The Saga of Mike Leach and Texas Tech: The Deadline Looms
by Seth C on Feb 14, 2009 7:17 AM CST
in Texas Tech Football
31 comments
Previous Editions of Our Saga
February 7, 2009 :: February 8, 2009 :: February 12, 2009
Us vs. Them
I want to get this out of the way first. It's easy to choose sides on this deal and I think that most people have, but I refuse to believe that this is a singular person's fault.
We can all pick sides here argue about who is right and who is wrong, but you need to keep in mind that it's no longer about you or what you think.
This has obviously become much bigger than either you or I and as much bitching and moaning as I'd like to do here, especially since I have this incredible forum, I think it would fall on deaf ears.
Perhaps that's a fairly apathetic attitude to take, but I'm convinced, especially now, that neither party is really acting in anyone's best interest but their own. Texas Tech's addition of the four terms probably knew that this would drive Leach insane. Leach's counter-offer wasn't much of a counter-offer and they knew that it would drive Myers insane. You starting to see how this isn't about what you want?
And I'd also offer that as much crap that Gerald Myers is catching, he's not acting alone. He's acting as a spokesperson for the entire athletic department, Chancellor and Board of Regents. I can not imagine that he has absolute power in the athletic department. As stated above, it's easy to blame Gerald and make him out to be the lone gunman, but there's just no way that he's acting alone. It you want to criticize the entire administration, then that's appropriate, but to put this entirely on Myers is probably inaccurate.
But back to my original point, which that this is about you, yes, you, versus "Them". The "Them" being everyone else.
Gerald Myers.
Mike Leach.
Kent Hance.
The Texas Tech Board of Regents.
Matt Baldwin.
Gary O'Hagan.
IMG.
These are the people and organizations that should make you angry. All of them. They are all responsible for helping tear down a program in the blink of an eye.
I would direct your ire to each and every one of them.
They are all at fault.
They are all responsible.
About that Counter-Offer
Leach's counter-offeras of February 10, 2009, which the media already has a copy of, I guess there's no need for Open Information Act requests at this point, the parties just start giving everything to the press anyway, doesn't change much, at least according to a statement from Myers:
"This ’so-called’ proposal is simply an offer for us to guarantee that Coach Leach could never be fired," Myers said in a written statement released Friday by the university. "It would cost us a maximum of $4.4 million if we wanted to change coaches in the first year. It would cost Texas Tech millions in subsequent years of his five-year contract."If Leach left Tech he would only pay Tech $500,000. Our proposal is a fair offer of $12.7 million for five years. Both Leach and Texas Tech would pay the same annually decreasing buyout figures. Leach’s agents’ proposal is not fair. We will not even respond to such a proposal."
Again, file this under "Reason Why A Contract Will Not Be Signed."
Making a Stand
I'm all about making a stand, but who's the enemy here? Some folks thinks it's Leach and his agents, some folks think it's the Texas Tech administration. The problem is that we're all die hard Texas Tech fans, but we're split on who is at fault and we shouldn't be looking at another fan's decision as wrong.
No one should question the loyalty of anyone if they choose Texas Tech or Leach. There are arguments as to why both should admonished and praised.
The parties mentioned above, have torn us apart.
You can make a stand by not renewing your season tickets, but then you lose out on something that you love, which is Texas Tech football. This of course assumes that you love Texas Tech more than Leach, or was at least a fan of the Red Raiders before Leach sailed into town, and right now, you're probably a fan of both.
In any event, despite my displeasure over this entire ordeal, DTN and Texas Tech athletics is my biggest escape in life. This is where I go to forget about everything else that's going on in my life.
I don't want to give that up.
I'm not going to boycott.
I don't think this makes me a bad fan, just really conflicted. It's not as easy for me, personally, because I can see both sides of the situation and you're probably tired of me saying it, it's both parties think they are bigger than the other and they don't care what you think. Leach and his agents don't care about you. The athletic department doesn't care about you.
0 recs |
31 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Thanks
Thanks for the level head. This is a very passionate subject and rightly so, we love Tech Football. I wish the best for all involved. I am not going to stress over actions that I have no control over. If I was a million dollar booster then I’d take some action. I’m not so I’ll just hope the grown ups in this situation (Lord please grant us a few grown ups to settle this) will work this out.
Ciao
Leach's counter offer
The AJ reported Tech will not respond to Leach’s counter offer. The provisions in the counter offer to pay Leach 40% of his remaining contract if Tech fires him and Leach pays Tech $500,000 if he leaves early are in his current contract. It appears Coach Leach just wants to retain that provision of his contract. Meyers refers to this as the “so called " proposal inferring this is some kind of crazy off the wall request. If it is so off the wall, then why is it in the current contract. What kind of reward for success are we offering if we are making his new contract less attractive than the current contract.
I would be curious to see what provisions Hance has in his contract with the University. What are the provisions of Meyers’ contract with the University.
Contracts with executives in "public” positions are designed to protect the executive from the policital changes that occur in public entities. New Governor, new board members, new administration, new personality conflicts, etc. may lead to a new direction without regard to the success of the current administration. The contract should have a hefty payout for dismissal “without cause”.
Now I am quite sure we can get a head coach for much less money, one who would be willing to accept a no buy-out provision, and one who we would never have a concern of another program wanting their services. We have had a few of those in our history and it was not very pretty on the field.
Put egos aside and get this thing signed. What Coach Leach has counter is very fair for all involved. If the powers that be can’t see this, then release Coach Leach, hire a $300,000 year to year contract coach and make my wife happy (finish project around the house instead of going to Lubbock 6 weekends every season).
This is the price we pay.
We want our program to be among the elite, but we do not want to put up with the baggage that comes with that level of success. The egos and power struggles are just part of the deal.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are people who want crops without ploughing the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning; they want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. The struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, or it may be both. But it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand; it never has and it never will.
Fredrick Douglass
VIVA LA FIGA!
I saw ESPN posted the story about Leach yesterday….definitely made Tech look bad and Leach look good. Would it be possible for Art Briles to take over the team during the game in Dallas?
What an awful article. They compared each of the clauses in that contract to the contracts of Mack Brown, Bob Stoops, Bill Snyder and Mangino; how many jobs have those guys interviewed for in the last 5 years (case in point: Stoops immediately stopped the rumors that the Broncos were interested by saying he wasn’t interested in leaving – and that is the best coaching job in sports).
Like Myers said, go win a national championship and then we will compare your contract to theirs. Even Mangino has taken his team to a BCS game. And let’s be honest it isn’t as if Kansas State is in any way concerned Snyder is going to go coach elsewhere.
Coaches in the big 12 that have been to a BCS game
-Mangino
-Snyder
-Brown
-Stoops
-Pinkel
-Hawkins (w/ Boise)
That is half and the other half has not had 9 seasons to try.
To further express my displeasure with this situation. Tech had the best season in its history, was more publicized than any other college football team and was at one time ranked #2. And last checked they brought in the #31 recruiting class in the country, that sucks. And all parties need to be held responsible for letting it come to this.
On another note, I also think V-day is a sham….average guy spends $145 dollars on V-day.
Please Seth..
I totally understand that you are tying to be “Switzerland” and be neutral, but winning programs(and we know you really want Tech to be a top tier program) ALL had to take a chance on their coach and NONE of them have any of those four clauses in thier contracts!!!
So if you really want to see what is best for this football program then explain to Raider nation why our administration is putting Leach in a corner with those four clauses when they told him he was free to find a better deal prior to the 11-2 season???
Please help me understand WHY those four clauses were justified considering how Tech handled this contract prior to the season???
I'm really not
trying to be neutral, but I find both parties at fault. The administration is reacting to Leach’s prior flirtations with those 4 clauses and like others, I really think we’re just talking about the buyout provisions at this point. They want loyalty from Leach and there’s a part of me that wants the same thing. That’s the reason for the 4 clauses. Both parties have bowed up (just like in high school when 2 guys were about to get their fight-on . . . bow out their chest, and stare each other down, really afraid to take the first punch).
I think there are plenty of people who feel like Leach has put the administration in this corner. I know that Leach’s agents have denied that he was never interested in many job opportunities, but the past 3 seasons he’s been associated with other jobs (Miami, UCLA, Clemson, Auburn, Washington, etc.). It’s in the agent’s best interest to deny, but I believe where there’s smoke there’s fire and there was at the very least a formal discussion. Leach’s agent’s were careful to say that Leach never did quite a bit of this, but they were careful to say that it wasn’t Leach who made contact, but they didn’t say anything about them.
Again, I really do see both sides.
I love Leach as my head coach, it makes my job infinitely more fun. I also love Texas Tech. Yes, I’m conflicted.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
and I do want to be clear
I’m not saying that Texas Tech’s actions were warranted, the addition of the 4 clauses, but I think Leach’s wandering eye is the reason for them. I am totally on the fence about that.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I really respect your passion and this forum...
So here is the part i don’t get…..
if your boss told you it was OK to look for a new job if you wanted to make more money because he couldn’t pay you more than you were making,so after having a good year at work you start looking for better money and then your boss tells you that you are not loyal!!!
Please explain why Leach should have not wandered???
Again, I'm
totally on the fence about this and I see both sides. On Leach’s side, I think that if I were told that we can’t pay what you’re asking, and BTW, Leach and his agents have come down quite a bit on that offer of $15 million/5 years to the current money, but TT told Leach, we can’t afford that much. What I would do in your scenario above is to tell my employer that I feel that my market is more than what you can afford and that I would be seeking employment elsewhere, i.e. Leach should have gone to Myers and Hance and told them that he would be seeking employment elsewhere because he felt that he was worth $3 million/year.
At that point, Hance and Myers would have no reason to complain because he was open and honest with them.
I’d also say that the Washington job was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I’m guessing here, but Leach and/or his agents have been shopping his services for the past 3 years.
Again, I really do see both sides and it drives me insane that both parties are acting like 6-year old children.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
With all due respect...
If my boss tells me that he is paying me the most he can pay me and thats it(what Myers did) then I would not feel obligated to “is to tell my employer that I feel that my market is more than what you can afford and that I would be seeking employment elsewhere”.
I still
would feel an obligation. Again, I work for a small business and if my boss told me that he couldn’t afford me anymore then I would certainly tell him that I’m going to have to look elsewhere. In my personal situation, he would understand. My personal situation isn’t everyone else’s opinion or what everyone else would do. It’s just me.
On Texas Tech’s level, I think that maybe what’s caused Hance to come out with his statements is that he wanted the common courtesy to know that his very well-paid coach was actually interviewing with Washington.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I can't fence sit.....
I compare this to the stimulus bill that basically is unknowable whether the damn thing will work to what level. There is information (and dis-information) on all sides and there are underlying motivations to believe one side or the other. I am unable to throw my hands up and believe all sides or just assign blame equally.
My predjudice is seeing Gerald in the 80’s on campus and not getting a warm fuzzy and seeing him in the 90’s and thinking he flat out lost it. I was impressed that he oversaw the hiring of Leach….thats about it. He has way overplayed his hand in the clout he has with the university, obstensively for bringing Bob Knight to Tech.
Leach is not a model employee, but his performance is outstanding and we DO NOT need to be pricking with him over the with cause termination portion of his contract. He has performed well in 9 years, and we shouldn’t be drastically cutting the amount owed to him in that scenario….it is rewarding performance. In return, we should have the buyout that is in the Tech proposal and the notification clause.
Had we proposed JUST those two things and did it with respect, I would not be leaning to Mike’s camp so much. Who gives a crap about the likeness clause and come on with the termination piece.
It went down the way it went down, and I think Gerald (and yes Hance, the BOR,etc) are more to blame than Leach, IMG sending an email directly to a member of the BOR (get over yourself). I look forward to complaining about going for it on 4th and 8 on our own 25 for years to come with everyone….
by oldschoolraider on Feb 14, 2009 4:34 PM CST reply actions
What are "they" thinking?
Or are “they” thinking? Why kill the goose that lays the golden eggs? Someone out there must have a contact that can shed light on the true position of the University representatives. I really want to know if there is an orchestrated strategy to force Leach out or did the negotiations digress to the point that the participants blinded by egotism and rage can no longer compromise? Where are the cooler heads? What about arbitration?
Seth, I applaud your loyalty to Tech and that you will continue to support the program. But if the success of Tech football returns to that of the bad “old days”, I wonder how many fans will follow suit?
counter
So basically he is taking a raise, keeping the buyout the same as it is on his current contract, and giving in to their request for interviews. The only thing he isn’t doing is signing over his name to the School, which would be stupid of him to do. I really don’t see why Tech didn’t accept this offer. Looks like they have champane taste on a beer budget.
buyout amount is the biggest issue now…the admin doesn’t trust Leach when he say’s he wants to be at Tech.
What part of
Leach wrote in part, "It is a thrill for me and my family to be at Texas Tech.’’ He also wrote, "It is also my hope that I can be the Head Coach at Texas Tech for many years to come.’’
and
“Absolutely I want to be here and have wanted to be here from the beginning. It’s a great town, I’ve got kids in school here,” the coach said in this afternoon’s radio interview. "No, there’s never been a question of wanting to be here.
If we win 7 games next year I’ll be the winningest coach in the history of Texas Tech history. I don’t think the guy that’s the winningest coach of various schools is the guy that wants to leave. And if that is, then that would be a situation that would be unique to here, so unequivocally ‘NO’, I’m excited about Tech and what we’ve built here."
don’t they trust?
Wes Welker can't be stopped.
I don’t know. But they clearly have an issue with it or they wouldn’t be so adamant about the clause.
You don't know
They clearly have an issue with it?
Or is it just that Gerald Myers is arrogant and uncompromising when he feels his authority is questioned and his job is at stake?
Wes Welker can't be stopped.
Q: How do you fire an employee who's too successful to get fired?
A: Like this.
by mojavereject on Feb 14, 2009 9:59 PM CST up reply actions
But why?
At the age of fifty, when Duke Ding of Lu was on the throne, Confucius’ talents were recognized and he was appointed Minister of Public Works and then Minister of Crime. But Confucius apparently offended members of the Lu nobility who were vying with Duke Ding for power (or was it the duke himself that Confucius had rubbed the wrong way?) and he was subsequently forced to leave office and go into exile.
Jealousy… Seems petty, doesn’t it?
Wes Welker can't be stopped.
The deadline...
…Is to accept the contract extension offer, so if Mike turns down the final tech offer(with the four clauses that NO other coach we know of has in their contract) then Mike still has two years left on his current contract… so why are we assuming he would get fired for not accepting a extension offer???
Certainly the Administration isn't that stupid.
Or crazy. Firing Leach would be suicide. I do not expect him to be released if he does not accept the extension offer. He should remain the head buccaneer at least for this season. He can’t afford not to. Captain needs to have a good season to have any shot at a new head coaching position at a comparable school and salary. But I would not put anything past any of the players at this point.
Board of Regents
Leach does not want to leave, but his hand is being forced by small-town politics.
The fourth clause is the final straw. It was added at the strong request by an ex board of regent. Hance took the advice and passed the order along to Myers. This all happened before the cotton bowl.
No person, coach or otherwise, should be forced to sign his/her personal rights away to an organization. This clause is ridiculous and the primary, first and foremost, reason that Leach cannot sign the contract.
Hance and Myers and the Board know this, but will not swallow their collective pride to allow the clause(s) to be removed.
AMEN Pancho!!!
This post IS THE KEY POINT in all of this mess….
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Double-T Nation
Related FanShots on Double-T Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
