I can’t say that I blame him. Some of that stuff is crazy. First of all why would they fire him ever? Second that buy out clause is way to high, and if a big time program wanted Leach they would pay that easy. Third isn’t that bad, but knowing Tech they would never let him interview. The fourth is stupid, just plain stupid by Techs part. You can never own a person like that and I really think if any of us were put into that we would be miserable. I hope Tech/Leach get this worked out.

having read the article, I think this has been a mess on either side. Leach’s agents are awful for him. They don’t know how to manage their own releases nor can they deal with “non-lawyerin’” folk like Myers and Hance.

On the other hand, Hance and Myers are doing a woeful job in this negotiation, losing every PR battle and putting clauses into Mike’s contract that are completely and understandably unacceptable. To sign the rights to Leach’s name over to TTU is by far the worst, though the “right to fire” clause is also a horrible idea.

I could see something in the contract aimed at preventing Mike’s wandering eye, perhaps a clause asking that he inform the athletic department prior to interviewing or another clause requiring that he make a public statement if he is involved in one of these coaching searches (IE he can’t take his vacation and then come back and no say, “yes, i interviewed or no, I don’t have any interest in this job”).

I really, really, really don’t want to lose Mike Leach. It’d be a massive setback for our program especially if he is chased away by the administration. Quite annoying.

The ONLY unreasonable thing is number four. The others, well, Leach sort of brought those on himself with his/his agents pandering to so many other openings in the recent past.

He hasn’t earned the right to not have a buyout simply because his wandering eye is so focused. Loyalty begats loyalty and Leach fired the first I’m-Not-Loyal volley with his desire for the Miami job.

I honestly side with Tech much, much more than I did before. And before I was pretty firmly behind them. Leach’s agents tried to do an end run on the negotiation team, got caught and it’s backfired miserably.

if you think Art Briles or any other high profile coach would come to Lubbock after the way this contract negotiation has gone. Come to Tech and sign over your rights to the University? Fat chance.

of an explanation from the DMN.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/020709dnspoleach.263ef9df.html

I don’t like any of this. That 4th one in there is definitely a slap in the face, but an intentional one, too, I believe. But, this is bad. Leach could be gone in two years.

And it has at least one ridiculous slap-in-the-face clause that makes it hard to believe they are really even trying to negotiate in good faith. It seems to have become personal and probably has been for quite a while. This doesn’t look like it will ever be worked out in any meaningful way until somebody is gone.
Personally, I vote for Gerald Myers.

this is very embarassing to read and I cant believe Leach and his agents are being so immature about this contract. It seems more than fair to me, and while I love coach Leach, I wish that he was more loyal and am going to begin to accept that he may be gone very soon. The 4th clause is the only unreasonable one, though I’m not sure I fully understand how the other three operate. I agree with what many have said that leach did some of this to himself by always interviewing and denying that he is doing so. I really hope they can all agree on something and maybe somehow find a way to respect each other and get along, because the fact that just about anyone who wants to read these e-mails can is very embarassing and makes our school and our coach look bad. Also, the fact that Leach and his agents seem to think they are the shit now after one good year really upsets me. What happens if Tech goes 7-5 next year and loses their bowl game?? Is it likely? No. It is possible? Very. We could easily lose to OU, UT, OSU, NU, and UH who is a very good team with a great offense that has a lot of talent coming back next year, and its a road game that they will be pumped for. Tech basically gets SCREWED out of it;s investment if he has another average year next year. In my opinion, Leach and his agents are trying to discuss these contract negotiations as if they have routinely had 11 win seasons, when in reality this is the FIRST one. I think Leach is a good fit for Tech, but if this doesn’t get fixed soon I think he needs to go. This may set the football program back a bit, but Texas Tech University does not need this kind of drama, nor does it need to be controlled and operated by the damn football coach!

In 2008, Mike Leach’s compensation package was 6th highest in the Big XII.
Was his performance 6th best in the league?
Do we expect his performance to be 6th best in the league?
Do we think the program he has built over 9 years is about 6th best in the league?
If so, let’s just jack him around with the contract and sit back contently in the middle of the Big XII.
In fact, we really don’t need to worry about getting the extension done, because we can probably find several other coaches who are capable of keeping us in the middle of the pack in the Big XII.

Leach has Tech third or fourth best in the conference as of this year. But the two or three in front have BCS games under their belt…division championships…conference championships…national championships…

Where do you think we finish next year? Possibly fourth in the division, let alone the conference. Do we adjust his pay each year? No, and I don’t imply you think that either.

I agree we need to pay the guy. And this contract does that quite nicely. By the same token, I don’t think he deserves to be one of the top two highest paid guys in the conference. I think Tech is being smart by protecting their interests by inserting a few clauses that make it a bit tougher to leave.

Based on this, Hance is the man!
http://www.kcbd.com/global/video/flash/popupplayer.asp?ClipID1=3422107&h1=Hance20Refuses20Further20Talks20With20Leach27s%20Agent&vt1=v&at1=Sport&d1=186834&LaunchPageAdTag=News&activePane=info&rnd=19476380

I can appreciate that Hance would like to negotiate with Leach directly; however, I am sure that part of the agreement to be represented by an agent is that the agent must represent him or he pays a penalty. Now the entire lot of them are acting like toddlers and want to take their ball and go home. Obviously, it is Leach’s decision whether or not to sign the contract, but at least 2 of the 4 items I think are out of line on Tech’s behalf.

1. Reducing the guaranteed income due Leach should Tech fire the coach without cause.

If some one better comes along, we can can you. There’s a trust builder. Why would you do this except to say we’re looking for someone better. Hope you find a new job first because if you don’t you’re going to wind up doing bad commentary late night for ESPN. Any reduction from the current contract is dumb, and that is what this is.

1. Increasing the buyout clause

I don’t find this that unreasonable. In a way it says we want you here and we want to make sure you don’t leave. Like Tech92, I don’t thing the terms are that bad either. If he says just 1 more year beyond his current obligation, the amount is the basically the same or less.

1. Asking permission to interview

This one I also find a little incredulous. I could understand a requirement to notify Tech if he is interviewing. But to have to be granted permission is crazy. How many people would ask their current boss permission to interview for a new job? I could understand a provision that would not allow him to leave directly to coach within the Big XII, but that is unlikely anyway.

1. Rights to pimp the Leach brand.

I think this boils down to making Mike earn a little more of the guaranteed supplemental income on his own instead of making Tech foot the entire bill. Last year, he only accounted for $10K on his own out of the total amount guaranteed him. Not exactly putting forth the greatest effort there, Captain. There is nothing in the clause that says he has to speak at every rotary club engagement in Shallowater. Whether it is on Leach or his agents for not booking any decent gigs, that amount is peanuts and pretty much a slap in the face to Tech, and I can see where it would put them in a financial bind of having to pay his contract versus do other things. Even if he just wears the O’Reilly logo on his shirt and lends his mug for a local billboard, at least that is something. Not an unreasonable request. Though it could be reworded such that he is responsible for earning at least a certain percentage of his guaranteed base through speaking engagements, endorsements, etc. Leach still gets al of the money he makes from the gigs. With a little effort, he might actually make some extra.

Ther you have it. IMO, #2 and #4, not such a bad deal. #1 and #3 definitely need some work.

This is all part of the negotiation process.

Like watching Big Horn Sheep fight during the rut, lots of head butting, snot, piss and dirt flying everywhere.
In the end the big ram wins; but the defeated ram stays with the heard because BHS do not have a do not have a strict dominance hierarchy. The defeated Ram still gets all the women and food he wants along with the protection of the heard.
All that head butting, snot, piss and dirt flying was to impress a few women and and establish respect.

TECH ( the Pres, Regents, and AD) is the big ram, they need a win here to “show” that they are the boss, that the power given to them by even bigger Rams is well placed. Leach needs to let them have this “victory” with a little give and take on these four items.
He will still come out fine because he gets the money, and the program that he has built.

 Now if he was coaching at A&M he would also get all the ewes he wanted.

Please be patient.