Questions about Jim Leavitt

Submitted by michgoblue on

Several posters in the MGoFish thread have speculated that our next DC could be Jim Leavitt.  Having not really followed USF at all, I know virtually nothing about him other than the unfortunate "incident" that led to his departure.  So, my question for those more knowledgeable (Magnus, Alum96, Space Coyote, etc.) is this:  putting aside his incident, which is pretty well discussed all over the web, what is the story with Leavitt?  Is he considered a good talent developer?  Schemer?  Recruiter (which I think is critical for a DC)? 

Thanks for any info.

michgoblue

December 15th, 2015 at 11:43 AM ^

The reason that I used the term "incident" is because it it the least charged word I could think of.  The fact is that we don't know the details, so I didn't want to add unnecessary color, positive or negative. 

As to the point about second chances, I totally agree.  If this really is an isolated event, then I do believe that he deserves a second chance.  I haven't seen anything that would indicate that the behavior of which he was accused was part of a pattern.  Didn't our current head coach have an indicent from years back relating to drinking and driving?  Arguably, that is worse, as it risks human life, yet I didn't hear a single fan say that the prior incident should prohibit us from hiring Harbaugh.

LB

December 15th, 2015 at 2:18 PM ^

According to Dennis Dodd at CBSSports.com, a previously suppressed statement by a Florida State Highway Patrol trooper present in the South Florida locker room when Jim Leavitt allegedly struck walk-on Joel Miller states that Leavitt did not hit anyone. A statement signed by what Florin says is Florida Highway Patrol trooper Benny Perez states that at halftime of the Nov. 21 game against Louisville, "Coach Leavitt did not grab Miller’s neck nor did he choke or strike Miller."

 
The story goes on to discuss other statements that may exonerate Leavitt:
 
Previous to Perez, the father of walk-on defensive end Cody Durakovic told the Tampa Tribune shortly after Leavitt’s firing that he did not see the coach strike Miller. Strength coach Ronnie McKeefery told school officials in the school’s report that Leavitt popped Miller’s shoulder pads twice and grabbed his jersey, but that there was no slap.
ZOMG - we have an abuser amongst us!
So coach Jim Harbaugh smacked some sense into him. Literally.
Harbaugh pounded on Speight's shoulder pads and whacked him in the chest.
What? You expected a warm-and-fuzzy moment of quiet reflection and deep, profound words of wisdom? "He just needed to get hit a few times," Harbaugh said, laughing.

DCGrad

December 15th, 2015 at 11:28 AM ^

was pretty bad (based on what we knwo), but wasn't it an isolated incident? If so I think he deserves a second chance/has kept his nose clean for a few years.

somewittyname

December 15th, 2015 at 1:14 PM ^

The biggest, one is a workplace incident and one is not. Given two incidents of equal severity, an employer will always care more about the incident taking place within the workplace for obvious and logical reasons.

Second, there are certainly shades of grey to a DUI. Blowing a 0.09 is obviously quite different than a 0.15. If you're arguing about potential damage of driving at 0.09, well it's less than talking on the phone while driving (illegal some places). I don't know what Harbaugh blew though.

ijohnb

December 15th, 2015 at 11:52 AM ^

tell - Who are you more angry with, Harbaugh or Leavitt?  Is it your position that Harbaugh should not have been hired because of his offense?  If so, do you advocate for his dismissal?  Or do you advocate for the Leavitt hire because we have done it in the past so that makes it alright, or that because we hired a coach who had DUI that we have burned our "sin" and should not do it again?  In short, what the hell are you talking about and what the hell is your point?

In reply to by ijohnb

Magnus

December 15th, 2015 at 11:58 AM ^

My point is that if you hire a head coach who has a DUI and give him a second chance, then there shouldn't be much question about whether someone with a "grabbing/striking a football player" incident should be given a second chance.

Hire Harbaugh? Fine. Then Leavitt shouldn't be an issue.

If Leavitt's past is an issue, then you shouldn't have hired Harbaugh.

Zarniwoop

December 15th, 2015 at 12:08 PM ^

The problem with that statement is that people react much more strongly to primary symbolism.

Harbaugh COULD HAVE killed someone doesn't affect the masses like Jim Leavitt DID hit a kid.

That's why outrage in popular media is often completely out of skew.  How personal does the story come across?  That's how strongly people will react, in general.

pescadero

December 15th, 2015 at 12:38 PM ^

"Hire Harbaugh? Fine. Then Leavitt shouldn't be an issue.

If Leavitt's past is an issue, then you shouldn't have hired Harbaugh."

 

This implies that all issues are of the same severity, and that everyone will agree on that scale of severity.

 

"Hire Harbaugh? Fine. Then Charles Manson shouldn't be an issue.

If Manson's past is an issue, then you shouldn't have hired Harbaugh."

 

It ALSO ignores the attempted cover up.

 

If Harbaugh had tried to convince other coaches and players to lie to officials/police about his DUI - it would certainly change the calculus on the situation.

TIMMMAAY

December 15th, 2015 at 1:32 PM ^

I remember in hs football one of our lineman was a real jackass, always talking smack to someone. One day he mouthed off to our dline coach, who promptly snatched him up by his throat and slammed him into a fence then held him there until the kid apologized. Never had problems from that one again. 

In short, it's a problem, but not a huge one. I'm good with it. It's a violent sport full of arrogant kids. 

Goggles Paisano

December 15th, 2015 at 2:22 PM ^

Yeah that is the gist of what I heard.  Kind of like when Mike Leach locked Craig James kid in the equipment room closet or something like that.  From what I hear, both kids were out of line and were punished for it.  Old school way of handling things works sometimes and I'm cool with that.  

JTrain

December 15th, 2015 at 2:44 PM ^

I agree with TIMMAAY. The problem is we live in a completely wussified society and if you touch little Johnny nowadays...you might as well pack your shit and leave.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

FrankMurphy

December 15th, 2015 at 7:30 PM ^

Is the amount of time that has passed since the incident relevant? Harbaugh's hiring by Michigan came almost 10 years after his DUI (2005), during which he had no other incidents. It has been about 6 years since the incident involving Leavitt (2009), during which he has had no other incidents. Given that, as others have pointed out, a DUI is more serious than mildly striking an athlete, Leavitt's 6 years without any further anger-related incidents is probably as deserving of consideration as Harbaugh's 10 years without any DUIs.

los barcos

December 15th, 2015 at 11:49 AM ^

While DUI is more "dangerous" to society as a whole, I think school adminstration would view physcial altercation with a student athlete as being far more damaging then driving while intoxicated.

Case in point: this whole convesration.  No one said "...but he has DUI..." when Harbaugh was hired. 

bcnihao

December 15th, 2015 at 4:47 PM ^

"But he has DUI" did come up previously when it was more recent.  Such as when there were reports that Harbaugh wanted the QB coach position that Loeffler filled.  Since that time, UM's football program fell drastically, Harbaugh's coaching record climbed dramatically, and sheer passage of time without similar incidents provided a buffer.