Full Mike Leach story (and then some!)
http://splog.nationallampoon.com/articles/how-to-dick-over-your-fans-by…
Well, the college football season is officially over so let's get on with the gossiping and other digressions.
The more I read about this, the less I like this adam james kid.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
me??? this is completely one sided and written by an obvious mike leach supporter... could adam james be a spoiled brat? yes... could the texas tech AD been looking for a reason to fire leach? yes... has this whole thing been rather shady? yes... my point is, no one is ever going to know the real story and by the time it comes out no one will even care... i don't think craig james did anything wrong... his son told him that he was being mistreated and james called the AD to find out what was going on. i see that as normal behaviour for any parent... if the AD used that phone call as a reason to make shit up to get the ball rolling to get leach fired then that is on him and only him...
January 8th, 2010 at 2:17 PM ^
I mostly agree with this. I think Leach was a problem, but so was Adam James.
Why Leach?
1) The video of the TTech kids getting off the bus before the game - they were all smiles and upbeat. Having just lost your coach, if you in fact supported him 100%, this would not have been the case.
2) They beat up on MSU without the guy. Granted MSU was missing a boatload of players, but TTech still won.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:24 PM ^
I totally am missing your logic. Why does beating an inferior team mean Leach was the problem at Texas Tech?
January 8th, 2010 at 3:26 PM ^
1) You're focusing on the secondary part of my argument.
2) I said BOTH Leach and James are problems. So to say that I said Leach is "the" problem is false and misleading.
3) To win a bowl game with a brand new coach, regardless of your opponent's misfortunes, is not easy. And if the prior coach really meant a whole lot to the program, you couldn't win that game (see: Kelly, Brian).
That is pretty much it.
January 8th, 2010 at 3:49 PM ^
Uhhh, did you really just make point 3?
See: Rodriguez, Rich.
January 8th, 2010 at 3:49 PM ^
You honestly think Cincinnati would have done much better with Brian Kelly there? Seriously?
January 8th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^
"Not ganna happen"
January 8th, 2010 at 5:59 PM ^
Not saying they would've won, but it can't have helped when Kelly's departure deflated a large potion of the team.
January 8th, 2010 at 6:13 PM ^
1) Cinci lost to Florida 51-24 and it wasn't that close (they beat UF 14-7 in the fourth quarter).
2) In their last game, Florida lost to Alabama by 19 points.
3) In Florida's only other game versus a ranked opponent, they beat LSU (#4 at the time) by 10 points.
4) It was Cinci's only loss of the year
5) Cinci beat two ranked opponents (USF, Pitt) and respectable opponents of UConn and WVU.
So... you add all of these things up and how the hell do you get Cinci losing to UF by 27 points? I just can't explain it other than b/c Kelly left. I mean, did you watch that game? The team looked AWFUL.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:51 PM ^
"i don't think craig james did anything wrong... his son told him that he was being mistreated and james called the AD to find out what was going on. i see that as normal behaviour for any parent..."
Craig James has done plenty wrong. Prior to the incident in question, Craig James repeatedly harassed the Texas Tech coaching staff to protest his son's playing time, and when rebuked by the coaches he went to administrators to complain about the coaches not giving his kid a fair shot.
After the concussion incident, Craig James utilized his position at ESPN to publicize his interests and to poison any semblance of fair and balanced reporting of the story.
James' on-air pleas conveniently left out any context of disagreement between Leach and Adam James, and he also flat-out lied about the "electrical closet" in which Adam was supposedly "locked." ESPN, for its part, has failed to either compartmentalize James or to recuse itself from reporting on the matter (gotta do one or the other to mitigate conflict of interest) and also foot-dragged on pointing out TTU's incentive to fast-fire Leach outside the ten-day-notice terms of his contract. (Even in the Leavitt story today, ESPN.com mentions Leach's firing but doesn't mention an ESPN employee was at the center of it.)
January 8th, 2010 at 4:00 PM ^
I responded with a comment there. I have deleted what I have already said here, but the piece and its comments were thought-provoking enough to make me go on a slightly differnt tangent than we have here so far:
"......I am not even a Tech fan but am very glad that this was written. I am a fan of the University of Michigan, and Tech's "misfiring" of Leach has been an on and off thread at mgoblog since it happened.
That might seem insignificant, but it isn't. The eyes of the entire sports world are on Tech and how they further mishandle this situation.......
This is part of a disturbing trend in which disgruntled students have gotten three head coaches fired this off-season. Basically, if this is allowed to continue, schools now have a way to weasel out of their contracts with their coaches and a way to not have to honor their buyout clauses.
I would be willing to bet that every coach at every D-1 school now has disgruntled students lining up to try and get their coach fired because they are dissatisfied with their playing time. The consequences that the people at Tech do or don't sustain will be very important in how other schools do business.
Sadly, while Tech, Kansas, and USF haven't changed the face of the game on the field, they may have changed it off the field if they aren't exposed and punished for their actions."
January 8th, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^
"(If any parts of this are considered libel, then those parts are all for satire, so don’t sue me.)"
That is excellent.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:14 PM ^
1. Mike Leach was not "treating" or "rehabbing" Adam James. He was punishing Adam's lazy white ass. Leach and his attorney are fabricating it if they say that they were "treating" the light-sensitive young James with darkness, ice, trainers, seclusion, bla-di-blah-blah.
2. Mike Leach did not hurt Adam James, nor did he place James in any risk of harm or injury. The James' are lying pussies if they claim that. The kid had a concussion. The kid was sent to the doctor. Doctor said the kid was basically okay. They did not put the kid back in pads or into hitting drills.
3. Mike Leach did not like Adam James, and he liked Craig James even less. And vice versa.
4. Mike Leach was doing a pretty fabulous job for the Red Raiders; so fabulous that he was shopping himself around for other jobs. All of that made a lot of people in Lubbock love Mike Leach (for his success), and it made a few people who were in positions of power, in terms of hiring and firing head football coaches, very suspicious of Mike Leach (for his disloyalty).
As a result of all of this, I think it is clearly time for the Lions to hire Mike Leach and make him the highest-paid OC in the NFL. The only downside there is that I might have to spend a few Sundays actually watching the Lions.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^
but if james did get the concussion in a bar fight or some other stupid non football related way, then leach should have just suspended him from practice using the good ol 'violation of team rules' reason. And then the whole situation could have been avoided.
January 8th, 2010 at 3:17 PM ^
If Leach hadn't blown his top, and had just said, "Adam, what kind of b.s. is this; go get dressed in shorts and a jersey, lose the sunglasses, get a ball cap, and be back here in 20 minutes," nothing would have happened.
If Leach had called Craig James and personally "apologized," nothing would have happend.
If Leach sat down for a meeting with the University President and the Jameses, nothing would have happened.
Some people wanted to fire Leach last year, obviously. We don't know how big that contingent was. It might have been farily small. But Mike Leach handed that group a Great Big Fat Greek Reason to fire him.
I still like Mike Leach. He's about the only thing that would make me interested in the NFL, other than Jason Avant.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^
just to follow up on pt 1, wasn't james not even supposed to be at practice? if not, why should leach's care have to exceed james' own? hell, he should have told him to get the hell home versus having folks take him to the shed.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:28 PM ^
I think what Texas Tech should've done to rectify the situation, while still managing to keep Leach, is build a "pimped" out electrical shed like Harbaugh's bathroom at Stanford.
January 8th, 2010 at 3:55 PM ^
already fully documented the Mike Leach situation.
However, the MSM has yet to pick up on the midget angle:
January 8th, 2010 at 4:46 PM ^
read, the more I believe that there are not two sides to this story, and that Leach did nothing wrong--at all. Putting him in the room in the 1st place wasn't even wrong--James, who had a history, showed up with sunglasses, which were frowned upon at practice. He was told--he responded with a wise ass comment, Leach took him up on it and sent him to the dark. He was punished for being a wise ass. And the punishment was completely fine.
January 8th, 2010 at 5:17 PM ^
I definitely go to National Lampoon when I want my completely serious and totally accurate sports coverage.
January 9th, 2010 at 3:14 AM ^
dont feel too bad for leach. he'll be back to work in no time. his offense is perfect for where the nfl is going right now. similar to what the saints do. he's a lot like mike martz. hopefully for his sake he has better people skills...though it looks like that isnt the case.