of theses people from Adam but apparently this kid did something to rub his coach the wrong way so the coach found a way to punish the kid that fit into what his alleged crime was. I am not saying I agree or disagree either way but your analogy doesn't make any sense at all

 

[WishIwasInBama]

Yep, you're exactly right. My son played baseball at Tech and is friends with some of the coaches there now and said the same thing. Mike Leach brought Tech football back to prominence and the football program was making so much money for the university. He's beyond disappointed with how Gerald Myers has handled this - so unprofessional and so public and right before a bowl game! Guess Craig James had something to do with the timing - what's up with that - it couldn't wait until the season was over??? Craig James hasn't done his son any favors by handling this situation this way and then getting on ESPN and blabbing about it. He should have just said it was a private matter and he wouldn't be making any statements about it until a later time. But he didn't give a darn about the team or the other players - and that's what's so bad - it makes you think - like father, like son. Selfish, selfish, all about me, me, me. I understand you must protect your kids if you REALLY feel they're in danger (which I don't think was the case here), but there's other ways to handle it than making a public spectacle of your son.
Tech football will go back to being a non-entity in the Big 12. They had a hard enough time recruiting against Texas as it was - they won't be able to recruit at all with all this upheaval. My son said the alumni are calling for the AD's resignation!

I am willing to bet little Adam James applies for a hardship transfer somewhere (SMU) as a result to all this. I personally think that was the motivation to the public side of this story.

 

[RedStar]

Not sure many on here have children. When a coach punishes a player for not practicing due to a concussion, I have problems with that.


Concussions are serious. Why was James punished? Because he did not want to practice with a Concussion? Fact is the young man had a concussion. The school doctor stated that James had a concussion. The doctor also stated it help James by placing him in the storage shed. :biggrin: I do not care if James practice habits are not up to speed. The real question is James health.

It does not matter what practice habits James had. The decison to punish a player for not practicing with a concussion was stupid.

Hopefully they fired the school doctor as well. Talk about bending the truth.

I spoke to my Doctor here in Key West and ask him what healing factor did the the storage shed contain. My doctor just shook his head and laughed.

If my Doctor does not know then who does! :biggrin:

Please tell me why a kid with a concussion being put in a dark room is such harsh punishment? I know the anti-Leach crowd on this board is in the minority, but no one has come out and said why they think this form of punishment was so cruel.

The kid had a concussion. He was put in a dark room, something most Dr's recommend. Most of you guys are buying what ESPN is saying, hook, line and sinker.

I know Leach's reaction was a bit sarcastic, I understand that. What many of you don't seem to understand is that he wasn't being punished for having an injury. If he was being punished for having an injury, Leach would have done something really crazy, like make him practice.

Please, please before you guys continue to misinterpret the situation, tell me why sending a kid with a concussion to a dark room with a trainer present is considered cruel punishment. I don't want any sidebar responses, just answer that one simple question.

 

[crimson mo]

I have sifted through this thread and Red star said he was treated for a concussion by being sent to a dark shed.
Next WishIwasInBama Said "the punishment should fit the crime and the kid must have rubbed his coach the wrong way".
So the shed was punishment.
Two different trains of thought after reading all of this thread.
Now if you had read some of my earlier post you would have seen that I said that he Should not have been fired.
I also said that in todays world you have to treat the kid as if the injury was real even if you thought he was faking.
I refered to the UCF case not to say they were the same but to say that with the case of a coach not acting in the best intrest of the player and the school already in the headlines, for liabilitys sake dont put him in a dark shed.
Perception is power.
Its a Political Correctness world and The coach has already gotten the University in The Headlines by Calling Young Girls "Fat Little Girl Friends".
It is not my call but if people think the kid is hurt then treat him as such.

 

[RedStar]

I have sifted through this thread and Red star said he was treated for a concussion by being sent to a dark shed.
Next WishIwasInBama Said "the punishment should fit the crime and the kid must have rubbed his coach the wrong way".
So the shed was punishment.
Two different trains of thought after reading all of this thread.
Now if you had read some of my earlier post you would have seen that I said that he Should not have been fired.
I also said that in todays world you have to treat the kid as if the injury was real even if you thought he was faking.
I refered to the UCF case not say they were the same but to say that with the case of a coach not acting in the best intrest of the player and the school already in the headlines, for liabilitys sake dont put him in a dark shed.
Perception is power.
Its a Political Correctness world and The coach has already gotten the University in The Headlines by Calling Young Girls "Fat Little Girl Friends".
It is not my call but if people think the kid is hurt then treat him as such.

I don't see how it's not evident that this is exactly what Leach did. He treated him as if he had a concussion. That's why he was sent to a dark shed. I'm really not trying to be rude, but some of you guys just aren't getting it.

Whether or not you think it was punishment is one thing, but the reason he was sent to a dark room was because he had a concussion. You're asking Leach to do something that he already did.

And as for liability, what are you inferring he did that was wrong from a liability standpoint? He had trainers, water, ice, air conditioning all with him. It seems to me that Leach covered all of his basis from a liability standpoint.

 

[crimson mo]

I don't see how it's not evident that this is exactly what Leach did. He treated him as if he had a concussion. That's why he was sent to a dark shed. I'm really not trying to be rude, but some of you guys just aren't getting it.

Whether or not you think it was punishment is one thing, but the reason he was sent to a dark room was because he had a concussion. You're asking Leach to do something that he already did.

And as for liability, what are you inferring he did that was wrong from a liability standpoint? He had trainers, water, ice, air conditioning all with him. It seems to me that Leach covered all of his basis from a liability standpoint.

ok ok your still missing my point.
You think what was done was cool because it didnt Physically hurt him.
I get that.
but what you seem to be missing is that to some people at the University it LOOKS BAD to put a kid in a shed at practice if he has a concussion whether it hurt him or not.
Calling the players girl friends " fat little girl friends" didnt physicaly hurt any of them.
"The Powers that be" at the University think it cast the University in a bad light.
True or not if the people in charge think it looks bad then they will do something to fix it.

 

[Hamilton]

I don't see how it's not evident that this is exactly what Leach did. He treated him as if he had a concussion. That's why he was sent to a dark shed. I'm really not trying to be rude, but some of you guys just aren't getting it.

Whether or not you think it was punishment is one thing, but the reason he was sent to a dark room was because he had a concussion. You're asking Leach to do something that he already did.

And as for liability, what are you inferring he did that was wrong from a liability standpoint? He had trainers, water, ice, air conditioning all with him. It seems to me that Leach covered all of his basis from a liability standpoint.

You did see the cell phone video of the electrical closet he was sent to, right? I mean, it really was an electrical closet. Not a penthouse suite as Leach has tried to claim. And James was the only person in there. There were no trainers or anyone else. It doesn't really change things for me, but it might for you. The point is, the kid shouldn't have been ostracized because it sent the wrong message. I would have probably done it, too...but I would have accepted that I screwed up and I would have apologized.

 

[WishIwasInBama]

I don't see the kid being sent to the shed as a way to help him with his concussion, I certainly don't think it hurt him in anyway but it seems like he was embarrassed by what happened and he was singled out for what ever reason. The only way I draw this conclusion is the fact that he was upset by having to do it which is what makes me think it was punishment. I personally don't think it was that bad, I have been put through a lot worse in my 10 years in the military and although I don't always agree with what ever I have to do, I do it. The only thing that makes me mad about this is how the ESPN ticker keeps running with the story line that he was being treated unfairly because he was hurt. To me that is where they are making news rather than reporting it. I also don't like how every commentator ESPN asks only talks about this situation from a concussion standpoint. It is really clear now that the kid had an attitude problem but that gets lost in the shuffle. I have said it before on here and I'll say it again, I want ESPN to have all these same announcers/commentators come on and give story's about how their coaches straighten out players whom were out of line. Does anybody remember Nick Saban berating that guy on Miami until he cried? I don't see how anyone who likes the way Nick Saban handles problem children have a problem with a kid having to sit in a dark, air condition room. Now I am not saying He has done anything comparable but I am pretty confident that if a player was out of line with Coach Saban there would be sweat involved in what ever the player had to do to make up for it.

 

[WishIwasInBama]

ok ok your still missing my point.
You think what was done was cool because it didnt Physically hurt him.
I get that.
but what you seem to be missing is that to some people at the University it LOOKS BAD to put a kid in a shed at practice if he has a concussion whether it hurt him or not.
Calling the players girl friends " fat little girl friends" didnt physicaly hurt any of them.
"The Powers that be" at the University think it cast the University in a bad light.
True or not if the people in charge think it looks bad then they will do something to fix it.

I know this wasn't directed towards me but I don't think I get your point either. I thought you have been arguing that Leach put the player in a bad situation regarding his health. I agree with you perception argument but only because there are some people out there that are up in arms over anything and everything that is said. BUT we are talking about the same university and AD that hired Bobby Knight.

 

[RedStar]

I don't see the kid being sent to the shed as a way to help him with his concussion, I certainly don't think it hurt him in anyway . . .

I'd also like to point out that this is how I feel. I don't think Leach was sending him to a dark room to benefit or help him in anyway in regards to the concussion, but it certainly didn't hurt him.

This is how I interpreted the situation:

Leach: "Whats with the sunglasses?"
James: "My Dr. told me I needed to stay out of the sun to help with my concussion, so I thought I'd wear 'em"
Leach: "Oh you need to stay out of the sunlight eh? We can make that happen..."

Sarcastic, odd, weird, bizarre? Sure, probably all of those things.

But it wasn't hurtful or harmful. And he didn't deserve to get fired for it. Again, people are wanting to take away a coaches ability to discipline a player.

I'm sure many of the military guys in here will agree. When someone is being an individual in a team or family like atmosphere, you have to break them down to build them up. That's what it appears Leach was doing. If he didn't want him on the team, he would have kicked him off. There's a reason he was kept on. If nothing else, Leach hadn't given up on James yet, but James is probably too arrogant to see that.

 

[Hamilton]

I know this wasn't directed towards me but I don't think I get your point either. I thought you have been arguing that Leach put the player in a bad situation regarding his health. I agree with you perception argument but only because there are some people out there that are up in arms over anything and everything that is said. BUT we are talking about the same university and AD that hired Bobby Knight.

You must have me confused with someone else. I've never said it put the player in a bad health situation. I HAVE said that the next player who has a concussion would have remembered this and would have felt pressured to practice with it rather than get locked in a closet. That's the biggest issue to me. I think if the kid had shown up, uninjured and being the little douchebag that he probably is, locking him in a closet would be fair game.

 

[RedStar]

You must have me confused with someone else. I've never said it put the player in a bad health situation. I HAVE said that the next player who has a concussion would have remembered this and would have felt pressured to practice with it rather than get locked in a closet. That's the biggest issue to me. I think if the kid had shown up, uninjured and being the little douchebag that he probably is, locking him in a closet would be fair game.

I think you're confusing yourself with someone else, unless you and crimson_mo are the same person. :biggrin:

 

[Hamilton]

I think you're confusing yourself with someone else, unless you and crimson_mo are the same person. :biggrin:

Bwahahaha! I could have sworn he quoted me. Guess I don't need another Jack and Coke.