Defining Abuse??
I'm prepared to take a hit to the point total, based on how things have gone on similar topics, but I would like to hear from the guys that really are upset about the actions of Leavitt. First a couple of disclaimers.
1. Never liked Leavitt think he was a douche before this incident.
2. I'm not that old, but I'm old school.
3. I love Bo, one of my heroes.
I got blasted on the Leavitt thread for asking is it really that bad to smack a kid in the face to get his attention?? To those claiming he should be fired, would you have called for the head of Schembechler for these transgressions if they were reported at the time, like they were retold in books later.
1. Grabbing Dierdorf by the stomach and twisting his fat while calling him fat.
2. Using a yard stick to blast the calves of his lineman who did not set up correctly.
3. Punching Brandstatter repeatedly for giving up a blocked punt in practice.
I ask these things, because many of the greatest coaches ever have been known to have a temper and to deliver harsh punishment to their players. Bo, Holtz grabbing the facemasks, Knight slapping the kid, Bear Bryant, Lombardi. Often times the kids involved in these instances look back at them fondly when they retell these stories(Ok well Neil Reed isn't a fan). Football is a tough game. Coaches ask kids to take on tremendous pain to carry out there assignments. When I was in high school our RB stepped out of bounds instead of fighting for the extra yard. In practice the next day our coach had set up the blocking pads 5 yards from the sidline and gave him the ball, his job was to break thru the 2 linebackers and if he went out of bounds during the drill he was off the team. Was that abuse?? Would you rather have taken a slap across the face?? I'm sure my RB would have after he was done.
We don't want abusive lunatics running around torturing kids, but I just find it intersting that in a game where kids often take a harder hit 50 times a day in practice everyone gets up in arms over a slap. What makes it so bad? Is it the insult to the ego? The embarrassment?
December 15th, 2009 at 10:29 AM ^
There are a million ways to get a kid's attention without resorting to hitting them in the face. Grab the facemask, yell, swear, whatever. But, as you said: "Coaches ask kids to take on tremendous pain to carry out there assignments." Therefore, coaches don't need to potentially hurt a kid further. From what I have heard about the Leavitt incident, it definitely qualifies as abuse. Same with any coach, ever. If you strike a kid, you should be GONE.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:57 AM ^
I would say that anything that singles a kid out and physically, mentally, or emotionally intimidates or harms them is defined as abuse. Levitt should be gone. Its the same logic as why a CEO cannot strike his managers for underperforming.
December 15th, 2009 at 8:19 PM ^
Did you play sports?
I'm most definitely not in favor of a coach hitting a kid in any situation whatsoever, but intimidation (emo or otherwise) is pretty prevalent. I'm not saying it's ok, but it's pretty common.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:30 AM ^
Click here Defining Abuse
December 15th, 2009 at 10:30 AM ^
1969 is a lot different than 2009. I don't know how bringing Bo's legendary antics into this brings a fair comparison.
It may have been socially acceptable for Lombardi, Bear Bryant, Bo, etc. to knock around their players, but as we've seen from Leavitt, Bobby Knight, etc., it's not socially acceptable anymore.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:42 AM ^
I don't think the difference between society in 1969 and 2009 should play a part in this. Remember that not too long before Bo's tenure, "separate but equal" was socially acceptable. And only 30 years before that, it was socially acceptable in Germany to kill anyone who didn't meet a very specific set of requirements. The social acceptance at the time doesn't make it OK.
Hindsight is 20/20 and all, but it was wrong for Bo to do it, and it's wrong for Leavitt to do it.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
Aaaaaannnnnnndddd....
Godwin'd.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^
+10000000 to you
December 15th, 2009 at 10:32 AM ^
That your point is that it is acceptable for coaches to punch players. PLEASE let that be your point.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:37 AM ^
if Bo hit someone he should have been gone. Period. It's pretty sickening how some people put Bo above criticism or use him as some sort of baseline for acceptable behavior.
Verbal "abuse" is fine, to a point - once racial/similar lines are crossed a la Mangino it should be all over, though.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^
jumped off a cliff you and Leavitt would follow?
Obviously you are "not that old" since this is the same childish logic I hear from my kids.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:42 AM ^
but I do coach other sports. I can not imagine a situation, ever, where hitting one of my players would be appropriate.
As coaches you are usually an adult that is overseeing the development of kids. These kids will make mistakes and that is a given. Especially in the case of a young walk-on.
I can tell you this much, if I was that kids Father, Leavitt would soon find out what it is like to take on a man instead of a kid.
I know that violence doesn't solve anything, but in this case at least that bag of shit would know that he can't get away with treating kids in that manner.
I know....i know....I'm a hypocite
December 15th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
a lot of times because of the pressure and the money involved people forget that these are still kid's just playing a game. The coaches have a lot more riding on W's and L's these days so its not hard to see why he'd get frustrated and angry. However there are a ton of different ways to handle the situation without hitting a kid. I'm not a coach, but I couldn't see myself ever hitting a kid for making a mistake. Being extremely disappointed? Maybe. I can tell you if a coach, of my walk on kid who wasn't getting compensated in any way for playing, hit my son I also would be looking to have a nice discussion with him.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:41 AM ^
at many ways.... what leavitt did was wrong and he should be fired for it. what went on back in the 60's and 70's was a different time. corporal punishment was allowed back then, so what any coach/teacher did was fine. ask your parents what went on when they were in school especially if they went to catholic school.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:42 AM ^
The actions you write about were in a different day and age. Those were before the era of political correctness, personal space, and where everyone has rights but no one has responsibilities. If this happened at any NCAA program today, the coach would be let go. The Universities would be under too much pressure not to let them go.
Coaches and teachers have a difficult job of developing mental and physical toughness without being accused of being abusive. I don't think any court today would stand for physical abuse or corporal punishment.
Here at the University of Michigan I'm sure Rich Rod couldn't even slap a fly off the back of one of his players without the douche Rosenberg writing about Rich physically abusing a player and murdering a defenseless creature.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:54 AM ^
The reason bullies get away with it is because they are allowed to. If you put your hands on a person, me or a 19 year old college player, with the intent to hurt or humiliate, you are wrong.
I, being older and in a profession, would trip the offender and boot them a few times because a coach can't hurt me in my pocketbook. I don't care if it is RichRod, the sainted Bo himself, or this scumbag. Abuse is wrong and I will not abide by it.
A kid going to school on the school's money can't defend himself against an attacking coach or (in Martin's case) a student employee can't defend himself against his employer, so the system has to step in.
Martin should be fired, hands down, for his attack. Same with everyone else. Bo, same deal, if he was still alive and attacked a student tomorrow I would be the first to write Mary Sue demanding he be fired and the county demanding he get charged.
(Assuming this is true after investigation) Leavit needs to be in jail. He needs to be fired for cause and lose the rest of his contract. The NCAA should ban him for life.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:55 AM ^
Can't tell if I'm missing the sarcasm/hyperbole/whatever, but you're going a bit far. I don't think Leavitt was right if he hit that kid (facts are still out on that one and stories are changing) but I doubt this is approaching the jailed/banned for life. Reprimanded, certainly, but there are degrees here.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
Come on man. Martin was a douche. That is not the same as an "attack", and doesn't mean he should be fired or go to jail. Now if he did it again, after being reprimanded once? Then fire him. You're way too free with the "go to jail" card. Perspective is nice.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
shut the fuck up. this is a fucking stupid thread you dumb mother fucker: verbal abuse.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:58 AM ^
This is a very "touchey" subject and a LOT of factors are to be considered. When I started playing football in the PAL I had a coach that slapped our helmets and yelled so much I cried all the home after practice. Funny thing is I believed this coach cared about me. Fast forward to college, there was a coach that cussed and screamed and occasionally grabbed facemasks and kicked players, this was in the late '80's. This guy was an a$$hole if there ever was one.
The point I was trying to make is sometimes when a coach or parent "spanks" a kid it is warranted and the kid(s) know the difference. That's why so many former speak highly of Bo, Lombardi, Bryant, Knight, etc.
Having said all that an abusive coach should be fired.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:00 AM ^
Unless you're in the military, this behavior is completely out of line.
It also depends on the situation. From what we've heard, he completely embarrassed a kid by grabbing his throat and hitting him in the face in front of the team.
IME it all comes down to respect. I have no idea what level of respect Bo had for his players, but if the coach respects his players he knows how to force them to give their all and improve without degrading them.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:18 AM ^
Um, even if you are in the military, this behavior is out of line. You can suffer multiple forms of verbal abuse and have to do almost anything a superior officer or NCO tells you to do, but nobody should ever be allowed to hit you.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:54 AM ^
In talking to people with special forces experience, they are often hit and worse. Sometimes they're dropped into unfamiliar territory in the middle of the night and told that they're out if they don't make it back by sundown.
It's different because they're required to be able to handle that kind of abuse out in the field, and I'd rather have them slapped around by an officer in the US military than by some terrorist or rebel.
Should 18 year old kids be slapped around in basic training? I don't know... it's a moral gray area, but if someone's going into special forces, I'd feel safer if I knew they'd taken some abuse, and even humiliation before heading out to war.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:10 AM ^
Much of what I wanted to say has already been said (not acceptable behavior in the 70's and not now, etc.) but I'd like to add that we're all going to find out whether this is acceptable behavior from an NCAA Football coach in the coming weeks. If the evidence is not in Leavitt's favor the Kansas Athletic Department has shown us that this sort of behavior is not acceptable. If there's some sort of cover-up or lengthy investigation meant to put this out of people's minds or the media gives up maybe we haven't progressed enough as a society to defend athletes against verbal and physical abuse. I'd like to go on record as a college football fan and say that Leavitt should be Mangino'd ASAP.
For those (Ziff) who either side with Leavitt or at some level question whether some sort of minor mental/ physical abuse of players is tolerable I'd like to ask if would you tolerate this out of Rich Rod's coaching staff? Personally I'd be appalled and I would want him fired immediately.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^
Can't tell if I'm missing the sarcasm/hyperbole/whatever, but you're going a bit far. I don't think Leavitt was right if he hit that kid (facts are still out on that one and stories are changing) but I doubt this is approaching the jailed/banned for life. Reprimanded, certainly, but there are degrees here.No, I am quite serious. Assuming he did what is reported, it is one step away from rape. The coach has authority over the player, including the ability to give orders to the player. The coach then used his authority to order his victim into the confined space, knowing that the victim can not defend himself or even protest or face loss of a playing career and a future, and the coach then placed his hands on the victim for the purpose or harming the victim. Rape isn't about sex, it is about to rush of harming a victim and humiliating them through power, be it the power of a gun, the power of a fist, or the power of a position. We punish school teachers and prison guards much more harshly because they have power over their victims, this coach has even more power and he chose to use it for the most vile purposes.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:09 AM ^
I agree with you in principle, but I'm a few steps behind as far as the necessary punishment goes.
December 15th, 2009 at 1:47 PM ^
Rape victims have no choice.
The fact that this kid had the choice to fight back and leave the team means he had a choice. These two events are not even close. Also, you don't know the intent in Leavitt's mind. Please stop the wildly inaccurate and insulting comparisons.
December 15th, 2009 at 1:51 PM ^
Slapping a football player in the face is not Satanic. Rape is.
December 15th, 2009 at 2:02 PM ^
Assuming he did what is reported, it is one step away from rape.That's a pretty big step.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:10 AM ^
Players who played for Tony Dungee said he rarely raised his voice, yet was a tremendously effective coach and teacher.
I played football and hockey for both screamers and teachers. The record of our teams were better under the screamers. However, I liked the coaches who were teachers(non-screamers)better.
There are better ways to motivate than by losing your cool.
Just my opinion.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:03 AM ^
John L. Smith was once fired for slapping a stupid child.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:09 AM ^
+1 for clever.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:10 AM ^
In his defense, he deserved it.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:06 AM ^
"I ask these things, because many of the greatest coaches ever have been known to have a temper and to deliver harsh punishment to their players."
Harsh punishment is not the same as demeaning, humiliating behavior.
"I just find it intersting that in a game where kids often take a harder hit 50 times a day in practice everyone gets up in arms over a slap. What makes it so bad? Is it the insult to the ego? The embarrassment?"
It's two related things. The choke and slap-slap of Leavitt is not during a football play. Players are not steeled or practiced for off-field violence (insert Miami joke here). Secondly, Leavitt's move and subsequent "I am God" statement is a power play over a subordinate player, an attempt to flex dominance in a hostile manner. It's the intent to rip down a player's humanity that makes it so egregious (if it's true).
Holtz's grabbing of facemasks was cited as demeaning in a 1992 book about Notre Dame football, and perfectly fit the image of Holtz as an insecure, uncompensated Napoleon complex with a whistle.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:10 AM ^
Well the player and father have retracted their statements and said he grabbed his shoulder pad. Is this ok?? I'd like to hear from some of the guys that played in college that are on here and what they think and if they encountered anything similar. I was blasted by a coach in the head(I did nothing I deserved it), grabbed by a teacher(unwarranted fought him back). Were their abusive dicks back in the day that today couldn't get away with that behavior now?? Yes and that's a good thing. Have kids lost a little bit of fear and respect for authority?? Probably, and maybe that's not been a good thing.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:21 PM ^
Fear does not equal, nor does it's existance toward an individual warrant respect.
The fact that the youth of today do not respect authority the same as the youth of the past can not be corrected by instilling fear in them.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:16 AM ^
The inability to do your job without committing a crime is a strong indictment against your fitness for the job.
Don't turn this into something that it isn't. It's not about society at large or how these-kids-today-whatever. It's not even about teaching. If Leavitt pulled the kid aside during practice and screamed at him, no one's talking about it.
But that's not what happened. This was not a teaching-moment. This was a temper-tantrum that turned into a crime. This was a grown man with such poor control over his emotions that he punched a kid. And when confronted with his behavior, instead of immediately apologizing, he came pretty close to going off on the father.
You want to talk about responsibilities??? Really?? How did Leavitt become free of all responsibility?
December 15th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^
Leavitt's alleged actions constitute legal assault and battery more than they constitute a more nebulous concept of abuse.
I never read that Bo struck Brandy after the punt block incident. I did hear from Jack Harbaugh that Bo would use the yardstick in the special teams period to measure the line's splits on punts, and occasionally would smack a kid with it. I took that as a sort of crude juvenile practical joke, like a towel snap, not a assault
Nowhere has it been suggested that Bo was beating players with a yardstick as a show of dominance.
Most importantly, Bo's criticism was never designed to intimidate and he was known for having a 24/7 open door policy for player concerns. I doubt he ever said "I am the most powerful person in this building."
All the concern about RR swearing in practice is crazy talk. The Leavitt incident is not, nor is the "get shot with your homies" comment at Kansas.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:19 AM ^
and the last thing some of these kids need is another adult screaming at them or hitting them.
Most are from good homes but some of them get this abuse at home.
They don't need a coach or teacher following up with more abuse.
Granted this kid is college age, but if I did that to a co-worker or subordinate at work I would be canned instantly.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:31 AM ^
"and the last thing some of these kids need is another adult screaming at them or hitting them.
Most are from good homes but some of them get this abuse at home.
They don't need a coach or teacher following up with more abuse."
I want to add to this - I coach youth (tackle) FB and I've noticed that the kids from "bad homes" where they are ignored are the ones who thrive on the coach's criticism.
Deep down they're thrilled that somebody cares enough about them to tell them they have to play better. I don't scream but I give him something he doesn't get at home - expectations.
Meanwhile, the kid with the helicopter parents, who has been told he's awesome his entire life, is the one who can't be coached and whose dad thinks he's so good he can skip practice to play travel soccer.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:21 AM ^
"When I was in high school our RB stepped out of bounds instead of fighting for the extra yard. In practice the next day our coach had set up the blocking pads 5 yards from the sidline and gave him the ball, his job was to break thru the 2 linebackers and if he went out of bounds during the drill he was off the team. Was that abuse??"
Not sure if I'd call that abuse, but I would call it really sh***y coaching. Threatening a kid with expulsion from the team for mistakes made in gameplay doesn't make sense, it just makes kids afraid to play to the edge and instead they play conservative so they don't do anything to get ripped on film.
That sounds like a good drill, because the kid needed to learn how to drive for the yardage, but the threat of kicking him off the team for failing the drill is nuts.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:08 PM ^
The whole incident was caught on tape. By MTV.
Don't worry, though... it wasn't as big of a deal to hit women in the 60's, so it really isn't a big deal here.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:19 PM ^
What Leavitt did and what his intentions were(as much as we know) is wrong. I agree with Noah that he shouldn't be absolved of all responsibility.
However, some of the arguments that have been brought up in this thread are worth discussing. I believe that "younger generations", of which I am one of, do have less respect for authority because there is no punishment or the punishment isn't visible to the general public. In a parent/child relationship this should be done with love, without uncontrolled anger, and for the purpose of instruction. I think that these principles could be translated into the coach/player relationship.
In this era, too much emphasis is placed on the love part of that formula and not on the punishment. It seems that every time a player's feelings are hurt, his first option is to transfer to another school. Again though, I would say that Leavitt defiantly went too far the other way and shouldn't be used as an example.
December 15th, 2009 at 9:27 PM ^
This is abuse, pure and simple, from back in the day and I love it.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:26 AM ^
I've been hit in the helmet and cup with whistles, clipboards, and slaps, and it was because I deserved it. I've been screamed at by a red-faced man whose nose was less than an inch from mine, no problem. To grab a player by the neck and hit him twice in the face is cowardly. The guy is a walk-on, and other players said he wouldn't have pulled that stunt on a starter. If he walked around all the time, acting like that toward everyone, it would be a little different. He specifically did it to this guy, because he knew he would take it. That is fucking cowardly. This was also in the locker room, after the heat of the moment. Then there's his "most powerful man in the building" comment, and his 2 weeks later apology after he found out about the firing of Mangino. If you're gonna slap this walk-on special teams player, you should be well prepared to slap every man in that room. Leavitt isn't old school, he's a pussy.