The Pirate Speaks: Leach thread v2.0

From the updated link:

In releasing the affidavits from Pincock and treating physician Dr. Michael Phy, the university said, "After coach Leach's conflicting recent media accounts of the treatment of James, the university asked witnesses to sign affidavits attesting to their original statements."

Phy told university officials in his affidavit that James "may not have been harmed," but he "considered this practice inappropriate, and a deviation from the medical standard of care."

More:

Texas Tech has released a signed, sworn affidavit from an athletic trainer who says former coach Mike Leach instructed him to "lock" receiver Adam James in a dark place and that he disagreed with Leach's treatment of James after the player was diagnosed with a concussion.

According to his affidavit, taken by representatives of the university on Dec. 21 and signed on Jan. 1, trainer Steve Pincock did not agree with the treatment and said he knew of no other player ever being placed in a similar room

It goes on:

In the affidavit, Pincock said: "I am not aware of any other player at Texas Tech University ever being placed in a darkened shed or room similar to James. Other players who have sustained concussions in the past were sometimes placed in the physician's examination room with the lights dimmed, or in the weight room or athletic training room. I feel that Leach's treatment of James was inappropriate and I did not agree with it. However, I felt I had to follow the instructions of the head coach

Agian, the doctor. Remember there are lawyers watching:

"Texas Tech also released the affidavit from Phy, taken on Dec. 22 and signed on Jan. 1. In it, Phy said: "I did not instruct anyone with Texas Tech to place James in an enclosed dark place for up to three hours. In spite of the fact that James may not have been harmed by these actions, I consider the practice inappropriate, and a deviation from the medical standard of care."

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4790586

 

The lawyers are out now. You have to keep that in mind.

 

So because the kid was a pain in the ass Leach could do whatever he wanted, even if there was a diagnosed brain injury?

No.

 

I'll take a signed affidavit over the bullshit Leach's people have been spewing.

 

I'll have a really hard time buying the suggestion that a football coach was not out of line for hazing a player who has been diagnosed with a concussion.

All the comments about James being a prick have come from Leach's camp. Now that Leach is gone, players are coming forward to say Leach was an asshole and they couldn't believe the way James was treated. The trainer says Leach's treatment of James was inappropriate.

So, is James a prick? Maybe. It's not like they're in short supply in D1 football programs. But don't try to excuse hazing a player with a concussion. That won't wash.

 

And I won't take either of them seriously because contradictory statements were made by both people in question.

Unless someone was there, we don't know which side is spewing bullshit at this point or if both are in different amounts. All I think is that it's more complicated that James showing up with sunglasses and immediately being put in these rooms for two practices.

PC - On the flip side, just because a player has a concussion doesn't mean he can't do something that would lead to him being disciplined. (Wow, there are a lot of negatives in that sentence). There are a lot of pricks in D1 football programs who have to run stairs and do hill climbers and run suicides and whatnot. To me, the difference will be was James being punished for doing something that would deserve discipline, like mouthing off to the coach or refusing to do something he was medically cleared for, or was James simply punished because Leach didn't like him. We don't know at this point.

 

The question here, as in management-worker disputes, is who has the power (channeling Michael Douglas in Disclosure). Those who have the power are much more accountable.

 

Signed affidavits are not to be taken lightly. Statements to the media don't fall into the same category.

Was the kid a jerk? Maybe so. I don't know. But does a kid with a diagnosed brain injury really deserve this kind of treatment. Hasn't Leach ever told a kid to leave the practice field? Kicked him out of practice, if needed? What compelled Leach to do this to a kid with this injury?

 

Were these true signed affidavits or simply sworn statements to the university (which wouldn't hold the same weight as statements made to law enforcement officials)? It sounds like they were signed after the fact, which would make them, in fact, not an affidavit in the sense we're familiar with but rather a statement sworn to the university as fact. Considering there are now contradictory statements, again, I don't find either to be particularly credible.

And I don't know if a kid with a diagnosed brain injury deserved that kind of treatment in this case. I can certainly think of scenarios where he would (for instance, and I'm in no way saying this happened, but telling the coach, 'fuck off,' when being asked to walk around the field, or having gone out to a bar the night before and then claiming he's not well enough to even do rehab work). Being hurt doesn't excuse you from having to follow team rules, and perhaps Leach thought this kid was trying to get out of practice for whatever reason, so he wanted to punish him by keeping him around. *shrugs*

There are so many questions we don't know the answer to at this point, and it's impossible to say who's more in the wrong until we know exactly how this played out. Someone somewhere has the tape of this practice, and that's the most likely place to find out what exactly happened.

 

As for what kind of affidavits. From the ESPN link::

Texas Tech has released a signed, sworn affidavit from an athletic trainer who says former coach Mike Leach instructed him to "lock" receiver Adam James in a dark place and that he disagreed with Leach's treatment of James after the player was diagnosed with a concussion.

According to his affidavit, taken by representatives of the university on Dec. 21 and signed on Jan. 1, trainer Steve Pincock did not agree with the treatment and said he knew of no other player ever being placed in a similar room.

I'll leave it to the lawyers here to tell us more specifics.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4790586

There are a lot of dynamics in play here. A brain injury and a stress fracture, for example, are different injuries and players with either should be disciplined -- if necessary -- in different ways.

 

Amazing the level of delusion on the Leach side of the debate now. The doctor and the trainer were reliable as long as their comments could be used to back Leach, but now they aren't? Bullshit.

And to be clear, the doctor's current statement does not contradict his previous comments. His initial statement only said that the way James was treated did not endanger him. He hasn't changed that. He has simply said more, and that additional comment is just one more in opposition to Leach. It sounds to me like he tried to stay out of this but was not able to do so.

I think the trainer was trying to cover his ass at first. But given that now we are dealing with a sworn affadavit, isn't it fair to say that perhaps this is more in line with the truth as he knows it.

Yes, James is probably a spoiled pain in the ass. It doesn't matter. You don't punish a kid for being hurt, even if he is being an asshole about it and especially if it is a brain injury.