Fat Girlfriends, Leach Firing & Coaches
First off, I think Leach's blast to the players about listening too much to their "fat girlfriends" was classic, and probably warranted. Frankly, more coaches need to come up with blasts like that to inspire their teams. But, it's a non-issue to this story. If people are offended by something like that, they would have to fire about every high-school and college coach in America.
Regarding the concussion stuff, that's another story. The first problem is that people want to make this about James and his father, but, it has nothing to do with Leach getting fired. I'm not saying James was a model player, hell, he might have been a thorn in Leach's side. But, there seems to be more than enough evidence showing that Leach really didn't care about his concussion and wanted to do whatever he could to prove his point that James should've been practicing.
#1 No one would've EVER heard the story and it would have been dead before it happened if Leach would have issued an apology to James as requested by the university. But he would not. We all know how strong willed, big headed, and how much power head coaches are given now-a-days, and it seems Leach couldn't bear the thought of having to apologize to James for running things "his way." Had he sucked up and apologized, nothing would have ever happened, he'd still have his job, and there wouldn't be a black mark on his record.
#2 James could've kept this thing manageable had he signed the legal document the university gave him stating that he would agree to treat players injuries according to the team physicians and NOT apply pressure on the athlete or physicians. The agreement went on to also state that his coaching staff would be held to the same terms. While it may sound ridiculous, they needed to do this because if James would do something else that caused harm on a player, the university would be sued out the wazoo and have to pay Leach's contract to boot. Whereas, if there was an agreement, it limits their liability and gives them cause to fire Leach should he do it again. Let me say this...I don't think a university is going to hand a document like that to a high profile head coach to sign for s_its and giggles. They had good reason to ask James to sign the document, and he again refused to do what the university was requesting of him. (Note to self...if someone is paying several mill a year for my job, I might want to at least consider signing a document they hand me and tell me to sign, no matter how much it pisses me off.)
This story has nothing to do with; athletes expecting primadona treatment, athletes not being tough enough, athletes always getting their way, James having a vendetta against Leach, the university rushing to judgment against Leach, Craig James flexing his muscles, and so on. Most people, including the media want to cling to some of these points but conveniently ignore the fact that Leach wanted to handle the situation his way, on his terms.
THAT'S why Leach was fired. It's not because of Craig James, his son, or mis-information and advanced judgment by the university without due process. He was fired because they had evidence he acted inappropriately, he then refused to apologize as requested, and then, he refused to sign an agreement with the university stating that he would abide by their terms for handling players with injuries. That's why he was fired, period.
Regarding the concussion stuff, that's another story. The first problem is that people want to make this about James and his father, but, it has nothing to do with Leach getting fired. I'm not saying James was a model player, hell, he might have been a thorn in Leach's side. But, there seems to be more than enough evidence showing that Leach really didn't care about his concussion and wanted to do whatever he could to prove his point that James should've been practicing.
#1 No one would've EVER heard the story and it would have been dead before it happened if Leach would have issued an apology to James as requested by the university. But he would not. We all know how strong willed, big headed, and how much power head coaches are given now-a-days, and it seems Leach couldn't bear the thought of having to apologize to James for running things "his way." Had he sucked up and apologized, nothing would have ever happened, he'd still have his job, and there wouldn't be a black mark on his record.
#2 James could've kept this thing manageable had he signed the legal document the university gave him stating that he would agree to treat players injuries according to the team physicians and NOT apply pressure on the athlete or physicians. The agreement went on to also state that his coaching staff would be held to the same terms. While it may sound ridiculous, they needed to do this because if James would do something else that caused harm on a player, the university would be sued out the wazoo and have to pay Leach's contract to boot. Whereas, if there was an agreement, it limits their liability and gives them cause to fire Leach should he do it again. Let me say this...I don't think a university is going to hand a document like that to a high profile head coach to sign for s_its and giggles. They had good reason to ask James to sign the document, and he again refused to do what the university was requesting of him. (Note to self...if someone is paying several mill a year for my job, I might want to at least consider signing a document they hand me and tell me to sign, no matter how much it pisses me off.)
This story has nothing to do with; athletes expecting primadona treatment, athletes not being tough enough, athletes always getting their way, James having a vendetta against Leach, the university rushing to judgment against Leach, Craig James flexing his muscles, and so on. Most people, including the media want to cling to some of these points but conveniently ignore the fact that Leach wanted to handle the situation his way, on his terms.
THAT'S why Leach was fired. It's not because of Craig James, his son, or mis-information and advanced judgment by the university without due process. He was fired because they had evidence he acted inappropriately, he then refused to apologize as requested, and then, he refused to sign an agreement with the university stating that he would abide by their terms for handling players with injuries. That's why he was fired, period.
Very quiet here tonight. I am sure you guys will make some excuse as to why OSU was able to dominate. I mean your article on the Pac-10 not being very good was already a way to cover your asses to say we beat an average team. Pryor progressed, the game plan was awesome and the bucks win. BigM eat some crow and shut up please.
Reply to this
mmm ... such tasty, tasty crow. with hot sauce. gimmie some more!!!!!
The point is, Jimmy boy FINALLY did those things we've been wanting him to do ALL ALONG. Tonight, he DID. We called for his firing because we assumed, based on many YEARS worth of track record, that he wouldn't ever do the Things that he did tonight.
But Tress goin' for it on 4th down? I knew we were gonna win that moment.
Not to mention him actually showing a pulse on offense, and heacock FINALLY bringing to pressure instead of that prevent zone bullshit.
Better late than never. Now we still gotta see if this is a one game aberration, but if every game from now on is coached in this way, coached TO WIN, then hopefully this site won't have to exist anymore.
We've never been ANTI-buckeyes, we just wanted certain changes made that Tressel was unwilling to make, UNTIL tonight. And I myself was always pro-pryor, even in the depths of purdue, the problem was always with Tressel's (playcalling, lack of killer instinct, etc). Everyone on this board was educated enough to not be one of those "get rid of TP" folks. I always knew the kid had this game in him. In fact, if anything most of our criticism was aimed at JT for NOT letting pryor break out, the way he finally let him tonight.
So shut your trolling mouth and stop flaming us like were wolverine fans or something.
Goes to show how pathetic you are that on this happiest of buckeye nights (the first and only bowl win for these seniors!) you decide to log on here and attack fellow buckeyes. Must be miserable up in youngstown.
O-H-I-FU_ _ING-O!!!!
Reply to this
YSUBuckeye - thanks again for contributing to the blog, all opinions are welcomed especially when a well supported point can be made. Which begs the question, what is your point?
I think Damien but it very succinctly, FINALLY The Vest did the things we've been advocating, begging and cajoling for. He opened up the offense (a little) and decided to trust his greatest assets to make plays on the field.
Nonetheless, one game does not a change of heart make. When he shows that he can do the same thing time and time again, I will GLADLY turn my attention to other things well worth my time and effort.
With that said, my heartfelt congrats to the Buckeyes and to Jim Tressel for a well fought and well earned victory. The team did what they needed to do and pulled off what we all know they're capable of doing. I have never, ever rooted against my beloved Buckeyes and wish them all the success possible next season.
For what it's worth, I was at tonite's game cheering hard for the Bucks and I'm wiped and can barely talk! My seats sucked ... last time I trust someone else with buying the tix ... but hey, I was there in person to see TP grow-up a little and Tressel win his first Rose Bowl. However, I can't resist asking the rhetorical question as to why we haven't seen more of this. Maybe The Vest has turned over a new leaf. Let's hope.
Reply to this
One more thing. Despite a victorious outcome, I still saw far too many of Tressel's bad habits appear throughout the game to make me remotely comfortable with what the future may hold. As soon as he thought he had a comfortable lead, he quickly reverted to conservative play calling, preferring instead to play his field position game. Against a prolific offense, that will never work and Oregon demonstrated that by quickly tieing the score in the second quarter. Another case in point ... where was that quick toss to Saine on the wings that was KILLING Oregon? Again, as soon as Tressel thought he'd built (in his mind) a sufficient lead, he stuffed that play in his pocket instead preferring to run Boom Herron off tackle. That clearly wasn't working but he kept going to it. Frankly, Oregon didn't have an answer for Saine whether he was on the wing as a receiver out of the backfield or in the flat or on the trap play off tackle. He consistently picked up more yards than Boom yet he didn't see the field for large stretches of the third and fourth quarters. Why?
That is yet another of The Vest's tendencies that frustrate the hell out of me. It's as if he can't stand sustained success or feels the need to establish other plays off his gameplan regardless of effectiveness. Any offensive mind worth his salt knows you go with the hot hand until the opponent shows he can stop it.
As we've said many times before ... when Tressel shows that he can go against his tendencies and do what it takes to win a game, regardless of how you get it done then we'll get off his back. It's that or he gets someone who can do it for him. Doesn't matter. The goal is to win games, ALL of them and most especially when it counts the most. Tonite was a GREAT first step!
Reply to this
You are so right YSUbuckeye...we scored 26 on a team that gave up 38 to Purdue, 41 to Arizona, and 51 to Stanford.
Sure, I made the predictions on the Pac-10 and Oregon to cover my a_s since I have nothing else better to do than to try and make me look good. Where were your predictions before the game? I made predictions in writing that were spot on and you're still trashing them?
You're an idiot, the defense was the star of the show anyway, but everyone gets too fixated on Offenses.
Pryor made some great throws, but if you think that all is well in Tressland because we scored 26 against a crap defense...nothing I say is going to make a difference anyway.
Go Bucks!
Reply to this
BigM - you stole my thunder!!
My thoughts exactly on this thing with Leach. I find it somewhat curious that this is similar to the Mark Mangino thing and it's a little odd that this is happening in the Big12 ... something amiss in that conference? Hmm ....
I'd only add a couple of things to the discussion. Mike Leach seems to have forgotten that he was an employee of Texas Tech. Put simply, Texas Tech could largely do as they pleased as it concerned Leach's behavior and if he didn't like it he was free to leave.
I look at this more as a cautionary tale and a reflection of our society in general, it's about a distorted of entitlement. Mike Leach has likely been told his entire adult life how great he is and what a wonderful job he's doing. Because he was winning, he could do as he pleased and grew to think he was entitled to behave as he pleased. After all, he thinks "I'm special, everyone tells me how special I am, I must therefore not be wrong." As long as he won, people looked the other way or, as you aptly stated, looked to make excuses for him. It's highly unlikely this incident with Adam James was isolated and I look at Leach's past comments about "listening to their fat little girlfriends" as a window to his soul and how he views the world. He's arrogant, self-centered and self entitled. Mike Leach thinks other's are beneath him and he keeps his own counsel, nothing others have to say has any value in his mind.
To whom much is given, much is expected. Mike Leach was fired because he forgot his responsibilities to his employer, his players and the community he serves. He placed himself first and foremost, everything else was a distant second.
Reply to this