Dwain Price of the DALLAS MORNING NEWS reports that Texas Tech has not paid Mike Leach $1.7 million he is owed for “work he performed for the school during the 2009 season.”
Like most football factories, Texas Tech compensated Leach with a small base salary supplemented by “outside income” sources. Those sources include radio and TV appearances and an apparel endorsement - a controlled by Tech officials.
According to Leach’s contract, Tech is supposed to pay him $1.6 million in guaranteed outside athletics-related personal income. He also was slated to collect an additional $25,000 because Tech played in a bowl, $25,000 because the Raiders finished the season ranked No. 21 in the final Associated Press poll, $25,000 because Tech won five Big 12 games, and $25,000 because its football program’s graduation rate was above 65 percent.
When contacted by Price, Tech Athletic Director Gerald Myers confirmed that Leach hadn’t been paid most of his 2009 salary.
“His base was $300,000, and then his other [salary] was outside income. He’s been paid his base. But there’s a lawsuit going on, and I’m really not at liberty to talk about what Leach is owed and what he’s not owed.”
Texas Tech also released the following statement:
“Mike Leach has been paid what he is owed by Texas Tech. His mistreatment of an injured student-athlete was a breach of his contract and ultimately resulted in Mike Leach’s termination. When he breached his contract, he no longer was entitled to further compensation.”
Price cites a source in reporting that “Tech has the right to debate what money is owed Leach for the four years that were remaining on his contract, but not the money Leach worked for in 2009.”
So far Leach has received zero support from his fellow coaches, including the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA). But if Tech succeeds in not paying Leach for work previously rendered, that’s an extremely damaging legal precedent pertaining to all college football coaching contracts.
If I was Leach, I wouldn’t lift another finger in the current situation. There’s no way the AFCA can afford to allow that sort of legal precedent to be established, so if you’re Leach, why not wait for the AFCA to come in with its superior legal resources to engage Tech?