Why the Leach firing will have repercussions far beyond his contract

[Texhome22]

Texas Tech's Leach fired short of bowl game - ESPN Dallas

He was supposed to have his restraining order hearing this morning. I wonder if that means he lost the hearing. It would seem odd for the university to fire him before the decision on the restraining order.

No, he was fired because if he had won the TRO the University would have had egg on its face. Rather than risk it, they fired him pre-emptively. Not very bright on TTUs part.

[Hot Lunch]

Boo on Texas Tech.

[Shaka]

This is going to turn into an epic court case trying to figure out a buyout. I doubt TT's With Cause firing will survive a court challenge. I guess they could negotiate in private but Leach is eccentric enough that he may want public revenge.

[Surfah]

I haven't read that Gladwell article. But I will. Though I admit I am a big skeptic and not really a fan of his.

I read the article. It is awesome. My opinion of Gladwell increased a bit.

[Flystripper]

I read the article. It is awesome. My opinion of Gladwell increased a bit.

This is probably worth its own thread, but why the dislike for Gladwell? I think his books and articles are interesting. He makes you think about issues and I appreciate that about his work . He does not claim to have all the answers. In the preface of his most recent book entitled What the Dog Saw (which is really only a compilation of some of his New Yorker essays) he says:

Nothing frustrates me more than someone who reads something of mine or anyone else's and says, angrily, "I don't buy it." Why are they angry? Good writing does not succeed or fail on its ability to persuade. Not the kind of writing you'll find in this book, anyway. It succeeds or fails on the strength of its ability to engage you, to make you think, to give you a glimpse into someone else's head - even if in the end you conclude that someone else's head is not a place you'd really like to be.

I would not call myself a Gladwell disciple, but he writes about interesting topics IMHO.

[UtahDan]

Once litigation hits the issue, is there any way to stop football from becoming an obsolete sport?

Assumption of the risk. They are adults.

[SeattleUte]

Assumption of the risk. They are adults.

Exactly. The same reason boxers don't sue each other. The same reason you can't sue a baseball team if you get beaned watching a game.

Football will not be banned by legal process. Not in the country I love and live in. Who would win? Do Jordan Wynn or Jake Heaps want football to be illegal? Life is fraught with risk. That's life. Market forces will decide; indeed, boxing is not nearly as popular as it once was. Ultimately, rules will change; mores will change. Football will evolve. I think technology will continue to improve safety as it has.

Football is what it is. It reflects a real part of life. Thankfully there aren't any real wars in American streets and parks. (We ARE a nation of fretful wimps.)

[SeattleUte]

This is probably worth its own thread, but why the dislike for Gladwell? I think his books and articles are interesting. He makes you think about issues and I appreciate that about his work . He does not claim to have all the answers. In the preface of his most recent book entitled What the Dog Saw (which is really only a compilation of some of his New Yorker essays) he says:



I would not call myself a Gladwell disciple, but he writes about interesting topics IMHO.

He's too slick. Too cute. He states the obvious with flair. His leveraging football concusions to further enhance his mystique is a classic example. People act like this is a revelation. Guess what. People like football because it's dangerous. That's not news. Neither is the danger.

[Katy Lied]

He's too slick. Too cute. He states the obvious with flair. His leveraging football concusions to further enhance his mystique is a classic example. People act like this is a revelation. Guess what. People like football because it's dangerous. That's not news. Neither is the danger.

I think that this particular article is revelatory. I dont think people had any idea of the ravages of head trauma previously seen as somewhat routine in sports like boxing and football. Since his article has come out, there's been a 60 Minutes story on it, refs have started enforcing the "leading with the head" penalty, and the NFL has started a study group.

There are two problems with studying football-related head blows: 1. The only indication of LT damage is found by examining the brains of dead players. Its not like you can get a diagnosis from your doctor. 2. There is no way to trace where the damage came from, other than patient history. Did the damage come from football, or was the kid really clumsy as a toddler?

I forgot to mention earlier that technological innovation doesnt seem to help this issue. The safer you make the helmets, the more invincible the players feel, the harder they hit with their heads. (I too was hoping for a tech solution)

Im not familiar with Gladwell's body of work, but I still think that this article was groundbreaking. He didn't come out and say it because he was too cowardly, but the inevitable conclusion of his article is that football should be banned. I'm not ready to take that position yet, but I briefly considered the possibility, especially for my (hypothetical) sons.

Now the comparison of football players to Michael Vick's dogs, that was cute and slick.

[Flystripper]

Now the comparison of football players to Michael Vick's dogs, that was cute and slick.

He is prone to a bit of hyperbole and exaggeration to make his point, but if SU hates him for that he must hate himself. Point that finger and you have 3 pointing back at you SU.

[Hallelujah]

If Leach were forcing him to practice, then that would be abusive. My understanding is that Leach sent him to a shed. It's a weird thing to do, but I don't see how sending the kid to a shed could have possibly hurt him or made his concussion worse. Maybe they are upset because Leach wanted him to practice and the kid was punished for refusing.

Basically the kid was embarrassed. His dad was told to shove it. The University believes they overpaid him. Get those 3 parties together and you have an illegitimate, and expensive, termination of Mike Leach.

Go Mike. I believe his daughter was in one of my classes at BYU.

[Hallelujah]

More proof of what I've been saying--DI sports is the tail, not the dog at a respectable uniersity. In fact, the dog mostly resents the tail. It considers the tail as something frivolous to entertain the masses.

Leach and his lawyer must have wanted to induce the firing. That's the only explanation for the suit. No way a court enjoins Tech now. You can't specifically enforce a personal services contract. This is Neuheisel and Price all over again--a problem for TT's insurers.

C'mon SU. They fired him because of the $800K bonus to be paid if they didn't. Some facts are so obviious that even an attorney can see them.

[Hallelujah]

This is going to turn into an epic court case trying to figure out a buyout. I doubt TT's With Cause firing will survive a court challenge. I guess they could negotiate in private but Leach is eccentric enough that he may want public revenge.

He was embarassed publicly by the James gang and TT. It's only appropriate he would want public revenge. What's good for the goose..........

[Fiyero]

Mike Leach's lawsuit against Texas Tech alleges the following:

Adam James stormed out of the athletic offices yelling an expletive and slammed the outer door to the coaches' office so hard that it split and came off its hinges, causing approximately $1,100 in damage. The alleged confrontation with the coaches took place after Leach and assistant coach Lincoln Riley had informed James that he was being demoted to third string.

Then daddy got involved:

Craig James called assistant coach Tommy McVay "to tell him, in effect, that you coaches are crazy and you're screwing my kid."

The same day that he made the call to McVay, Craig James left a message for Riley "stating, in effect, 'You don't know what you're doing. Adam James is the best player at the wide receiver position. ... If you've got the [blank] to call me back, and I don't think you do, call me back.' "

And now of course daddy has nothing to say:

Craig James, who was in Austin on Thursday for a speaking engagement, declined to comment on allegations by Leach that he lobbied for more playing time for his son.

Mike Leach lawsuit details Craig James calls, damage to coaches' offices - ESPN