- Thread starter
- #1
cowboysrule48
Active member
All these announcers have done the whole game is try to run down Leach's name and ruin him. This is outrageous. So much for objective reporting.
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
cowboysrule48 said:I also think Craig James should be given a leave of absence while this is going on. Paid of course. However, it is a MAJOR conflict of interest to have him still working for ESPN while they are covering this pretty big story. I am a former journalism student, and the lack of ethics that ESPN has been showing is what really gets to me.
mstng99tim said:cowboysrule48 said:I also think Craig James should be given a leave of absence while this is going on. Paid of course. However, it is a MAJOR conflict of interest to have him still working for ESPN while they are covering this pretty big story. I am a former journalism student, and the lack of ethics that ESPN has been showing is what really gets to me.
Don't you have to have ethics in order to lack them? ESPN has ZERO ethics!!!
cowboysrule48 said:All these announcers have done the whole game is try to run down Leach's name and ruin him. This is outrageous. So much for objective reporting.
pigskincardboard said:I've decided to completely hate that kid.
Let's not forget that Craig James was at SMU during the crookedest effin' football administration of all time. It's like Jon Calipari times one trillion (by the way, that guy is so sketch).
ESPN is playing these team admin/doctor sworn affidavits from people that.....wait.... want to keep their effin jobs.
They fired the coach over squat. Does anyone think that the entire administration would do anything other than place blame on leach?
Guh, I hate this kid. TTU wouldn't exist if not for Mike Leach.
pigskincardboard said:Doesn't every program have a place to send shat disturbers though?
I honestly don't see this as any different than banishing a kid to do sit-ups along-side the practice field, or sending him to the film room. There are definitely certain kids that screw with the demeanor of everyone that's not practicing and having them on the side-lines ends up messing up everyone's practice.
Of all the things coaches do, this seems pretty harmless other than harming the kids ego. Obviously it wasn't done to speed up recovery, but as a form of punishment. I'm not sure why everyone considers it an awful form of punishment, though.
Punish the kid for what?
What was he doing at that particular practice that warranted a punishment of going to the isolated room?
Don't like a hat on backwards? --tell him to take it off
Don't like sunglasses on? --tell him to take them off
Making noises and laughing? ----Yell at him or send him back to the dorm
Running stadium stairs, runnings laps, etc at least can be a form of conditioning. I undertsand that the kid was "injured" and couldn't do the physical punishment but what good is sending him to an isolated shed/garage?
Different programs might have their own form of punishment like the shed/garage but I bet coaches will think twice before they use that strategy any time soon.
How do you punish a kid? ---not with unusual punishment of isolating him the way Leach did.
I'm sure this kid is a tool but you need to separate that when looking at this situation in an administrative way. If the kid was a distraction at the practice, send him home. Leach's actions were punitive. Coaches are supposed to coach, teach, etc and being punitive without having any positive result come from it = lousy. (again at least stadium stairs = conditioning, at least sending to film room = useful, etc)
If Leach would have admitted fault and poor judgement, he most likely would have coached last night
How are you supposed to punish a kid that's being a little brat (I'm not saying James was being totally detrimental, but rather posing a what if)?
Mind you, I prefer guys like Bobby Knight over Calipari.